Could a Runabout beat an X-wing?
Lolipop of Borg
Some friends of mine got into an argument about this one. I say that to
make it fair you'd have to put a shuttle pod against the Wing thing
instead. Hello, is anyone listening to me.
--
Lolipop of Borg
---------------------------------
"You will all become one with the
Sweetshop, INCLUDING that cat."
Greg Bobkiewicz
So which one would win?
Greg Bobkiewicz
So which one is the better ship?
Darkom
gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca (Greg Bobkiewicz) wrote:
>So which one would win?
Come on, it's no contest the defiant would blast the falcon out of the
sky. Did you even see the fire power on the Defiant, the phasers and
the quantum torpedoes, not to forget the cloaking device and the armor
plates. What does the falcon have ? lasers ? they wouldn't even
scratch the defiant's shields.
Darkom
Klingon: qaStaHvIS wa' ram loS
SaD Hugh SIjlaH qetbogh loD
English: Four thousand throats may be cut
in one night by a running man.
Michael Wong
In article <55155f$i...@service3.uky.edu>, elc...@mik.uky.edu says...
>> So which one is the better ship?
>The Falcon is a much cooler ship, and would win solely because of the
>overwhelming superiority of SW weapons and shields, as posted in the
>asteroid calculations.
>But, if you ignore those, and take my general stance when trying to do
>a comparison, that is... SW Lasers = Phasers, then the Defiant would win
>because it's bigger and has more weapons + a cloaking device.
Technically, he didn't ask which ship would win in a fight. He asked which
ship is "better". I personally think the Falcon is much better because it is
much faster at long-distance FTL travel, it requires minimal crew, and it is
capable of planetary landings, so it would be better for everything EXCEPT
head-to-head combat.
Tom LeTourneau
Gloucester <kd...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote in article
<32745...@ntnews.compusmart.ab.ca>...
> In article <551h66$f...@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>,
> jos...@freenet.columbus.oh.us says...
> >
> >Greg Bobkiewicz (gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca) wrote:
> >: So which one is the better ship?
> >
> >Defiant. Pulse phasers, quantum torpedos, and a cloaking device pretty
> >much give it the advantage. God I love that ship.
> What the Defiant can't do is attach itself to the hull of a really
> huge ship to hide from it's sensors (like the Falcon did with the ISD in
> Empire Strikes Back).
>
>
Just because it's never been done doesn't mean it can't be done.
Shuttlecraft have done it! It would, however, have to be a pretty BIG ship!
Eric Lee Cline
In article <550rlo$n...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca> gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca (Greg
> So which one is the better ship?
The Falcon is a much cooler ship, and would win solely because of the overwhelming
superiority of SW weapons and shields, as posted in the asteroid calculations.
But, if you ignore those, and take my general stance when trying to do a comparison,
that is... SW Lasers = Phasers, then the Defiant would win because it's bigger and has
more weapons + a cloaking device.
Eric Lee Cline, Star Wars Junkie
Amara
On 27 Oct 1996, Greg Bobkiewicz wrote:
> So which one is the better ship?
The question that is on everyone's lips is....
Who cares? ;)
May the force be with you, live long and prosper... can't we all just get
along?
Amy
"We count 30 rebel ships, Lord Vader, but our men are so pissed they
couldn't hit a bull's butt with a bass fiddle."
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
Amy 'Amara' Pronovost: Anthro/Star Wars artist, Star Wars Cool Girl,
Official rassm Cool person, Psychovixen.
ap...@cleo.murdoch.edu.au <*> http://rat.org/amara <*>
Josh Lee
Defiant. Pulse phasers, quantum torpedos, and a cloaking device pretty
much give it the advantage. God I love that ship.
--
Until it's over, it's still on.
Lloyd James
In <550r75$n...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca> gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca
(Greg Bobkiewicz) writes:
>
>
>So which one would win?
Win what? Are they playing poker?
DJ
Daniel Miller
It's all happening again... <hnnh, hnnh, hnnh>
--
Dan'l sha...@expert.cc.purdue.edu <*>
"So don't forget, folks,
That's what you get, folks,
For makin' whoopie!"
Timothy Applegate
In <550rlo$n...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca> gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca
(Greg Bobkiewicz) writes:
>
>So which one is the better ship?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Chris
Mandalore
--- "This ship was meant to fight."
--- "What a piece of junk!"
Mariusz Jesmanowicz
So why is it that this ship always gets is ass kicked. I have not seen an
episode where this ship did anyhtiung good yet. And now it will be blown
away to pieces in the upcoming movies, so what is so great about it.
Overpowered yet never did anyhting amazing.
Josh Lee <jos...@freenet.columbus.oh.us> wrote in article
<551h66$f...@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>...
> Greg Bobkiewicz (gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca) wrote:
> : So which one is the better ship?
>
Maurice Leong
Greg Bobkiewicz <gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca> wrote in article
<550rlo$n...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>...
> So which one is the better ship?
Defiant. It can go faster (warp is faster than hyperspace I *think*), and
it's got sharper teeth.
Nico
The Milennium Falcon is a smuggler's ship not an attack craft. It's the
fastest in the
galaxy and the most manoeuverable but in weapons it has just enough for
defense.
Much like comparing Apples and Oranges.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Nicodemus Chan Games Programmer
GAMES ONLINE:Sembawang Media Pte. Ltd., 82 Boat Quay, Singapore 049870
PHONE:(65)4697146x31 FAX:(65)4697145 E-MAIL: ni...@smedia.com.sg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Todd McNeil <to...@peg.apc.org> wrote in article
<3275B2...@peg.apc.org>...
> Defiant would win, obviously. The Millenium Falcon was supposed to be an
> old thrash-mobile of a spaceship and the Defiant's a brand-spanking new
> starship.
>
Josh Lee
Gloucester (kd...@compusmart.ab.ca) wrote:
: In article <551h66$f...@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>,
: >: So which one is the better ship?
: >
: >Defiant. Pulse phasers, quantum torpedos, and a cloaking device pretty
: >much give it the advantage. God I love that ship.
: huge ship to hide from it's sensors (like the Falcon did with the ISD in
: Empire Strikes Back).
Ever heard of a cloaking device?
Josh
Timothy Applegate
Forget all the # crunching!!! Trek writers clearly had/have no idea
what SI units are, therefore the #s are no more valid than Veitch's
line in DE, "The Falcon blasts at twice the speed of light..."
Instead, let's talk tactics...
Impstars have no particle shielding over their engines (at least while
they're operating). One photon torpedo-- poof.
Chris
Mandalore
"Two X-wing squadrons? ONLY two?" --- Myself
Stephen John Harley
Maurice Leong wrote:
>
> Greg Bobkiewicz <gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca> wrote in article
> <550rlo$n...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>...
>
> it's got sharper teeth.
I don't break this personal rule often but...
Warp isn't faster its just that you can manvour and change course and do
other neat stuff. Its actually much slower cause with hyperspace you
can travel the width of the galaxy in a few months while warp would
take over 100 years.
But your right Defiant would rip the hull of the Millenium Falcon.
--
-= + =-
sha...@dial.pipex.com
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/sharley/
"Hit hard, Hit Fast, Hit Often."
-= + =-
Wayne Poe
On Fri, 25 Oct 1996 kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu wrote:
>> In canon record, Enterprise shields cannot withstand much more than 400GW of
>> energy.
>
> Ahhh. But that's when shielding against:
>
> 1) a single powerful highly focused beam (not many low intensity beams,
> and yes there is a huge difference)
NOO!! Don't drag me back into this!! But it's so much fun!! Hehehe! Hey
dude, would you rather be hit in the head with 10 pounds of feathers or
a 10 pound bowling ball? <snicker>
>> Final note: As to the validity of the Asteroid calculations, remember
>> calculated to a level that would make iron GLOW, which
>>the ISD clearly did.
> Oh these often quoted asteroid calculations, I
>took a look at them while they're a good measure of the maximum power an
>ISD can output, they are not a good measure of the power of a single
>turboLASERS on an ISD because MANY turboLASERS are used to blast the
>asteroid. IF someone was to divide the energy needed by the number of
>turboLASERS used, that figure would be a good basis for comparison of
>weapons.
Geezus Christ! I am convinced that Trekkies have a copy of TESB different
from the rest of the world! Here's what I (and the rest of the world) saw:
One asteroid, one turbolaser blast.
Matthew Jeremy Blevins
>
> Defiant Vs. Millenium Falcon
>
> From: gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca (Greg Bobkiewicz)
> Reply to: Greg Bobkiewicz
> Date: 27 Oct 1996 23:36:24 GMT
> Organization: University of Alberta
> Newsgroups:
> rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc,
> rec.arts.startrek.current,
> rec.arts.startrek.misc,
> rec.arts.startrek.tech
> Followup to: newsgroup(s)
>
>So which one is the better ship?
Part of the reason I love the Defiant is because it owes a lot to the Falcon.
Technically, it's bigger and has more firepower, and is obviously not some thrown-together mess
like the Falcon. But in battle, esp. in the battle seen in "Shattered Mirror" and the one in
"Paradise Lost," she moves a lot like the Falcon: quick, agile, and in your teeth. Basically,
she's just a wonderful ship to watch in battle because she doesn't just SIT there like most
larger cruisers.
From a technical standpoint, I think the Defiant is obviously superior. When she charges
a larger ship, that ship had better the hell RUN! From a character standpoint, and as a whole, I
love them both though. The Falcon is sometimes unreliable, but a fun and amazing ship. And the
Defiant, just from it name, has a hell of a lot of character. Why choose? They both rock!
--
-Matthew Blevins
BAD PUNS IN GREAT LITERTURE
"But no more of this blubbering now, we are going a-whaling, and there is
plenty of that yet to come." -Melville, Moby Dick
Mario Alaniz & Marco Castillo
Greg Bobkiewicz wrote:
>
> So which one is the better ship?
Shame on you, Greg! :)
Starting a huge, pointless thread for no reason! I'd bet you get about
300 posts attached to this thread before its through!
Peace,
Mario Alaniz
Timothy Applegate
In <327672...@ccm.ch.intel.com> Parapraxis
<John_Sc...@ccm.ch.intel.com> writes:
>Todd McNeil wrote:
>>
>> Defiant would win, obviously. The Millenium Falcon was supposed to
be an
>> old thrash-mobile of a spaceship and the Defiant's a brand-spanking
new
>> starship.
>
Like what? It had a hard enough time with those sentry TIEs in ANH. It
-evaded- a number of ships in ROTJ. It barely got away from the ISDs
and TIEs in ESB. Of course, knocking out the DS II's reactor counts...
not. That was, after the maneuvering, about as hard as "point and shoot
at something ten times your size." There's no references to it taking
out corvettes, or... hmmm, not many cap ships in the trilogy. The only
really big ship I can recall it taking out was the SSD Iron Fist
(should've been Iron Fist II). And that was with the help of a Hapan
fleet.
The Defiant, on the other hand, has taken out... well, Trekkers are too
mature to need senseless battles for entertainment :). Anyways, it's
been seen taking out a Voodieh-class cruiser (Voodieh is sort of
conjectural) with minimal help. Granted, it'll get trashed by the Borg
ship in FC, but only ships named Enterprise survive the Borg.
Todd McNeil
Parapraxis
The Falcon continually beat newer, supposedly better ships.
--
_________________________________________________________________________
Parapraxis: These are my opinions.
Also known as the (Like Intel has an opinion of Star Wars!)
"Zhap" in "Zhapekanovich"
Timothy Applegate
Read on...
The post of someone that does not regularly watch "Deep Space Nine..."
In <01bbc4b1$1f916b60$5e3293cf@cube176a> "Mariusz Jesmanowicz"
<mkje...@students.wisc.edu> writes:
>
>So why is it that this ship always gets is ass kicked. I have not seen
an
>episode where this ship did anyhtiung good yet. And now it will be
blown
>away to pieces in the upcoming movies, so what is so great about it.
>Overpowered yet never did anyhting amazing.
>
Lessee, it took out a Voodieh-class dreadnaught (and that was an
el-cheapo quickie version of it, too!) could have destroyed the Great
Link, holds its own for a time against the Borg, etc. etc.
The Falcon is pretty good at running... oh, yeah, maneuverable, too.
Joe Schulte
Timothy Applegate (tap...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: Read on...
Hah. The Space Shuttle Columbia with an ICBM strapped to it could have
taken out the great link...
For that matter, so could the Falcon.
: The Falcon is pretty good at running... oh, yeah, maneuverable, too.
And getting shot. Something a Trek ship can't do without a core breach.
Brad Stethem
Timothy Applegate <tap...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<555uh7$5...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>...
> The Defiant, on the other hand, has taken out... well, Trekkers are too
> mature to need senseless battles for entertainment :). Anyways, it's
> been seen taking out a Voodieh-class cruiser (Voodieh is sort of
> conjectural) with minimal help. Granted, it'll get trashed by the Borg
> ship in FC, but only ships named Enterprise survive the Borg.
The only reason the Defiant will get trashed is because Worf is in charge.
Whenever Sisko is in charge the ship kicks ass. The only time it got badly
beat with Sisko around was when it was up against 6 (or maybe more, I can't
remember) Jem'Heddar ships all by itself.
Mariusz Jesmanowicz
Timothy Applegate <tap...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<555uh7$5...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>...
> In <327672...@ccm.ch.intel.com> Parapraxis
> <John_Sc...@ccm.ch.intel.com> writes:
> >
> >Todd McNeil wrote:
> >>
If you guys notice one huge difference between SW and ST is that in SW
technology is not a problem, it is the money and resources. If you have the
cache we'll build it. You can have beautiful ships, It is just a problem
with resources. In ST it's not the money but the technology. IF it were not
for technology, BORG would be destroyed with one shot. In SW Universe we
don't know the limit of technology, cause we see story of people in
struggling situations for right tools to fix somethings. If Han Solo had
the money and resources of Earth in 24th century, he would have a flying
fortress with everything perfect. The story would suck then wouldn't it.
