Why the SW vs ST debate gets silly
virus-x
must face facts. There is no way in Hell the Galactic Empire & New
Republic are going to be able to move through a wormhole with their
entire forces and conquer the United Federation of Planets. Their
assembled power would be an awesome sight, complete with Eclipse-class
star destroyers, world devastators, death stars, torpedo spheres, etc.,
but it is just way too slow and the technology just isn't there to beat
the UFP. They both portray themselves as being very advanced, and both
contridict themselves on several occasions, but, the facts are there.
The Star Wars universe just doesn't have what it takes. People cry
about size, but that is just about the stupidest arguement I've ever
heard. So just because something is big, it would win? So Arnold
Schwarzeneggar is just going to run all over the asses of Jackie Chan
and Bruce Lee? So Han Solo would just sodomize Yoda, if he smarted off
to him? Don't be an idiot. You're a lot bigger than a bullet, but I
guarantee that a .50 caliber round to your forehead from a Barrett .50
caliber sniper rifle would kill your ass, faster than you'd be able to
say: "uh, oh". I love both, but SW is clearly technologically
inferior, and I point to facts of contridiction and verification in
both universes. If you wish to debate this, I'm right here. However,
I'm not going to listen to emotional bullcrap; back your stuff up with
facts, not the desire to see your arguement win.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
virus-x
doesn't matter. The Death Stars were destroyed by a small,
underpowered starfighter-scale torpedo with less than a kiloton yield,
and a broken down freighter. If you want massive starships from Star
Trek, look at the one from "The Corbomite Maneuver". A handful of
starships combining their power in "Scorpion" destroyed a planet, on
Voyager's season finale. Then, a fleet of ships in "The Die Is Cast"
from DS9 rendered a planet uninhabitable in seconds. As for their mile
long ships, apparently they didn't do the Empire much good, as the
Empire has been beaten into near-extinction by a bunch of ships they
consider out-dated.
Chuck
virus-x <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:040278db...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com...
>If you wish to debate this, I'm right here. However,
> I'm not going to listen to emotional bullcrap; back your stuff up with
> facts, not the desire to see your arguement win.
Welcome.
Here's the FAQ, with plenty of previous arguments to look through for
"facts": http://ttm.choam.org/faq.html
Also, you might want to read the Newbie FAQ:
http://pages.prodigy.net/csonn/faq.html
Finally, a primer on debating here:
http://pages.prodigy.net/csonn/debate.html
Again, welcome aboard, and fire up your heat shields.
--
Chuck
Sci-Fi Debris: http://pages.prodigy.net/csonn/debris.html
Join the Star Wars vs. Star Trek Webring!
http://pages.prodigy.net/csonn/asvs.html
Rob Dalton
Technologically inferior my ass. You don't see many Feddie ships the
size of a small moon that can destroy planets, nor mile-long starships
capable of slagging entire worlds.
Dalton
Strowbridge
>
> Again, like I said, no emotion. And, again, I reiterate that size
> doesn't matter. The Death Stars were destroyed by a small,
> underpowered starfighter-scale torpedo with less than a kiloton yield,
Really? And where did you get that yield from. No emotions, just back it
up with facts.
> A handful of starships combining their power in "Scorpion" destroyed a
> planet, on Voyager's season finale.
Fortunately for the Empire Species 8472½ are, for the most part, back in
their home dimension.
> Then, a fleet of ships in "The Die Is Cast" from DS9 rendered a planet
> uninhabitable in seconds.
Really, that's not what I saw. I saw hits to a small portion of the
planet causing MINOR atmospheric damage.
> As for their mile long ships, apparently they didn't do the Empire
> much good, as the Empire has been beaten into near-extinction by a
> bunch of ships they consider out-dated.
And which ships are those.
C.S.Strowbridge
Rob Dalton
virus-x
it up with facts.
STAR WARS TECHNICAL JOURNAL, Vol. #3: "Unlike some fighters, teh
X-wing's primary fuselage is large enough to carry proton torpedo
launching systems. These weapons allow the fighter to do damage to
target areas that are ray-shielded, where lasers or ion cannons would
be useless. Eash proton torpedo caries a nuclear warhead rated at just
under one kiloton, reequiring that they be fired from greater distances
in order to avoid source-vessel damage."
A handful of starships combining their power in "Scorpion" destroyed a
planet, on Voyager's season finale.
Really, that's not what I saw. I saw hits to a small portion of the
planet causing MINOR atmospheric damage.
MINOR atmospheric damage isn't visable from space. Further, people
don't usually say:
"The first barrage is complete."
"Effect?"
"30% Of the planetary crust destroyed in opening volley."
If they hadn't said that, then the results would have been open to
interpretation. However, the statement is quite clear, and your
interpretation of special effects is completely irrelevant. That's
just living in denial. In fact, that's about as stupid as saying that
the Death Star couldn't destroy a planet. 30% In about 4 seconds.
Explosions visible from space aren't minor atmosphereic disturbances,
either.
As for their mile long ships, apparently they didn't do the Empire much
good, as the Empire has been beaten into near-extinction by a bunch of
ships they consider out-dated.
And which ships are those.
X-wings, Katana Fleet dreadnoughts, YT-1300 freightors, etc. That's
which ships.
C.S.Strowbridge
Rob Dalton
<frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > Really? And where did you get that yield from. No emotions, just
> > back it up with facts.
> STAR WARS TECHNICAL JOURNAL, Vol. #3: "Unlike some fighters, teh
> X-wing's primary fuselage is large enough to carry proton torpedo
> launching systems. These weapons allow the fighter to do damage to
> target areas that are ray-shielded, where lasers or ion cannons
> would be useless. Eash proton torpedo caries a nuclear warhead rated
> at just under one kiloton, reequiring that they be fired from greater
> distances in order to avoid source-vessel damage."
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Tech/Torpedoes/Torpedo2.html
> > > A handful of starships combining their power in "Scorpion"
> > > destroyed a planet, on Voyager's season finale.
And those were S8472, who are far more advanced than any piddly Star
Trek faction.
> > Really, that's not what I saw. I saw hits to a small portion of the
> > planet causing MINOR atmospheric damage.
> MINOR atmospheric damage isn't visable from space. Further,
> people don't usually say:
> "The first barrage is complete."
> "Effect?"
> "30% Of the planetary crust destroyed in opening volley."
> If they hadn't said that, then the results would have been open to
> interpretation. However, the statement is quite clear, and your
> interpretation of special effects is completely irrelevant. That's
> just living in denial. In fact, that's about as stupid as saying
> that the Death Star couldn't destroy a planet. 30% In about 4
> seconds. Explosions visible from space aren't minor atmosphereic
> disturbances, either.
FAQ you. http://ttm.choam.org/faq.html
> > > As for their mile long ships, apparently they didn't do the Empire
> > > much good, as the Empire has been beaten into near-extinction by a
> > > bunch of ships they consider out-dated.
> > And which ships are those.
> X-wings,
Prototype starfighter. When the Galactic Empire came into power, Incom
took all plans and prototypes to the rebellion. X-Wings are highly
versatile and hardly outdated.
> Katana Fleet dreadnoughts,
Red herring. Those did not appear until the Thrawn Trilogy, and even
then Thrawn got most of them.
> YT-1300 freightors,
One. The Millennium Falcon.
> etc. That's which ships.
Funny, you neglect to mention Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, Corellian
Corvettes, Stolen Nebulon-B frigates, Y-Wings, A-Wings, B-Wings, Escort
Frigates, and New Republic-built Star Destroyers.
And you also neglect the existance of the Aing-Tii monks, who could
wipe out S8472 without even breaking a sweat.
Dalton
virus-x
X-wings were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated. They were
outdated by the third movie. Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, Corellian
Corvettes, Nebulon-B frigates, Y-Wings, A-Wings, B-Wings; those are all
outdated, too. Why don't you read the books, sometime.
I don't know what red herring you're talking about. Dreadnoughts were
around, long before the Thrawn Campaign. Just because they weren't
called Katana dreadnoughts is irrelevant. Dreadnoughts are even more
outdated than the rest of them.
Further, I don't really care about Aing-Tii monks. They don't pertain
to any stories I'm discussing, here. For that matter, Jesus Christ
could beat all of them, put together.
As for 8472's technological superiority, why were they beaten so badly,
they retreated from our plane, entirely by a single frigate (Voyager)?
Because they weren't as superior as they thought, obviously.
Rob Dalton
X-wings >were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated. They were
outdated by >the third movie. Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, Corellian
Corvettes,
>Nebulon-B frigates, Y-Wings, A-Wings, B-Wings; those are all outdated,
>too. Why don't you read the books, sometime.
Getting a wee bit emotional there, eh? You never even mentioned what
period of time you were talking about. And yes, I have read the books,
obviously more than you.
>I don't know what red herring you're talking about.
The New Republic did not have any Katana Fleet dreadnoughts except the
six brought in by Garm Bel Iblis.
>Dreadnoughts were around, long before the Thrawn Campaign. Just
because >they weren't called Katana dreadnoughts is irrelevant.
Then why did you say "Katana Fleet Dreadnoughts?"
> Dreadnoughts are even more outdated than the rest of them.
And that's why the New Republic has replaced them with MC90a Star
Cruisers.
>Further, I don't really care about Aing-Tii monks. They don't pertain
>to any stories I'm discussing, here.
Yes they do. Read Vision of the Future by Timothy Zahn.
>For that matter, Jesus Christ could beat all of them, put together.
Strawman attack.
>As for 8472's technological superiority, why were they beaten so
badly, >they retreated from our plane, entirely by a single frigate
(Voyager)? >Because they weren't as superior as they thought, obviously.
No, because Voyager pulled some technobabble bullshit solution out of
their ass and exploited the glaring flaw of S8472. And they are far
more advanced since they blew up a planet. Stop contradicting yourself.
Dalton
virus-x
> (WEG,BTM, etc.) put the yield at anywhere from 150 kt, to 5 mt.
> BTW, the torpedo didn't destroy the DS. It set off the reactor, the
> resulting explosion set off a chain reaction that destroyed the
> DS. But off course, anyone who has seen the movie know that.
It's poorly researched, because you don't like the data. If it was so
bad, maybe LucasArts shouldn't have approved it. Further, West End
Games, if that's what you mean by WEG, doesn't give yields on
torpedoes. If they do, where? Quote them, don't talk about them.
Also, I really don't care about what point the torpedo struck, it
wouldn't do any good against Federation ships. That's what this is
about, not how they blew up the Death Star.
The FACT remains that the dialogue doesn't match either what we
see or the computer generated estimation (which you conveniently
ignored). Ergo, it is the DIALOGUE that is the problem, not the
visuals.
Again, I don't care about your personal interpretations. That's what
the episode said. Neither you, nor I, can dispute them, because they
wrote it. If you're going to run on, tell me what computer estimation
you're talking about, or do you really have one? I have the movie on,
right here, and I don't see any 'computer generated estimation'. The
dialog is written and approved.
X-Wings are top of the line, so is the MF. As for the dreadnoughts, they
were only a problem due to the state of the Imperial Navy at the time.
X-wings were top-of-the-line 20 years ago, when "A New Hope" came out.
Not, anymore. The Millennium Falcon isn't either. The Imperial Navy
was defeated using dreadnoughts, as well as all their other ships, and
this was from the beginning. Since you like to throw names like WEG
around, try looking in the Rebel Alliance Sourcebook on page 59 at a
modified one. Obviously, they had to have them, to modify them.
virus-x
They are not too slow, hyperdrive has speeds of at least 127 ly/hr,
with many drives producing speeds in excess of 2000 ly/hr.
Naturally, you neglect to mention the fact that Timothy Zahn's account
contridicted everyone else's. Also, I asked people to show their
sources, not just drop names. Must I do things for you?
Dark Force Rising: .5 hyperdrive = 127 light years/hour
Heir to the Empire: .4 hyperdrive multiplier, 70 light years/day
Star Wars Technical Journal of the Planet Tatooine Vol #1; page 16:
"Able to reach .5 beyond lightspeed, she is one of the fastest
non-Imperial vessels currently in use and owes much of her power
availability curve to a vast array of unregistered and normally
incompatible computer and thrust modifications."
"In addition to piloting, I like to tinker. She'll make point five
factors beyond lightspeed." -Han Solo, Star Wars, A New Hope, page 92;
by George Lucas
If the ships were moving that fast, they'd be destroyed, instantly.
"Real objects in realspace have a hyperspace shadow - if a star is at a
certain location in realspace, it is also pesent in hyperspace at the
same location. This explains the inherent danger in travelling through
hyperspace. Contact with a hyprspace shadow results in instant
destruction for the unlucky ship, just as running into a planet in
realspace would result in a ship's destruction." Star Wars, the Role
Playing Game (approved by LucasArts), page 113; "Hyperspace".
If they could fly that fast, there would be no unknown parts of their
galaxy: "Still, over 90 percent of the objects in realspace are
unknown.." Star Wars, the Role Playing Game, page 113; "Nav Computers"
And yet, somehow the Zulus managed to overrun the British rather
handedly.
The Zulus did not defeat the British, they were defeated. The Zulus
won some battles, nothing more. They won the battle, and lost the war.
Commander Thelea
It doesn't matter. A 25,000 year old Full-scale (2.5km+) cruiser from
the age of Xim the Despot could probably take out a 450m Strike class
Pocket cruiser that had come out of the shipyards a week ago. That's
the staticness of Star Wars technology. The Old Republic/Empire/New
Republic is like ancient Egypt. The Egyptians actually lost the ability
to build massive stone pyramids after the old kingdom, though by the
time of the New Kingdom they'd discovered the wheel. Still, for the
entire existance of ancient Egypt, they had virtually no technological
change. The same goes for the Empire. There's official proof that
3,000+ years old Invincible Class Heavy Cruisers are still in service
with the Corporate Sector Authority, and they have firepower comparable
to a VSD-II.. Infact, they could probably take one down in a fight,
considering they have three times as many fighters.
