Star Destroyers Shielding

Knight: nope... I admire what Saxton's done, and I (broadly) agree with him about sensor domes and the length of the Ex, for instance, but not on everything...

Sturm: yeah...

- The Imperial Ewok

 

I go with sensordomes, especially for the longrange sensors.

In the first blueprints of the Stardestroyers they were sensordomes.

In the movies they were never called shieldgenerators OR sensordomes.

The A-Wing would have never reached them if the shields were up. So shields are down, A-Wing smashes in globe - Conclusion: They are anything but shieldgenerators. No need for complicated explenations.

Unfortunately the EU follows the blanders made by WEG and others.

 

Regardless of what Saxton has written (and you should not believe what he says in any case), they are shield generators. Period.

 

Thanks ImpEwok and 2nd Quest. Its just a theory, and it'll never be anything more than that, or go beyond this topic, but it potentially fixes a few problems.

I think that the SWTC works with all the sources he is given, puts emphasis on movie sources and gives his opinion. This means that in cases of continuity problems, contradictions and the like, he gives an answer, but not one that will be universally satisfactory. Such as here.

Its a commentary, an essay, not a definitive and inequivocal guide to star wars technology. Its still awesome though.

 

Correct. So in cases where his work conflicts witht he movies or EU, the movies or EU take precedence.

 

Yeah, SWTC uses 'scientific method' and the LFL definition of canon fairly strictly, which is what drives Saxton to some of his odder (in EU terms) conclusions - eg, the Endor holocaust, all the provisional classes of SDs...

- The Imperial Ewok

 

I love how this is still an issue. I love how we can argue about it. All the valid arguments make me laugh out loud. All the page long explanations are even funnier.

The domes are shield generators. Why? Because the A-wings blow them up and the shields go away. The Imperials SAY this. That is why their ship IS DESTROYED. Also, everything else, sourcebooks, tech books, video games, point to those as being 'shield generators.' It doesn't have to make sense. Remember how many things in Star Wars don't.

 

Well, the dome that was destroyed certainly HAS TO DO with shields, but we've got tons of theories about exactly what that scene meant.

I'm still a little confused.

 

"considering that they look like radar domes on modern warships"
Yes they do.. I wonder if they used model parts from a model ship to make them..

But as to the function of those domes. Modern war ship radar do not have to scan down or below the ship. They have to use sonar for that. A whole different kind of system. In space you would need to scan in a total sphere around the ship. The same kind of sensor would be needed below the ship as above to eliminate a blind spot. We would see these domes on the bottom of the ship too.

 

Also, what would be the advantage to destroy the sensor domes.....I mean, it doesn't cut visual contact, it would be a disadvantage, but a much smaller one than losing means to raise the shields back

 

Here is my view on things.

All power is diverted from the ships power generator or engins (can't rember where it comes from)and into the domes which then distribute the power to the projectors around the ship.

Then if one is lost then the projectors arn't getting any power which could lead to some collapsing under massed fire(which could come from the fleet).

As for the A-Wing that hit the bridge, The pilot lost control of his fighter due to damage and so made his death count for something by making sure it was pointing in the right direction.

 

P.S.

1).Against the domes being sensors -

(a). Why would you need two sensors that big in the same place?

(b). If they are there, and are that powerful, why couldn't they detect where the falcon went when it was so close?

(c). Why did operation "parasite" in X-Wing: Iron Fist target the sensors to drop the shields?

and

2). The SSD went into the DS because -

(a). It was having problems in the first place.

(b). In the X-Wing books it seems to be a standard tactic to target the engins of an enemy craft, so it is safe to assume that they were attacking there aswell.

 

(b). In the X-Wing books it seems to be a standard tactic to target the engins of an enemy craft, so it is safe to assume that they were attacking there aswell.

Correct. We can even see the Executor's engines aflame as it crashes into the Death Star.

 

Also is there anything in any book/comic where most of our technical info comes from to suggest that they are anything else?

I know that i haven't come across anything.

 

Watch the movie: The rebelfighter would have never been able to reach and to destroy the dome if the shields were still up. So they had to be down BEFORE the fighter crashed into the dome. It CAN´T be a shieldgenerator.

The interpretation of the globes to be part of the shielding mistakes cause with result.
The globes could be destroyed because the shields were already down, not the shields went down because the globes were destroyed.

Why did they need two sensordomes?

Its a question of symmetry. If there was only one dome on one side, there would be a much bigger blind spot, then with two sensordomes. Despite that they still can´t detect what is covered by the hull of the ship, what excplains Hans success with hiding the Falcon in TESB. So its reasonable to assume that the domes are longrange sensors, while closeup sensors are covering the rest of the hull.

It is also impossible to assume that they are different kind of shield projectors or are we supposed to believe that the left side of the SD is protected by rayshields and the right side by particelshields?

Iron Fist doesn´t count, it follows the error of the official material.

 

The star wars universe Ain't real what ever story teller says is what happens. When you can prove to me that SD are real you can tell me who or what is in error. But not until then. Until then it's only authors and story tellers and lucas who have any rights as to what is and isn't part of continuity.

The problem with using the movie as evidence is it doesn't flat out say anthing. Unlike star trek people don't break out into technobabble to explain details. So 2 sides read into it in the way they want too. Either you got the ones that go about saying Fictionalists are wrong. Or the ones that say the Supposositionists are wrong. Either way it gets far too Nerdy. Yet still only the ones payed to do something actually have the write to say anything and that is what is considered true by all of LFL.

They will never listen to fan based supposition.

 

FTeik--please stop believing the BS that is in the Technical Commentaries. They are fanfiction, nothing more, so what they say can and will be overridden by the novels.

We have already explained how the A-wings were able to get under the shields. They are shield generators because there is NO evidence for them being sensor domes.

 

This is an amusing debate, but if i see one more person say that the awing crashed into the dome, im going to cry.

You guys crack me up "Watch the movie. It couldnt have crashed into the dome." Riiight.


If you guys would actually watch the movie, it would be obvious that what COULD have happened was: the fighters which were strafing the tower weakened the shields enough so that thier weapons got through. The shield tower blew and the next thing we see is an awing crashing into the BRIDGE!(NOT THE DOME!)

I also agree with the statement that star wars doesnt have to make sense.

 

"star wars doesnt have to make sense."



Sure.. but it is fun to try and make it.. That is why we are here.. to have fun.. making sense out of this stuff is part of that fun..

 

Well it seems that some of you haven't been listening.

FTeik - Jedi_Cryix is right, the fighter that took out the shield dome did not crash into it, it fired a proton torpedo
that penatrated the shield and destroyed the dome, and shield penatration has been shown time and again in the EU.

Anyone else???