Star Wars vs Star Trek

No, if we went by purly visuals, then torpedoes would show to display massive shockwaves that can cross planets in instances without a massive display of fireballs.

Of course, if we went by purely visuals for Star Wars, their weapons would be on par with modern naval ships.

Kinda cherrypicking aren't you? Because Star Trek has also use isotons and isograms as a unit of weight. So you oculd just as easily argue 200 isotons of matter/antimatter slush just waiting to detonate.

Of course, using only visuals is rather dishonest and trying to interpret information as literal in order to obtain the lowest result possible is rather dishonest and contradicted by multiple sources.

But that's never stopped you before, has it? Oh, and can't wait for my reply.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not necessarily - a number of ships have been re-designated to keep a name alive (Excelsior being one of them, as there is now a Galaxy class Excelsior with the same registry), but you are right in that we distinguish them. They normally get a Alphabetical suffix on the name (like, the A-E) - the ONLY known conflict to this is the NX classes, and as they're prototype classes anyway, it makes sense not to worry too much as they aren't in full production

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You won't get a reply mate - he's going to run away again, like usual :shrug:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As far as we know, only four were supposed to be built I think and we only saw two completed. Given that the first warp seven ships were about to be built, it's not really surprising that the entire class would have been retired before it was put into full production.

 

No no, I mean the USS Excelsior of the Excelsior Class - when that was destroyed, a Galaxy class was renamed USS Excelsior-A to keep the namesake alive

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Or, if you are referring to the NX classes - NX is a prototype Designation, NOT the class the NX-01 (Enterprise) was. Hence why the Defiant and Prometheus have NX designations

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

However I am INCLUDING visuuals of Photons striking a planet or asteroid. There are many incidences of full strength torpedo strikes on a planet that would be considered sub twenty kilotons. We see torpedoes crash through bulkheads rather than explode and take out the vessel in question.

As for Turbolaser we have NEVER seen a heavy Turbolaser used on a target that wasn't shielded and heavily armored. Also case in point for the Turbolaser, it would be like a shaped charge, not a wide area explosion.

You would be correct IF they never explained in Star Wars what the hyperspace index means. Plus also the correct quote is:

Notice he didn't say 1.5 times the speed of light, or anything like that. We also get the point that the ship is traveling very, very fast from the fact that it makes it to another star system in a short amount of time.

So sisnce they NEVER correct the meaning or terminology in Star Trek and even go so far as to use it as a measurement of weight one would suppose they were using the scinetific terminology. So yes I am being nice.

 

What is scinetific terminology? Do you mean Scientific? And perhaps they DO mean weight, at which point you have 200 isotonnes of matter and anti-matter combining instantaneously to form one HELL of an explosion... so either way you are fubar.

 

However I am INCLUDING visuals of Photons striking a planet or asteroid. There are many incidences of full strength torpedo strikes on a planet that would be considered sub twenty kilotons. We see torpedoes crash through bulkheads rather than explode and take out the vessel in question.

Have you ever considered:

A) Variable Yields
B) The desire to disable rather than outright destroy
C) Orbital views that show the planet in full on screen resulting in small appearance for explosions on the surface
D) The desire to NOT cause massive collateral damage on the surface


A) Yes and discounted as it would require removal of warhead material.
B) Yes and discounted as in most cases of the visuals they were going for all out destruction.
C) Yes and compensated. If the test of the atomic bomb shed a certain amoint light, then a Photon Torpedoe should have as muc if it was more powerful.
D) Yes and discounted as in any case youu want to minimize surface damage should use more precise methods, not explosives.

As for Turbolaser we have NEVER seen a heavy Turbolaser used on a target that wasn't shielded and heavily armored. Also case in point for the Turbolaser, it would be like a shaped charge, not a wide area explosion.

Oh, like General Grievous's ship when it's shields were disabled? How the turbolaser blasts (the 1% that actually hit a mostly disabled capital ship, lawl) caused what appeared to be mostly flashes like what you would see in the flash pan of a flintlock rifle... not exactly impressive

Ah excuse me, you not referring to the ship that was heavily armored and did seem to have some shields in areas that were not the Hangar bay. As for the rest of your comment it is just drivel.


You would be correct IF they never explained in Star Wars what the hyperspace index means. Plus also the correct quote is:

Notice he didn't say 1.5 times the speed of light, or anything like that. We also get the point that the ship is traveling very, very fast from the fact that it makes it to another star system in a short amount of time.


Whoop dee doo - as they ALSO never give an accurate measure of DISTANCE, we could easily assume the star systems were very close together, not that the drive was very fast. And .5 past light speed implies, to the average, intelligent, normal person, that the ship could do 1.5x light speed... which is .5 past 1c, and last I checked, .5x + 1x (or in this case, .5c + 1c) = 1.5x (or 1.5c). Thus, your Millennium Falcon goes 1.5 times the speed of light... not exactly impressive.