There is a WEG statement saying that a standard Proton torpedo is
equivlant to a modern nuke. The most common nuke in the 90s when those
WEG books were made, and still is today, is the 500 kiloton device,
used on Russian SS-18s and our Trident submarine missiles, and British
submarine missiles. Considering that Photon torpedoes have an yield of
48 megatons when factoring in the lack of complete annilation, an
average of 20 megatons would be concentrated against the shields of a
starship by one, because of the bubble-shaped nature of the shields.
However, a Proton torpedo focuses the entire blast into a very small
arc directly forward. With a direct hit, the FULL force of the 500
kilotons would be directed against a circular area of the shields
around 1 meter in diameter, to be generous. At the same time, a 1 meter
area of the shields affected by the detonation of a Photon torpedo
would receive far less of the energy; based on the detonations we see
an screen, let's be generous and say 100 kilotons are directed at an
area of the shield that size at the point of impact. 1/5th of the
energy directed by a Proton torpedo. Though the total energy directed
against the target is far less, it's far more likely to overload a
small area of the shield than a Photon torpedo is, with leftover force
to impact against the hull.
Finally, the visual evidence in The Die is Cast shows that those ships
only destroyed the surface, not the entire crust in that area. The
reason for this is that if the entire crust had been destroyed down to
the magma level in that area, the crust covering the other 70% of the
planet would have instantly cracked into dozens of pieces. It didn't,
therefore the entire crust in that area was not destroyed.
And, last of all.. The method of destruction for the Death Star I was
a serious design flaw, but the method of the destruction of the Death
Star II is irrelevant because it was UNDER CONSTRUCTION. I'm sure I
could blow up an Abrahms tank with a hand grenade if it was under
construction, it didn't have a turret yet, and I threw it inside
through the big gaping opening where the turret will go. Sheesh. There
are your scientific answers.
Commander Mrith'hele'arana. "If where your enemy fights with intensity
he will survive, but if not he will perish, it is called 'Fatal
Terrain'. On Fatal Terrain, always engage in battle." - Sun-tzu,
Chinese military theoretician, from his essays "The Art of War".
Morphious
of. In the star Trek world the only time that I saw any thing being
modified was on the original Star Trek. That was another part of what made
it so good. The ships in Star Wars are more or less all modified to be
better in some way. After one or two meetings in combat the Star Wars
Vessles would be modifid to be able to compete with the Star Trek ships.
That is the reason why Star Wars will always have the upper hand, because
the ships in the Star Wars universe can be change to add more shielding or
add more to the ships arsenal.
Look at all of the modifications that Boba Fett did to his ship. If every
ship in the Star Wars universe had the same fire power and battle power as
the Slave 1 does, and any ship could be modified to have that power in the
Star Wars universe, then between the numbers and the brute force of space
combat in the Star Wars universe they would have the power to destroy the
UFP.
Not to mention if it came to hand to hand combat the jedi could destroy any
species in Star Trek.
And just to let all of you know there is emotion in this posting, and no I
don't have any facts to prove my opoinos of my feelings of Science Fiction.
--
have you ever had a dream that you were so sure was real?
Rob Dalton
[snip]
Unfortunately, all your shit is contradicted by canon.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
I want a holodeck. Then I can simulate the impossible - like ST beating
SW.
virus-x
this cryptic VSD-II, is not known to me. I keep asking people to leave
documentation of their source, and no one does. The Invincible class
has a hull rating of 3D+2 and 2D in shields. A Victory I has 2D
shields & 4D shields. In "Han Solo & the Corporate Sector Authority",
I see on pages 92-94 no evidence that they carry any starfighters. The
Victory I is shown to carry:
"2 TIE fighter squadrons (6 fighters/squadron, Star Wars the role
playing game sourcebook, page 27), Star Wars the role playing game
Sourcebook, page 32. While the Invincible does have compariable
firepower, it would boil down to the captains, if the Victory doesn't
launch fighters.
In the late 70s-early 80s, we stopped using 500 kiloton weaponry,
because the physical destruction curve levels out after SHARPLY after
300 kilotons. My friend is a former WT (Weapons Technician) from the
United States Navy nuclear weapons technician, and I am a United States
Army Military Police Physical Security veteran, and we both know that
your figures on nuclear weapons is way off. We stopped using 500
kiloton warheads around 20 years ago, in the mid-1980s. We've
experience with Soviet firepower, and it is not nearly that high,
either. We cannot legally disclose the true yields, but they are much
lower. If you wish to see real sources or speak to that nuclear
weapons technician, contact me at FromBF...@hotmail.com, and it
will be more clearly explained. As for the rest about how a proton
torpedo warhead works, you have no evidence. What West End Games says
is irrelevant, only what LucasArts authorizes is held as canon. Where,
in writing, does it say this, and where is the authentication?
Finally, the visual evidence in The Die is Cast shows that those ships
only destroyed the surface, not the entire crust in that area. The
reason for this is that if the entire crust had been destroyed down to
the magma level in that area, the crust covering the other 70% of the
planet would have instantly cracked into dozens of pieces. It didn't,
therefore the entire crust in that area was not destroyed.
No one said that the planet had been pounded down to the magma.
Furthermore, what we did and didn't see was dictated by special effects
technicians. They said the crust was destroyed; they didn't say it
wasn't there, anymore. If I blow up a car with a stick of dynamite,
it's destroyed, not completely blown to nothingness.
And, last of all.. The method of destruction for the Death Star I was a
serious design flaw, but the method of the destruction of the Death
Star II is irrelevant because it was UNDER CONSTRUCTION. I'm sure I
could blow up an Abrahms tank with a hand grenade if it was under
construction, it didn't have a turret yet, and I threw it inside
through the big gaping opening where the turret will go. Sheesh. There
are your scientific answers.
The Abrahms was not touted to be invincible; the Death Stars were.
Furhermore, in Return of the Jedi, didn't the Emperor say that the
Death Star was "armed and operational"?
You should join the military and study weapons, before trying to
comment on them through whatever source you may or may not have
consulted. And there is nothing scientific in anything you've
presented me.
Commander Mrith'hele'arana. "If where your enemy fights with intensity
he will survive, but if not he will perish, it is called 'Fatal
Terrain'. On Fatal Terrain, always engage in battle." - Sun-tzu,
Chinese military theoretician, from his essays "The Art of War".
If you do further research into Sun-Tzu, you will find that the great
general never fought in any pivotal wars in China, and never got a
chance to test out his theories.
Rob Dalton
[snip]
God damn it, will you please differentiate between your shit and
Thelea's stuff?
--
Dalton
It is not enough to know; you must also know how to -apply- what you
know.
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Rob Dalton
>
Actually, I find this very true and believable.
> --
> have you ever had a dream that you were so sure was real?
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Some people have one of those days. I have one of those lives.
virus-x
Coruscant to Tatoonine in less than 24 hours. As Coruscant is in the
galactic core, and Tatooine is on the outer edge of the galaxy, the
distance between these two star systems must be _at least_ 30,000
lightyears. This requires a speed of at least 2000 ly/hr, and a much
more likely speed of around 5000 ly/hr.
As I have mentioned, before, both Star Wars and Star Trek contridict
themselves in matters of speed. The Enterprise D crosses the
Federation in an episode, when it should've taken substantially longer,
on the order of years. And where do you have distances from Tatooine
and Coruscant? Again, no one wants to quote directly from sources,
because you don't have any. Like I said already:
If the ships were moving that fast, they'd be destroyed, instantly.
"Real objects in realspace have a hyperspace shadow - if a star is at a
certain location in realspace, it is also pesent in hyperspace at the
same location. This explains the inherent danger in travelling through
hyperspace. Contact with a hyprspace shadow results in instant
destruction for the unlucky ship, just as running into a planet in
realspace would result in a ship's destruction." Star Wars, the Role
Playing Game (approved by LucasArts), page 113; "Hyperspace".
AND
Star Wars Technical Journal of the Planet Tatooine Vol #1; page 16:
"Able to reach .5 beyond lightspeed, she is one of the fastest
non-Imperial vessels currently in use and owes much of her power
availability curve to a vast array of unregistered and normally
incompatible computer and thrust modifications." "In addition to
piloting, I like to tinker. She'll make point five factors beyond
lightspeed." -Han Solo, Star Wars, A New Hope, page 92; by George Lucas
AND
If the ships were moving that fast, they'd be destroyed, instantly.
"Real objects in realspace have a hyperspace shadow - if a star is at a
certain location in realspace, it is also pesent in hyperspace at the
same location. This explains the inherent danger in travelling through
hyperspace. Contact with a hyprspace shadow results in instant
destruction for the unlucky ship, just as running into a planet in
realspace would result in a ship's destruction." Star Wars, the Role
Playing Game (approved by LucasArts), page 113; "Hyperspace".
Which indicates nothing, as if they were truly travelling at that
speed, the movies could not happen. The entore galaxy would be a black
hole.
The movie would happen, if the worlds were close together, as they so
obviously are. If you look at a galaxy, the closer to the core you
get, the closer the worlds are together. I don't even think you know
what you're talking about with this black hole stuff.
WEG materials are at the very bottom of the official materials chart,
just above the computer games, which don't even count. I suggest you
read this group's FAQ before you make a fool of yourself. The danger of
high speeds does not mean that it is impossible, rather it means that
their computers are capable of plotting every object along the journey
that could possibly harm them.
If they could fly that fast, there would be no unknown parts of their
galaxy: "Still, over 90 percent of the objects in realspace are
unknown.." Star Wars, the Role Playing Game, page 113; "Nav Computers"
I don't care where you rate canon, it's canon. George Lucas only
approves stuff for his movies that he says fits, and he has made
mistakes, but guess what? He still approves them. The only series not
judged to be canon is the Marvel Comics Star Wars series. So I really
don't care about your jury-rigged FAQs. Unless it's a site approved by
and run by LucasArts, it doesn't mean anything, except that someone
else has an imagination. And even if a computer could plot a course,
which it obviously could, or they couldn't fly at all, that doesn't
mean that the ships could turn fast enough to avoid objects in front of
them, when they're moving that fast. In Empire Strikes Back, if star
destroyers were that maneuverable, why couldn't they pull away from
those asteroids and avoid colliding with each other?
Which is contradicte by both the Behind the Magic map, and the Vector
Prime map. It is clearly shown that they have explored virtually their
entore galaxy.
Like I said, the sources contridict themselves. If you look in the
Star Wars the Role Playing Game (2nd edition) book on page 131, you'll
see that they aren't all over the galaxy. Also, read in the Star Wars
the role playing game sourcebook on page 33:
"The galaxy is huge; even the Empire has never visited a majority of
the stars within it. Controlling it all is impossible. The best that
can be hoped for is to frighten all into submission with the threat of
destruction - and swiftly and ruthlessly crush any opposition that
appears."
Technological superiority will still not win you a war. The Imperial
fleet numbers at least 4 million ships, while the federation is around
5000. Those kind of odds are impossible to beat.
Again, estimates with no proof or sources. Until you tell me where
exactly you find information, all you have is wishful thinking and
speculation.
"WEG materials are at the very bottom of the official materials chart,
just above the computer games, which don't even count. I suggest you
read this group's FAQ before you make a fool of yourself." I suggest
you take stock of the fact that you try to discredit any source that
says something you don't like.
virus-x
In no Star Trek series has there ever not been some form of
modification done to something, especially engines and shields.
Furthermore, if the Star Wars universe possessed people intelligent
enough to make the technological leap of light years between Wars and
Trek, they'd have done it, already. If everyone flew a Death Star, it
wouldn't make any difference. They're still way too far behind the
curve. As it is, they've been around 25,000 years, and can barely
break the speed of light. And as for the Jedi, I really don't think
the Q are too worried. Or the Dowg. Or the Vulcans. Or the
Cytherians. Or the Ocampa. Or the Founders. Or the Borg. Or Species
8472.
Chuck
Graeme Dice <grd...@home.com> wrote in message
news:388691E0...@home.com...
> Special effects are irrelevant and do not exist for the purpose of this
> debate. Please read the FAQ.
You of course mean that we do not use the fact that something is an effect
to exclude it from discussion, or give it less weight. Right?
Chuck
virus-x <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:2750ac20...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com...
> Like I said, the sources contridict themselves.
You've said this before. You've also chastised people for not giving
sources. So, which is it?
Would you like us all to just say Star Trek will win? Is that what you
want? You're picking and choosing evidence for your sources and disallowing
the evidence of others. You've admitted you're not interested in the rules
for debate that we've set up. You obviously haven't read the FAQ, despite
many requests to do so. You tell people not to be emotional, and then make
insulting remarks to them. In short, you're rude, and you are unwilling to
listen to reason. If you decide to remain and continue to act like this,
here's what will happen: the Wars side will come to despise you because
you're impossible to debate with; the Trek side will be embarrassed of you
for the very same reason; after some time of trying to deal with you and
failing, both sides will agree to just killfile you altogether so you no
longer need to be dealt with. Sorry, but that's the truth. If you don't
want to play nice with others, then no one will play with you.
virus-x
I don't know any Thelea. No wonder you're not making any progress in
this discussion; you've not much of a vocabulary. Your explainations
suck, and you can't say two words without swearing. Move on to 10th
grade.
virus-x
simulate a clue.
virus-x
Unless it's approved by LucasArts, and I haven't seen one that was,
yet, it's just as meaningless as your tired, groundless, pointless and
unproven arguements.
virus-x
You've said this before. You've also chastised people for not giving
sources. So, which is it?
These are people that quote sources and say that the one they had is
the only one, and most of them don't even do that. If you have one
that says there's 2 and one that says there's 3, don't automatically
tell me there's 2. Try checking more than one source, for a change,
and actually say who you're using. I have.
Oh, I'm rude? I'm not the one that swears at others, little boy.
Furthermore, I don't really give a crap what they do on their sites,
they can do what they want to. I do what I want, here. So I really
don't care about what you think is rude. As for their constanty
throwing their little FAQ at me like a life preserver, why don't they
ever say that their little FAQ is from an official source? Probably
because it isn't. I quote every source I have, and if they conflict,
I'll say so, because unless I can find a tiebreaker source, I have no
source, and I'm willing to admit it, right down to author and page. So
if you're going to pitch a fit, then pitch one at the people that
attack me with profanity, because I'm not really caring about your
little hissy. I don't insult, unless I'm insulted, and that's what's
coming in. Check, before you write. I don't know where you come from,
but where I come from, we defend ourselves from verbal tyrades, not sit
back and cry. If you can't find sources to back up what you say, then
don't say it's canon. I had to tell someone else the books and pages
of their own source, just a few letters back, becaue he, apparently
didn't know, himself.
Commander Thelea
<frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> A Victory-class star destroyer, if that's what you mean by just
> saying
> this cryptic VSD-II, is not known to me.
If, as you say below, you're in the military, you ought to understand
acronyms. VSD-II stands for Victory class Star Destroyer Mark Two.
I keep asking people to
> leave
> documentation of their source, and no one does.
Maybe because you don't provide any documentation for YOUR sources.
And I did provide it; visual evidence for The Die is Cast.
The Invincible
> class
> has a hull rating of 3D+2 and 2D in shields. A Victory I has 2D
> shields & 4D shields. In "Han Solo & the Corporate Sector
> Authority",
> I see on pages 92-94 no evidence that they carry any starfighters.
I believe the 72-fighter reference is from Lords of the Expanse or
another of the adventure journals.
> The
> Victory I is shown to carry:
> "2 TIE fighter squadrons (6 fighters/squadron, Star Wars the role
> playing game sourcebook, page 27),
Official evidence in the X-wing novels says 12 fighters a squadron,
and that overrides WEG.
Star Wars the role playing game
> Sourcebook, page 32. While the Invincible does have compariable
> firepower, it would boil down to the captains, if the Victory
> doesn't
> launch fighters.
If neither ship launches fighters, you mean, yes. It still shows,
though, that it's irrelevant if the ships are old. Star Wars tech stays
the same.
> In the late 70s-early 80s, we stopped using 500 kiloton weaponry,
> because the physical destruction curve levels out after SHARPLY
> after
> 300 kilotons.
The destruction curve never "levels out". It increases at the same
rate. That rate just isn't equal to the rate of increase of the
megatonage. For instance, a 20 megaton bomb will level structures in an
area 120 times larger than a 20 kiloton bomb will, despite the fact
it's firepower is 1,000 times greater.
My friend is a former WT (Weapons Technician) from
> the
> United States Navy nuclear weapons technician, and I am a United
> States
> Army Military Police Physical Security veteran, and we both know
> that
> your figures on nuclear weapons is way off.
Actually, they're not. And what does physical security mean? And when
did you leave the service, because a "Physical Security" division of
the Military Police must be very new.. I've never heard of it before.
Are you armed exclusively with nightsticks or something?
We stopped using 500
> kiloton warheads around 20 years ago, in the mid-1980s.
That's wrong. I'm looking at a file in my hand that I got through the
freedom of information act, and there's a 500 kiloton warhead type
listed on it. There's also 20 bombs we still have greater than 10
megatons in yield, for that matter.
We've
> experience with Soviet firepower, and it is not nearly that high,
> either.
Wrong. All Russian SS-18s have multiple 500 kiloton warheads.
We cannot legally disclose the true yields, but they are
> much
> lower.
A lie. Through the freedom of information act, I'm holding in my hands
a list of the names and megatonage of all warheads currently in US
service. They're not going to give out the construction blueprints, but
the Freedom of Information act allows any US citizen to get a list of
the yields of nuclear warheads, of instance.
If you wish to see real sources or speak to that nuclear
> weapons technician, contact me at FromBF...@hotmail.com, and it
> will be more clearly explained.
I don't need anything explained from a Troll who's lieing about his
background. "Physical security". Did you make that up from watching a
cartoon?
As for the rest about how a proton
> torpedo warhead works, you have no evidence.
Official sources say the entire blast is focused towards the target.
Numerous official sources.
What West End Games
> says
> is irrelevant, only what LucasArts authorizes is held as canon.
> Where,
> in writing, does it say this, and where is the authentication?
NOTHING LucasArts says is Canon, dimwit. What LucasFilm says is Canon.
LucasArts makes the Computer games, not the movies!
> No one said that the planet had been pounded down to the magma.
The Star Trek ships are weaker than Star Wars ships. Thank you for
admitting that.
> Furthermore, what we did and didn't see was dictated by special
> effects
> technicians.
Visual evidence overrides dialogue.
They said the crust was destroyed; they didn't say it
> wasn't there, anymore. If I blow up a car with a stick of
> dynamite,
> it's destroyed, not completely blown to nothingness.
True. But an ISD can do a Base Delta Zero. Turn a planet to molten
slag, down to the Core. The TOTAL destruction of the entire crust,
depending on which official source you listen to, but ALL of them give
it some sort of capability like that.
> The Abrahms was not touted to be invincible; the Death Stars were.
No, not Invincible. Tarkin just thought that his Death Star was
invunerable from Snub-fighter attacks. If that exhaust port hadn't been
there, he'd have been right.
> Furhermore, in Return of the Jedi, didn't the Emperor say that the
> Death Star was "armed and operational"?
No. The Superlaser was armed and Operational. Try this analogy: A
Battleship is under construction, and it's turrets have been installed,
but there's no superstructure or funnels, and half the hull plates
haven't been put on yet. Then the enemy comes to bombard the harbour
where this Battleship is under construction, and the main turrets are
used like improvised coastal defence batteries. That is a proper
analogy to the status of the Death Star II.
> You should join the military and study weapons, before trying to
> comment on them through whatever source you may or may not have
> consulted.
I was going to go to the Airforce academy, but my eyesight wasn't good
enough. I have a serious fascination with nuclear warfare, and I study
it constantly. Enough to know that you're making up everything you've
claimed about nuclear weapons.. And your career, most likely. Unless
you were drunk when you posted that.
And there is nothing scientific in anything you've
> presented me.
Yes there is. I just didn't write out any long numbers because there's
half a dozen websites where you can find those for what I said.
> If you do further research into Sun-Tzu, you will find that the
> great
> general never fought in any pivotal wars in China, and never got a
> chance to test out his theories.
It's irrelevant, because that's just a quote. And by studying ancient
battles, you can find that successful generals employed strategies like
those he described. Some of them had read his works. Simply because he
didn't test them personally doesn't mean they weren't right.
A final note.. Even if an Imperator class vessel is only comparable to
a 1.9km long Kazon Predator, a race that doesn't have transporters and
pretty much fits the technology level you claim for the Empire, a Kazon
Predator was the equal of an Interpid class Starship, which is
generally agreed on by Trekkies to have half the firepower of a Galaxy
class starship. Therefore, even if it took 2 ISDs to equal a Galaxy as
you seem to be claiming with your vague "Less advanced" claims, does
the Federation have 12,500 Galaxy class Starships? Hell no. The Empire
would still win. And the Empire is far more powerful than the Kazon. It
would be a complete slaughter.
virus-x
special effects that are not made by astrophysicists. Just like the
idiot that tried telling people the exact output of turbolasers,
because the asteroids looked red to him in Empire Strikes Back. From
that, he immediately said that he knew the mineral content and exact
sizes, and how much it would take to destroy them. That's what I mean.
No one says exactly where this so called computer evidence is, because
it isn't there, and they choose to ignore the fact that the facts were
clearly stated by the actors in the scene, so that even a blind man
would know what just happened.
Chuck
virus-x <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:00091c0e...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com...
> Oh, I'm rude? I'm not the one that swears at others, little boy.
Yeah, it takes a big man to call people names doesn't it. I read every one
of your posts smart guy, and you are not reasonable, and you show no sign of
being the mature one. Wake up; you're not the first person to come in
making grandiose remarks and claiming to be the mature one. It will
continue long after you've left us believe me. The simple fact is: you
don't want to discuss this. You're convinced that you're right and that
everyone else is wrong. Your ego is bloated and you are intolerable, and
every post only serves to further prove this.
You don't want to play by the groups that this group decided upon? Fine, go
back to where you came from, write a webpage, post on a BBS, but I have a
feeling no one's going to want to respond to any of your messages on this
group very soon, from either side of the debate.
Commander Thelea
<dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
> Grand Admiral Reid wrote:
> >
> > Rob Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote in message
> > news:38869A1E...@erols.com...
> > > virus-x wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I don't know any Thelea. No wonder you're not making any
> progress in
> > > > this discussion; you've not much of a vocabulary. Your
> explainations
> > > > suck, and you can't say two words without swearing. Move on
> to 10th
> > > > grade.
> > > >
> > >
> insufficient. I have
> > > seen better arguments and insults out of a five year old.
> Additionally,
> > > it seems you lack sufficient attention to continue with this
> debate as
> > > Thelea is the person you were replying, or at least trying, to
> reply to.
> > > In the future, please do try to learn how to use the internet.
> >
> > Virus x is like a politician. You ask them a question that they
> are not
> > prepared to answer so they look at their notes and give you some
> bullshit
> > they thought about for a while.
> This is very true.
> > Example:
> > Reporter: Sir how could such an underpowered ship destroy the
> Death Star?
> > Politician: *aww shit cant answer this umm better think of
> something quick*
> > because the X-Wing is out of date.
> > Reporter: huh?
> > Politician: Vote for virus!
> >
> LoL
> > Thats basically how he argues. Just like a politician he can
> not directly
> > answer you question because he has no answer, so he trys to
> swerve around it
> > by bullshitting.
> >
> Looks like something fell into the batch of TOWNMNBS clone DNA.
Not only that, but this guy said he was from the quote "Physical
Security" section of the Army Military Police. Thanks to the freedom of
information act, I checked around and confirmed that there is NO SUCH
THING as a "Physical Security" section of the Army Military Police,
though I already knew that.. I now have that, in addition to the fact
that the USA, Russia, and Britain have 500 kiloton nukes, in writing.
Next he's probably going to say that the Physical Security section
teaches Kung-Fu to basic trainees and that he's killed thirty people
with his bare hands. I know the type.
Also, he uses the infamous "My friend" or "My Teacher" or "My Father"
defence that Mike Wong slaughters so many people for verbally, in
claiming that his best friend in an ex-nuclear technician in the Navy
and says the USA doesn't have 500 kiloton nuclear warheads. The problem
with his claim is that nuclear technicians work on reactors, not
nuclear missiles and their warheads. Stupid idiot can't even lie
properly.
Finally.. Reid.. Your little Politician gig is damned funny. I
wouldn't be surprised if, when discussing nukes or the military, Virus
says a George W. Bush Jr.-ism, like.. "Uh.. Kosovos.. Kosvoians.. Uh..
Uh... Kosovoarovians..? Err, those people from near Albania."
Strowbridge
>
> > Really? And where did you get that yield from. No emotions, just
> > back it up with facts.
>
Ah yes. The poorly researched and utter crap SW:TJ. Other sources (WEG,
BTM, etc.) put the yield at anywhere from 150 kt, to 5 mt.
BTW, the torpedo didn't destroy the DS. It set off the reactor, the
resulting explosion set off a chain reaction that destroyed the DS. But
off course, anyone who has seen the movie know that.
> A handful of starships combining their power in "Scorpion" destroyed a
> planet, on Voyager's season finale.
>
> Really, that's not what I saw. I saw hits to a small portion of the
> planet causing MINOR atmospheric damage.
>
> MINOR atmospheric damage isn't visable from space.
Bullshit. Last year there were forest fires in Florida that were visible
from space.
> Further, people don't usually say:
> "The first barrage is complete."
> "Effect?"
> "30% Of the planetary crust destroyed in opening volley."
> If they hadn't said that, then the results would have been open to
> interpretation. However, the statement is quite clear, and your
> interpretation of special effects is completely irrelevant. That's
> just living in denial.
And completely ignoring the visuals which show less than 30% of the
planet effected isn't living in denial?
The FACT remains that the dialogue doesn't match either what we see or
the computer generated estimation (which you conveniently ignored).
Ergo, it is the DIALOGUE that is the problem, not the visuals.
> > > As for their mile long ships, apparently they didn't do the Empire
> > > much good, as the Empire has been beaten into near-extinction by
> > > a bunch of ships they consider out-dated.
>
> > And which ships are those.
>
> X-wings, Katana Fleet dreadnoughts, YT-1300 freightors, etc. That's
> which ships.
X-Wings are top of the line, so is the MF. As for the dreadnoughts, they
were only a problem due to the state of the Imperial Navy at the time.
C.S.Strowbridge
Graeme Dice
>
> Though we debate it ad-nauseum, it is still interesting. However, we
> must face facts. There is no way in Hell the Galactic Empire & New
> Republic are going to be able to move through a wormhole with their
> entire forces and conquer the United Federation of Planets. Their
> assembled power would be an awesome sight, complete with Eclipse-class
> star destroyers, world devastators, death stars, torpedo spheres, etc.,
> but it is just way too slow and the technology just isn't there to beat
> the UFP.
They are not too slow, hyperdrive has speeds of at least 127 ly/hr, with
many drives producing speeds in excess of 2000 ly/hr.
> They both portray themselves as being very advanced, and both
> contridict themselves on several occasions, but, the facts are there.
> The Star Wars universe just doesn't have what it takes. People cry
> about size, but that is just about the stupidest arguement I've ever
> heard. So just because something is big, it would win? So Arnold
> Schwarzeneggar is just going to run all over the asses of Jackie Chan
> and Bruce Lee? So Han Solo would just sodomize Yoda, if he smarted off
> to him? Don't be an idiot. You're a lot bigger than a bullet, but I
> guarantee that a .50 caliber round to your forehead from a Barrett .50
> caliber sniper rifle would kill your ass, faster than you'd be able to
> say: "uh, oh".
And yet, somehow the Zulus managed to overrun the British rather
handedly.
> I love both, but SW is clearly technologically
> inferior, and I point to facts of contridiction and verification in
> both universes. If you wish to debate this, I'm right here. However,
> I'm not going to listen to emotional bullcrap; back your stuff up with
> facts, not the desire to see your arguement win.
Graeme Dice
--
"Ok, so we built robots, and they became smarter then we,
then they started destroying us. Been there, done that,
and with a 3D graphics accelerator card to boot"
-- Dror Foyer / 'Captain Internet', Israeli computer magazine,
comenting on 'The Matrix'
Grand Admiral Reid
> "A New Hope" happened about 20 years ago. Get with the present.
> X-wings were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated. They were
> outdated by the third movie. Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, Corellian
> Corvettes, Nebulon-B frigates, Y-Wings, A-Wings, B-Wings; those are all
> outdated, too. Why don't you read the books, sometime.
Are you trying to tell us that X-Wings were outdated when they destroyed the
Death Star? What a kriffin joke. They were top of the line whey they
destroyed the Death Star and exploited a major weakness in the design.
A-Wings and B-Wings were the top of the line starfighters during the Return
of the Jedi time period, and have been replaced by E-Wings and K-Wings.
> I don't know what red herring you're talking about. Dreadnoughts were
> around, long before the Thrawn Campaign. Just because they weren't
> called Katana dreadnoughts is irrelevant. Dreadnoughts are even more
> outdated than the rest of them.
The New Republic refitted their dreadnaughts and turned them into assault
frigates. Thus bringing them up to date with current tech.
> As for 8472's technological superiority, why were they beaten so badly,
> they retreated from our plane, entirely by a single frigate (Voyager)?
> Because they weren't as superior as they thought, obviously.
LOL. S8472 took out Borg cubes inm two shots and estroyed a planet, havw
we ever seen Voyager do that? No, they worked with the Borg to help develop
a weapon to fight S8472 with.
--
Don't judge a book by its movie!
Visit my Star Trek vs Star Wars web page
http://members.home.net/bcdreid/SWvsST.htm
Strowbridge
>
> STAR WARS TECHNICAL JOURNAL, Vol. #3:
> > Ah yes. The poorly researched and utter crap SW:TJ. Other sources
> > (WEG,BTM, etc.) put the yield at anywhere from 150 kt, to 5 mt.
> > BTW, the torpedo didn't destroy the DS. It set off the reactor, the
> > resulting explosion set off a chain reaction that destroyed the
> > DS. But off course, anyone who has seen the movie know that.
>
> It's poorly researched, because you don't like the data.
It's done by the same guy who wrote the laughable "Mr Scotts Guide to
the Enterprise."
> Further, West End Games, if that's what you mean by WEG, doesn't give
> yields on torpedoes. If they do, where? Quote them, don't talk about
> them.
In GG:9 they say they are equivalent to modern nukes. This is backed up
by BTM and is an SEVERE underestimation according to Slave Ship & Iron
Fist.
> Also, I really don't care about what point the torpedo struck, it
> wouldn't do any good against Federation ships. That's what this is
> about, not how they blew up the Death Star.
Maybe you should take notes cause you seem to be losing track of the
debate. You used the Torpedoes effectiveness on the DS as proof of the
DS weakness.
> > The FACT remains that the dialogue doesn't match either what we
> > see or the computer generated estimation (which you conveniently
> > ignored). Ergo, it is the DIALOGUE that is the problem, not the
> > visuals.
>
> Again, I don't care about your personal interpretations. That's what
> the episode said.
And I care more about what we saw.
So maybe you should pull your head out of your ass and WATCH the episode
again.
> If you're going to run on, tell me what computer estimation you're
> talking about, or do you really have one? I have the movie on, right
> here, and I don't see any 'computer generated estimation'. The dialog
> is written and approved.
They talk about it in the first part of the two parter.
> > X-Wings are top of the line, so is the MF. As for the dreadnoughts,
> > they were only a problem due to the state of the Imperial Navy at
> > the time.
>
> X-wings were top-of-the-line 20 years ago, when "A New Hope" came out.
I see, so you are comparing the last remnants of the Imperial Navy and
using that to judge the navy as a whole. Real fair.
C.S.Strowbridge
Graeme Dice
Please use the button which says "Include original message" if you are
replying.
>
> virus-x wrote:
>
> > They are not too slow, hyperdrive has speeds of at least 127 ly/hr,
> > with many drives producing speeds in excess of 2000 ly/hr.
>
> Naturally, you neglect to mention the fact that Timothy Zahn's account
> contridicted everyone else's. Also, I asked people to show their
> sources, not just drop names. Must I do things for you?
> Dark Force Rising: .5 hyperdrive = 127 light years/hour
> Heir to the Empire: .4 hyperdrive multiplier, 70 light years/day
>
The Phantom Menace clearly shows Darth Maul's Infiltrator going from
Coruscant to Tatoonine in less than 24 hours. As Coruscant is in the
galactic core, and Tatooine is on the outer edge of the galaxy, the
distance between these two star systems must be _at least_ 30,000
lightyears. This requires a speed of at least 2000 ly/hr, and a much
more likely speed of around 5000 ly/hr.
> Star Wars Technical Journal of the Planet Tatooine Vol #1; page 16:
> "Able to reach .5 beyond lightspeed, she is one of the fastest
> non-Imperial vessels currently in use and owes much of her power
> availability curve to a vast array of unregistered and normally
> incompatible computer and thrust modifications."
>
> "In addition to piloting, I like to tinker. She'll make point five
> factors beyond lightspeed." -Han Solo, Star Wars, A New Hope, page 92;
> by George Lucas
Which indicates nothing, as if they were truly travelling at that speed,
the movies could not happen. The entore galaxy would be a black hole.
>
> If the ships were moving that fast, they'd be destroyed, instantly.
> "Real objects in realspace have a hyperspace shadow - if a star is at a
> certain location in realspace, it is also pesent in hyperspace at the
> same location. This explains the inherent danger in travelling through
> hyperspace. Contact with a hyprspace shadow results in instant
> destruction for the unlucky ship, just as running into a planet in
> realspace would result in a ship's destruction." Star Wars, the Role
> Playing Game (approved by LucasArts), page 113; "Hyperspace".
WEG materials are at the very bottom of the official materials chart,
just above the computer games, which don't even count. I suggest you
read this group's FAQ before you make a fool of yourself. The danger of
high speeds does not mean that it is impossible, rather it means that
their computers are capable of plotting every object along the journey
that could possibly harm them.
>
> If they could fly that fast, there would be no unknown parts of their
> galaxy: "Still, over 90 percent of the objects in realspace are
> unknown.." Star Wars, the Role Playing Game, page 113; "Nav Computers"
Which is contradicte by both the Behind the Magic map, and the Vector
Prime map. It is clearly shown that they have explored virtually their
entore galaxy.
>
> > And yet, somehow the Zulus managed to overrun the British rather
> > handedly.
>
> The Zulus did not defeat the British, they were defeated. The Zulus
> won some battles, nothing more. They won the battle, and lost the war.
>
Technological superiority will still not win you a war. The Imperial
fleet numbers at least 4 million ships, while the federation is around
5000. Those kind of odds are impossible to beat.
Graeme Dice
--
If I wished to punish a province, I would have it governed by
philosophers.
-- Frederick II, the Great (1712-1786)
Graeme Dice
>
> A Victory-class star destroyer, if that's what you mean by just saying
> documentation of their source, and no one does.
Please read the FAQ, Curtis Saxton's web site, and Micheal Wong's site.
This information is all contained there.
> The Invincible class
> has a hull rating of 3D+2 and 2D in shields. A Victory I has 2D
> shields & 4D shields. In "Han Solo & the Corporate Sector Authority",
> I see on pages 92-94 no evidence that they carry any starfighters. The
> Victory I is shown to carry:
> "2 TIE fighter squadrons (6 fighters/squadron, Star Wars the role
> playing game sourcebook, page 27), Star Wars the role playing game
> Sourcebook, page 32. While the Invincible does have compariable
> firepower, it would boil down to the captains, if the Victory doesn't
> launch fighters.
>
> In the late 70s-early 80s, we stopped using 500 kiloton weaponry,
> because the physical destruction curve levels out after SHARPLY after
> 300 kilotons. My friend is a former WT (Weapons Technician) from the
> United States Navy nuclear weapons technician, and I am a United States
> Army Military Police Physical Security veteran, and we both know that
> your figures on nuclear weapons is way off. We stopped using 500
> kiloton warheads around 20 years ago, in the mid-1980s. We've
> experience with Soviet firepower, and it is not nearly that high,
> either. We cannot legally disclose the true yields, but they are much
> lower. If you wish to see real sources or speak to that nuclear
> weapons technician, contact me at FromBF...@hotmail.com, and it
> will be more clearly explained. As for the rest about how a proton
> torpedo warhead works, you have no evidence. What West End Games says
> is irrelevant, only what LucasArts authorizes is held as canon. Where,
> in writing, does it say this, and where is the authentication?
West End Games made the Role-playing games, therefore what they say is
authorized. See Michael January's page for an analysis of how
concentrating even a one kiloton blast compares to a spherical
explosion.
>
> Finally, the visual evidence in The Die is Cast shows that those ships
> only destroyed the surface, not the entire crust in that area. The
> reason for this is that if the entire crust had been destroyed down to
> the magma level in that area, the crust covering the other 70% of the
> planet would have instantly cracked into dozens of pieces. It didn't,
> therefore the entire crust in that area was not destroyed.
Actually, the visual evidence shows that virtually zero destruction
occurred. Again, please read the necessary information before posting.
>
> No one said that the planet had been pounded down to the magma.
> Furthermore, what we did and didn't see was dictated by special effects
> technicians. They said the crust was destroyed; they didn't say it
> wasn't there, anymore. If I blow up a car with a stick of dynamite,
> it's destroyed, not completely blown to nothingness.
>
Special effects are irrelevant and do not exist for the purpose of this
debate. Please read the FAQ.
> And, last of all.. The method of destruction for the Death Star I was a
> serious design flaw, but the method of the destruction of the Death
> Star II is irrelevant because it was UNDER CONSTRUCTION. I'm sure I
> could blow up an Abrahms tank with a hand grenade if it was under
> construction, it didn't have a turret yet, and I threw it inside
> through the big gaping opening where the turret will go. Sheesh. There
> are your scientific answers.
>
> The Abrahms was not touted to be invincible; the Death Stars were.
> Furhermore, in Return of the Jedi, didn't the Emperor say that the
> Death Star was "armed and operational"?
Over half of it was missing! That's hardly fully built. Fully armed
and operational only means that it was fully armed, the operational is
not included in the qualifier.
>
> You should join the military and study weapons, before trying to
> comment on them through whatever source you may or may not have
> consulted. And there is nothing scientific in anything you've
> presented me.
That's because you have offered no scientific evidence to back up your
claims.
>
> Commander Mrith'hele'arana. "If where your enemy fights with intensity
> he will survive, but if not he will perish, it is called 'Fatal
> Terrain'. On Fatal Terrain, always engage in battle." - Sun-tzu,
> Chinese military theoretician, from his essays "The Art of War".
>
> If you do further research into Sun-Tzu, you will find that the great
> general never fought in any pivotal wars in China, and never got a
> chance to test out his theories.
Which is irrelevant, as they still make nice quotes.
Graeme Dice
--
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from
mediocre minds.
-- Albert Einstein
Rob Dalton
Your speculation is invalid as it violates the FAQ.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Carlin for Prez
Graeme Dice
>
> In no Star Trek series has there ever not been some form of
> modification done to something, especially engines and shields.
> Furthermore, if the Star Wars universe possessed people intelligent
> enough to make the technological leap of light years between Wars and
> Trek, they'd have done it, already. If everyone flew a Death Star, it
> wouldn't make any difference. They're still way too far behind the
> curve. As it is, they've been around 25,000 years, and can barely
> break the speed of light. And as for the Jedi, I really don't think
> the Q are too worried. Or the Dowg. Or the Vulcans. Or the
> Cytherians. Or the Ocampa. Or the Founders. Or the Borg. Or Species
> 8472.
>
As I have already shown you from completely canon evidence, SW
hyperdrive's typically work in the range of 2000 ly.hr, to 5000 ly/hr.
This is hardly "just barely breaking the speed of light". If SW ships
were as slow as you claim, then the SW galaxy would collapse into a
black hole from the necessary closeness of the stars.
Graeme Dice
--
Annoy the IRS: Fill out your tax form using binary
Rob Dalton
>
> In no Star Trek series has there ever not been some form of
> modification done to something, especially engines and shields.
> Furthermore, if the Star Wars universe possessed people intelligent
> enough to make the technological leap of light years between Wars and
> Trek, they'd have done it, already. If everyone flew a Death Star, it
> wouldn't make any difference. They're still way too far behind the
> curve. As it is, they've been around 25,000 years, and can barely
> break the speed of light. And as for the Jedi, I really don't think
> the Q are too worried. Or the Dowg. Or the Vulcans. Or the
> Cytherians. Or the Ocampa. Or the Founders. Or the Borg. Or Species
> 8472.