What about the Jedi Academy trilogy (i know not a cannon) but that ship
could not be destroyed by anything, the one that Kyp Duran was flying. They
had to put it in the core of the sun, so no one could use it, and what ST,
hey we had some shields but we could only sit in corona and only for few
minutes. So I guess you can't compare these technologies. SW was only 3
movies based on story not technology, where Trek has everything explained.
All the scientists gotta do is read the manuals of St and we'll be flying
out of this Solar system in no time :) but I guess that is stupid so let's
start a new topic which is better
Who would win Q from ST or Yoda ?????????????????????????????????? :)
Lloyd James
In <01bbc58c$a80df180$47bf32ca@computer> "Maurice Leong"
<dan...@wave.co.nz> writes:
>
>
>
>Greg Bobkiewicz <gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca> wrote in article
><550rlo$n...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>...
>
and
>it's got sharper teeth.
>
It depends on what you mean by "better." Defiant definitely
outclasses the Falcon in terms of weaponry and fighting skill, but the
Falcon still looks *cooler* (no matter what it does). If I had the
choice of watching the Falcon in battle or the Defiant in battle...I'd
have to go with the Falcon.
DJ
DJ
Federation Outpost Station 77
This is actually a better matchup than it first appears. I would have to
give the Defiant the upper hand in armaments and defenses, but think the
'Falcon would still be more manuverable and faster because it is
slightly smaller.
I remember the Defiant getting it's butt whipped by an upgraded
Excelsior class ship in one episode of Star Trek... so it's armaments
are not *that* much better than Federation standards.
If Worf, Dax and O'Brien are on the Defiant, and Hans, Chewbacca, Leia
and Luke are on the 'Falcon. The Defiant is toast. The force is with
them. ;>
Josh Ethridge
Lloyd James wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> It depends on what you mean by "better." Defiant definitely
> outclasses the Falcon in terms of weaponry and fighting skill, but the
> Falcon still looks *cooler* (no matter what it does). If I had the
> choice of watching the Falcon in battle or the Defiant in battle...I'd
> have to go with the Falcon.
>
> DJ
Exactly how I feel. It is great to watch the Millenium Falcon fight
because you also have the cut scenes to what is going on with Han,
Chewy, Threepio, etc on the inside of the ship. Han and Chewy working
in the back on the hyperdrive and complaining about how it works while
they're getting shot at. Leia making cracks about the ship when its the
only thing saving her ass. And the battle at the end of Return of the
Jedi is the coolest thing on screen I've ever seen.
The Defiant is nice, but it is boring to have Sisko say, "Dax, kill
them." Dax pushes a few buttons and every JemHadar ship in the quadrant
is vaporized.
Just my thoughts,
Josh
Matthew Jeremy Blevins
Oh, jeez, people are whining about the Defiant's battle record
again. I think the important thing to note is that the writers have to
put the ship in danger to create that nifty thing called DRAMA. Thus, you
have to consider the circumstances the Defiant has been put in:
-bushwacked while cloaked w/ no shields and main power off by
half-a-dozen Jem'Hadar ships
-battling in the ionized atmosphere of a gas giant where the pressure is
massive and shields are practically useless.
-attacked by a souped up Federation ship, the Lakota, which they couldn't
"shoot to kill" against.
-trying to save a disabled Cardassian ship from several Klingon vessels,
(ie had to divide their fire and stay between them and the Cardassian ship)
Let's face it, the Enterprise-D would have been toast in most of
these situations! And as we've seen in "The Die is Cast" and "Shattered
Mirror," the Defiant can kick some serious ass when in direct battle
(esp. with Sisko in command!)
As for First Contact, we'll have to see. I worry that since it's
a TNG movie they will disrespect the Defiant (ie trash it to make the new
E look good), but we'll see. But for goodness sake, it's the *ucking
BORG!! Any ship that can make a dent is pretty tough if you ask me!
Federation Outpost Station 77
If you think of the Galaxy Class as a Battle Ship, and the Imperial Star
Destroyer as an Air Craft Carrier, it changes tactics slightly doesn't
it?
If a Naval Battleship was toe to toe with a modern Air Craft Carrier,
the 18 inch guns would win out. But in reality, the air craft carrier
would launch it's fighters *long* before the Battleship was ever in
range to use it's weapons.
If you think the Galaxy's shields will protect her from "snub" fighters,
be serious. Small craft can penetrate the shields of Federation ships
easily. (it has happened numerous times in Star Trek, erg: Cannon.).
And once inside the shields the Star Wars "snub" fighters weapons would
be very effective. If I was the strategist in the conflict, I'd tell
the "snub" fighters to concentrate their attack on the 'weak' support
structures for the Warp nacelles... ;)
Joseph M. Osborne
Federation Outpost Station 77 wrote:
> I remember the Defiant getting it's butt whipped by an upgraded
> Excelsior class ship in one episode of Star Trek... so it's armaments
> are not *that* much better than Federation standards.
Watch "Paradise Lost" again!!
The U.S.S. Lakota was *heavily* upgraded with the latest technology as O'brien pointed
out. The technology on the Lakota was probably first developed for the Defiant!
Also, the Lakota didn't win, it surrendered. At the end of the battle, both ships
were severely damaged. It was pointed out though, that the Defiant could probably
take a few more hits while the Lakota could not survive another. When Worf contacted
the Lakota, they surrendered since the Defiant had the advantage.
The U.S.S. Lakota was a heavily refitted Heavy Cruiser, the Admiral sent very best
ship in the Starfleet to intercept the Defiant, and it failed.
For the record, the Defiant was built to fight the Borg, a single Star Destroyer would
be a fair fight.
Josh Lee
Federation Outpost Station 77 (outp...@geocities.com) wrote:
: Josh Lee wrote:
: >
: > Gloucester (kd...@compusmart.ab.ca) wrote:
: > : In article <551h66$f...@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>,
: > : jos...@freenet.columbus.oh.us says...
: > : >
: > : >Greg Bobkiewicz (gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca) wrote:
: > : >: So which one is the better ship?
: > : >
: > : >Defiant. Pulse phasers, quantum torpedos, and a cloaking device pretty
: > : >much give it the advantage. God I love that ship.
: > : What the Defiant can't do is attach itself to the hull of a really
: > : huge ship to hide from it's sensors (like the Falcon did with the ISD in
: > : Empire Strikes Back).
: >
: > Ever heard of a cloaking device?
: >
: > Josh
: >
: > --
: > Until it's over, it's still on.
: This is actually a better matchup than it first appears. I would have to
: give the Defiant the upper hand in armaments and defenses, but think the
: 'Falcon would still be more manuverable and faster because it is
: slightly smaller.
: I remember the Defiant getting it's butt whipped by an upgraded
: Excelsior class ship in one episode of Star Trek... so it's armaments
: are not *that* much better than Federation standards.
That episode it was a FIXED UP Excelsior class. The Defiant won the battle
and could of destoryed, but didn't WATCH THE EPISODE!
: If Worf, Dax and O'Brien are on the Defiant, and Hans, Chewbacca, Leia
: and Luke are on the 'Falcon. The Defiant is toast. The force is with
: them. ;>
Lets see Worf is a trained Klingon, Dax is just Dax, and O'Brien is one of
the best engineers in Starfleet. Ohhh lets put Sisko on the Defiant too.
Just to make things more intresting. :o)
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
> This is actually a better matchup than it first appears. I would have to
> give the Defiant the upper hand in armaments and defenses, but think the
> 'Falcon would still be more manuverable and faster because it is
> slightly smaller.
Hello....
Star Wars ships have a max sublight speed of "thousands of
kilometers per second" = 10^6 m/s. A Galaxy Class ship has a max speed of
.5C approx 10^8 m/s. Which gives it a much greater sublight speed than an
A-wing. Now at sublight the Defiant is faster than a Galaxy is faster
than an A-wing is faster than the Millenium Falcon.
Manueverability (sp?): are you defining it as:
the time rate of change of angular position (how long [time wise] it takes
to point front in another direction)
or
as the time rate of change of angular position divided by speed (how much
forward distance it takes to point front in another direction at a
certain speed)
if you are using the first definition the Defiant wins.
if you are using the second definition where both ships are travelling at
the Millenium Falcon's top speed then the Defiant wins [realy only
dividing both manuverabilities given by definition 1 by the same
constant, if A/B = (A/const)/(B/const) ]
if you are using the second definition plugging in both ships respective
maximum speed, I don't know there is not adequate information
available for comparison without frame by framing DS9 and the Star
Wars Trilogy.
However:
1) the second definition is not a "fair" one
2) Even if the Falcon was "shown" to be more manueverable by
"frame by frame analysis" this data would not be admissable
because presumably Han Solo is a much better pilot than whoever
is flying (spacing?) the Defiant.
[ comparison of Han Solo to Tom Paris (voyager) anybody? ]
3) The Falcon is a modified FREIGHTER, it was not DESIGNED to be
manueverable, the Defiant was.
> I remember the Defiant getting it's butt whipped by an upgraded
> Excelsior class ship in one episode of Star Trek... so it's armaments
> are not *that* much better than Federation standards.
Excuse me but:
1) the Falcon is an upgraded FREIGHTER
2) the Deiant won and was trying to disable the warship grade Excelsior
class ship that was trying to destroy the Defiant (actually the
commander didn't want to but she didn't tell that to her crew)
and
3) if you're going to go into weapon power based on "Asteroid
calculations" then use:
5/12*pi*(L/2)^3 as the volume of an asteroid
(asteroids are typically closer to "pill-shaped" [a cylinder
capped by hemispheres on both ends where the diameter of the sphere
equals the height of the cylinder, L is the length of the
asteroid] than spheres)
The composition of an unknown asteroid as 10% iron, 50% silicon, and 40%
carbon (percent by mass). If an asteroid is said to be rich in metal then
use 20% iron, 50% silicon, and, 30% carbon (by mass)
Figure Federation "standards" from the Next Generation episode with "the
nitrium metal eating parasites, this is also the one where Lwuaxanna Troi
almost gets married, and Picard says "It would be my pleasure to give her
away" (emphasis on give her away). In the opening scene of this episode
the Enterprise "behaves like a turbo-charged sports car" and blows up an
asteroid (rich in nitrium) that was big enough to wipe out "all" life on a
planet whose native race still had "primitive" technology. Does anyone
know the supposed size of the asteroid that was supposed to have wiped out
the dinosaurs (was it 200 miles, 500 miles)?
Figure that pulse phasers are roughly twice as powerful as normal
phasers, figure that there are 8 (? there's so many of them it's hard to
count) on the Defiant, figure that they fire 5 times faster than
Federation standard. Figure that the Defiant has quantum torpedoes, a
souped up version of photon torpedoes (faster annihilation of
matter-antimatter giving them a shorter/more-intense release of energy),
figure 4 photon torpedoe launchers (each can fire a vollies of 10 if they
are "only" Federation standard), figure the Star Wars galaxy has not
mastered anti-matter.
"Then and only then..." compare weapons.
> If Worf, Dax and O'Brien are on the Defiant, and Hans, Chewbacca, Leia
> and Luke are on the 'Falcon. The Defiant is toast. The force is with
> them. ;>
doubtful. Han might be able to keep the defiant from getting hit (much)
but 1 hit = BOOM. Falcon's weapons couldn't do jack squat to the Defiant.
Worf is an expert tacticle officer and would be in charge of the defiant.
Luke typically has a problem reading, the minds of alien races he is not
accustomed to (What about a species, trill (Dax) with 2 minds). Tractor
beams to catch the Falcon hold it in place ..... 'nough said, this a much
more ridiculous match up than the Galaxy vs an Imp Star Destroyer.
-Keith Dalbey
Jedi Knight and friend of Captain Solo.
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On 30 Oct 1996, Joe Schulte wrote:
> : The Falcon is pretty good at running... oh, yeah, maneuverable, too.
>
> And getting shot. Something a Trek ship can't do without a core breach.
Does any body remember last season's series premier of Star Treck DS9,
you know the one, where the klingons are trying to take over the
Cardassians and the defiant has to go and rescue the Cardassian government
who are fleeing. In this episode the Defiant gets wailed on for was it
4 or six minutes while it HAD ITS SHIELDS DOWN so it could make
maximum use of the transporters to beam the cardassians on board by a
Vortch'a class Klingon assault cruiser. The only thing on the Defiant
that got toasted, okay 2 things, were the ablative shielding and 2 the
cloaking device, it did not have a core breach, 1 panel might have
exploded. Now we are talking phased energy weapons here, not the puny
(turbo)lasers here that Star Wars uses. As for puny weapons try a new
batch of asteroid calculations ones for the Enterprise.
sam
Lloyd James wrote:
> >Greg Bobkiewicz <gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca> wrote in article
> ><550rlo$n...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>...
> >> So which one is the better ship?
> >
> >Defiant. It can go faster (warp is faster than hyperspace I *think*),
> and
Warp aint faster than hyperspace. Think about it using hyperspace you
can get from one end of a galaxy to the other, using warp you can barely
get from the outer rim to the center of the gallaxy.
:) falcon kicks
gt2...@prism.gatech.edu
In article <17831B42C...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>,
Andre Canis <UZS...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de> wrote:
>
>what about:
>Who would win: Squad of Stormtroopers or Starfleet Security ?
Starfleet Security for sure.
Security officer: [hums to himself] setting phaser to wide dispersal, maximum
stun setting. ZAP!! [squad of Stormtroopers down for the
count]
OR
Security officer to team: Men, set phasers to maximum power setting. And fire
at will
[phasers lashing out, vaporizing squad of Stormtroopers]
Andre Canis
In article <01bbc5c2$92fcf800$473f93cf@cube176a>
"Mariusz Jesmanowicz" <mkje...@students.wisc.edu> writes:
> .... < SNIP > .... t's
>start a new topic which is better
>Who would win Q from ST or Yoda ?????????????????????????????????? :)
>
Timothy Applegate
In <17831B42C...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>
Howabout:
Who would win? A squad of stormtroopers or a twelve-year-old with a
gun?
Amara
> In article <01bbc5c2$92fcf800$473f93cf@cube176a>
> "Mariusz Jesmanowicz" <mkje...@students.wisc.edu> writes:
>
> > .... < SNIP > .... t's
> >start a new topic which is better
> >Who would win Q from ST or Yoda ?????????????????????????????????? :)
> >
>
> what about:
> Who would win: Squad of Stormtroopers or Starfleet Security ?
>
>
Star Fleet Security.. I mean, anything has to be able to shoot better
than Stormtroopers. ;)
Amy- Who thinks Original Trek was neato and likes Tribbles. :):)
"We count 30 rebel ships, Lord Vader, but our men are so pissed they
couldn't hit a bull's butt with a bass fiddle."
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
Amy 'Amara' Pronovost: Anthro/Star Wars artist, Star Wars Cool Girl,
Official rassm Cool person, Psychovixen.
ap...@cleo.murdoch.edu.au <*> http://rat.org/amara <*>
Lloyd James
In <55ates$i...@acmey.gatech.edu> gt2...@prism.gatech.edu writes:
>
>In article <17831B42C...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>,
>Andre Canis <UZS...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de> wrote:
>>
>>Who would win: Squad of Stormtroopers or Starfleet Security ?
>
>
>Security officer: [hums to himself] setting phaser to wide dispersal,
maximum
> stun setting. ZAP!! [squad of Stormtroopers down for the
> count]
>
>OR
>
>Security officer to team: Men, set phasers to maximum power setting.
And fire
> at will
> [phasers lashing out, vaporizing squad of Stormtroopers]
>
But you're forgetting something--namely, how utterly INCOMPETENT
Starfleet security is! They would drop like flies.
Of course, stormtroopers have really bad aim...
But security guards are extremely unlucky...
Chances are, a stormtrooper would fire a shot into the air, but a
security guard (trying to avoid getting shot) would accidentally dive
into the laser fire and die anyway.
DJ
Dax A. Morgan
Federation Outpost Station 77 <outp...@geocities.com> wrote in article
<32778A...@geocities.com>...
> Timothy Applegate wrote:
> If a Naval Battleship was toe to toe with a modern Air Craft Carrier,
> the 18 inch guns would win out. But in reality, the air craft carrier
> would launch it's fighters *long* before the Battleship was ever in
> range to use it's weapons.
>
> If you think the Galaxy's shields will protect her from "snub" fighters,
> be serious. Small craft can penetrate the shields of Federation ships
> easily. (it has happened numerous times in Star Trek, erg: Cannon.).
> And once inside the shields the Star Wars "snub" fighters weapons would
> be very effective. If I was the strategist in the conflict, I'd tell
> the "snub" fighters to concentrate their attack on the 'weak' support
> structures for the Warp nacelles... ;)
>
I really don't want to get into this argument but, when have small ships
penetrated Fed shield. If you will remember correctly, they can extend
shields to protect smaller craft, but I don't remember any outright
punching through them. But that is besides the point SW and ST are to
vastly dissimilar technologies, you can't fairly compare them. Personal I
love SW but I would go with any late generation ST vessel over anything
except the DS. Simply because, Fed vessels can fire at and their weapons
are capable of warp speeds, they would never have to get close enough to
bring the SD'd weapons in to play.
--
Dax Morgan - Jedi Knight
d...@intex.net
"I have a bad felling about this..."
- Any Star Wars character at some point in time... Take your
pick.
Chuck Tewksbury
One isnt necessarily faster than the other,... they are different
concepts......
CT
Jeremy Kwiecien
Greg Bobkiewicz wrote:
>
> So which one is the better ship?
In general, I would have to say the Defiant is a better combat ship (It
was
designed SPECIFICALLY for ass-kicking), whereas the 'Falcon was a
freighter
modified to make it more _useful_ in smuggling.
BUT, for the sake of argument (much fun), I can come up with some ways
for
the 'Falcon to win:
1) If the Falcon had it's crew from ANH (ie Han, Luke and Chewbacca),
then
the fight would be much closer. (Those guys are better (at combat
piloting)
than anyone in 'Trek)
2) The Falcon DID survive numerous direct hits from Turbolasers.
Assuming
that turbolasers are about as tough as a ship-bourne phaser, the Falcon
may have a chance.
3) The Falcon blew up a Death Star, those things are bigger than the
Defiant.
(those concussion missles pack a whollop, and no, they aren't the ones
from
X-Wing/Tie-Fighter games)
4) Maneouverability: The 'Falcon (in the hands of a great pilot) is
quite
agile, dodging lasers and asteroids while avoiding Tie fighters, or
skimming
by hostile 'Destroyers being dogged by several Ties. While the defiant
is
quick, we've never seen it up against anything really fast.
5) Going into WEG source material: the Falcon has capital ship scale
shields,
weapons and engines, but is smaller than capital scale. ie it's much
tougher
than it looks. Also, the Falcon has a mega-powerful jamming system,
which is
good against anything less than a cruiser. Not being able to accurately
compare 'Trek and Star Wars sensors, we'll assume that the Falcon can
confuse
the Defiant long enough to get in some damaging shots. (Trek relies
heavily
on computers and sensors for aiming and firing weapons)
5 points? Pretty good.
Jer
Parapraxis
Joseph M. Osborne wrote:
>
> Federation Outpost Station 77 wrote:
>
> > Excelsior class ship in one episode of Star Trek... so it's armaments
> > are not *that* much better than Federation standards.
>
>
> The U.S.S. Lakota was *heavily* upgraded with the latest technology as O'brien pointed
> out. The technology on the Lakota was probably first developed for the Defiant!
>
> Also, the Lakota didn't win, it surrendered. At the end of the battle, both ships
> were severely damaged. It was pointed out though, that the Defiant could probably
> take a few more hits while the Lakota could not survive another. When Worf contacted
> the Lakota, they surrendered since the Defiant had the advantage.
>
> The U.S.S. Lakota was a heavily refitted Heavy Cruiser, the Admiral sent very best
> ship in the Starfleet to intercept the Defiant, and it failed.
>
> For the record, the Defiant was built to fight the Borg, a single Star Destroyer would
> be a fair fight.
episode. The same vessel will be an awesome ship one episode, piece of
crap the next. I guess that happens when your plot is just a patchwork
of various interpretations. Same thing seems to have happened in all
the post-trilogy works of Star Wars.
Brad Stethem
Federation Outpost Station 77 <outp...@geocities.com> wrote in article
> "They used some sort of dishonorable mind trick!" Worf explains....
>
> ;>
>
> The Force is with them.
>
> "Don't be too proud of this technological terror you have created. The
> ability to destory an entire planet is insignificant compared to the
> power of The Force."
So in both of the little fantasy scenes you came up with, the only way the
Falcon won was by Luke using the Force. I hate to break the news to you,
but Luke isn't always on the Falcon. Sure, the Falcon might be
undefeatable with Luke on board, but that's like saying that "nobody could
beat the Defiant if they had a Q". It has absolutely no bearing on the
ship-to-ship comparison.
Timothy Applegate
In <327A2B...@uwaterloo.ca> Jeremy Kwiecien <jakw...@uwaterloo.ca>
writes:
>Greg Bobkiewicz wrote:
>>
>> So which one is the better ship?
>
>
>In general, I would have to say the Defiant is a better combat ship
(It
>was
>designed SPECIFICALLY for ass-kicking), whereas the 'Falcon was a
>freighter
>modified to make it more _useful_ in smuggling.
>
>BUT, for the sake of argument (much fun), I can come up with some ways
>for
>the 'Falcon to win:
>
>1) If the Falcon had it's crew from ANH (ie Han, Luke and Chewbacca),
>then
>the fight would be much closer. (Those guys are better (at combat
>piloting)
>than anyone in 'Trek)
How do you know? Sisko can fly pretty well, and most combat in Trek
doesn't involve dodging light-speed weapons.
>2) The Falcon DID survive numerous direct hits from Turbolasers.
>Assuming
>that turbolasers are about as tough as a ship-bourne phaser, the
Falcon
>may have a chance.
Taking that assumption. However, the Falcon didn't survive that many
hits, and phasers are far more accurate than little (big)
turret-mounted turbolasers that have men aiming and firing them.
>3) The Falcon blew up a Death Star, those things are bigger than the
>Defiant.
>(those concussion missles pack a whollop, and no, they aren't the ones
>from
>X-Wing/Tie-Fighter games)
The Falcon took out its reactor, presumably causing a chain reaction
similar to the one that took out DS I. Of course, that's just my
presumption.
>4) Maneouverability: The 'Falcon (in the hands of a great pilot) is
>quite
>agile, dodging lasers and asteroids while avoiding Tie fighters, or
>skimming
>by hostile 'Destroyers being dogged by several Ties. While the
defiant
>is
>quick, we've never seen it up against anything really fast.
200+ Jem'Hadar ships from "The Die is Cast" had a hard enough time
getting it.
>5) Going into WEG source material: the Falcon has capital ship scale
>shields,
>weapons and engines, but is smaller than capital scale. ie it's much
>tougher
>than it looks.
Which WEG books do you have? Mine have stats in good old starfighter
class. 3D, to be exact, and that's from the DE sourcebook. 3D of
capital scale would make its shields as powerful as an MC90.
> Also, the Falcon has a mega-powerful jamming system,
>which is
>good against anything less than a cruiser. Not being able to
accurately
>compare 'Trek and Star Wars sensors, we'll assume that the Falcon can
>confuse
>the Defiant long enough to get in some damaging shots. (Trek relies
>heavily
>on computers and sensors for aiming and firing weapons)
Trek has subspace "radar" for sensors. The sensors in SW are all DER
(dedicated energy receptors) and the like. Hence, the Falcon could not
jam the Defiant. Unless they messed with their subspace radio, using a
phase-shifted DER to determine the jamming frequency, but that's a
Voyager tactic.
>
>5 points? Pretty good.
>
>
>Jer
Chris Applegate
"What a piece of junk!" Luke Skywalker, Future Jedi Master, ANH
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Fri, 1 Nov 1996, Parapraxis wrote:
> It seems to me, though, that ST is inconsistant from episode to
> episode. The same vessel will be an awesome ship one episode, piece of
> crap the next. I guess that happens when your plot is just a patchwork
> of various interpretations. Same thing seems to have happened in all
> the post-trilogy works of Star Wars.
No, it didn't go from awesome to a piece of crap, it went from a peice of
crap to awesome. As you should know, the Defiant is a prototype
(proof of concept, not yet ready for combat) ship. It still had a lot of
bugs left in it when Sisko first got it, he said something to the effect
of "she'll shake herself apart at full throttle", and "she's way
overgunned and overpowered". Heck I think the pulse phasers blew out the
first time they used them, leaving the Defiant dead in the water but she
wrecked the 2 Jem' Ha' dar fighter that she went up against. Since this
time O'brien and the rest of the incredibly skilled engineering crew at
DS9 have put a lot work into the Defiant, fixing all (most)the problems.
As every one should admit, the Defiant consitently kicks ass now.
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On 1 Nov 1996, Timothy Applegate wrote:
> In <327A2B...@uwaterloo.ca> Jeremy Kwiecien <jakw...@uwaterloo.ca>
> writes:
> >5) Going into WEG source material: the Falcon has capital ship scale
> >shields,
> >weapons and engines, but is smaller than capital scale. ie it's much
> >tougher
> >than it looks.
>
> Which WEG books do you have? Mine have stats in good old starfighter
> class. 3D, to be exact, and that's from the DE sourcebook. 3D of
> capital scale would make its shields as powerful as an MC90.
3D, capital scale, of shields (with 6D back up) would make the Falcon as
tough as an MC80, 6D of capital scale (with 6D back up) would make the
Falcon as tough as a MC90 (not counting hul strengths). Unfortunately,
for the Falcon, it only has 3D fighter scale shields. It also has "warhip
grade armor" protecting the crew and engineering compartment, but
that is already figured into the WEG stats that give it a Hull rating
of 6D (if I remeber correctly), fighter scale.
The Falcon's shields and armor is no where close to the Defiant's.
Neither is it's armament or speed.
By WEG stats the Falcon is pretty slow (space rate only 8) and not
varry manueverable (2D) compared to modern Star Wars fighter's like
squints (TIE interceptors), A-wings, or E-wings or A-9's or Incom
Howlrunner's, or the new version of the X-wing (Jedi Acadamy Sourcebook
[very awesome a must own for any jedi fan] has a space rate of 12). Most
of the impressive manuver's the Falcon pulled off were due to the skill of
the pilot, namely Han Solo (flying demi-god). I'm not saying that 2D
isn't manueverable, it's awesome especially for a freighter, but the
Falcon just doesn't stack up (manueverability and sublight speeds only
we're talking here) to newer combat ships.
For sublight (max useful) speeds, the Defiant beats the Galaxy
beats an A-wing beats the Falcon by the order of 10^8 to 10^6
meters/second, yes I can and have often documented those figures. As for
manueverability the Defiant wins out too, No I'm not talking who has the
smaller turning circle at their respective top speeds. I'm talking
relative sizes turning circles, radius or diameter of turning circle
divided by ship length. Besides if the Defiant needed a smaller turning
circles for combat against the Falcon it could reduce its speed to the
Falcon's max and it would have it. Heck if a pilot wanted to I'm betting
that the Defiant could just spin 180 (or whatever other angle neccesary)
about its axis with manuevering thrusters and use those powerful sublights
it has to break/change direction.
Allen Newman
In article <01bbc4a8$7e9897e0$263c92ce@stalker>, "Tom LeTourneau"
<sta...@rangenet.com> wrote:
>Gloucester <kd...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote in article
><32745...@ntnews.compusmart.ab.ca>...
>> In article <551h66$f...@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>,
>> jos...@freenet.columbus.oh.us says...
>> >
>> >Greg Bobkiewicz (gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca) wrote:
>> >: So which one is the better ship?
>> >
>> >Defiant. Pulse phasers, quantum torpedos, and a cloaking device pretty
>> >much give it the advantage. God I love that ship.
>> What the Defiant can't do is attach itself to the hull of a really
>> huge ship to hide from it's sensors (like the Falcon did with the ISD in
>> Empire Strikes Back).
>>
>>
>Just because it's never been done doesn't mean it can't be done.
>Shuttlecraft have done it! It would, however, have to be a pretty BIG ship!
And there are no ships that big in Star Trek (except for V'ger in the first
ST movie).
The Defiant would probably beat the MF -- more weapons, stronger hull, and
better maintained. The Defiant is a top-of-the-line design with every
advanced weapon known, while the Falcon is a battered old "piece of junk"
that is only as cool as Han Solo can make it when he has enough free time
to work on it. If the Defiant caught up to the MF when the MF was in as
bad a shape as it was in ESB, the Defiant would clobber it. With
hyperdrive, the MF is faster, but hypespace is so fast and takes so long to
set up jumps for that it's really only good for escapes -- the Defiant
being able to cloak balances that capability pretty well. The Defiant can
survive being shot when the defectors are down because it has a special
armored hull, while if the Falcon takes a direct hit without deflectors
it's "done for".
Wait for Star Trek: First Contact to see the Defiant perform on the big
screen -- which is as close to the Star Wars universe as it will ever get.
I can't believe I actually posted to a SW vs. ST thread. I guess I've sunk
pretty low. :)
-------------------------------------------------------------
ALLEN NEWMAN: Self-taught Mac masseur since 1984, recovering
Trekkie, theatre-school groupie, mass communication product,
Superman fan, and member of the Star Wars Generation.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Armed only with a blaster pistol and an intimate knowledge of
Imperial methods, Newman prepares to go to lunch....
Russell Gavelin
g> From: gt2...@prism.gatech.edu
g> Subject: Re: Defiant Vs. Millenium Falcon
g> Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
g> In article <17831B42C...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>,
g> Andre Canis <UZS...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de> wrote:
>
>what about:
>Who would win: Squad of Stormtroopers or Starfleet Security ?
g> Starfleet Security for sure.
g> Security officer: [hums to himself] setting phaser
g> to wide dispersal, maximum
g> stun setting. ZAP!! [squad of Stormtroopers down for the
g> count]
g> OR
g> Security officer to team: Men, set phasers to
g> maximum power setting. And fire
g> at will
g> [phasers lashing out, vaporizing squad of Stormtroopers]
Ahhh... No. I think the StormTroopers would kick some serious butt. They have
the numbers and they'd be able to take out a lot more of the security than the
security would of them.
--
|Fidonet: Russell Gavelin 135:69/20
|Internet: Russell...@wwlan.linknet.incentre.net
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
Russell Christiansen
This is a stupid thread that has lasted FOR OVER A FREAKIN' YEAR!!!
No more Galaxy class versus Imperial Star Destroyer crud PLEASE!!!
- Russell Christiansen
The Olsons
sam wrote:
> Warp aint faster than hyperspace. Think about it using hyperspace you
> can get from one end of a galaxy to the other, using warp you can barely
> get from the outer rim to the center of the gallaxy.
> :) falcon kicks
From what I understand about Star Wars using hyperspace can get you up to
1.5c tops. When warp can do past that at warp 2.
My personal theory is that the Star Wars galaxy (one far, far away) is
much, much smaller than the Milky Way. So if the planets and systems are
closer together you would only need hyperspace to go across the galaxy.
Well, What do you think???
gt2...@prism.gatech.edu
In article <298_961...@linknet.incentre.net>,
Russell Gavelin <Russell...@wwlan.linknet.incentre.net> wrote:
>Ahhh... No. I think the StormTroopers would kick some serious butt. They have
>the numbers and they'd be able to take out a lot more of the security than the
I agree on the point of the Troopers having power in sheer numbers. But
numbers alone don't really count in a firefight. From what I gathered on
the various SW tech stuff, the StormTrooers aren't very well trained. Even
their suit is not strong enough to resist a blaster fire, I don't think it
can even stop a stun bolt. And assuming that they are using your typical
run of the mill blaster, I don't think they have much in the way of power
and dispersal settings.
Where as the Security forces in Starfleet are trained, both for hand-to-hand
and armed combat. They have variable power setting and variable dispersal
pattern weapons, from hand phasers to phaser rifles, not to mention photon
grenades and personel deflector shields (mentioned in DS9 episode "Paradise
Lost"). Plus I don't think the StormTrooper hand weapons can be set to
overload. In ST, now and then they talk about phasers being set to
overload. And they have shown instances of a phaser either vaporizing or
exploding royalaly (in the OS, don't know if it's been done in TNG or DS9)
from being set to overload.
If it came down to hand-to-hand combat, the StormTroopers would have an
edge because of their armor. I have yet to see a Starfleet officer of any
type wearing sometime of combat armor. Except for maybe that dying guy
that Jake stumbled across. That dying guy seemed to be wearing somekind of
vest from the bulky look. But then, it could just be his guts ready to
fall out.
But in an armed combat, I'd even have to say a U.S. marine platoon can
take out a StormTrooper squad.
Now, what about a group of Klingons vs. a squad of Storm Troopers? Or yet,
Borg "units"against the same?
Andrew Toth
The Olsons <usol...@televar.com> wrote:
{+}sam wrote:
{+}> Warp aint faster than hyperspace. Think about it using hyperspace
you
{+}> can get from one end of a galaxy to the other, using warp you can
barely
{+}> get from the outer rim to the center of the gallaxy.
{+}> :) falcon kicks
{+}From what I understand about Star Wars using hyperspace can get you
up to
{+}1.5c tops. When warp can do past that at warp 2.
{+}My personal theory is that the Star Wars galaxy (one far, far away)
is
{+}much, much smaller than the Milky Way. So if the planets and
systems are
{+}closer together you would only need hyperspace to go across the
galaxy.
{+}Well, What do you think???
Well if I remember correctly from some one who explained on this NG
earlier, when they mean Lightspeed, its a minomer. The modifier, in
this case 0.5 is how close describes how close you come to traveling
at infinite speed. Warp 10 in Star Trek terms. So the equilivalent
speed of the Falcon traveling through Hyperspace would roughly be
around Warp 9, again in Star Wars terms.
How it actually works out, ( I don't have the source book.), I am not
sure, as I stated earlier, I am just saying what I recall from an
earlier post on the subject.
Beyowulf
Beyo...@pipeline.com
Steely Blue Dragon Of The -==UDIC==-
jfor...@ucla.edu
Forget the sourcebooks, they have no idea what they are talking about! At sublight speeds the Defiant is no match for the Millenium Falcon. In ESB, the Millenium Falcon flies from Hoth, to the Anoat system to Bespin without ever successfully engaging it
s hyperdrive! Now, even in the densest
globular clusters, stars can get as close as a few light months apart. However, the stars outside of the Falcon look to be as spread out as they are typically potrayed in Star Trek, so the distances are more on the order of at least a light year or two, m
aybe more. So, even if maximum impulse is about the speed of light, a Star Trek ship would take at least two years to travel from system to system to system. I don't get the impression from ESB that it takes the Falcon anywhere near that length of time.
It blasts off from Hoth, does some nifty flying and runs into an asteroid field. It leaves the field, attaches to the back of the Star Destroyer for a moment. When they simply float away they are in the Anoat system. Now, the asteroid field wasn't mo
ving in hyperspace, becasue we would have seen the hyperspace tube. They aren't on the Star Destroyer for that long, because C-3PO is still yammering, so it didn't take them to a new system. (And even if it did, they must have done without engaging hype
rdrive,or else the ship would have escaped at that point instead of when it did. This establishes that ships in the Star Wars universe can haul butt without jumping to lightspeed (which must be a quaint holdover phrase from their first flights at these s
peeds, because obviously hyperdrive goes much, much faster than c. So maybe when Han says in ANH that she'll do point five past the speed of light, he meant without using the hyperdrive. I think hyperspace, should be worked as some sort of space compres
sion system. This would also make sense of Han's comment in ANH that he made the Kessel run in under 12 parsecs, which initially sounds dumb since parsecs are a distance measurement. However, if he has tuned up his hyperdrive to make it compress the dis
tance of the run below 12 parsecs, this would make sense. (I know Kevin J. Anderson also tried to explain away this unfortunate terminological choice in one of his first Star Wars books, but I generally think the books suck, and if it ain't in the movies
, then it ain't Star Wars) Anyway, it takes them very little time to get from Hoth to Anoat and they never use hyperdrive. Maybe the asteroids or the Star Destroyer somehow got them there, but still they alone directly fly from Anoat to Bespin, and agai
n it does not take them that much time. Not nearly as long as it would for the Defiant without its using warp drive. So, an non-hyperspace/warp speeds, the Millenium Falcon could outrun anything Starfleet could even conceive of. (And obviously, its fas
ter at hyperspace/warp speeds too, since Han has traveled from one end of the galaxy to the other, and Janeway can't get home in her lifetime. But that's another story.)
-John "That's two you owe me, kid." Foreman
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On 3 Nov 1996 jfor...@ucla.edu wrote:
> >The Falcon's shields and armor is no where close to the Defiant's.
> >Neither is it's armament or speed.
> > By WEG stats the Falcon is pretty slow (space rate only 8) and not
> >varry manueverable (2D) compared to modern Star Wars fighter's like
> >
> > For sublight (max useful) speeds, the Defiant beats the Galaxy
> >beats an A-wing beats the Falcon by the order of 10^8 to 10^6
> >meters/second, yes I can and have often documented those figures. As for
> Forget the sourcebooks, they have no idea what they are talking about! At
> sublight speeds the Defiant is no match for the Millenium Falcon. In
> ESB, the Millenium Falcon flies from Hoth, to the Anoat system to Bespin
> without ever successfully engaging its hyperdrive!
the Falcon has a back up drive, a x8 multiplier if i'm not mistaken and if
you look in Galaxy guide 9 (?): Tramp Freighters, you'll find that a
typical backup drive only works once. Meaning if on your first jump
with a backup drive you don't go somewhwere you can get your primary
drive fixed you don't leave.
> I know Kevin J. Anderson also tried to explain away this unfortunate
> terminological choice in one of his first Star Wars books, but I generally
> think the books suck, and if it ain't in the movies, then it ain't Star Wars
Freedom of speech means everybody has a right to speak their opinion, it
does not mean that everyones opinion is equal valid. For example if it
was your opinion that 2 plus 2 equals 3, you would have the right to say
that but you would not be right.
(sorry about that but I'm having a really bad day and I don't need this
crap from you or anybody else right now, I know I'm a compettetive person
so when I enter a debate I intend to win, When I don't want to be
compettetive I don't enter a win/lose confrontation, so now that you've
challenged my opinion you're getting it with both barrells.)
My opinion: WEG sourcebooks are canon. books by different authors
that all agree with each other and reference each other and use the
same non-movie characters as each other are canon. As for it not being
Star Wars, it says so on the covers and if you look inside the covers
under the little copyright/trademark section it says it's Star Wars, this
mean it is legally Star Wars, and if they wanted to sue you for libel and
slander (saying it's not Star Wars) they probably could. One more thing,
Lucas has the final say to what the Star Wars lable goes on, and He chose
to put it on Zahn's and all the rest of the books, guess what, Zahn
originally planned to say that Darth Vader's mask was a styalized version
of a Norogi (sp?) face, Lucas said no, so it didn't print, Zahn originally
planned to have Joruus be a clone of Obiwan Kenobi, Lucas said no, so it
did't print. Everything that did print Lucas did approve of so it is
canon. period.
Rob Lent
jame...@ix.netcom.com(Lloyd James) taught us that:
> But you're forgetting something--namely, how utterly INCOMPETENT
>Starfleet security is! They would drop like flies.
> Of course, stormtroopers have really bad aim...
> But security guards are extremely unlucky...
> Chances are, a stormtrooper would fire a shot into the air, but a
>security guard (trying to avoid getting shot) would accidentally dive
>into the laser fire and die anyway.
>DJ
In such a battle, the Starfleet security would obviously be able to
outshoot the Stormtroopers. The Starfleet security also has to
die, of course. Now, what would happen would be that the
Starfleet security troops would shoot all of the Stormtroopers,
leaving no obvious way for the Starfleet troops to die!
This is a bad and dangerous thing. The universe will not tolerate
such an anomaly. The safest thing for all involved would be for
the security troops to shoot themselves. If they are not willing
to do this, the universe will get them itself, perhaps by way of
summoning a giant space penguin to step on them.
Very messy. Or, the Starfleet troops heads could all explode.
If you are a Starfleet security officer, there is only one way to
survive. Appear in more than one episode. All it takes is for
the command staff to begin to like you, and you become
immortal, unless of course, you want to go off and start a
big movie career.
