ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

enterprise-e vs empiral star destroyer

parrothead117

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 299

Report this Mar. 17 2011, 9:28 am

I've never been quite clear on their respective sizes.  Which one is bigger?  And what's a standard crew for a Star Destroyer?


Clearly the Millenium Falcon is much larger than a shuttlecraft.  But the Falcon seems very small compared to a Star Destroyer.  So the Star Destroyer must be much larger than the Enterprise.  The Enterprise would have a mobility edge, but it's not really all that mobile, it takes it a while to turn.


Phasers and photon torpedoes would, at best, only destroy parts of a Star Destroyer.  But Star Destroyers don't seem to have all that much firepower themselves, unless there are a lot of them firing together.


I think it would be a long, slow, unweildy fight, with the Enterprise barely winning in the end.


"We must strive to be more than we are, Lal. It does not matter that we will never reach our ultimate goal. The effort yields its own rewards." - Data, "The Offspring"

Data42286point3

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 36

Report this Mar. 17 2011, 6:58 pm

Quote: parrothead117 @ Mar. 17 2011, 9:28 am

>

>I've never been quite clear on their respective sizes.  Which one is bigger? 

>


In answer to your question - http://www.merzo.net/ - this is the best chart I've ever found.


 


The Falcon is not quite 30 meters, with a galaxy class star ship being a almost 650 meters, and the Death star is about 160 kilometers.


 


Although the Enterprise-E minght pack quite a punch and have better maneuvering cababilities but, against the Death Star sheer power and size, I don't think the Enterprise would last more than a minute.


chr33355

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1551

Report this Mar. 18 2011, 1:41 pm

A star destory's main weapons can one shot kill the Enterprise E.  The Enterprise does have a slight manuverablity advantage but not enough to dodge the Destoryer's weapons. 


 


as you see an star wars episode six all you need to do is target the shield generators witch have little to no protection You don't know what you are talking about.  The things destroyed in episode 6 where not shield generators but communication arrays.  And the fighters will not have enough power to get through the Enterprise shields unless they have missiles.


lnagr1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1403

Report this Mar. 18 2011, 5:42 pm

Hey, be fair the enterprise e is alot smaller, but far easier to manuever!!! Enterprise e can do it, he might just have to do what he did in nemesis or as Janeway did in year of hell, just ram it into it!!!!


lnagr1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1403

Report this Mar. 18 2011, 5:46 pm

Go enterprise!! the other ships weapons wouldnt even touch ablative armor, just install that onto the enterprise e and it would sooooo win!

lnagr1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1403

Report this Mar. 18 2011, 5:48 pm

actually just set species 8472 on them(:

chr33355

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1551

Report this Mar. 18 2011, 7:23 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>as you see an star wars episode six all you need to do is target the shield generators witch have little to no protection You don't know what you are talking about.  The things destroyed in episode 6 where not shield generators but communication arrays.  And the fighters will not have enough power to get through the Enterprise shields unless they have missiles.

>
          did you miss the part when the empiral general says "sir,weve lost are bridge deflecter shiels!" one quantom torpedo could blow the bridge to bits.not even that huge reman ship could destroy the small enterprise,or the borg,or the borg sphere

 

  Yes I did the fact the array was destoryed means the shields were already down.


chr33355

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1551

Report this Mar. 18 2011, 7:27 pm

Quote: lnagr1 @ Mar. 18 2011, 5:42 pm

>

>Hey, be fair the enterprise e is alot smaller, but far easier to manuever!!! Enterprise e can do it, he might just have to do what he did in nemesis or as Janeway did in year of hell, just ram it into it!!!!

>
  Not manuverable enough to dodge turbolasers.  Besides ramming is a useless tactic against the star destoryer because their shields, and armor can take far more punishment than the enterprise's shields (starfleet doesn't have any armor).


Go enterprise!! the other ships weapons wouldnt even touch ablative armor, just install that onto the enterprise e and it would sooooo win!  Sorry ablative armor can't take over 200 gigaton's of firepower.


actually just set species 8472 on them(:  Still an easy victory for the star destoryer.


lnagr1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1403

Report this Mar. 18 2011, 8:55 pm

Hey, give them a chance, im sure they could bring down one of those evil ships!!! sry to all star wars fans here but i dont like star wars!!!!! sry!

lnagr1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1403

Report this Mar. 18 2011, 8:56 pm

Set the Borg on them (: assimilate them!!!!!

chr33355

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1551

Report this Mar. 19 2011, 6:46 am

Quote: lnagr1 @ Mar. 18 2011, 8:55 pm

>

>Hey, give them a chance, im sure they could bring down one of those evil ships!!! sry to all star wars fans here but i dont like star wars!!!!! sry!