>
An X-Wing with a hyperdrive is faster than Voyager doing it's maximum
sustainable warp speeds. (Ref: HttE)
Almost the entire SW galaxy is mapped. Only 11% of the Star Trek galaxy
is known. (Ref: Most SW books, TNG)
A fast enough Star Wars ship can cross the galaxy in days. (Ref: ESB)
Mass shadows in hyperspace is irrelevant, since Star Wars computers have
sufficient computational power and accurate enough maps to plot a
hyperspace course, thus avoiding destruction. (Ref: ANH)
Rob Dalton
>
> I don't know any Thelea. No wonder you're not making any progress in
> this discussion; you've not much of a vocabulary. Your explainations
> suck, and you can't say two words without swearing. Move on to 10th
> grade.
>
Your attempts to get a rise out of me are utterly insufficient. I have
seen better arguments and insults out of a five year old. Additionally,
it seems you lack sufficient attention to continue with this debate as
Thelea is the person you were replying, or at least trying, to reply to.
In the future, please do try to learn how to use the internet.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Some people have one of those days. I have one of those lives.
Rob Dalton
>
> Canon you can't seem to find. If you do happen upon a holodeck,
> simulate a clue.
>
TPM.
Concession accepted. Next time, do try to come up with an argument that
takes me more than five minutes to refute.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Those of you with filthy minds are working overtime.
Graeme Dice
I have already asked you once to use the easy to find "insert original
message" button on Remarq. If you do not, then you are violating all
know rules of netiquette.
virus-x wrote:
>
> The Phantom Menace clearly shows Darth Maul's Infiltrator going from
> Coruscant to Tatoonine in less than 24 hours. As Coruscant is in the
> galactic core, and Tatooine is on the outer edge of the galaxy, the
> distance between these two star systems must be _at least_ 30,000
> lightyears. This requires a speed of at least 2000 ly/hr, and a much
> more likely speed of around 5000 ly/hr.
>
> As I have mentioned, before, both Star Wars and Star Trek contridict
> themselves in matters of speed. The Enterprise D crosses the
> Federation in an episode, when it should've taken substantially longer,
> on the order of years. And where do you have distances from Tatooine
> and Coruscant? Again, no one wants to quote directly from sources,
> because you don't have any.
We have supplied our sources. You are simply too idiotic too read them.
Repeating evidence in the same post? Hardly a valid debting tactic.
>
> Which indicates nothing, as if they were truly travelling at that
> speed, the movies could not happen. The entore galaxy would be a black
> hole.
> The movie would happen, if the worlds were close together, as they so
> obviously are. If you look at a galaxy, the closer to the core you
> get, the closer the worlds are together. I don't even think you know
> what you're talking about with this black hole stuff.
It the Millennium Falcon only moved at 1.5c, then the entore galaxy we
see would have to be all within less a lightyear. This would collapse
into a blackhole with the mass of a galaxy.
Read our sources failure to do so makes you a troll.
> "WEG materials are at the very bottom of the official materials chart,
> just above the computer games, which don't even count. I suggest you
> read this group's FAQ before you make a fool of yourself." I suggest
> you take stock of the fact that you try to discredit any source that
> says something you don't like.
I think you are a troll.
Graeme Dice
--
Finagle's laws for combat :
10. Always remember that the weapon you hold was being
manufactured by the lowest bidder.
Graeme Dice
> > debate. Please read the FAQ.
> to exclude it from discussion, or give it less weight. Right?
Exactly. This person refuses to read our evidence, and expects us to
post the same arguments we have posted dozens of times. It's insulting
really.
Graeme Dice
--
Men were real men. Women were real women. And small, furry
creatures from Alpha Centauri were *real* small, furry
creatures from Alpha Centauri.
Graeme Dice
>
> virus-x <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
>
> > Like I said, the sources contridict themselves.
> sources. So, which is it?
> want? You're picking and choosing evidence for your sources and disallowing
> the evidence of others. You've admitted you're not interested in the rules
> for debate that we've set up. You obviously haven't read the FAQ, despite
> many requests to do so. You tell people not to be emotional, and then make
> insulting remarks to them. In short, you're rude, and you are unwilling to
> listen to reason. If you decide to remain and continue to act like this,
> here's what will happen: the Wars side will come to despise you because
> you're impossible to debate with; the Trek side will be embarrassed of you
> for the very same reason; after some time of trying to deal with you and
> failing, both sides will agree to just killfile you altogether so you no
> longer need to be dealt with. Sorry, but that's the truth. If you don't
> want to play nice with others, then no one will play with you.
Well said Chuck. I hate having to silence the opposition.
Graeme Dice
--
"After a year's research, one realizes it could have been done in a
week."
-Sir William Henry Bragg
Rob Dalton
>
> And who wrote your FAQ? You?
The FAQ was written years ago and has been approved by most of the
regulars here.
> Unless it's approved by LucasArts, and I haven't seen one that was,
> yet, it's just as meaningless as your tired, groundless, pointless and
> unproven arguements.
>
My arguments are supported by canon. The heirarchy of canon has been
established by Lucasfilm and is availabe for reading in the FAQ.
Unfortunately, most of your sources, which for the most part seem to be
the SWCCG, are contradicted by canon sources: The movies, novelizations
of the movies, scripts, radio plays, and novelizations of the movies, in
that order. Any information contained therein overrides anything from
official sources. http://members.home.net/strowbridge/Rules.htm
Since you utterly refuse to abide by the set laws and standards of this
newsgroup, I have no choice but to label you as a troll and treat you as
such until such time that your debating style matures.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Politicians suck.
Graeme Dice
>
> virus-x wrote:
> >
> > I don't know any Thelea. No wonder you're not making any progress in
> > this discussion; you've not much of a vocabulary. Your explainations
> > suck, and you can't say two words without swearing. Move on to 10th
> > grade.
> >
>
> Your attempts to get a rise out of me are utterly insufficient. I have
> seen better arguments and insults out of a five year old. Additionally,
> it seems you lack sufficient attention to continue with this debate as
> Thelea is the person you were replying, or at least trying, to reply to.
> In the future, please do try to learn how to use the internet.
This guy is trying to rival TOWNMNBS.
Graeme Dice
--
If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop
diggin'.
Rob Dalton
>
> Rob Dalton wrote:
> >
> > virus-x wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't know any Thelea. No wonder you're not making any progress in
> > > this discussion; you've not much of a vocabulary. Your explainations
> > > suck, and you can't say two words without swearing. Move on to 10th
> > > grade.
> > >
> >
> > Your attempts to get a rise out of me are utterly insufficient. I have
> > seen better arguments and insults out of a five year old. Additionally,
> > it seems you lack sufficient attention to continue with this debate as
> > Thelea is the person you were replying, or at least trying, to reply to.
> > In the future, please do try to learn how to use the internet.
>
> This guy is trying to rival TOWNMNBS.
>
It's unbelievable. Same logic, less rhetoric.
> Graeme Dice
> --
> If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop
> diggin'.
That's a good way to look at life.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Carlin for Prez
Graeme Dice
>
Unfortunately you are too stupid to use the Internet properly. Learn to
live with flames. If you can't take them, then leave, before we TGOD
you.
Graeme Dice
--
Smith & Wesson - The original point and click interface...
Strowbridge
>
> No, what I'm saying is that people are ignoring the script's text, for
> special effects that are not made by astrophysicists. Just like the
> idiot that tried telling people the exact output of turbolasers,
> because the asteroids looked red to him in Empire Strikes Back. From
> that, he immediately said that he knew the mineral content and exact
> sizes, and how much it would take to destroy them.
The asteroids are Nickel-Iron. It is clearly stated in 'Tales from the
Bounty Hunters.'
From that we can easily judge how much energy it would take to vaporize
them.
C.S.Strowbridge
Strowbridge
>
> And who wrote your FAQ? You?
No, it was voted on by this group has a whole. It is what we choose to
use as a guideline to regulate the debate here. If you chose to ignore
it, as Chuck said, you will be ostracized by BOTH sides.
C.S.Strowbridge
Grand Admiral Reid
> >
> > I don't know any Thelea. No wonder you're not making any progress in
> > this discussion; you've not much of a vocabulary. Your explainations
> > suck, and you can't say two words without swearing. Move on to 10th
> > grade.
> >
>
> Your attempts to get a rise out of me are utterly insufficient. I have
> seen better arguments and insults out of a five year old. Additionally,
> it seems you lack sufficient attention to continue with this debate as
> Thelea is the person you were replying, or at least trying, to reply to.
> In the future, please do try to learn how to use the internet.
Virus x is like a politician. You ask them a question that they are not
prepared to answer so they look at their notes and give you some bullshit
they thought about for a while.
Example:
Reporter: Sir how could such an underpowered ship destroy the Death Star?
Politician: *aww shit cant answer this umm better think of something quick*
because the X-Wing is out of date.
Reporter: huh?
Politician: Vote for virus!
Thats basically how he argues. Just like a politician he can not directly
answer you question because he has no answer, so he trys to swerve around it
by bullshitting.
--
Rob Dalton
>
> Rob Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote in message
> news:38869A1E...@erols.com...
> > virus-x wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't know any Thelea. No wonder you're not making any progress in
> > > this discussion; you've not much of a vocabulary. Your explainations
> > > suck, and you can't say two words without swearing. Move on to 10th
> > > grade.
> > >
> >
> > Your attempts to get a rise out of me are utterly insufficient. I have
> > seen better arguments and insults out of a five year old. Additionally,
> > it seems you lack sufficient attention to continue with this debate as
> > Thelea is the person you were replying, or at least trying, to reply to.
> > In the future, please do try to learn how to use the internet.
>
> Virus x is like a politician. You ask them a question that they are not
> prepared to answer so they look at their notes and give you some bullshit
> they thought about for a while.
This is very true.
> Example:
> Reporter: Sir how could such an underpowered ship destroy the Death Star?
> Politician: *aww shit cant answer this umm better think of something quick*
> because the X-Wing is out of date.
> Reporter: huh?
> Politician: Vote for virus!
>
LoL
> Thats basically how he argues. Just like a politician he can not directly
> answer you question because he has no answer, so he trys to swerve around it
> by bullshitting.
>
Looks like something fell into the batch of TOWNMNBS clone DNA.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Politicians suck.
Eric
I honestly feel sorry for you guys in this respect...you get far more
idiot trolls popping up than we do.
On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 13:46:48 -0800, virus-x
<frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>Though we debate it ad-nauseum, it is still interesting. However, we
>must face facts.
Does that mean you're going to post some?
>There is no way in Hell the Galactic Empire & New
>Republic are going to be able to move through a wormhole with their
>entire forces and conquer the United Federation of Planets.
Apparently not.
No where do we assume that the Empire will move its -entire- military
to assault the alpha quadrant. It wouldn't require anything -near-
that size.
>Their
>assembled power would be an awesome sight, complete with Eclipse-class
>star destroyers, world devastators, death stars, torpedo spheres, etc.,
>but it is just way too slow and the technology just isn't there to beat
>the UFP.
The Death Star -blows planets the fuck up-. The UFP has -nothing-
like that in its arsenal, and cannot possibly hope to defend against
it.
The Eclipse-classes can render worlds entirely uninhabitable--no way
the UFP can defend against that sort of firepower.
A handful of World Devestators can build up a military force faster
than the whole of the UFP could at its best.
>They both portray themselves as being very advanced, and both
>contridict themselves on several occasions, but, the facts are there.
Where are your facts? I haven't seen any yet....
>The Star Wars universe just doesn't have what it takes. People cry
>about size, but that is just about the stupidest arguement I've ever
>heard.
Actually, we shout 'power!' Size is nothing without power to back it
up...but SW -has- the power to back up the enormous sizes of their
ships.
>So just because something is big, it would win? So Arnold
>Schwarzeneggar is just going to run all over the asses of Jackie Chan
>and Bruce Lee? So Han Solo would just sodomize Yoda, if he smarted off
>to him? Don't be an idiot. You're a lot bigger than a bullet, but I
>guarantee that a .50 caliber round to your forehead from a Barrett .50
>caliber sniper rifle would kill your ass, faster than you'd be able to
>say: "uh, oh".
Gee, can you say 'strawman attack'?
>I love both, but SW is clearly technologically
>inferior, and I point to facts of contridiction and verification in
>both universes.
Where are your facts? There is no real contradictions within the SW
universe. The movies overrule anything else.
Contradictions in ST abound, on the other hand.
Care to cite any specific problems with our verification?
>If you wish to debate this, I'm right here. However,
>I'm not going to listen to emotional bullcrap; back your stuff up with
>facts, not the desire to see your arguement win.
Fine; if you're not going to debate emotionally, howabout debating
with facts, like we do most of the time? Of course, there's an
intrinsic problem here--you seem incapable of supplying the facts
necessary to a non-emotional debate.
*yawn*
C'mon, give me a -challenge-. Your fanaticism clearly is in the
Elim/TOWMNBN/Paul levels, but your grasp of science is clearly
deficient compared to theirs.
Eric
remove NO.SPAM.DAMMIT to mail
"Graham Kennedy is Paul Jacques with a web page." - Eric
"Sufficiently advanced technology is often indistinguishable
from magic." - Clarke's Third Law
The Cuttlefish
>> This guy is trying to rival TOWNMNBS.
>>
>
>It's unbelievable. Same logic, less rhetoric.
>
Mmmm, TOWNMNBS Lite....
LT.HIT-MAN
--
" The hell with the beatings if morale does not improve
I'll give you something to cry about! "
LT.Hit-Man
virus-x wrote in message <040278db...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com>...
>Though we debate it ad-nauseum, it is still interesting. However, we
>must face facts. There is no way in Hell the Galactic Empire & New
>Republic are going to be able to move through a wormhole with their
>entire forces and conquer the United Federation of Planets. Their
>assembled power would be an awesome sight, complete with Eclipse-class
>star destroyers, world devastators, death stars, torpedo spheres, etc.,
>but it is just way too slow and the technology just isn't there to beat
>the UFP. They both portray themselves as being very advanced, and both
>contridict themselves on several occasions, but, the facts are there.