Rob Lent
Benjamin
Federation Outpost Station 77 (outp...@geocities.com) wrote, and I quoth ...
: I remember the Defiant getting it's butt whipped by an upgraded
: Excelsior class ship in one episode of Star Trek... so it's armaments
: are not *that* much better than Federation standards.
Actually, it was Captain Benteen of the Lakota who surrendered. As (either
Kira or O'Brien) said, "one more hit will finish them off". Sure, the
Defiant took some hits, but it certainly whipped the opponent, and not the
other way round.
--
i do not go gentle into that good night,
but i am going on sabbatical in december.
benjam...@t-i-p.com
Robert Winkeler
Well, this may not really be on topic, but over and over, I've heard that "whatever ST
ship is faster/slower than whatever SW ship," so I've attempted to prove what their
actual speed is. According to the Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2nd edition, Revised and
Expanded:
"While starships move at relatively slow speeds in orbit, they can achieve
incredible velocities in open space. Here are some *very rough* guidelines for
sublight travel times.
Five minutes to fly from orbit to a safe hyperspace jump point.
Half an hour to fly from a planet to one of its moons.
Two to six hours to fly from one planet to the nearest planet in the system.
(Two hours for relatively close terrestrial worlds; the upper limit is for flying
between distant gas giants.)
Anywhere from 10 to 48 hours to fly from a star to the outer limits of the
system, depending upon distance and the presence of any hazards such as asteroid belts
or gas clouds. (It takes about 15 hours to reach the outer limits of a
"representative" system composed of a single yellow star and less than a dozen
significant planetary bodies.)"
In the final sentence, I assume that are referring to a solar system approximately
similar in size to ours. So if:
1. Pluto is, on average, 5,900,000,000 km from the Sun
2. The speed of light is 1,071,360,000 kilometers per hour
3. A SW ship can reach Pluto in 15 hours
then a SW ship traveling in open space moves at a speed of 393,333,333.3 kph or
approximately 0.367c. (Note that this is a conservative estimate, since my calculations
are based on a system with nine planets instead of twelve. This also most likely not
the *maximum* speed, but only the cruising speed, since a ship is not likely to travel
at maximum speed everywhere it goes. One could guess that an average SW ship's maximum
speed is anywhere from 0.5c to 0.7c.) Conversely, the Enterprise moving at full impulse
(0.5c or 535,680,000 kph) would take 11.014 hours to cover the same distance.
Also note that both ST and SW ships have true maximum sublight speeds of just below the
speed of light. If both were to accelerate for a long enough period of time, they could
reach such speeds, but doing so would take extremely long amounts of time and would
cause problems with the time continuum. The previously calculated maximum speeds are
actually the maximum easily attainable speed.
In the end, all of this can prove a lot, or nothing at all, depending on which side
you're on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Winkeler
Gets out the fire extinguisher, preparing for flames...
Kirin
Matthew Jeremy Blevins wrote:
>
> >
> > Defiant Vs. Millenium Falcon
> >
> > From: gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca (Greg Bobkiewicz)
> > Reply to: Greg Bobkiewicz
> > Date: 27 Oct 1996 23:36:24 GMT
> > Organization: University of Alberta
> > Newsgroups:
> > rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc,
> > rec.arts.startrek.current,
> > rec.arts.startrek.misc,
> > rec.arts.startrek.tech
> > Followup to: newsgroup(s)
> >
> >So which one is the better ship?
>
> Technically, it's bigger and has more firepower, and is obviously not some thrown-together mess
> like the Falcon. But in battle, esp. in the battle seen in "Shattered Mirror" and the one in
> "Paradise Lost," she moves a lot like the Falcon: quick, agile, and in your teeth. Basically,
> she's just a wonderful ship to watch in battle because she doesn't just SIT there like most
> larger cruisers.
> From a technical standpoint, I think the Defiant is obviously superior. When she charges
> a larger ship, that ship had better the hell RUN! From a character standpoint, and as a whole, I
> love them both though. The Falcon is sometimes unreliable, but a fun and amazing ship. And the
> Defiant, just from it name, has a hell of a lot of character. Why choose? They both rock!
>
> --
> -Matthew Blevins
I would love to imagine Scotty on the Falcon instead of Chewy and the
bizarre stereotypical dialogue that would ensue between Scotty and Han
Solo during the heat of battle with scads of Tie fighters (where of
coarse machinery would start breaking down....).
Duggy
On Sat, 2 Nov 1996, The Olsons wrote:
>From what I understand about Star Wars using hyperspace can get you up to
>1.5c tops. When warp can do past that at warp 2.
Why do people keep insisting that ".5 past Hyperspace" means 1.5c?
Does Warp 9 mean "9mph past Light" or "9 times the speed of light"?
>Well, What do you think???
I think you need to pay attention more...
- Dug. __________________________
/ \
/ Paul "Duggy" Duggan. \
________________| |____________________
| The views here | <coe...@jcu.edu.au> | I have a problem |
| are mine, and | | letting go of my |
| agreeing will |http://www.jcu.edu.au/~coe-pad| childhood, but I |
| be seen as a |______________________________| still find time to |
|Copyright breach| |play with my manhood|
|________________|Official rassm Cool person(tm)|____________________|
| |
\ /
\_T_R_U_S_T___N_O___O_N_E__/
Jeremy Kwiecien
Todd McNeil wrote:
>
> Defiant would win, obviously. The Millenium Falcon was supposed to be an
> old thrash-mobile of a spaceship and the Defiant's a brand-spanking new
> starship.
The Millenium Falcon was never made out to be a trash-mobile. Sure the
Hyperdrive had problems when Han tried to upgrade, then use it, without
propre testing. And of course it LOOKED scummy, how could anyone take
a scummy ship seriously? It had fire power equivelent to the Tantive
IV,
and Ship-of-the-Line calibre shielding! (All according to WEG SW
Sourcebook (1st ed)).
After saying all that, as long as the Defiant didn't underestimate the
'Falcon, it should win hands down.
Jer
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Mon, 4 Nov 1996, Duggy wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Nov 1996, The Olsons wrote:
>
> >From what I understand about Star Wars using hyperspace can get you up to
> >1.5c tops. When warp can do past that at warp 2.
>
> Why do people keep insisting that ".5 past Hyperspace" means 1.5c?
<Ahem> that's ".5 past lightspeed" if you're quoting Han in "A New Hope"
While it has been explained to me that this is slang/a figure of speech
for having a x.5 hyperdrive multiplier in WEG terms (.5 means trip time is
half of what it would be for a ship with a x1 multiplier), it is not
obvious. So allowances have to be made for new comers.
> Does Warp 9 mean "9mph past Light" or "9 times the speed of light"?
No, but Warp is defined in the Next Generation Tech Manual, and is not
used in conjunction with the term "lightspeed" which is very easy to
confuse with the phrase "speed of light".
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Sun, 3 Nov 1996, Robert Winkeler wrote:
> then a SW ship traveling in open space moves at a speed of 393,333,333.3 kph
> or approximately 0.367c.
> This also most likely not the *maximum* speed, but only the cruising speed,
> Conversely, the Enterprise moving at full impulse (0.5c or 535,680,000
> kph) would take 11.014 hours to cover the same distance.
I agree that the *maximum*/cruising speed of the Eneterprise does appear
faster than that of a Star Wars ship. Just so you know the time it would
take for the Enterprise to cross the SOL (SOL refers to our sun) system
is tabulated along with warp speed times in the Star Trek Encyclopedia
under the entry "warp". The 11 hour figure seems to stick out in my mind
as the time to cross the SOL system.
> Also note that both ST and SW ships have true maximum sublight speeds of just
> below the speed of light.
> Gets out the fire extinguisher, preparing for flames...
I'm not going to flame you, relax. One more thing the Defiant has a much
more powerful Impulse (change in momentum) drive than the Enterprise, and
a greater thrust to mass ratio (Newtonian Acceleration) than the
Enterprise, which in turn is apparently faster than any Star Wars ship at
sublight speeds. (note: I said apparently so don't flame me)
Jeff Dorfman
Just a little point on this facet of the tiresome Defiant v. Falcon
argument. The battle between the refitted Lakota and the Defiant is
important because it pitted *identical* weapons against each other
(quatoms, pulse phasers, boston-cream pies) on *different* platforms (the
older Excelsior v. the new Valiant) The Defiant won, proving that it was
the superior *class.* In addition, the Defiant was not even really trying
as hard as the Lakota was becuase the Defiant crew did not want to kill
fellow starfleet officers while the Lakota _was_ trying to destroy the
Defiant becuase they believed it was carrying a crew of changelings.
Nevertheless, the Defiant was victorious. It won with one nacelle tied
behind its back, so to speak.
IMHO, the Defiant would win unless Worf tried to ram it or something.
Jeff "the artist formally known as Dorf" Dorfman
:Sig-less and loving it:
On 3 Nov 1996, Benjamin pointed out that:
Robert Winkeler
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu wrote:
>
> On Sun, 3 Nov 1996, Robert Winkeler wrote:
>
> > then a SW ship traveling in open space moves at a speed of 393,333,333.3 kph
> > or approximately 0.367c.
> > This also most likely not the *maximum* speed, but only the cruising speed,
>
> > Conversely, the Enterprise moving at full impulse (0.5c or 535,680,000
> > kph) would take 11.014 hours to cover the same distance.
>
> I agree that the *maximum*/cruising speed of the Eneterprise does appear
> faster than that of a Star Wars ship. Just so you know the time it would
> take for the Enterprise to cross the SOL (SOL refers to our sun) system
> is tabulated along with warp speed times in the Star Trek Encyclopedia
> under the entry "warp". The 11 hour figure seems to stick out in my mind
> as the time to cross the SOL system.
> Also note that both ST and SW ships have true maximum sublight speeds of just
> below the speed of light.
> I'm not going to flame you, relax. One more thing the Defiant has a much
> more powerful Impulse (change in momentum) drive than the Enterprise, and
> a greater thrust to mass ratio (Newtonian Acceleration) than the
> Enterprise, which in turn is apparently faster than any Star Wars ship at
> sublight speeds. (note: I said apparently so don't flame me)
Don't worry, I'm not flaming you either. In my opinion, however, an average SW ship
such as a medium freighter (I don't mean the MF, though) or shuttle has a speed equal to
the Enterprise. 0.367c is (most likely) only a SW ship's cruising speed - it's maximum
is probably anywhere from 0.4 to 0.7. Smaller ships such as TIEs and A-wings might be
able to achieve 0.8+.
Also, exactly how fast is the Defiant? I'm guessing about 0.7c, but that's just a
guess...
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Winkeler
Federation Outpost Station 77
> ship-to-ship comparison.
I was trying to stay "in character" for both shows. Sorry If the humor
escaped you.
Star trek is automated, computer guided, weapons locks. Star Wars is
about people. About emotions and weaknesses. Luke destroyed the Death
Star not by using the computer aided guidance system, but by drawing
upon his own inner strengths. It is my belief, based on nothing but
actual footage of Star Trek and Star Wars (no Role playing Game specs,
or game rules of engagements, No Technical Manuals written about the
shows, no Fictional novels about the shows, etc.) that the 'Falcon is
smaller, faster and more manuverable at sub-light speeds than the
Defiant. I have never seen the Defiant in a multiple engagement battle
with dozens of other ships while navigating an asteroid field. Have
you? I have never seen the Defiant fly into a super structure of a
space station, while evading enemy fighters. Have you? In fact, I have
only seen the USS Enterprise navigate inside a huge asteroid 1 time (and
the Romulans trapped her there in "The Pheonix" and it was a far cry
more spacious in that asteroid than the one the 'Falcon flew down to
hide. (even if it did turn out to be the home of a giant creature.)
I believe, that given the 'Falcon's small size and Star Wars 'manual is
better than automated' attitude, that The Defiant would have a hard time
locking on and actually hitting the 'Falcon. I believe that the 'Falcon
has weapons capable of damaging the Defiant. While it won't bea "Let's
save on the old budget and blow up the enemy in 1 hit" kind of a TV
fight, it would take several hits from the 'Falcon against the Defiant
to do significant damage. But each hit *would* count, and eventually
the 'Falcon could wear down the Defiant's defenses and disable her. It
doesn't matter how powerful your weapons are, if you can't hit the
target. Even the true RPGers will have to agree on that point. I
believe that the Defiant's automated targetting system would not be
effective, and that the Phasers / tractor beam would have to be manually
aimed and fired. Starfleet personnel, while trained at manual
targetting, are not as effective at it as their automated systems. (Else
why would they so heavily rely on them??) In Star Wars, the 'human'
factor plays a much larger role. I believe that would be the deciding
factor....
"Lock phasers on Target!" Worf barks
"I can't get a phaser lock, their moving around too much." Dax replies.
"Then switch to manual." Worf insists.
"Switching to manual targetting."
"Fire!"
Three pulse phaser beams streak out into space, missing the 'Falcon as
she pitches side to side and does a barrel roll to avoid the last blast.
On the 'Falcon
"They are firing their weapons!" Princess Leia says.
"I can see that Princess!" Hans replies.. then adds, "I can't keep this
up forever, eventually they are gonna get a shot through."
Chewbacca grunts.
The 'Falcon fires it's weapons, scoring direct hits on the Defiant.
Back on the Defiant.
"Damage report!" Worf barks.
"Minimal damage. Minor hit on Deflector shield 2. The field strength
is down to 89%.
Two more hits rocks the Defiant.
"Shield strength down to 76%"
"Why are you not firing!" Worf demands.
"They are manuvering into our weapons blind spots. Then rolling from
side to side, locating the next blind spot. I don't have time to
manually target and fire before they are safely out of range of our
weapons." Dax sounds frustrated.
