Star Wars vs Star Trek

Discussion in 'SciFi & Fantasy' started by Pollux V, May 9, 2002.

?

Which universe would win?

  1. Star Trek

    227 vote(s)
    35.5%
  2. Star Wars

    268 vote(s)
    41.9%
  3. Spaceballs

    47 vote(s)
    7.3%
  4. Farscape

    12 vote(s)
    1.9%
  5. Dune

    50 vote(s)
    7.8%
  6. Stargate

    36 vote(s)
    5.6%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Well, one, the GAU would overheat if the pilot was dumb enough to fire for 3 seconds... 2, the plane is moving at how many hundred miles per hour, thus the course of the bullets is tracking, and finally, COST FOR FUCKS SAKE.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    Bullshit. Have you never ever, ever, seen a clip of that cannon going off? They fire in 3 second bursts. They don't even have that option of 1/2-3 second bursts. What the hell are you trying to pull off?

    Anyways the maximum firing time is around 5 seconds before your off target. And they fire from a 30 degree angle, the problem isn't with going off target, its that the recoil will slow the plane down so much it will lose control.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    One, because of the fact it is a multi barreled gattling gun it doesnt overheat or jam as fucking frequently, if you knew the first thing about gattling type weapons you would know it takes a whole fucking lot longer to over heat than other guns, and two they don't jam frequently.

    It would take way, way more than 3 seconds of firing.

    And third, look up the A-10 firing its main gun on youtube, you will see that gun will fire for longer than 2 seconds.

    And what the hell is up with point two? What kind of grammer is that?

    Come now, the US spends nearly as much on the military as every other country in the world combined. Do you think cost would be a fucking issue?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger
    There's very nice pic of a GAU-19 on the net somewhere showing the barrels glowing red after a 200 round burst (IIRC).

    Comprehensible?
    Yup.

    That would be why they publish the budgets every year and try to keep costs
    down then?
    Cosy is ALWAYS an issue - the cheaper something is the more you can buy, or buy other stuff you want.
    Take at a look at ANY military programme and see how much effort is put into reducing acquisition and lifetime costs.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    At 250 mph your nose is 100+ metres away from the original aim point for every second that passes...

    Oh that old chestnut...
    It's so wrong it's laughable.
    Same Wiki article.
    Or simply do the calculations yourself.
     
  8. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    Soy our telling me the pilots that fly the fucking thing, the engineers who designed the fucking thing, and the mechanics that maintain the fucking thing, are all wrong?

    Dude you don't need to equal the engines power you just need to slow the plane down enough so that it' wings cannot create enough lift.

    Here is what I have against you, you think that you know more about a particular subject, say the Gau-8 avenger gattling cannon on the A-10 more than the pilots that fly the fucking thing. The pilots know mroe about it than you, the engineers know more about it than you, End of fucking story lets move on.
     
  9. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    Awww, poor Saquist goes for ad homienm and patently false one as well.

    I never alluded the cannonball fragments itself, but rather it can kick up fragments or shatter stone it may strike. It's a long shot but yes. Also cannon ball are designd to bounce alo0ng through regimental lines as well.

    As for the aforementioned 30mm HEAPI round, it just does not have the blast radius or fragmentation density to really be a threat passt a few feet. The round is designed for light armor penetration, not Anti Infantry.
     
  10. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    You guys this is a fictional Star war vs. Star trek thread and other scifi battles.

    can we please get back on topic

    No offense but battling it out with oli on the physics of the A-10 thunderbolt II is not at the top of my list of things to do.
     
  11. Enterprise-D I'm back! Warp 8 Mr. Worf! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,898
    I think this is a dead argument. The star in the Dyson sphere did not require stabilization before the sphere itself was built. The Dyson was constructed around the star, such that the star provided solar energy to the Dyson occupants. The sphere appeared to be abandoned because the star became unstable while inside it (if I remember this episode correctly).

    There was no indication of Q being involved. Indeed neither TOS or TNG crew figured out who made that particular Dyson sphere in the first place.

    However.

    Dyson Spheres are the research of our existing reality. Indeed they are named after Freeman Dyson, who postulated the theoretical Dyson Sphere.

    Extrapolating, to Star Trek therefore, Dyson Sphere's a likely "meant" to be continuing research of the UFP, indeed we have seen the UFP own stations within asteroids onscreen (Dyson Spherettes if you will

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ).

    They are certainly not outside the realm of possibility in the Trek Universe, but as to weapons application, I cannot say. Thus...a moot point.
     
  12. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    No, we can't get on topic, for one simple reason:

    You can't accept that you're wrong on a subject that we have concrete evidence for... I have SEEN a fucking GAU-8 Fired in person... after a 3 second burst, those barrels are RED HOT.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS6cstOc9aQ&feature=related

    This video here is of a modified one - they were attempting to increase it's safe firing time by using forced-injection air cooling. Yet you can STILL see the flames pouring out of the side of it.

    As for the recoil "issue"

    Bitch...

    accuracy:
    As for the RoF:

    The pilots limit it to a 1 or 2 second burst to increase barrel life... also, so they don't use all their fucking ammo.