>The Star Wars universe just doesn't have what it takes. People cry
>about size, but that is just about the stupidest arguement I've ever
>heard. So just because something is big, it would win? So Arnold
>Schwarzeneggar is just going to run all over the asses of Jackie Chan
>and Bruce Lee? So Han Solo would just sodomize Yoda, if he smarted off
>to him? Don't be an idiot. You're a lot bigger than a bullet, but I
>guarantee that a .50 caliber round to your forehead from a Barrett .50
>caliber sniper rifle would kill your ass, faster than you'd be able to
>say: "uh, oh". I love both, but SW is clearly technologically
>inferior, and I point to facts of contridiction and verification in
>both universes. If you wish to debate this, I'm right here. However,
>I'm not going to listen to emotional bullcrap; back your stuff up with
>facts, not the desire to see your arguement win.
>
>
Matthew Hyde
Rob Dalton <daltonato...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >"A New Hope" happened about 20 years ago. Get with the present.
> X-wings >were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated. They were
> outdated by >the third movie. Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, Corellian
> Corvettes,
> >Nebulon-B frigates, Y-Wings, A-Wings, B-Wings; those are all outdated,
> >too. Why don't you read the books, sometime.
> Getting a wee bit emotional there, eh? You never even mentioned what
> period of time you were talking about. And yes, I have read the books,
> obviously more than you.
> >I don't know what red herring you're talking about.
> The New Republic did not have any Katana Fleet dreadnoughts except the
> six brought in by Garm Bel Iblis.
> >Dreadnoughts were around, long before the Thrawn Campaign. Just
> because >they weren't called Katana dreadnoughts is irrelevant.
> Then why did you say "Katana Fleet Dreadnoughts?"
> > Dreadnoughts are even more outdated than the rest of them.
> And that's why the New Republic has replaced them with MC90a Star
> Cruisers.
> >Further, I don't really care about Aing-Tii monks. They don't pertain
> >to any stories I'm discussing, here.
> Yes they do. Read Vision of the Future by Timothy Zahn.
> >For that matter, Jesus Christ could beat all of them, put together.
> Strawman attack.
Strowbridge Attack.
heh
--
Ut tensio sic vis
-- Robert Hooke (1678)
Matt Hyde, math lab consultant
Michigan Tech math sciences
http://www.mathlab.mtu.edu/~mdoughy
Lord Protector Kayle Skolaris
Okay, which complete waste of skin brought Christ into it??? Whichever
one of you did, I hate to break it to ya but Christ is DEAD!!! Has been
over over 2,000 years now. Only thing he's doing is feeding worms. Now
keep the goddam JesusFreak bullshit OUT OF HERE!!!
--
Any Technology Distinguishable From Magic
Is Insufficiently Advanced - Haughton's Corollary
to Clarke's Third Law
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Deimos Anomaly
> Okay, which complete waste of skin brought Christ into it??? Whichever
> one of you did, I hate to break it to ya but Christ is DEAD!!! Has
been
> over over 2,000 years now. Only thing he's doing is feeding worms. Now
> keep the goddam JesusFreak bullshit OUT OF HERE!!!
I don't know, but at a guess I'd say the most likely candidate was boyd.
--
"But this script can't sink!"
"She's made of irony sir, I assure you she can!"
Matthew Hyde
virus-x <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
<SNIP>
> In the late 70s-early 80s, we stopped using 500 kiloton weaponry,
> because the physical destruction curve levels out after SHARPLY after
> 300 kilotons. My friend is a former WT (Weapons Technician) from the
> United States Navy nuclear weapons technician, and I am a United States
> Army Military Police Physical Security veteran, and we both know that
> your figures on nuclear weapons is way off. We stopped using 500
> kiloton warheads around 20 years ago, in the mid-1980s. We've
> experience with Soviet firepower, and it is not nearly that high,
> either.
For the SS-18 ("Satan") missile:
Mod 1 The SS-18 Mod 1 carried a single large reentry vehicle, with a
warhead yield of 18 to 25 MT, a distance of about 6000 nm. testing began
in October, 1972, with initial operational capability reached in early 1975.
Mod 2 The SS-18 Mod 2 included a post-boost vehicle and up to eight
reentry vehicles, each with a warhead yield of 0.6 to 1.5 MT, with a range
capability of about 5500 nm. The initial flight test of the Mod 2 MIRV
version occurred in August, 1973, with IOC in 1975.
Mod 3 The SS-18 Mod 3 carried a single large reentry vehicle, with a
warhead yield of 18 to 25 MT.
Mod 4 The SS-18 Mod 4 carries at least 10 MIRVs and was probably
designed to attack and destroy ICBMs and other hardened targets in the
US. The SS-18 Mod 4 force has the estimated capability to destroy 65 to
80 percent of US ICBM silos using two nuclear warheads against each.
Even after this type of attack, it is estimated that more than 1,000 SS-18
warheads would be available for further strikes against targets in the US.
Mod 5 The newer, more accurate version (the SS-18 Mod 5) placed in
converted silos allowed the SS-18 to remain the bulwark of the SRF's
hard-target-kill capability. The increase in the Mod 5's warhead yield,
along with improved accuracy, would, under the START treaty, help allow
the Russians to maintain their hard-target-kill wartime requirements even
with the 50 percent cut in heavy ICBMs START requires.
Housed in hard silos, the highly accurate fourth generation SS-18 ICBM is
larger than the Peacekeeper, the most modern deployed US ICBM.
Well, how about that? the current generation of Soviet missiles is more powerful (and I
don't think the FAS is going to say "larger" in a different manner than warhead) than
ours!
But that was Russian. But he said their weapons yields are lower than ours. Actually,
when you say we "stopped using" 500-kt devices, well, what does that mean?
As far as I can tell, we "stopped" using nuclear weapons in 1945. And we stopped
manufacturing nuclear weapons altogether in 1989.
Our current ACTIVE stockpile includes weapons ranging from 0.3 kT to 9 MT. For
instance, the TX MK14 can be from 5 to 7 MT. the MK15 is 1.69 MT. Neither of these is
on the retired list. TX-16, 6-8 MT. EC-17, 11 MT. MK17, 10-15 MT.
EC-24, 13.5 MT. And on and on. now these figures came from a different page on the FAS
site than the active list, but there are no contradictions in here.
>We cannot legally disclose the true yields, but they are much lower.
So the Federation of American Scientists is lying? that was taken from their website,
http://www.fas.org/index.html
They're not a bunch of crackpots.
I understand what you mean about legality if you are talking about newer weapons that
have not been declassified. But you pretty much advertised that you would reveal
classified figures if we emailed you for the yields of our latest weapons, did you
not? I'm sure NIS would find that.... intriguing. Without buying secrets, we can see
that many weapons that have been declassified and are on the active lists are larger,
more powerful. Was that you who said "do some research"?
> If you wish to
>see real sources or speak to that nuclear
> weapons technician, contact me at FromBF...@hotmail.com, and it
Jonathan Boyd
Okay, virus-x, you've heard the SW side telling you what to do, well now
it's the ST side's turn. Hopefully since you claim to be on the same side
you might just listen to us.
First off, the FAQ. You say you won't read it unless it's authorised by
LucasArts. LucasArts make games, they're not in charge of SW canon.
LucasFilm is. Besides, this newsgroup isn't owned by them. The FAQ is a
document which is agreed on by the majority of the group and guides us in
how we debate. You want to get anywhere, you follow its guidelines. The
rules there have been voted on by us.
Secondly, before you start debating you would do well to research the
subject. See what the evidence available is, what sources this group
accepts, what debates we've heard before. As I've already said, reading the
FAQ is a good place to start. After that, head off to sites long Mike Wong's
page and Curtis Saxton's. Yes, they're both pro-SW, but they're by
intelligent, rational people and o the whole are well researched. I can't
remember the addresses off hand, but I've got them along with quite a few
other SW and ST sites on m links page http://www.jboyd.co.uk/links.html Well
you're there you might want to read my alt.startrek.vs.starwars (you'll
often see this abbreviated to ASVS) information
http://www.jboyd.co.uk/asvs/index.html and STvsSW arguments
http://www.jboyd.co.uk/stsw/index.html
Another site I'd strongly recommend since you're new is Chuck's Newbie FAq,
also linked from my site.
Lastly, most of the people here have been debating for a long time. We've
seen debaters and trolls come and go. If you're here to debate sensibly,
that's fine. Read the pages I've suggested and you'll be okay. If you're
just here to push your views and ignore the rules we follow then you're
going to get burnt very quickly. We hate trolls. Some people make FAQs about
them. Some parody them. Others flame or TGOD them. You don't want to be one.
--
Jonathan
AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/
There is an old saying that if a million monkeys typed on a million
keyboards for a million years, eventually all the works of Shakespeare would
be produced. Now, thanks to Usenet, we know this is not true.
Matthew Hyde
Commander Thelea <Lusankya...@Aol.com.invalid> wrote:
> In article <3886A59E...@erols.com>, Rob Dalton
<snip>
> Not only that, but this guy said he was from the quote "Physical
> Security" section of the Army Military Police.
He didn't say there was a "section," he just said he was a vet and his
words express that he was in physical security (as opposed to a desk
jockey, I suppose).
Matthew Hyde
> The Phantom Menace clearly shows Darth Maul's Infiltrator going from
> Coruscant to Tatoonine in less than 24 hours. As Coruscant is in the
> galactic core, and Tatooine is on the outer edge of the galaxy, the
> distance between these two star systems must be _at least_ 30,000
> lightyears. This requires a speed of at least 2000 ly/hr, and a much
> more likely speed of around 5000 ly/hr.
> As I have mentioned, before, both Star Wars and Star Trek contridict
> themselves in matters of speed. The Enterprise D crosses the
> Federation in an episode, when it should've taken substantially longer,
> on the order of years. And where do you have distances from Tatooine
> and Coruscant? Again, no one wants to quote directly from sources,
> because you don't have any. Like I said already:
> If the ships were moving that fast, they'd be destroyed, instantly.
But they're not... Gee, they must have superior tech! What a weird
argument.
that reminds me of that old adage they used to say about speeds of the
turn of the century, that if you went in excess of 60 mph you would be
destroyed.
Aron Kerkhof
<frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>"A New Hope" happened about 20 years ago. Get with the present.
>X-wings were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated.
Someone call up the airforce! The F-14/15 is outdated!
>They were
>outdated by the third movie. Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, Corellian
>Corvettes, Nebulon-B frigates, Y-Wings, A-Wings, B-Wings; those are all
>outdated, too.
Eh? Y-Wings, yeah, you got us there, but B-Wings and A-Wings were
brand new in ROTJ. Bleeding edge stuff.
>Why don't you read the books, sometime.
Et tu? For example, the NR has hardly rested on it's laurels. They
have came out with the E and K wing fighters, which *surprise* take
over for the venerable X and B wings. And in Vector Prime, they roll
out a new Calamari designed warship.
>I don't know what red herring you're talking about.
You need to look at the FAQ. It's a logical fallicy.
>Dreadnoughts were
>around, long before the Thrawn Campaign. Just because they weren't
>called Katana dreadnoughts is irrelevant.
But *you* called them that, which is what made them relevant. Did you
know that most of the US Navy's ships of the line are 30 and 40 years
old. Can you give a reason why ships that can take an ass beating and
deliver one right back can be called "obsolete" in a few short years?
This isn't like car production, where you add some pinstripes and a
spoiler and make all the idiots rush out and buy the newest and
latest.
>Dreadnoughts are even more
>outdated than the rest of them.
Than the Katana dreadnaugts? They are the same ships.
>Further, I don't really care about Aing-Tii monks. They don't pertain
>to any stories I'm discussing, here. For that matter, Jesus Christ
>could beat all of them, put together.
Whoo boy. You are entering Troll territory here.
>As for 8472's technological superiority, why were they beaten so badly,
>they retreated from our plane, entirely by a single frigate (Voyager)?
>Because they weren't as superior as they thought, obviously.
Hmm, yes, and that's interesting. Voyager could beat a foe that was
whupping up on the Borg, something that the Fed's hadn't managed to do
ever. I think I'll start a vote to strike all of Voyager from canon.
Aron Kerkhof
galactec.com/neolith
Aron Kerkhof
<frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>No, what I'm saying is that people are ignoring the script's text, for
>special effects that are not made by astrophysicists.
Oh, and the scripts ARE written by astrophysics. I think we are all
forgetting the quote that ENDS this particular debate:
Elim: "They're sending up false sensor readings!"
Elim realized the sensors weren't jiving with what we saw onscreen.
Why can't you?
>Just like the
>idiot that tried telling people the exact output of turbolasers,
>because the asteroids looked red to him in Empire Strikes Back. From
>that, he immediately said that he knew the mineral content and exact
>sizes, and how much it would take to destroy them.
No, that is not it at all. It is far easier to vaporize a solid iron
asteroid than a stoney one. Thus, what was derived was a pretty good
lower limit for turbolaser power.
>That's what I mean.
>No one says exactly where this so called computer evidence is, because
>it isn't there, and they choose to ignore the fact that the facts were
>clearly stated by the actors in the scene, so that even a blind man
>would know what just happened.
Elim realized what was going on, why can't you?
Aron Kerkhof
galactec.com/neolith
Rob Dalton
> information act, I checked around and confirmed that there is NO SUCH
> THING as a "Physical Security" section of the Army Military Police,
> though I already knew that.. I now have that, in addition to the fact
> that the USA, Russia, and Britain have 500 kiloton nukes, in writing.
> Next he's probably going to say that the Physical Security section
> teaches Kung-Fu to basic trainees and that he's killed thirty people
> with his bare hands. I know the type.
> Also, he uses the infamous "My friend" or "My Teacher" or "My Father"
> defence that Mike Wong slaughters so many people for verbally, in
> claiming that his best friend in an ex-nuclear technician in the Navy
> and says the USA doesn't have 500 kiloton nuclear warheads. The problem
> with his claim is that nuclear technicians work on reactors, not
> nuclear missiles and their warheads. Stupid idiot can't even lie
> properly.