"Execute flight plan Worf Alpha 1" Worf commands.
The Defiant begins it's own set of barrel rolls, only confusing Dax's
targetting efforts more as she is not used to manually targetting the
weapons systems of the Defiant.
"You incompetent fool!" Worf growls. "I will target the weapons
myself!"
Dax steps aside, letting the Klingon take the controls. Two more hits
rock the Defiant as shield strength drops to 61%. "I guess dinner is
off for tonight with that attitude!" Dax retorts.
Back on the 'Falcon.
"They are still firing at us!" the Princess says.
Hans rolls his eyes. "Good, they have started evasive manuvers. I bet
they are tired of our hiding in their weak spots."
Chewbacca grunts.
"I know pal, I have a bad feeling about this..."
The Defiant fires it's phasers. Two of the three bolts miss completely,
but one rocks the 'Falcon as sparks begin to fly everywhere.
"We've been hit!" the princess explains.
"Don't worry, she'll hold together." Hans turns to the dashboard of the
'Falcon, "..common baby, hold together..."
Several more shots are fired from the 'Falcon, all landing without fail.
On the Defiant.
The Computer speaks, "Warning, Shield strength down to 10%".
"Were not winning." Dax spits out to Worf.
Worf gives her an evil look. "I will try and catch them in a tractor
beam."
"Yeah, right. You can't even hit them with the phasers let alone a
tractor beam." Dax replies.
Worf's anger flairs. "I will not take this insubordination!" His
attention distracted from his targetting efforts.
Two more hits rocks the Defiant. Her shields fold.
**********
Jabs hurt. If you are hit with enough of them, and can't land any
punches of your own, you loose. It's that simple.
As a side bar. We are in agreement that the 'Falcon is *much* smaller
than the Defiant yes?
Federation Outpost Station 77
Duggy wrote:
>
> On Thu, 31 Oct 1996, Federation Outpost Station 77 wrote:
>
> >The above statements are meaningless. No where in the 6 hours of Star
> >Wars footage that played on the Silver Screen did they say how fast the
> >ships travel at "sub-light speeds". There was a reference to how fast
> >the 'Falcon would go "past light speed", but nothing below it.
>
> umm, 7 and a quarter hours...
>
> - Dug.
>
Sorry Dug. I stand corrected. :) I just rounded to 2 hours per movie.
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On 5 Nov 1996, Timothy Applegate wrote:
> In <327E36...@geocities.com> Federation Outpost Station 77
> >I have never seen the Defiant in a multiple engagement battle
> >with dozens of other ships while navigating an asteroid field.
agreed but isn't 20 wrecked cardassian and romulan ships plus an estimated
60 wrecked Jem'Ha'dar ships plus about 150 functional Jem'Ha'dar ships
pretty close to a multiple ENGAGEment battle with dozens (or more)
of other ships while navigating an asteroid field when you consider all
the debris floating around?
>> In fact, I have only seen the USS Enterprise navigate inside a huge
>> asteroid 1 time and
>> the Romulans trapped her there in "The Pheonix" and it was a far cry
<ahem> that's "The Pegasus"
>>"Lock phasers on Target!" Worf barks
>>"I can't get a phaser lock, their moving around too much." Dax replies.
>>"Then switch to manual." Worf insists.
>>"Switching to manual targetting."
>>"Fire!"
>>Three pulse phaser beams streak out into space, missing the 'Falcon as
<ahem> at least eight pulses (not beams) in a spread and 3 or more spreads
in 1 bursts means a much greater chance of hitting target.
>>she pitches side to side and does a barrel roll to avoid the last
>blast.
> "How could they evade something moving at the speed of light?" Worf
> demands.
> "I have no idea," Dax says. "But they sure are maneuverable for such a
> little ship- they don't even have a subspace field."
subspace field? StarFleet ships don't have subspace fields. Subspace is a
multiple parallel dimensions type thing. In subspace 3*10^8 is not a
limmiting speed so it is used as a medium to send signals in.
> "Primitive technology," Worf says. "Lock on to them with a tractor
> beam."
> "Their shields are up," Dax reports. "I'm having a tough time getting a
> lock." Dax grins evilly. "A torpedo or two should fix that."
> On the MF...
> "SIR!" cries Threepio. "They're firing some kind of torpedo!"
> Chewie howls, indicating that their area of space if filling with huge
> amounts of gamma radiation- far more than the Falcon's ray shields can
> take.
> "Our shields are down, hotshot," Leia says. "What are we going to do
> now?"
> "Um, pray to the Force?" Han suggests.
> On the Defiant...
> "I've locked on," Dax reports. "Shall I transport them to the brig?"
> Worf considers. "No. I must gain some satisfaction from this silly
this is WAY out of character for Worf
> post. Fire phasers, I want that tramp freighter destroyed."
> Thus, the MF dies... then the Feds make an alliance with the Imps and
> trade Defiant tech for TIE Defender tech (or something)!
<ahem> non-inteference is the prime directive.
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Mon, 4 Nov 1996, Federation Outpost Station 77 wrote:
> Jabs hurt. If you are hit with enough of them, and can't land any
> punches of your own, you loose. It's that simple.
I was kind of thinking all that excess (more than any other ship in
StarFleet) power that the Defiant had and was feeding into its shields
would repair them as fast as the Falcon could damage them.
by the way the Falcon doesn't have phasers they have lasers
how many 'jabs' would it take for you to knock down a solid oak door?, I
feel that this would be an appropriate estimate considering
> As a side bar. We are in agreement that the 'Falcon is *much* smaller
> than the Defiant yes?
Falcon is 26.7 meters long if memory serves me correctly,
A Constituion class ship is less than 300 meters long
figuring the length of Defiant to be about the size of the saucer section
of a Constitution class ship I get a rough estimate of 75 meters for the
length of the Defiant.
The Defiant is about 3 times as long as the 'Falcon. I would not
consider Defiant *much* bigger than the 'Falcon.
Russell Gavelin
g> I agree on the point of the Troopers having power in sheer numbers. But
g> numbers alone don't really count in a firefight.
g> From what I gathered on
g> the various SW tech stuff, the StormTrooers aren't
g> very well trained. Even
g> their suit is not strong enough to resist a blaster
g> fire, I don't think it
g> can even stop a stun bolt. And assuming that they
g> are using your typical
g> run of the mill blaster, I don't think they have
g> much in the way of power
g> and dispersal settings.
g> Where as the Security forces in Starfleet are
g> trained, both for hand-to-hand
g> and armed combat. They have variable power setting
g> and variable dispersal
g> pattern weapons, from hand phasers to phaser rifles,
g> not to mention photon
g> grenades and personel deflector shields (mentioned
g> in DS9 episode "Paradise
g> Lost"). Plus I don't think the StormTrooper hand weapons can be set to
g> overload. In ST, now and then they talk about phasers being set to
g> overload. And they have shown instances of a phaser
g> either vaporizing or
g> exploding royalaly (in the OS, don't know if it's
g> been done in TNG or DS9)
g> from being set to overload.
g> If it came down to hand-to-hand combat, the StormTroopers would have an
g> edge because of their armor. I have yet to see a
g> Starfleet officer of any
g> type wearing sometime of combat armor. Except for maybe that dying guy
g> that Jake stumbled across. That dying guy seemed to
g> be wearing somekind of
g> vest from the bulky look. But then, it could just be his guts ready to
g> fall out.
g> But in an armed combat, I'd even have to say a U.S. marine platoon can
g> take out a StormTrooper squad.
g> Now, what about a group of Klingons vs. a squad of
g> Storm Troopers? Or yet,
g> Borg "units"against the same?
Okay... Good Point. But, 10 to one says that the StormTrooper rifles can go
Automatic. The Troopers also would have a nice little thing called Thermal
Detonators. (Security? What security? KABOOM!) Anyway, Against Klingons and
Borg, they would prob. Get their butts kicked. If I had my choice, I would use
Rifts characters against them. (I.E. Coalition Soldgiers (Dead Boys),
Coalition SAMAS, and the like) Starfleet Marine company goes over the ridge,
and gets obliterated by a Glitter Boy's famous 'Boom Gun'. The Coalition
soldgiers are better trained, better armed, and One hell of a lot better
armored. Not too literate though....... (See... Sput..... See Sput.... Rum?)
Or, If I had my choice, Let some people from RoboTech in there. I'd love to
see the Enterprise take on the SDF-1. While dealing with several hundred
Veritech fighters, they have to deal with the SDF's famed 'Main Gun'.
Hehehehee......
R. Gavelin
UA Hyperion Core
Timothy Applegate
In <327E36...@geocities.com> Federation Outpost Station 77
"How could they evade something moving at the speed of light?" Worf
demands.
"I have no idea," Dax says. "But they sure are maneuverable for such a
little ship- they don't even have a subspace field."
"Primitive technology," Worf says. "Lock on to them with a tractor
beam."
"Their shields are up," Dax reports. "I'm having a tough time getting a
lock." Dax grins evilly. "A torpedo or two should fix that."
On the MF...
"SIR!" cries Threepio. "They're firing some kind of torpedo!"
Chewie howls, indicating that their area of space if filling with huge
amounts of gamma radiation- far more than the Falcon's ray shields can
take.
"Our shields are down, hotshot," Leia says. "What are we going to do
now?"
"Um, pray to the Force?" Han suggests.
On the Defiant...
"I've locked on," Dax reports. "Shall I transport them to the brig?"
Worf considers. "No. I must gain some satisfaction from this silly
post. Fire phasers, I want that tramp freighter destroyed."
Thus, the MF dies... then the Feds make an alliance with the Imps and
trade Defiant tech for TIE Defender tech (or something)!
Chris Applegate
Federation Outpost Station 77
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu wrote:
[snip]
> time O'brien and the rest of the incredibly skilled engineering crew at
> DS9 have put a lot work into the Defiant, fixing all (most)the problems.
> As every one should admit, the Defiant consitently kicks ass now.
>
> -Keith Dalbey
> Jedi Knight and friend of Captain Solo.
well, for the next 18 days any ways. ;)
Mariusz Jesmanowicz
If we are going to that let's do this right :) :)
Falcon: Han, Luke, Leia, Chewie, 3CPO, R2D2
Defiant: The crew with Sisko as captain, Worf in his old post (weapons) Dex
flying ...
Han: What the hell is this Chewie? some new weapon from the Empire
Chewie: Grhgghggh
Luke: I can feel Vader on that ship, I am endangering the mission
Han: What mission?
Leia: I thought you said he died on the 2nd Death Star ???
Luke: Ooops sorry. Too much training
3CPO: We are doomed, We re all going to die
R2D2: 001101101 0110110101....
3CPO: What do you mean this ship can talk to you???
r2d2: 001011101 101101 101 1....
Han: Shut up both of you, Leia, Luke to the guns this is not over yet
Leia: We haven't started anything yet you bug brain.
Luke: Just go Leia, I know what he means, I can feel it.
Defiant:
Worf:Captain, we have never encounter a ship like this I recommend we raise
shields.
Sisko: What do you expect Mr. Worf. We are in a different Galaxy and in a
different time
That damn Q again. I hat him. What the hell does he want us to
do here.
Dex: Cheer up Benjamin, this could be fun
Captain: I don't have time for fun, old man, he should have thrown Jean
Luke Picard here, not us
He is his good old pal. I hardly know Q.
Worf: May I point out that Captain Picard does not have a starship yet.
Dex: that would explain why he drinks so much earl gray lately :)
Captain: Funny old man, but I don't have time for this, scan that ship and
give me tactical analyses
Worf: should I open a hailing freq. captain ???
Captain: Why the hell not, our translators know all the language in all the
galaxies.
This is Captain Benjamin Sisko, of the UFofP, please respond.
Worf: Sir, I am getting a respond from a computer unit called something
R2D2, but suddenly it disconnected, and
said it had to "shut up"
Sisko: I don't have time for this, destroy that ship. It probably does not
even exist, it looks TOO COOL.
Probably one of Q's jokes.
Worf: Oh yes, the battle is starting
Luke: Look at the size of this ship
Han: Cut the chatter Red 5, worry about the towers and I'll worry about the
size
Leia: I thought you said that the size doesn't matter
Han: Oh yeah, your highness, bring that up now. Why don't you just shoot me
now
Chewie: ghgrgh:)::)grhrgh yhrgrh:)grhrgr
Han: shut up, she did not mean it that way, and when did you see me
naked???
Luke: I can feel the Force
Leia: What else is new
Luke:Well I can fell it now pretty clear, and Ben is not around
Han: oh yeah that old man, was he able to get rid of that tractor beam???
Luke: Shut up and fly that old bucket
Han: Hey who are you calling scraffy looking???
3CPO: Oh my maker, we are all going to die.
Han: I am beginning to agree with him. Let's attack that ship Chewie
STAR WARS music,and Falcon coming out of the Star's light, like in ANH when
Han yelled" You're all
clear kid, let's blow...."
Sisko: What is going on, are they attacking us?? If I am not mistaken they
are shooting lasers
Am I right Mr. Worf
Worf: You are right captain but there is something about those lasers...
Sisko:Then what is it, speak up man!!!
Worf: They are a lot more powerful then laser.
Dex: How powerful ???
Worf: Well if you made a Super Laser out of that, it could destroy planets.
Sisko: that some serious laser Mr. Worf, let's just make sure we don't run
into one
Dex: How about if we use our cloaking shield
Sisko: Good thinking old man. make it so
Worf:(under his nose) I hat when worse captains steal better captains lines
Sisko: Did you say something Commander?
Worf: Nope just that cloaking shield is activated
Luke: there are not here but I can feel them
Han: A small ship like this with cloaking device, impossible
Leia: I thought you said it was a huge ship
3CPO: I though you said that the size did not matter
Han: Why do you have to give me all this #^&* today princess?