    SO piss off little kid... you can't accept when you're wrong on a real life FACT based argument... how can we possibly expect you to argue with any kind of logic when backed into the corner for a FICTIONAL item?
     
  13. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    I'm sorry... I don't see an ad hominem in that statement... he said you claim to be a professor of science, but argue with a distinct lack of scientific method... he also called you out and bet you wouldn't provide a response to what he stated, which you kindly agreed to and DID NOT do.
     
  14. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Finally, to put it to rest:

    They have High Explosive, D/U Armor Piercing, and other rounds to use for the GAU-8... so get over yourself fedr...
     
  15. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Finally, to put it to rest:

    They have High Explosive, D/U Armor Piercing, and other rounds to use for the GAU-8... so get over yourself fedr...
     
  16. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    Can we get off the fucking subject?

    So what you won I lost.

    Can we move the fuck on or do you need to gloat a little more to make you feel better?
     
  17. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Not until you understand the point -

    If you cannot accept when you are wrong in a tangible subject when the argument you are trying to say is wrong is backed by hard, tangible, real data... how can we POSSIBLY trust you to argue a subject when

    A) you're heavily biased
    B) you can't admit when you're wrong
    C) you argue in the face of logic and fact

    I'm being honest here... not trying to be rude or mean, but you see my problem with continuing this discussion...
     
  18. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    You really pushing it now. I could always go back and re-edit that message to say f*** off.

    The only reason i gave up is because if an admin were here he would give us all refractions for going way off the fucking topic. So if you seriously think i said you were right and I was wrong because I thought you really were you are so fucking wrong. I did it to get us back on subject. But no that wasnt good enough for Kittamaru, no he had to have a comeback for it too.

    If you had just said okay fed, and gone back it would be fine. But god forbid you do that. Atleast I have the humility to actually say you were right and I was wrong to get us back on the real debate.
     
  19. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    The problem I have with you is that i have the fucking guts to go up and not only offer a truce but to actually say you won and I lost.
    But that was not good enough for you.

    So what does that show? That shows I am argueing against a person that is 1.) heavily biased 2.) cannot admit they are wrong (come on name the last post you said the words "I am wrong you are right") 3.) you argue in the face of logic and fact.

    And it's funny because you claimed those three points about me, I may be heavily biased, but wasnt me saying "I was wrong you are right" kind of disprove the last 2?
     
  20. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    *chuckles*

    You're still missing the point, and best of all, you're getting pissed off about it... it's incredible.

    Mate, you ARE wrong. For fucks sake, I have 2 family members currently in the military (one in the Air Force as a tech, and one in the Marines) and my father is retired british SAS, my grandfather is ex-air force, and I have 2 friends currently in the Air National Guard... not to mention that the A-10 is one of my favorite planes currently to take to the skies...

    You
    Are
    Wrong

    It isn't about being "good enough" for me... it isn't even about me being right at all... it's the simple fact that you are either too stubborn, too immature, or simply incapable of admitting when you are wrong, even when cold hard FACT says so.

    How the hell can we expect you to be capable of admitting a mistake or excepting reasonable logic in a fictitious debate about a fictional subject when you can't do it for a real debate about a real subject?

    Go back and edit the post to say whatever you like - as I said, I don't care. It's not about ego for me... it's about your hubris.

    And as for the statement of "offering a truce", no, you weren't... you were squirming and trying to worm your way out of it without having to actually concede anything. try and say it isn't true and save face... but you know yourself that it's true and that's why you're pissed off...

    EDIT:

    And I do apologize for insulting you in my previous post - I have no idea of your age, and simply called you a kid based on my observation of your debating techniques - if I am mistaken, I do apologize and did not intend it as a personal insult.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2009
  21. antaran_1979 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,447
    dudes, in 300 pages of participation i have not seen this kind of sparks even when SW VS ST was in "full contact" and now the A-10 brings them up? and give TWS a break, if he is a dedicated Imperial officer he'd never go against the empire. this is called character. or discipline.
     
  22. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    Actually it's called objective analysis of the data presented. I am a Trekkie as well as a Jedi. I love both franchises and they share second place in my heart in regards to Sci-fi, Firefly/Serenity taking first.

    Believe me I would like to believe that the Federation/ST would win over Empire/Star Wars. However the realist in me as well as the dedicated fan looks at the canon of both universes and I have to accept the truth. In a war between the STar Wars galaxy and the Star Trek galaxy, Star Wars wins every time. They have superior numbers, superior tech excpet in a few small areas and even that is arguable, superior strategy speed, superior power generation, and vastly superior firepower. It's like asking Robocop (ST) to fight Megatron (SW) while one is clearly the good guy the other is so insanely powerful in comparison as to be unbeatable.
     
  23. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    Dude I said the words "I am wrong and you are right" why the fuck could you not leave it at that?

    And to be honest the above post applies to both of us in all practicality.

    And also, The A-10 was retired a while ago.

    Now are you finished?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page