He's full of shit and I'm not buying it :^)
> Finally.. Reid.. Your little Politician gig is damned funny. I
> wouldn't be surprised if, when discussing nukes or the military, Virus
> says a George W. Bush Jr.-ism, like.. "Uh.. Kosovos.. Kosvoians.. Uh..
> Uh... Kosovoarovians..? Err, those people from near Albania."
>
That was hilarious.
Rob Dalton
Not infuriating, just...annoying.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Invalid thought detected. Close all mental processes and restart body.
Rob Dalton
>
> Hmmmmmm another guest for the fan fic review it would seem, welcome
>
Take him out, man. Make it messy.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Carlin for Prez
Rob Dalton
>
> Rob Dalton <daltonato...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >"A New Hope" happened about 20 years ago. Get with the present.
> > outdated by >the third movie. Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, Corellian
> > Corvettes,
> > >Nebulon-B frigates, Y-Wings, A-Wings, B-Wings; those are all outdated,
>
> > Getting a wee bit emotional there, eh? You never even mentioned what
> > period of time you were talking about. And yes, I have read the books,
> > obviously more than you.
>
>
> > six brought in by Garm Bel Iblis.
>
> > because >they weren't called Katana dreadnoughts is irrelevant.
>
>
>
> > Cruisers.
>
> > >to any stories I'm discussing, here.
>
>
>
>
> Strowbridge Attack.
>
> heh
I'm sure he'd appreciate that :^)
--
Dalton
Making lives miserable since 1980
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Rob Dalton
>
> Angry rant from Lord Protector Kayle Skolaris:
>
> > Okay, which complete waste of skin brought Christ into it??? Whichever
> > one of you did, I hate to break it to ya but Christ is DEAD!!! Has
> been
> > over over 2,000 years now. Only thing he's doing is feeding worms. Now
> > keep the goddam JesusFreak bullshit OUT OF HERE!!!
>
> I don't know, but at a guess I'd say the most likely candidate was boyd.
>
It was virus-x.
Rob Dalton
>
> virus-x <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > The Phantom Menace clearly shows Darth Maul's Infiltrator going from
> > Coruscant to Tatoonine in less than 24 hours. As Coruscant is in the
> > galactic core, and Tatooine is on the outer edge of the galaxy, the
> > distance between these two star systems must be _at least_ 30,000
> > lightyears. This requires a speed of at least 2000 ly/hr, and a much
> > more likely speed of around 5000 ly/hr.
>
> > As I have mentioned, before, both Star Wars and Star Trek contridict
> > themselves in matters of speed. The Enterprise D crosses the
> > Federation in an episode, when it should've taken substantially longer,
> > on the order of years. And where do you have distances from Tatooine
> > and Coruscant? Again, no one wants to quote directly from sources,
> > because you don't have any. Like I said already:
> > If the ships were moving that fast, they'd be destroyed, instantly.
>
> But they're not... Gee, they must have superior tech! What a weird
> argument.
>
> that reminds me of that old adage they used to say about speeds of the
> turn of the century, that if you went in excess of 60 mph you would be
> destroyed.
>
And if you tried to break the speed of sound you would be destroyed.
--
Dalton
Fool! Thou shalt feel my motherfucking wrath!
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Deimos Anomaly
Cardassian from ST
Chuck
Rob Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:38874E0E...@erols.com...
> And if you tried to break the speed of sound you would be destroyed.
Wasn't it supposed to collapse your lungs or something?
--
Chuck
"Beware the fury of a patient man" -John Dryden
Chuck
Lord Protector Kayle Skolaris <omega_z...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:86769v$3gc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Okay, which complete waste of skin brought Christ into it??? Whichever
> one of you did, I hate to break it to ya but Christ is DEAD!!! Has been
> over over 2,000 years now. Only thing he's doing is feeding worms. Now
> keep the goddam JesusFreak bullshit OUT OF HERE!!!
My God! He's channeling the spirit of Lord Shaithis!
Rob Dalton
Dunno about that, but from what I remember from the early test flights,
the closer you got to the barrier the more resonance or something and
the plane would shake itself to pieces. I think these were the unmanned
ones.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Warp is for pussies.
Chuck
Deimos Anomaly <sam...@jamieson-03.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8680m4$pc2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Do you refer to Elim-nomemory from this newsgroup, or Elim Garak, the
> Cardassian from ST
The smart one. :-)
Matthew Hyde
Rob Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
> Chuck wrote:
> >
> > Rob Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote in message
> > news:38874E0E...@erols.com...
> >
> > > And if you tried to break the speed of sound you would be destroyed.
> > Wasn't it supposed to collapse your lungs or something?
> >
> >--
> >Chuck
> >"Beware the fury of a patient man" -John Dryden
> Dunno about that, but from what I remember from the early test flights,
> the closer you got to the barrier the more resonance or something and
> the plane would shake itself to pieces. I think these were the unmanned
> ones.
I can't quote anything for sure, but more than once I have seen references to WW2 fighter planes
approaching the speed of sound in dive bombing and shaking apart.
Matthew Hyde
> Wow. The threads that happen when you're asleep.
<snip>
> ... long Mike Wong's...
LOL!
Rob Dalton
>
> Rob Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote:
> > Chuck wrote:
> > >
> > > Rob Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote in message
> > > news:38874E0E...@erols.com...
> > >
> > > > And if you tried to break the speed of sound you would be destroyed.
> > > Wasn't it supposed to collapse your lungs or something?
> > >
> > >--
> > >Chuck
> > >"Beware the fury of a patient man" -John Dryden
>
> > Dunno about that, but from what I remember from the early test flights,
> > the closer you got to the barrier the more resonance or something and
> > the plane would shake itself to pieces. I think these were the unmanned
> > ones.
>
> I can't quote anything for sure, but more than once I have seen references to WW2 fighter planes
> approaching the speed of sound in dive bombing and shaking apart.
Hmm.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Politicians suck.
Chuck
Matthew Hyde <mdo...@mtu.edu> wrote in message
news:8686pc$m3s$2...@campus3.mtu.edu...
> Jonathan Boyd <jona...@jboyd.co.uk> wrote:
> > Wow. The threads that happen when you're asleep.
>
> <snip>
>
> > ... long Mike Wong's...
>
>
> LOL!
LOL, isn't that the video that got Clarence Thomas in trouble? ;-)
Andras Otto Schneider
wrote:
> Matthew Hyde wrote:
The straight wings of prop fighters( and some early jets) caused a build up
of air pressure called compressability, this caused the a/c to lose control
and break up or crash
AOS
"Those blast points are too accurate for Imperial Stormtroopers. Only
Imperial Special Effects Technicians are so precise."
Ben Kenobi to Luke Skywalker in the redubbed SW:ANH
Matthew Hyde
Commander Thelea <Lusankya...@Aol.com.invalid> wrote:
> In article <11f733ec...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com>, virus-x
<snip>
> > In the late 70s-early 80s, we stopped using 500 kiloton weaponry,
> > because the physical destruction curve levels out after SHARPLY
> > after
> > 300 kilotons.
> The destruction curve never "levels out". It increases at the same
> rate. That rate just isn't equal to the rate of increase of the
> megatonage. For instance, a 20 megaton bomb will level structures in an
> area 120 times larger than a 20 kiloton bomb will, despite the fact
> it's firepower is 1,000 times greater.
Well, they don't take a physicist and turn him into a police rover, *lol*
And I would expect an MP to know about as much aboput fire control and
weapons as a signalman :)
Rob Dalton
Oh, cool, thanks.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Why doesn't the world die?
Jonathan Boyd
sam...@jamieson-03.freeserve.co.uk wrote on 20/1/00 2:42 pm:
> Angry rant from Lord Protector Kayle Skolaris:
>
>> Okay, which complete waste of skin brought Christ into it??? Whichever
>> one of you did, I hate to break it to ya but Christ is DEAD!!! Has
> been
>> over over 2,000 years now. Only thing he's doing is feeding worms. Now
>> keep the goddam JesusFreak bullshit OUT OF HERE!!!
>
> I don't know, but at a guess I'd say the most likely candidate was boyd.
Amazingly not. It was virus-x. I can see Lord Solaris would have loved the
little debates I had with Kynes and Shaithis.
--
Jonathan
AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/index.html
Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind -
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it. - Gene Spafford
Jonathan Boyd
wrote on 20/1/00 11:46 pm:
> Jonathan Boyd <jona...@jboyd.co.uk> wrote:
>> Wow. The threads that happen when you're asleep.
>
> <snip>
>
>> ... long Mike Wong's...
>
>
> LOL!
Methinks I've got a typo on my post somewhere... :^)
--
Jonathan
AIM: BoydClone | STvsSW website: http://www.jboyd.co.uk/index.html
There is an old saying that if a million monkeys typed on a million
Graeme Dice
>
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 16:55:27 -0800, virus-x
>
> >"A New Hope" happened about 20 years ago. Get with the present.
> >X-wings were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated.
>
How about F-4 Phantom's. That's what they use for the Electronic
Warfare role.
>
> >They were
> >outdated by the third movie. Mon Calamari Star Cruisers, Corellian
> >Corvettes, Nebulon-B frigates, Y-Wings, A-Wings, B-Wings; those are all
> >outdated, too.
>
> Eh? Y-Wings, yeah, you got us there, but B-Wings and A-Wings were
> brand new in ROTJ. Bleeding edge stuff.
Yep.
>
> >Why don't you read the books, sometime.
>
> Et tu? For example, the NR has hardly rested on it's laurels. They
> have came out with the E and K wing fighters, which *surprise* take
> over for the venerable X and B wings. And in Vector Prime, they roll
> out a new Calamari designed warship.
Which would make sense.
>
> >I don't know what red herring you're talking about.
>
> You need to look at the FAQ. It's a logical fallicy.
>
> >Dreadnoughts were
> >around, long before the Thrawn Campaign. Just because they weren't
> >called Katana dreadnoughts is irrelevant.
>
> But *you* called them that, which is what made them relevant. Did you
> know that most of the US Navy's ships of the line are 30 and 40 years
> old. Can you give a reason why ships that can take an ass beating and
> deliver one right back can be called "obsolete" in a few short years?
> This isn't like car production, where you add some pinstripes and a
> spoiler and make all the idiots rush out and buy the newest and
> latest.
>
> >Dreadnoughts are even more
> >outdated than the rest of them.
>
> Than the Katana dreadnaugts? They are the same ships.
>
> >Further, I don't really care about Aing-Tii monks. They don't pertain
> >to any stories I'm discussing, here. For that matter, Jesus Christ
> >could beat all of them, put together.
>
> Whoo boy. You are entering Troll territory here.
>
> >As for 8472's technological superiority, why were they beaten so badly,
> >they retreated from our plane, entirely by a single frigate (Voyager)?
> >Because they weren't as superior as they thought, obviously.
>
> Hmm, yes, and that's interesting. Voyager could beat a foe that was
> whupping up on the Borg, something that the Fed's hadn't managed to do
> ever. I think I'll start a vote to strike all of Voyager from canon.
How about we just load Voyager into a canonn. :)
--
"There is a time to think, and a time to act. And gentlemen, this
is no time to think."
-- "Canadian Bacon"
Jeffrey Yu
news:040278db...@usw-ex0106-048.remarq.com...
<snip lots of B.S.>
Nice to see an opinion unclouded with knowledge.
Aron Kerkhof
<sam...@jamieson-03.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>Do you refer to Elim-nomemory from this newsgroup, or Elim Garak, the
>Cardassian from ST
The "real" Elim. Although mentioning Pollinger only adds to the
irony.
Aron Kerkhof
galactec.com/neolith
Eric
>Aron Kerkhof wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 16:55:27 -0800, virus-x
>> <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >"A New Hope" happened about 20 years ago. Get with the present.
>> >X-wings were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated.
>>
>> Someone call up the airforce! The F-14/15 is outdated!
>
>How about F-4 Phantom's. That's what they use for the Electronic
>Warfare role.
>
>>
I thought the F-4s were completely phased out. Didn't the A6E
Intruder take its place? It's far better suited to the role.
As for outdated aircraft...you can't find a plane more suited for its
role than the wonderful A-10. If you're in a tank column without
significant AAA and an A-10 comes attacking...you -will- die. :)
Eric
remove NO.SPAM.DAMMIT to mail
"Graham Kennedy is Paul Jacques with a web page." - Eric
"Sufficiently advanced technology is often indistinguishable
from magic." - Clarke's Third Law
Graeme Dice
>
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 01:38:37 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@home.com> wrote:
>
> >Aron Kerkhof wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 16:55:27 -0800, virus-x
> >> <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"A New Hope" happened about 20 years ago. Get with the present.
> >> >X-wings were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated.
> >>
> >> Someone call up the airforce! The F-14/15 is outdated!
> >
> >How about F-4 Phantom's. That's what they use for the Electronic
> >Warfare role.
> >
> >>
>
> I thought the F-4s were completely phased out. Didn't the A6E
> Intruder take its place? It's far better suited to the role.
>
> As for outdated aircraft...you can't find a plane more suited for its
> role than the wonderful A-10. If you're in a tank column without
> significant AAA and an A-10 comes attacking...you -will- die. :)
Or an Apache, but that's not a plane.
Graeme Dice
--
In any formula, constants (especially those obtained from
handbooks) are to be treated as variables.
Matthew Hyde
> No, what I'm saying is that people are ignoring the script's text, for
Who the hell cares what *you* are saying, what I am saying is I posted a
little nuke weaps research that contradicts you and you haven't replied.
But it's OK, I know you won't say anything cogent anyway...
Matthew Hyde
virus-x <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> In no Star Trek series has there ever not been some form of
> modification done to something, especially engines and shields.