>
  Sorry their is no chance Wars weapons and shield tech is just to advanced compaired to star trek.


 


Set the Borg on them (: assimilate them!!!!!  Again the main weapons on a star destoryer can kill everything in the borg arsenal in one shot.


legacymillenium

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 18

Report this Jun. 30 2011, 5:34 pm

I’m so tired of hearing that a turbolaser has gigatons of firepower. Does anyone even know what canon is? Pick up the most recent edition of Star Wars The New Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology, Revised Edition, released from Lucas Books, which is an official book authorized by George Lucas.

First off, the book states that a Turbolaser fires laser energy. This is pretty clear that laser energy means electromagnetic based energy, and not some ultra powerful particle based weapon as suggested by a 200 gigaton yield per shot. That means that a single shot from a Turbolaser has the equivalent yield of 4000 times the Tsar bomba. The amount of damage done to a planet’s surface from a single shot would destroy a small state if not more.

Second, the maximum range of a Turbolaser is 100 Km. Star Trek phasers have a maximum effective range of roughly 300,000 Km.

Third, the amount of fuel utilized by the fusion process to yield 200 gigatons is ridiculously huge. None of this sounds realistic at all. Just watching the battle sequence over the capital didn’t show yield of this level.

Finally, there is no mention of it having a yield of 200 Gigatons. The manual doesn’t state the power output of a Turbolaser just the range and the typr of energy. This information is canon, again coming from the Star Wars The New Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology, Revised Edition. Anything contradicting this SHOUlD NOT BE CONSIDERED CANON.

A type 10 phaser on a Galaxy Class ship is rated at a maximum output power of 50,000 Terrawatts. To be clear it’s a particle beam weapon made of particles called nadions. A turbolaser as stated earlier utilizes, and I quote “laser energy”. The tech manual for SW also states there is a difference between laser enrgy and blaster energy which is consistent to what’s seen on the screen.

This whole 200 Gigaton business is coming from one description by the author of one of the Star Wars books, which by the way is not T-canon at all, and that description does not have any numbers associated with it. It’s just the author’s way of describing the scene. To be completely fair and unbiased we can’t compare a creative decription
from a novel to actual technical numbers stated in the official Star Trek technical manual. It’s comparing apples to oranges. Both have to be on par with the same format. If you are going to compare descriptions of books then compare descriptions of 2 books. If you are going to compare numbers then compare numbers, but don’t start mixing and matching cause all it does is lead to conjecture. It’s like going to court with one side having hearsay and the other having DNA and other measured evidence, the former would get trounced in the court room.


Oh and by the way I mentioned fusion power. I put that in here because such sites and wookiepedia and others have stated that Imperial ships use powerful fusion reactors to power there ships up. I’m not sure what Lucas and any CANON and I repeat, CANON material suggests about the power source or sources used in SW, but fusion power does not make any sense. To do what is suggested by the weapons, shields, and hyperdrives in the SW universe, fusion power WOULD NOT CUT IT. ST primarily uses Antimatter power to power up ships, which is has atleast 1000 times more output per unit of matter compared to the fusion process. In other words, as an example, slamming two deuterium atoms together is for fusion is 1/1000 the power of slamming a deuterium and anti-deuterium together.

legacymillenium

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 18

Report this Jul. 18 2011, 12:31 pm

I keep seeing posts where suddenly this whole one shot from a star destroyer will kill everything is the accepted mantra.  those numbers are in dispute.  Until there is something undisputed you can't quote that as fact.  The entire burden of proof is on the people making the suppostion that a turbolaser has the equivalent power of 200 gigatons.  You need to prove this first beyond a shadow of a doubt, before this becomes accepted.  So before people start saying the burden of proof is on the people doubting the figure, the figure itself must be fully accepted by all parties involved, and the truth is it's not.  For various reasons, the figures are doubted.

Invader_Wishfire

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 27518

Report this Jul. 18 2011, 1:18 pm

One ISD versus one Sovereign-class starship?


ISD doesn't stand a fart's chance in a match-lighting contest.

Invader_Wishfire

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 27518

Report this Jul. 18 2011, 1:46 pm

I didn't dig it out. The poster above me did, less than an hour before my post.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum