Books Death Star Owner's Technical Manual: Imperial DS-1 Orbital Battle Station

I was thinking the same thing a few days ago. In my mind I feel the determination Star Wars lengths and numbers is sort of like a Math test where someone has guessed a very incorrect answer, but instead of finding the error they change the question, so that the answer is now correct.

Don't think that will ever change, so may the much larger Death Star 2 rest in peace for now, that is till the next technical guide is released

 

Assuming the cite of Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds is accurate, that is.

We'll have to wait and see, but I was under the impression that, just like Owners Workshop Manual for the Falcon, this was supposed to be the final definitive book.

 

Geonosis And the Outer Rim Worlds says the Endor moon is 4900 km(I have the book in front of me now). But Endor the gas giant is 148,000 km.

 

What evidence, though? Did Windham ever read Cinefex or any internal ILM notes?

 

Well intended size is not the same as canon size. Also screenshot analysis of models or matte paintings does not add up. You get contradictory numbers and have to decide which to pick. Saxton and those who worked with him (cause that was not him alone!) picked one, others the other. The resolution to the long debate depends on more than contradictory out of universe material that always is contradictory even if intended size is given. Since sizes published are for inuniverse use and in books inuniverse, inuniverse logic should also factor in and not just out-of-universe analysis.

I agree that based only on production, one could assume a larger DS2. But not 100% due to contradictory shots that do not synch up with others and support both numbers. Inuniverse credibility though does support more one than the other and thus settled the near-equal out of universe stalemate.

As for Endors size: Agreed, Saxton and Co used brilliant guesswork for their numbers. And had subsequent books kept Endor appropriate he may have been proven more correct. Still other shots do not line up with that despite the guesswork however you keep Endors size. The Endor hologram on Home One is not to scale when compared to the shots of the DS2 in space over Endor. And that was one of his main proofs for the analysis. He found numbers backing him up in some shots and ignored the others.

 

My mistake about Endor. I confused the moon and the planet, but, to be honest, the sources were the first ones to do that mistake. After all, Endor was originally the name of the moon orbiting an unidentified planet (called Tana by the Ewoks.)

 

They did their research well. They had to convince Leland and Pablo after all and did! Trust them, they know their stuff. You may not like the result, I get that, but there really is research and evidence.

 

Some of those shots can have the depth perception skewed, like this, a well-known trick in photography:

So, it's like when LFL ignored the impossible shot of the Executor crashing into a near-flat DSII surface? Which would not be so impossible if the DSII really was 800-900 km in diameter.

You just responded with four sentences, not one of which actually presents these evidences they laid forth.

 

that was not ignored. Saxton himself in his commentaries (see link in my article) notes that the shot is not usable to determine any reliable DS size, merely maybe to use it to calculate one for the SSD.

 

So, without checking, you just parroted something from someone else.

If the DSII is really 160 km, then a 19 km Executor would be quite noticeable:

 

And without cheeking you keep forwarding a random, obscure movie fan magazine as your only source? I swear if Richard Marquand said that Jabba was human whilst joking at some random interview, you would also keep insisting it was so.

 

I think Millennium Falcon- A 3-D Owner's Guide actually was the first source for this; it was during the creation of this that the creators found out it was all too obvious people wouldn't have room to stand if they used the old figure. It was the same creative team as for the Haynes Guide, though, and the two came out fairly close together.

EVERY book is supposed to be the final, definitive book. They never are. There's always something more to be added, some overlooked fact to rediscover, or some contradictory information that has to be reconciled.

 

so? movies are fictional and the closer you look the more contradictions you find. we are here to enjoy the movies and analyse them. It is a fictional universe with does not follow real world physics. Sadly so, and whereever it works we may use them to nitpick, analyse and have fun. But you cannot make everything fit if it did not fit from the beginning. F.e. equatorial trench matte paintings do not add up with a 900km DS2 as Saxton too notes in his commentaries, assuming a way too large equatorial trench which got a trench within a trench to solve his problem there. That is possible but a bit weird, don't you think?

As I noted in my article, movies are made to look great, not to fit real world physics. The more does fit though the better but we shouldn't get lost in analysis since we know not everything can fit when it comes to movie props, matte paintings, etc. The EU should be made to fit, timelines should etc. there I agree. But a movie has a different goal, which is to look great. And adding curvature to the Executor shot may look too crazy and not cool.

