Star Wars vs Star Trek

As long as one of us doesn't have the name George W. Bush, it would be fine

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Erm, speed as in muzzle velocity or speed of deployment?
Firepower is a derivative of other factors:

http://www.answers.com/topic/firepower
Likewise range is a function of V[sub]0[/sub] (muzzle velocity) and projectile mass/ sectional density/ ballistic coefficient. Oh and targeting/ aiming system - for instance a tank APFSDS round is perfectly capable of travelling 40+ km, but you can't deliberately hit anything with it at that range except by fluke because the entire system (mount/ sights etc) won't allow you to acquire a target at that range with sufficient precision.
The "basics" would be V[sub]0[/sub], throw weight/ calibre and RoF (rate of fire). Or even simply devolve them down to delivered energy per unit time (and possibly projectile diameter and material).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I got the thing wrong, I made a huge mistake, I forgot accuracy, my bad. For speed, I meant both velocity and speed of deployment.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Question for everyone - would ANYONE here claim the Saucer Section of the Ent-D is Aerodynamic and capable of creating any substantial amount of lift?

 

I could see it as possible, if the saucer was angled right.

 

True, but density also plays a role.

 

You'd have to get geeky. It would depend on "wing loading" (i.e. mass per unit area) and speed, as well as AoA (alpha). At high enough speeds it would generate body lift* (presumably the design dept. will claim that it is shaped to use this

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

).

* A good number of missiles actually rely almost entirely on body lift - the fins and "wings" are purely control surfaces.

 

I am assuming at least hypersonic. Also, the missile body itself doesn't create lift, the rocket does

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

hmm kinda slow lately huh?
Concerning the saucer section of the Enterprise D, it is aerodynamic if all systems are fuctioning.
Speaking of which, anyone notice that the captains gally(?) (which can separate from the Enterprise-E), almost looks like Anubis' escape ship?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I'm talking the Saucer Section as it was in ST: Generations, as it plummeted towards earth.

Ricerery and his cronies on SpaceBattles are trying to say it was "more aerodynamic" than a space marine that fell from a ship, and are claiming that the Space Marine underwent higher stresses than said saucer section upon impact... UGH what morons...

 

Well, if the space marine fell straight down, with no deceleration, and then stopped when he hit the ground, they can argue that the SM endured higher Gs than the E-D saucer, but stress? The Galaxy class is something like ~10 million metric tons, and the saucer takes up somewhere near half of that. The SM may endure more G-force, but also has far, far less mass to stop, and so less total momentum to negate upon crashing.

 

Exactly - at most, the Space Marine was at terminal velocity. We know the saucer section was going far faster than that (maximum thrusters if I'm not mistaken). Not to mention the fact that it dredged into a cliffside and across how many kilometers of mountainous forest.

 

Well, by the time the E-D hit the ground, she had decelerated considerably. They had managed to reduce her speed to something that didn't ionize the air (though they were going fast enough to do that for a while), and they weren't producing a visible compression shockwave, so they were probably sub-sonic. We could probably get a measure of how fast they were going and get at least a rough idea of the range of kinetic energy involved without too much trouble, though I don't have Generations on DVD yet to analyze the scenes myself.

Either way, though, it's definitely going to be a LOT more kinetic energy than a space marine would face. Yes, the SM would endure higher G-forces if there was no deceleration until the sudden stop at the end, but we've seen the E-D endure far higher G-force from acceleration and deceleration with no concern at all just moving about at low impulse speeds.

 

Nah, air to air missiles (and some air-to-surface ones). They're what I was talking about. The rocket motor in those only pushes horizontally.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You know, it kind of sucks not having somebody to make outlandish claims that we can rip apart. Right now we seem to be taking it easy.

 

Yoda loves oranges and after eating two can destroy any planet in the universe, single-handed.

Good enough for you?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Well, if I hadn't had to go back to working 7 days a week, I would have just started analyzing the data for shits and giggles, because I enjoy that kind of stuff, but I haven't had time.

To jump in a different, philosophical direction, though, who here thinks Yoda was a great, wise and benevolent Jedi?

 

Yoda was a dick - he ate all of Luke's Candy Bars!

 

I had to read that twice because the first time did not process right...

Five minutes to five on a Friday... thank the frickin' stars (now if I only had real Fridays again...).

 

Well, there is nobody debating for Star Wars. I am not debating for either.