That's funny, bec we all except you know that ST relies heavily on a
technobabble solution involving modifications and reconfigurations.
> the Q are too worried.
Oh I must have forgotten the Q were in the Federation, or something.
>Or the Dowg. Or the Vulcans.
LOL. Vulcan nerve pinch versus force choke....
>Or the Cytherians. Or the Ocampa.
Oh the scary, powerful Oompah-Loompahs, somebody save me!
>Or the Founders.
Who would just as soon eat the Fed for lunch right?
>Or the Borg.
who are constantly being emasculated, eveiscerated, and castrated by the
writers so some Grandma on an oversized toilet can defeat them (as an
aside).
Ummmm half the species you mentioned would probably ally with the empire.
And by being in an empire-dominated galaxy, by definition they become part
of the empire. Did you not study the Roman Empire, or the differences
between an empire and other forms of government? Empires are
heterogeneous; after conquering the opposing governments, the Romans let
the subjugated people keep their cultural identities in the framework of
citizenry in the Roman government.
Eric
>Eric wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 01:38:37 GMT, Graeme Dice <grd...@home.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Aron Kerkhof wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 16:55:27 -0800, virus-x
>> >> <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >"A New Hope" happened about 20 years ago. Get with the present.
>> >> >X-wings were made some 20 years ago. They're outdated.
>> >>
>> >> Someone call up the airforce! The F-14/15 is outdated!
>> >
>> >How about F-4 Phantom's. That's what they use for the Electronic
>> >Warfare role.
>> >
>> >>
>>
>> I thought the F-4s were completely phased out. Didn't the A6E
>> Intruder take its place? It's far better suited to the role.
>>
>> As for outdated aircraft...you can't find a plane more suited for its
>> role than the wonderful A-10. If you're in a tank column without
>> significant AAA and an A-10 comes attacking...you -will- die. :)
>
>Or an Apache, but that's not a plane.
>
>Graeme Dice
Apaches are nice for stand-off-and-killing, but you just can't beat
that GAU/8a Avenger. 4500 milk-bottle size slugs of depleted uranium
per minute. Mwahaha!
Ahem.
SW Rulez!
<frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> :
>
>
>In no Star Trek series has there ever not been some form of
>modification done to something, especially engines and shields.
>Furthermore, if the Star Wars universe possessed people intelligent
>enough to make the technological leap of light years between Wars and
>Trek, they'd have done it, already. If everyone flew a Death Star, it
>wouldn't make any difference. They're still way too far behind the
>curve. As it is, they've been around 25,000 years, and can barely
>break the speed of light.
Gee, how'd they manage a galactic civilisation with ships "barely able
to break the speed of light"?
---------
SW Rulez!
---------
Chuck
SW Rulez! <dontw...@email.nomatterwhat> wrote in message
news:3888d716...@news.iafrica.com...
> Gee, how'd they manage a galactic civilisation with ships "barely able
> to break the speed of light"?
The sources contradict.
Lord Edam de Fromage
>>In no Star Trek series has there ever not been some form of
>>modification done to something, especially engines and shields.
>>Furthermore, if the Star Wars universe possessed people intelligent
>>enough to make the technological leap of light years between Wars and
>>Trek, they'd have done it, already. If everyone flew a Death Star, it
>>wouldn't make any difference. They're still way too far behind the
>>curve. As it is, they've been around 25,000 years, and can barely
>>break the speed of light.
>
>
>Gee, how'd they manage a galactic civilisation with ships "barely able
>to break the speed of light"?
Like the man said, they've been around 25000 years. You can cover a lot of
distance at just over light speed in that time. Certainly enough to cover
most of the galaxy.
Rob Dalton
I sincerely hope you're being facetious :)
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
Some people have one of those days. I have one of those lives.
The Cuttlefish
>>> As for outdated aircraft...you can't find a plane more suited for its
>>> role than the wonderful A-10. If you're in a tank column without
>>> significant AAA and an A-10 comes attacking...you -will- die. :)
>>
>>Or an Apache, but that's not a plane.
>>
>>Graeme Dice
>
>Apaches are nice for stand-off-and-killing, but you just can't beat
>that GAU/8a Avenger. 4500 milk-bottle size slugs of depleted uranium
>per minute. Mwahaha!
>Ahem.
>
Indeed. And the thing to remember about the ole' Warthog is that the USAF
didn't try to retire them because they were obsolete, but because they were
designed to be used for the Army, and because the A-10s don't rely on the
latest wunder-electronics to do everything. In fact, when you think about
it, the USAF and Starfleet both seem to have the same fascination with
gee-whiz flashing lights and pretty displays.
-CF
SW Rulez!
<Lord...@yahoo.com> :
>SW Rulez! wrote in message <3888d716...@news.iafrica.com>...
>
>>>In no Star Trek series has there ever not been some form of
>>>modification done to something, especially engines and shields.
>>>Furthermore, if the Star Wars universe possessed people intelligent
>>>enough to make the technological leap of light years between Wars and
>>>Trek, they'd have done it, already. If everyone flew a Death Star, it
>>>wouldn't make any difference. They're still way too far behind the
>>>curve. As it is, they've been around 25,000 years, and can barely
>>>break the speed of light.
>>
>>
>>Gee, how'd they manage a galactic civilisation with ships "barely able
>>to break the speed of light"?
>
>Like the man said, they've been around 25000 years. You can cover a lot of
>distance at just over light speed in that time. Certainly enough to cover
>most of the galaxy.
Not by a long shot.
This galaxy (Milky Way) is 100,000 light years across, and the SW
galaxy supposedly 120,000 ly.
25,000 years at "barely over light-speed" will be almost
insignificant.
Nice try, Edam.
---------
SW Rulez!
---------
Matthew Hyde
Matthew Hyde <mdo...@mtu.edu> wrote:
> virus-x <frombfecan...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > In no Star Trek series has there ever not been some form of
> > modification done to something, especially engines and shields.
> That's funny, bec we all except you know that ST relies heavily on a
> technobabble solution involving modifications and reconfigurations.
OOPS, sorry! I missed the "not" in his first sentence...
virus-x
destroyer" was not an acronym utilized in the Army, Navy, Air Force or
Marine Corps. Why should I have memorized it?
2: I’ve presented 100% more evidence than you have. I have the
episode running next to me, and your ‘evidence’ is nowhere to be seen.
You crow about it, and no one says where it is. It isn’t there.
3: Just because it has a different number doesn’t mean it ‘overrides’
anything. I have plenty of books here, and some say two different
things. If I encounter such a case, I don’t take either as evidence of
anything, until I can find something that backs one, or the other,
unlike you, who seems to go anywhere the wind blows. Also, you seem to
go along with the notion that if you don’t personally like a book, it
is automatically not credible. Also, if you had taken the time to read
things, as opposed to criticize people with differing opinions, you
would know that the star destroyers were notorious for being produced
one way, then another. Some have fighters, some don’t, but it isn’t a
‘standard’. I’ve seen Imperial-class star destroyers with weapons that
varied from one ship to another. The Star Wars Imperial Sourcebook,
page 60 says about a Victory-class: "The Victory-class vessel’s main
deficiency is it’s slow sublight speed. However, it does have rapid
hyperspace capabilities ad can make jumps quickly. To augment it’s
slow speed, the Victory carries 2 TIE fighter squadrons." About the
Victory II, "Victory II Destroyers are designed with hangar bays large
enough for 2 squadrons of TIE fighters. A recent shortage and high
demand for the starfighters has seen the mothballing of several
hangars, or the use of non-combat craft as battle platforms." Same
book, different page (61). Like I said, they say different things,
because the Imperials are notorious for variants. The time period for
that book was not long after Episode 4 (see page 5).
4: Yes, Star Wars tech has remained the same. For 25,000 years.
5: "Level out" isn’t meant to be synomimous for ‘flattening out’, and
no, your estimate isn’t correct about destructive ranges. It takes far
too much energy to make nuclear weapons that destructive, through our
conventional technologies, that’s why we don’t use 500 kiloton weapons,
when we can get the same level of destruction from a 300 kt warhead.
As I said, yes, you are way off on your estimate from West End Games.
6: "Physical Security" was a section of PM-PAC (Provost
Marshal-Pacific) in the Republic of Panama (where I was stationed from
1987-1990) that was dedicated to analyzing the security procedures
taken by everyone, from the entire installation down to individual
company armsrooms. Physical security is not a division. We looked
over passwording, computer security, law enforcement levels of
awareness, the security of special ammunition, restricted areas,
classification of materials from sensitive through top secret, etc. It
isn’t new, but the Military Police (and the Army as a whole) just don’t
put a lot on the Internet. Not because of some big security thing, but
probably because of a lack of motivation to do so. If you’ve any
questions about the MPs or the Army, you can ask me at
FromBF...@hotmail.com; I’d be more than happy to provide you with
anything I know off the top of my head from being there. Physical
security duty MPs don’t normally patrol like regular MPs, though they
are armed with regular sidearms. Nothing fancy, there’s no James Bond
work. In fact, sometimes, seeing as to how it was a big paperwork
thing, it had a tendency to suck.
7: We don’t actively MANUFACTURE 500 kiloton weapons, anymore, but
they’re still in our arsenal. However, many are being scrapped,
because we can utilize their nuclear materials for making a whole bunch
more smaller bombs, that are just as destructive. The Russians have
realized the same thing, and through such things as the START
(STrategic Arms Reduction Treaty), they’re cutting down, too. If you
watch the news, they’re trying to experiment with a reactor in Canada
to accept weapons grade plutonium from American and Russian nuclear
weapons, in an effort to ‘recycle’ the materials. This was a couple of
months ago, and I haven’t heard anything about it, since.
8: The man to ask for yields is not me, but my friend the former WT
(Weapons Technician), and he says that published yields are not always
entirely accurate, for security reasons. They’re not a total lie,
unless you’re dealing with a very new weapon, and most of our nuclear
weapons are not really new. The Russians just made a new one, though,
just a few months ago. I just meant that WE (Brian & I) cannot freely
discuss things like that, because when we (and others) left the
service, you sign a document with S2 that basically says you’ll watch
your mouth. That’s all. S2 Is battalion security/intelligence. Every
battalion has one, and larger elements have equivalents. One of the
biggest is G2, located in EUSAREUR (United States Army Europe). That’s
no secret.
9: As for shaped charges, that’s nothing spectacular. We have them,
too. They’re old news. I’m not disputing that proton torpedo warheads
work that way in some configurations. You’ll get no argument out of
me, there.
10: You have yet to actually show me authentication. When someone
tells me a source, I look it up. Not to call them liars, but to see
for myself, just for my own edification. There’s nothing wrong with
that. I just like for people to quote sources like I did, book (full
name, not acronyms), page number, exact quotes, etc. Or web addresses.
LucasArts is a corporation that is Lucas’ trademark. When you see the
name on these things, it means that it was approved by Lucas, which
includes the games. For example: "All rights reserved. Trademarks of
LFL used by West End Games under authorization." That’s from "The Last
Command" sourcebook. Here’s an article:
"And with the Star Wars universe continung to expand Lucasfilm has
meticulously graphged the plotline of every piece of licenced material
to weed out potential conflicts. Fans always want to know what
material is actual canon and what isn’t, and Lucasfulm executive
recently addressed that question during an on-line conference with Star
Wars fans held on the on-line system Genie. Strictly speaking, the
movies, the radio dramas, and the novelizations are the most accurate
and are considered canon. The Marvel Comics Star Wars series is
definitely not."
-Sci-Fi Universe Premiere Issue
"Countdown to ’97 the next Star Wars Trilogy"
by Chris Gore
page: 58
I am not saying that your sources are inaccurate in respect to Star
Wars, I’m just saying that like mine, they’re not infallible. West End
Games is knowledgeable about Star Wars, but not nuclear weapons. They
recently almost lost their contract with Lucasfilm, because Lucas
didn’t believe the game was worth pursuing, because it didn’t generate
the money the other merchandise did, like the comics. I am not calling
you a liar, because I have too much class to be so insulting to someone
that hasn’t done anything to me, but you don’t seem to have that kind
of foundation. All I’m saying is that I want exacts and specifics, not
just references. That’s all. If that’s insulting to you, sorry about
that. The novels contradict themselves, but that’s not to say that
Star Trek games don’t. Look at the Star Trek the Next Generation
Officer’s Manual. Whomever from FASA wrote that crap should run a warm
bath, get in and open a vein. A lot of the books from Star Wars are,
technologically, and storyline-wise, drawn directly from the games. I
read them both. Star Trek is not organized, at all, in their books, so
I refuse to acknowledge them, and they’ve already been denounced as
being non-canon, anyway, so I’m justified.
11: I never did say that Imperial-class star destroyers couldn’t tear
a planet apart, but so could Star Trek ships, generally. They didn’t
in The Die is Cast, because you don’t have to core a planet to kill
someone living on it’s surface. "The Imperial star destroyer has
enough firepower to reduce a civilized world to slag or take on a fleet
of lesser enemy vessels." Star Wars Imperial Sourcebook, page 61. I’m
sure there is a degree of exaggeration, just as there is in many
stories, but not by much. I just don’t say much about it, because to
say that they absolutely could do something without my being able to
say exactly where I got that information would make me look like I’m
just talking out of my ass.
12: I never said that Sun Tzu’s theories on warfare were incorrect.
13: You don’t know how many ships the Federation has, because there is
no official estimate given. The amount of star destroyers projected
was 25,000 (?), but many were lost in battle, starting with the battle
of Endor. As for the firepower of that Kazon ship, until I see stats
on it, I can’t say anything about it’s firepower. Trekers that say
they know something about it are full of crap.
14: As for your bombing out of the AF academy because of eyesight, try
laser surgery. If correctable within x% of 20/20 with glasses &/or
surgery, the armed forces will still admit you.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!