I too think it is a pity that our beloved SW universe is flawed because it is fictional. The closer we look the more we find problems. Primarily we should make sure most fits and enjoy the ride. It is Heisenberg again: either you make it fit all perfect but the movie looks crappy or you make it look awesome (which is why we all are here today) and details may be off.

 

Yeah, like the Tantive IV being a CR70 later refit during the Dark Times into a CR90 was final and definitive until TCW came along and completely changed it.

 

That's good- means that it can replace the Prima Game Guide as the Wookieepedia cite- since it's an earlier source.

While some might raise that possibility that the DS2 is much "further" than it appears:

Spoiler

most have it close enough that you can see it in "front" of the Forest Moon- with the Moon's horizon curving behind the DS2.

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

I think we can all agree on one thing: neither measurements are "correct" anyway. 900 km is too large, 160 km is too little.

 

160km is much more compatible with a 4900km Forest Moon though. Especially if the size ratio of Moon to DS2 is in fact higher than 11.5:1, as most of the shots would suggest.

 

THIIIIIIIIIS

I think Saxton is mistaken about the trench placement, myself. It could be one of the smaller bands surrounding the station below or above the equator, no need for a trench inside a trench.

Just for fun, I did a quick scale-down of that shot of the DSII in front of the giant Endor matte painting. Anyone up for a barely 30 km DSII?
Consequently, a 3+ km Executor, then.

 

Ooops! Double post.

 

Okay, out of curiosity.. how small would that make then a regular Stardestroyer and the Tantive IV?

and good call in it possibly being another trench. but I think it would be weird if a movie features a big trench and no trench (trenchrun or hangars) we see is the one seen from space. but numberswise I agree. could be another. though approaching ships zooming in target the equatorial band or it looks like something close to it if not that.

 

Sizes aside... looking at my Death Star gallery I got a question for you folks:

The DS1 as seen in ROTS shows it was build with a mainframe first and then only interior and plating added. Much akin to the DS prototype of the Maw Cluster. The DS2 however was constructed different. At certain angles we see that the only thing finished are the reactorcoreaxis, the superlaser and the equatorial trench region. The other hemisphere trenches are not even close to finished before half of DS2 got filled with interior systems etc. This is a very unconventional way to construct something this big and made me wonder: Was the DS2 ever meant to be finished at all? Palpatine wanted it operational for his trap, so construction may have been concentrated on the superlaser relevant parts mostly. Still that not even the mainframe was finished before everything else got filled in is surprising.

 

The construction droids on the DSII might behave like a complex system of cells, filling out the superstructure randomly at first, while eventually settling into a pattern. It's like those simulated microorganism programs you see in computer documentaries meant to fill out their environments by determining their own movements.

For the original DS, the Imperial engineers were in unknown territory and might have experimented more cautiously and over a much longer period of time, thus we see a more conventional construction pattern for the major elements. Plus, they were building at least one prototype just to test the superlaser.

 

It would sure be nice if the numbers fell more in the middle ground territory more often when there are so many contradictions.

Maybe the Death Star III can be 900 km going forward

As mentioned above I would love to see the apparent slam dunk evidence of the 160 km Death Star 2 that was presented. Since Windham didn't have the specifics, hopefully they one day interview the other two perpetrators, I mean authors, and ask.

 

Some of the evidence is in Saxtons own tech commentaries but he did ignore them for preferance of the other figure based on his assumed size of Endor and gravity/composition playing a role, which it does not in any other calculation that yielded the smaller number.

As for DS3.. lets talk my pet theory still is that it, due to similiarities with DS1 is a project that got started way before ANH and DS2 actually. Another testbed like the Maw prototype that got in secret finished by Grand Admiral Zaarin yet not before his untimely demise. Thus someone else used it post Endor I guess. But 900km is too large. Or lets say DS3 was the missing/unfinished half of DS2 that detached before the Battle of Endor and was kept in reserve by the Emperor.

 

Am I the only one who thinks it is rather ironic that they released a new Death Star phonegame called "Tiny" Death Star

 

more on how DS1 may have been constructed as per TFU concept art! I love this one