Leia: Cause I love you fool.
Luke: Feel the love Han, don't get angry, that will only lead you to the
dark side
Han: What side?I am not a Jedi you moran.
Luke: Sorry again, hey R2 what are our chances of hitting that cloaked
ship if we start shooting
randomly.
R2D2: 0010110.10101
3CPO: He says 1:1
Han: Never tell me the odds.... wait a second, what these are actually
pretty good odds, nice job Luke
Let's do it
3CPO: R2 says it might take you about 2045678 years, but you'll do it
Han: (getting up) I am going to kill those two
Leia: Sit down Han we need you.
Luke: (closing his eyes) Leia , Leia, Leia help me
Leia: What is it Luke
Han: shut up you and let's find this ship.
Chewie:jhjfhfjh fjkhfjhjhgjhg hghghgr hrrrhgrhgrhr rhru
Han: Don't worry, If everything goes wrong, and it usually does, we'll jump
into hyperspace
Leia: I've heard that one before
Sisko: this is getting ridiculous, we are just going to sit here and watch
them
Dex: How about we all go for dinner, my treat.
Worf: We have replicators, how the hell are you going
to treat us?
Dex: You haven't seen me naked yet have you :)
Sisko: Oh shut up old man, I don't want to see you naked. Let's destroy
that ship, let's drop the cloak
Luke: I can feel them clearly
Han: Well kid, I can see them even better
Leia: they look nice though, very nice ship, and it probably works
Han: But can they do Kessel run in less than 12 parsecs?
Luke: Probably not, they probably know what parsec means Han
Han: Hey farm boy, you were dusting crups while I was saving the galaxy
Chewie: jfhjhghrjhjhrrrhrhrhrhrhrhrh
Han: Smuggling, saving what's the difference Chewie. Important thing is we
were there
to be continued... (running out of time or as Han would put it "running out
of parsecs"
Mr. Kenneth Bailey
main character factor. The people that Stormtroopers tend to miss
are main characters. They made pretty easy work of the blockade
runner at the beginning of the movie, they also made pretty easy work
of the Lars family ranch and the Jawas. And don't forget Obiwan
Kenobi, "Only Imperial Stormtroopers are so precise".
So it is thus established that Stormtroopers are deadly against non-main
characters they would waste the Starfleet security sincee most of them
tend to be non-main characters.
--
***********************************************************************
** "But the whole point of a Doomsday | **
** device is lost if you keep it a | \ / **
** secret!"-Dr. Strangelove | x________\(O)/________x **
**---------------------------------------- o o O(.)O o o **
** e-mail:: kba...@emuvax.emich.edu | **
** snail-mail:: Yeah right. | Hornets Forever **
** name:: Mr. Kenneth E. Bailey | **
***********************************************************************
Michael Wong
In article <55m4q9$5...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>, tap...@ix.netcom.co says...
<snip long, nonsensical story about how Defiant would kill MF>
>Thus, the MF dies... then the Feds make an alliance with the Imps and
>trade Defiant tech for TIE Defender tech (or something)!
I am beginning to suspect that people "adopt" either SW or ST, and think that
it somehow makes them bad-asses if they can "prove" that their favourite ship
is also a bad-ass. Give it a rest.
Brad Stethem
Federation Outpost Station 77 <outp...@geocities.com> wrote in article
> I believe, that given the 'Falcon's small size and Star Wars 'manual is
> better than automated' attitude, that The Defiant would have a hard time
> locking on and actually hitting the 'Falcon. I believe that the 'Falcon
> has weapons capable of damaging the Defiant. While it won't bea "Let's
> save on the old budget and blow up the enemy in 1 hit" kind of a TV
I just saw the episode tonight with the mirror-universe Defiant. It was
maneuvering around a Klingon ship that's about the size of a Star
Destroyer, dodging disrupter beams the whole way. From the on-screen
evidence I've seen, the Defiant is at least as maneuverable as the Falcon.
Plus, that was an alternate Defiant that was thrown together in just a few
weeks. The real Defiant is probably better.
> fight, it would take several hits from the 'Falcon against the Defiant
> to do significant damage. But each hit *would* count, and eventually
> the 'Falcon could wear down the Defiant's defenses and disable her. It
> doesn't matter how powerful your weapons are, if you can't hit the
> target. Even the true RPGers will have to agree on that point. I
I remember in ANH when Luke and Han are manually targeting and shooting at
Tie Fighters. They weren't hitting very often. Of course, the Ties
(probably shooting manually as well) were doing even worse. There is no
way manual targeting can be better than computer-controlled targetting like
on the Defiant. Not everyone can use the Force to hit their targets.
> **********
>
> Jabs hurt. If you are hit with enough of them, and can't land any
> punches of your own, you loose. It's that simple.
>
> As a side bar. We are in agreement that the 'Falcon is *much* smaller
> than the Defiant yes?
I think the best guess for the Defiant's length is about 100-120 meters.
The Falcon is about half that. Or maybe as long as 75 meters. I guess the
best way to figure it out would be to compare it with the Star Destroyer's
tower when it's attached.
Timothy Applegate
>
>subspace field? StarFleet ships don't have subspace fields. Subspace
is a
>multiple parallel dimensions type thing. In subspace 3*10^8 is not a
>limmiting speed so it is used as a medium to send signals in.
>
Starfleet vessels, ever since the Ambassador prototype NX-62526(?)
employ a subspace field to increase sublight speed and maneuverability.
>> "Primitive technology," Worf says. "Lock on to them with a tractor
>> beam."
>
>> "Their shields are up," Dax reports. "I'm having a tough time
getting a
>> lock." Dax grins evilly. "A torpedo or two should fix that."
>
>> On the MF...
>> "SIR!" cries Threepio. "They're firing some kind of torpedo!"
>
>> Chewie howls, indicating that their area of space if filling with
huge
>> amounts of gamma radiation- far more than the Falcon's ray shields
can
>> take.
>
>> "Our shields are down, hotshot," Leia says. "What are we going to do
>> now?"
>
>> "Um, pray to the Force?" Han suggests.
>
>> On the Defiant...
>
>> "I've locked on," Dax reports. "Shall I transport them to the brig?"
>
>> Worf considers. "No. I must gain some satisfaction from this silly
>
>this is WAY out of character for Worf
I was hoping the mention of "this silly post" would have revealed my
hidden intent: Sarcasm!
>> post. Fire phasers, I want that tramp freighter destroyed."
>
>> Thus, the MF dies... then the Feds make an alliance with the Imps
and
>> trade Defiant tech for TIE Defender tech (or something)!
>
><ahem> non-inteference is the prime directive.
Again, sarcasm. I was saying that "TIE Defender wing vs. Defiant" or
something like that would be more reasonable.
>
> -Keith Dalbey
> Jedi Knight and friend of Captain Solo.
>
Chris Applegate
Dark Apprentice, Enemy of Captain Solo
Timothy Applegate
In <327ee...@eclipse.wincom.net> Michae...@sar.hookup.net (Michael
Wong) writes:
>
>In article <55m4q9$5...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>,
tap...@ix.netcom.co says...
><snip long, nonsensical story about how Defiant would kill MF>
>>trade Defiant tech for TIE Defender tech (or something)!
>
think that
>it somehow makes them bad-asses if they can "prove" that their
favourite ship
>is also a bad-ass. Give it a rest.
>
My favorite bad-rectums (language, language) ARE SW ships, even though
I am a Trekkie before a Warie. In ST, the Defiant rules (for 17 days).
In SW, the T/Defender and Eclipse rule. If you mix 'em... well, that's
when the nonsense starts.
Chris Applegate
Jeremy Kwiecien
Andre Canis wrote:
>
> what about:
> Who would win: Squad of Stormtroopers or Starfleet Security ?
If the Redshirts had stones and twigs? The Redshirts.
If the Reshirts are on an away mission? the Stormtroopers.
If they're running into a room to capture droids, the stormtroopers
(helmets will stop that nasty headache)
If they're attacking a Jawa Sandcrawler? the stormtroopers.
If they're standing thirty feet away and shooting? the Redshirts
Jer
Jeremy Kwiecien
Again, just for the sake of argument (I know the Defiant is better, but
in
my heart, I can't let the 'Falcon die)
Timothy Applegate wrote:
>
> In <327A2B...@uwaterloo.ca> Jeremy Kwiecien <jakw...@uwaterloo.ca>
> writes:
> >
> >Greg Bobkiewicz wrote:
> >>
> >> So which one is the better ship?
> >
> >
> >In general, I would have to say the Defiant is a better combat ship
> (It
> >was
> >designed SPECIFICALLY for ass-kicking), whereas the 'Falcon was a
> >freighter
> >modified to make it more _useful_ in smuggling.
> >
> >BUT, for the sake of argument (much fun), I can come up with some ways
> >for
> >the 'Falcon to win:
> >
> >1) If the Falcon had it's crew from ANH (ie Han, Luke and Chewbacca),
> >then
> >the fight would be much closer. (Those guys are better (at combat
> >piloting)
> >than anyone in 'Trek)
>
> How do you know? Sisko can fly pretty well, and most combat in Trek
> doesn't involve dodging light-speed weapons.
If Sisko were so good he wouldn't be sitting around on a space station,
he'd
be smuggling spice for some Hutt. :)
Jabba calls Han the best smuggler ever (paraphrased), while that doesn't
make
him the best pilot ever, since in SW flying is a big part of smuggling,
we'll
assume he is among the elite in the Galaxy at piloting.
>
> >2) The Falcon DID survive numerous direct hits from Turbolasers.
> >Assuming
> >that turbolasers are about as tough as a ship-bourne phaser, the
> Falcon
> >may have a chance.
>
> Taking that assumption. However, the Falcon didn't survive that many
> hits, and phasers are far more accurate than little (big)
> turret-mounted turbolasers that have men aiming and firing them.
True
>
> >3) The Falcon blew up a Death Star, those things are bigger than the
> >Defiant.
> >(those concussion missles pack a whollop, and no, they aren't the ones
> >from
> >X-Wing/Tie-Fighter games)
>
> The Falcon took out its reactor, presumably causing a chain reaction
> similar to the one that took out DS I. Of course, that's just my
> presumption.
Called my bluff. But you have to wonder how heavily armoured the
reactor
was? IT WAS designed to contain reactions generating massive amounts of
power. It had to be really strong. (I imagine firing a missle at an
aricraft carrier would be quite damaging, but I also imagine that the
nuclear reactor would survive it pretty well.)
>
> >4) Maneouverability: The 'Falcon (in the hands of a great pilot) is
> >quite
> >agile, dodging lasers and asteroids while avoiding Tie fighters, or
> >skimming
> >by hostile 'Destroyers being dogged by several Ties. While the
> defiant
> >is
> >quick, we've never seen it up against anything really fast.
>
> 200+ Jem'Hadar ships from "The Die is Cast" had a hard enough time
> getting it.
Tough to tell
>
> >5) Going into WEG source material: the Falcon has capital ship scale
> >shields,
> >weapons and engines, but is smaller than capital scale. ie it's much
> >tougher
> >than it looks.
>
> Which WEG books do you have? Mine have stats in good old starfighter
> class. 3D, to be exact, and that's from the DE sourcebook. 3D of
> capital scale would make its shields as powerful as an MC90.
Now that you mention it, it was in WEG SW Sourcebook 1st edition, and
there was no mention of scale, just the story about the Falcon and its
'aquired' Starship grade parts, and how there was a Frigate somewhere
that had to wait extra long for repair.
(Actually there was a mention of scale, the ventral BLASTER was
character
scale)
I haven't any Second Edition refs (i've leafed through them, they seem
less 'Star Wars' to me than the 1st edition, but 2nd seems like a better
game to play)
Article Unavailable
Duggy
On Mon, 4 Nov 1996 kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu wrote:
><Ahem> that's ".5 past lightspeed"
Sorry.
> if you're quoting Han in "A New Hope"
>While it has been explained to me that this is slang/a figure of speech
>for having a x.5 hyperdrive multiplier in WEG terms (.5 means trip time is
>half of what it would be for a ship with a x1 multiplier), it is not
>obvious. So allowances have to be made for new comers.
So, you have to go by what's in the movie, not outside information.
>No, but Warp is defined in the Next Generation Tech Manual, and is not
>used in conjunction with the term "lightspeed" which is very easy to
>confuse with the phrase "speed of light".
So, you can use information from outside the movie/series...
Make up your mind...
---
- Dug.
___________________________________________________________
|DISCLAIMER: I didn't do it, | Paul "Duggy" Duggan. |
| No body saw me do it, | <coe...@jcu.edu.au> |
| You can't prove anything. | Official rassm Cool person |
|_____________________________|_____________________________|
Vila Resthal
I just love these crossover-universe threads! It lets one get all
kinds of insight as to how the fans actually think. Plus, there are
some instances of really good writing. Of course, some of it isn't so
good, but that's life! These are much better reads than all of the
flamebait threads. Keep it going, folks!
Vila
Dan L. Hollifield_Assistant Editor Dragon's Lair Webzine:
http://www.jagunet.com/~rbennett/dragon.htm
Mare Inebrium Homepage:
http://www.america.net/~vila/
Jeremy Kwiecien
The Olsons wrote:
>
> sam wrote:
>
> > Warp aint faster than hyperspace. Think about it using hyperspace you
> > can get from one end of a galaxy to the other, using warp you can barely
> > get from the outer rim to the center of the gallaxy.
> > :) falcon kicks
>
> From what I understand about Star Wars using hyperspace can get you up to
> 1.5c tops. When warp can do past that at warp 2.