Excuse me yet again, but it was explained in EU just like Warp was explained by observing the show instead of outright explanation. As for a reasonably intelliegent person thinking another starsystem could be minutes away at 1.5 light, you're kidding right? Earth is eight nminutes for the sun at lightspeed. Stars would be packed so tight no plaent would ever have nightfall again.

Truth of the matter is Star Trek did a piss poor explanation and did Star Wars, however Star Wars fully explained it in EU and Star Trek has barely explained any thing.


So since they NEVER correct the meaning or terminology in Star Trek and even go so far as to use it as a measurement of weight one would suppose they were using the scientific terminology. So yes I am being nice. ”

Small problem with the 200 isoton weight, in that Sisko can pick up one with only some effort. So unless he's suddenly Kryptonian, the only FUBAR is Star Trek universe.

And Iso is a common prefix meaning one. it is used in words such as Isoliner and Isolation. In the word usage here iit pretty much is saying one ton.

 

Which means saying 200 IsoTonnes obviously makes no sense, thus we should probably look for a more reasonable explanation. Such as the following:

In Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual a figure of 1,5kg of antimatter is given as the maximum warhead material of a photon torpedo. (pg. 129) Using standard physics calculations a direct 1:1 explosion would equal to about 64 megatons. Warhead materials are however premixed to achieves the level of destructive force of an antimatter pod rupture containing 100 cubic meters of antideuterium. (pg. 69) Antimatter is stored as liquid or slush on starships. (pg. 68) Density of mere liquid antideuterium is around 160 kg per cubic meter. According to this comparison the high annihilation rate energy release would be comparable to about 690 gigatons. Furthermore it is not clear if the 1,5 kg should be compared to the 200 isoton figure given on-screen, or the 25 isoton figure given in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual.

Finally, it doesn't matter, as it is stated IN CANNON:

* A photon torpedo explosion of 25 isotons could destroy an entire city within seconds. (VOY: "Living Witness")

* A 54 isoton yield gravimetric charge could blow up a small planet. (VOY: "The Omega Directive")

* An 80 isoton yield gravimetric torpedo was used by USS Voyager to destroy a harmonic resonance chamber containing approximately 144 million omega molecules (72% of approximately 200 million) in 2374. (VOY: "The Omega Directive")

* A bomb with 90 isotons of enriched ultritium had the explosion radius of 800 kilometers. Such a bomb was used to blow up a ketracel-white facility in Cardassian space in 2374. (DS9: "A Time to Stand")

* 200 isotons was the explosive yield of a photon torpedo with a class-6 warhead. (VOY: "Scorpion, Part II")

* A 5 million isoton explosion of a multi-kinetic neutronic mine could affect an entire star system. The shock wave had a dispersive force radius of 5 light years. (VOY: "Scorpion, Part II")

* A Malon export vessel, eleventh gradient could transport 90 million isotons of antimatter waste. (VOY: "Night")

* In the year 2375, the Malon civilization produced 6 billion isotons of antimatter waste as an industrial byproduct daily. (VOY: "Night")

* Another type of Malon export vessel could transport 4 trillion isotons of antimatter waste. (VOY: "Juggernaut")

So, we see that obviously, Isoton is NOT being used as the RL example (which, btw, is not even a fucking WORD you idiot)

Finally:

200 (iso)tons of antimatter = 1.8 X 10^22 joules = 4.5 teratons of TNT.

So, fine, it is a measure of weight, and thus, our torpedoes are incredibly densely packed with explosive.

 

UFP Fleet size and NCC Numbers.

NCC Numbers.

I will also go into firepower and warp speed later.

Edit:

 

This was taken from a thread in another forum trying to determine the true nature of Isoton.

If we interpret isoton as referring to quantity of antimatter, the 25 isoton torpedo would have a yield of 562.5 gigatons.

The 200 isoton class six warhead would be, as I said, 4.5 teratons.

The 5 million isoton mines in Scorpion would be 112,500 teratons, or about a thousand times more powerful than the explosion that killed off the dinosaurs. Of course, they're technobabble.

This is just looking at this page.

Edit: this is assuming the unit is measured as an explosive containing equal amounts of matter and antimatter. If it's just antimatter, double all the figures.

 

There is literally no need. In any Sci-fi atmosphere if a term is not explained one breaks it down by it root parts. Since Isoton was never expalined and seems to refer to both firepower and measurement of weight.

Of course therein lies the problem. Star Trek does not possess a powersource more efficent than Antimatter/Matter reactors. Thus the desired devices would be more than 50, 400, and 10 million ton devices. Which we all know is patently ridiculous.

No, if we go scientific method a torpedo is the equivalient of 25 to 500 tons of TNT. Not a figure to be laughed at as I will give you video reference.


429 tons

100tons

 

And yet you insist on posting bullshit figures that put our weapons around the same as a few hundred tons of TNT, when they are capable of fully stripping an atmosphere from a planet or turning it's crust to molten slag in minutes... obviously far beyond a few megatons of tnt...

Also, Prophet of Wisdom, I met your older bro today... nice chap... seems to have a bit of a beef with you though... *grins devilishly* seems you've pissed him off by taking over his computer without his permission

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Actually, the slagging of the panet surface we did not see. In "The Die is Cast" the visuals did not support the dialog. and Rules #1 is that the visuals always win over dialog.

As for the burning off of an atmosphere, the Bird of Prey had ignited an already unstable and volatile atmosphere. Much like shooting a flare into a Methane cloud.

Leave it to you to take two extreme upper end examples of weapons used in extraordinary cases and assume that is the lower end of the weapons.


BTW thank you Prophet of Wisdom for a very accurate post.

 

Wrong and wrong:

it is stated by a high ranking officer that the Defiant has the capability to slag a planet on it's own in under half an hour. As there is NOTHING (no evidence what so fucking ever) to counter this, then the burden is up to YOU to disprove.

It is also stated that the Enterprise A could, readily and easily, burn away the atmosphere of a Class M (READ - EARTH TYPE) Planet with a single phaser blast by IGNITING the atmosphere and turning it into a high-energy plasma.

In other words, you lose.

 

I believe these are called BLUFFS. Untill they are backed by visuals then it just isn;t so. In fact we have seen visuals that support the reverse. MANY powerful warships were firing on a single planet in the "The Die is cast." They did not ignite the atmosphere or incinerate the crust. In fact the suface is only levelled.

you have to prove they can be done, and only viduals will do that.

 

Uhm, sorry, but this is Star Trek, not Star Wars - OUR officers don't bluff their OWN CREW when doing so puts them in a position to DIE PAINFULLY with NO MEANS of escape. Unlike your untrained morons, our crews are actually important.

As for The Die is Cast, a simple explanation - they didn't WANT to slag the planet, just remove the civilization from it. More than likely, they had wanted to capture the raw materials and such... after all, we don't randomly blow up planets we don't like, we capture them and turn them for our own use.

 

Hye, sometime you exaggerate to your crew. Sometimes people smack talk. Unless we got technical data or visuals to back it up, it's just smack talk, nothing more.

The Romulan and Cardassian had said their intent was to destroy all the Founders. To decimate their world and leave it an unsalvagable ruin. Which would imply a nice atmosphere burn off would be best as uit would be easiest and maximize effectiveness

 

Did you ever stop to think that maybe a "simple atmospheric burn off" wouldn't have been enough? Hell, maybe disruptor based weapons (what the Rommies and cardassians use) arent' capable of atmospheric burn. Would make sense - the nadion particles of a Phaser beam are rather exotic. *shrugs* Who knows, but you're digging on a single plot hole to try to explain away the weapons power of EVERY major power in the entirety of Star Trek - sorry, that simply doesn't work. Every race had unique weapons and technology, unlike in Star Wars where everyone used the same damned thing just with a different color!

 

Hey, sometime you exaggerate to your crew. Sometimes people smack talk. Unless we got technical data or visuals to back it up, it's just smack talk, nothing more.

Then I guess the force is as impotent as a limp schize as we never see it, in the movies, do anything more impressive than lifting a few objects and mind-fucking weak-minded clones. Oh yeah, and choking a person. Whoop de doo, I can do that without the force. It's call mustard gas, tractor beams, and crotical stimulators.

Small problem. Since for Star Wars EU is canon we know the Force can do a a great many more things.

BTW things the force can do as seen in the movies:
*Telekinesesi with no real weaight limit.
*Telepathy with no distance limit
*Clairvoyance with no distance limit
*Hypnosis (BTW Storm Trooper circa A New Hope and beyond are not clones)
*Audio Illusion
*Precognition
*Increase physical speed and other abilities
*Improve skills


The Romulan and Cardassian had said their intent was to destroy all the Founders. To decimate their world and leave it an unsalvagable ruin. Which would imply a nice atmosphere burn off would be best as uit would be easiest and maximize effectiveness ”

Did you ever stop to think that maybe a "simple atmospheric burn off" wouldn't have been enough? Hell, maybe disruptor based weapons (what the Rommies and cardassians use) arent' capable of atmospheric burn. Would make sense - the nadion particles of a Phaser beam are rather exotic. *shrugs* Who knows, but you're digging on a single plot hole to try to explain away the weapons power of EVERY major power in the entirety of Star Trek - sorry, that simply doesn't work. Every race had unique weapons and technology, unlike in Star Wars where everyone used the same damned thing just with a different color!

Well, since it was a Kling on Bird of Prey that ignited and atmosphere in TNG with distrupter fire (albeit on a very volatile atmosphere), your argument is moot. Besides all races have phaser coils as well, it's kind of a universal ship weapon.

Basically untill we see it done in ST we can't know it is smack talk or not. Especially since all previous image conflict directly with what the officers were saying.

Besides Star Wars is much more realistic. A galatic culture would share technologies if they were under a single governement. After all even the Federation would abandon the Photon and Quantum torpedo if it had a better option.

as for different races having different tech, that is true for SW on a smaller scale. Wookies have Bowcasters, Mandolorians have battle armor, Verpines have their own special weaponry...