>
> much, much smaller than the Milky Way. So if the planets and systems are
> closer together you would only need hyperspace to go across the galaxy.
>
> Well, What do you think???
First off NOWHERE does it say the 'Falcon goes at 1.5c (Han merely
states
that it goes .5 past light speed, whatever that means). From the
novelisation, it states that the Star Wars Galaxy is average sized.
The rest of this is from ONSCREEN evidence:
The MF goes from Tatooine to Alderaan in an undisclosed period of time.
(Tatooine is a remote world, Alderaan is a central planet), as does
Devastator, with Leia and Vader.
The Death Star goes from Alderaan to Yavin within a day ("This day shall
mark the end of Kenobi and the rebellion"), and the Death Star was
slower
than the 'Falcon. Even if Yavin and Alderaan were neighbouring systems,
(unlikely), they would still be pretty far apart.
How long does it take for a ST ship to travel to adjacent systems?
I'm not a devote trekkie, but it seems to me they take days to get
anywhere.
Jer
Jeremy Kwiecien
Kirin wrote:
>
> Matthew Jeremy Blevins wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Defiant Vs. Millenium Falcon
> > >
> > > From: gbob...@gpu3.srv.ualberta.ca (Greg Bobkiewicz)
> > > Reply to: Greg Bobkiewicz
> > > Date: 27 Oct 1996 23:36:24 GMT
> > > Organization: University of Alberta
> > > Newsgroups:
> > > rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc,
> > > rec.arts.startrek.current,
> > > rec.arts.startrek.misc,
> > > rec.arts.startrek.tech
> > > Followup to: newsgroup(s)
> > >
> >
> > Technically, it's bigger and has more firepower, and is obviously not some thrown-together mess
> > like the Falcon. But in battle, esp. in the battle seen in "Shattered Mirror" and the one in
> > "Paradise Lost," she moves a lot like the Falcon: quick, agile, and in your teeth. Basically,
> > she's just a wonderful ship to watch in battle because she doesn't just SIT there like most
> > larger cruisers.
> > From a technical standpoint, I think the Defiant is obviously superior. When she charges
> > a larger ship, that ship had better the hell RUN! From a character standpoint, and as a whole, I
> > love them both though. The Falcon is sometimes unreliable, but a fun and amazing ship. And the
> > Defiant, just from it name, has a hell of a lot of character. Why choose? They both rock!
> >
> > --
> > -Matthew Blevins
>
> I would love to imagine Scotty on the Falcon instead of Chewy and the
> bizarre stereotypical dialogue that would ensue between Scotty and Han
> Solo during the heat of battle with scads of Tie fighters (where of
> coarse machinery would start breaking down....).
Holy Moly! The MF broke down ONCE, and that was when they did a quick
start without finishing REPAIRS. The only reason the Hyperdrive didn't
work in ESB was because a) the 'Falcon had been hit by a laser cannon
or b) it had been sabotaged. There is NO other reference to the MF
being
dilaplited (in the movies, but I can't recall a book reference off
hand).
On the other hand, 'Trek ships' bridges explode in a shower of sparks
every single time the ship takes any damage (slight exageration, but
you get the point)
Jer
Brendan T Moran
ube176a> <17831B42C...@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de> <327F81...@uwaterloo.ca>
:Organization: Hampshire College, Amherst MA
Distribution:
Jeremy Kwiecien (jakw...@uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
: Andre Canis wrote:
: Jer
This is kind of like the Immovable Object vs. the Irrestistable Force
argument: it's the Guys-Who-Can't-Hit-A-Damn-Thing (except stationary
sandcrawlers manned by midget junk salesmen) vs. Guys-Who-Cannot-Survive-
A-Mission. See, stormtroopers can't hit anything, but Redshirts must
fall down dead almost immediately. I think that the paradoxical nature
of this encounter would destroy the fabric of both universes.
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Tue, 5 Nov 1996, Jeremy Kwiecien wrote:
> Again, just for the sake of argument (I know the Defiant is better, but
> in my heart, I can't let the 'Falcon die)
> Called my bluff. But you have to wonder how heavily armoured the
> reactor
> was? IT WAS designed to contain reactions generating massive amounts of
> power. It had to be really strong. (I imagine firing a missle at an
> aricraft carrier would be quite damaging, but I also imagine that the
> nuclear reactor would survive it pretty well.)
Presumably Fusion reactors use a magnetic field to contsrain the
fuel/reaction. The metal shell of a fusion reactor should be there
to shield/block radiation (we don't wan't to kill the crew now due
we, also don't wan't to waste EM [light] energy), there should also be
some kind of mechanism to generate the above mentioned magnetic field.
Now assuming that's true, boom, no more magnetic field BOOOOOOMMMMMM!
Let's assume I'm wrong about this, I'll admit that material would have too
be pretty strong, what would happen if we, boom, weakened it a little?
BOOOOOOOMMMMMMM!
as for sensors the DEFIANT is a cruiser+ is a corvet's (or smaller) body.
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Wed, 6 Nov 1996, Duggy wrote:
> ><Ahem> that's ".5 past lightspeed"
> Sorry.
> > if you're quoting Han in "A New Hope"
> >While it has been explained to me that this is slang/a figure of speech
> >for having a x.5 hyperdrive multiplier in WEG terms (.5 means trip time is
> >half of what it would be for a ship with a x1 multiplier), it is not
> >obvious. So allowances have to be made for new comers.
> So, you have to go by what's in the movie, not outside information.
when did I say this? WEG is West End Games (outside info) and a x.5
hyperdirve is twice as fast (half the trip time) as a x1 hyperdrive.
> >No, but Warp is defined in the Next Generation Tech Manual, and is not
> So, you can use information from outside the movie/series...
Yes
> Make up your mind...
okay, you can use info from outside movies/series, namely Star Wars novels
and RPG material, and Star Trek Tech manual/encyclopedia's but
not novels
(Rodenberry made a bid deal about Star Trek novels not being Canon so are
not considered canon, Until Lucas does the same anything in print with the
official Star Wars logo is canon by default.)
Sean Fallesen
On 6 Nov 1996, Brendan T Moran wrote:
>
> This is kind of like the Immovable Object vs. the Irrestistable Force
> argument: it's the Guys-Who-Can't-Hit-A-Damn-Thing (except stationary
> sandcrawlers manned by midget junk salesmen) vs. Guys-Who-Cannot-Survive-
> A-Mission. See, stormtroopers can't hit anything, but Redshirts must
> fall down dead almost immediately. I think that the paradoxical nature
> of this encounter would destroy the fabric of both universes.
>
>
Actually, the stormtroopers only have trouble hitting heroes and
short furry creatures. Look at the job they did on the Rebel guards in
the opening of Star Wars! The rebs had relatively good defensive
positions, with a little cover in doorways, and perfectly clear shots at
the Stromtroopers' entry hole. Now, with, what, 20 or so rebels
concentrating fire on stromtroopers coming in one at a time, they should
have been able to hold out a lot longer than they did. But what did we
see? All but about 5 rebels killed for a loss of 2 stormtroopers. No, I
must say that the stormtroopers would completely waste the red shirts,
with the precision that, according to Ben Kenobi, they're supposedly
famous for. However, they won't be able to hit any of the main characters
from 10 feet away, and tribbles just might be able to annihilate the
entire stormtrooper corps with no losses.
MTFBWY
Grand Admiral Sean
Brendan T Moran
This has nothing to do with the silly lightspeed debate, and keep in
mind that I firmly believe an ISD can whup a Galaxy-class starship
(like it matters), but the Defiant would obliterate the Falcon.
Duggy (coe...@jcu.edu.au) wrote:
: On Sat, 2 Nov 1996, The Olsons wrote:
: >From what I understand about Star Wars using hyperspace can get you up to
: >1.5c tops. When warp can do past that at warp 2.
: Why do people keep insisting that ".5 past Hyperspace" means 1.5c?
: Does Warp 9 mean "9mph past Light" or "9 times the speed of light"?
: >Well, What do you think???
: I think you need to pay attention more...
: - Dug. __________________________
: / \
: / Paul "Duggy" Duggan. \
: ________________| |____________________
: | The views here | <coe...@jcu.edu.au> | I have a problem |
: | are mine, and | | letting go of my |
: | agreeing will |http://www.jcu.edu.au/~coe-pad| childhood, but I |
: | be seen as a |______________________________| still find time to |
: |Copyright breach| |play with my manhood|
: |________________|Official rassm Cool person(tm)|____________________|
: | |
: \ /
: \_T_R_U_S_T___N_O___O_N_E__/
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Wed, 6 Nov 1996, Jeremy Kwiecien wrote:
> The Olsons wrote:
> > sam wrote:
> > > Warp aint faster than hyperspace.
> > > :) falcon kicks
Warp vs hyperspace [drives]:
max speed of typical hyperdrive is greater max speed of typical warp
drive. I have conceeded this point because it is true. (but it
doesn't matter because DEFIANT would rock/wreck ANYthing in Star Wars
before it had the chance to make the calculations to go to lightspeed)
> > From what I understand about Star Wars using hyperspace can get you up to
> > 1.5c tops. When warp can do past that at warp 2.
>
> First off NOWHERE does it say the 'Falcon goes at 1.5c (Han merely
> states
> that it goes .5 past light speed, whatever that means).
means MF has x.5 hyperdrive multiplier (.5 takes half the time [twice as
fast] as a x1 hyperdrive)
kda...@acsu.buffalo.edu
On Wed, 6 Nov 1996, Jeremy Kwiecien wrote:
> > I would love to imagine Scotty on the Falcon instead of Chewy and the
> > bizarre stereotypical dialogue that would ensue between Scotty and Han
> > Solo during the heat of battle with scads of Tie fighters (where of
> > coarse machinery would start breaking down....).
>
>
> Holy Moly! The MF broke down ONCE, and that was when they did a quick
> start without finishing REPAIRS. The only reason the Hyperdrive didn't
> work in ESB was because a) the 'Falcon had been hit by a laser cannon
> or b) it had been sabotaged. There is NO other reference to the MF
> being dilaplited (in the movies,
A New Hope
Luke: "what a hunk of junk"
Leia: "you came in that thing, you're braver than I thought"
Empire Strikes Back:
Han (to chewie): put here back together we're taking off
chewie: nnngggaaaahhrrraaaa
Han: what do you mean she won't fly?
Chewie: nuhh rahh ruhh
Han: She's got a busted ..... "AGAIN? Well see what you can do with it."
Storm troopers aproaching
Han runs into cockpit flips a bunch a switches lights go on then flicker
out. Han hits the control panel above the doorframe, they go back on.
Han goes to start the sublights (repulsors) MF makes the sound of a car
that turns over but does't start, a nnnn nnnn nnnn nnn sound.
Leia: "would it help if I got out and pushed?"
Han: "You better watch your mouth princess or you'll be walking home in a
minute"
Leia: "they[stormtroopers]'re shooting at us!"
Han: "Don't worry she'll hold together, come on baby hold together."
Now the Falcon hasn't even taken off at this point, do I really have to
continue or is that enough references from the movies about the Falcon
being a broken down piece of junk
> but I can't recall a book reference off hand).
Courtship of Princess Leia,
Dark Empire
Corellian trilogy
etc.
Jill Hendrickson
> Howabout:
> Who would win? A squad of stormtroopers or a twelve-year-old with a
> gun?
You guys never make fair matches. The twelve year old of course.
Jill
random quotes:
*Run, Luke, run!*
Thorin
I'd like to point out that the Millenium Falcon is a very cool ship,
and handles very well against Star Wars ships. However, unless I am
*way* out of touch, the Falcon uses laser cannons as its main
armaments. These would have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the
shields of the Defiant. The Defiant, on the other hand, uses phasers.
To a phased energy beam like a phaser, the Falcon's shields might as
well not even exist. If the ships did fight, the Defiant would win
inside
of 10 seconds. You can't really even compare the two ships, as they
have totally different defensive technologies. It's like comparing a
Ferengi to a Horta. You just can't do it.
david sleeper
In <Pine.GSO.3.95.961106...@rigel.oac.uci.edu> Sean
Fallesen <sfal...@rigel.oac.uci.edu> writes:
>
>
>On 6 Nov 1996, Brendan T Moran wrote:
>
>>
>> This is kind of like the Immovable Object vs. the Irrestistable
Force
>> argument: it's the Guys-Who-Can't-Hit-A-Damn-Thing (except
stationary
>> sandcrawlers manned by midget junk salesmen) vs.
Guys-Who-Cannot-Survive-
>> A-Mission. See, stormtroopers can't hit anything, but Redshirts
must
>> fall down dead almost immediately. I think that the paradoxical
nature
>> of this encounter would destroy the fabric of both universes.
>>
>>
>
> Actually, the stormtroopers only have trouble hitting heroes and
>short furry creatures. Look at the job they did on the Rebel guards
in
>
No, I
>must say that the stormtroopers would completely waste the red shirts,
>with the precision that, according to Ben Kenobi, they're supposedly
>famous for. However, they won't be able to hit any of the main
characters
>from 10 feet away, and tribbles just might be able to annihilate the
>entire stormtrooper corps with no losses.
>
> MTFBWY
>
> Grand Admiral Sean
>
right thru it, and it proved absolutely no defense to furry little
primitive brown midgets armed with sticks. At least the redshirts got
killed by equal or superior beings
Too much time on my hands...
Wayne Poe
On 5 Nov 1996, Timothy Applegate wrote:
> "Their shields are up," Dax reports. "I'm having a tough time getting a
> lock." Dax grins evilly. "A torpedo or two should fix that."
>
> On the MF...
> "SIR!" cries Threepio. "They're firing some kind of torpedo!"
>
> Chewie howls, indicating that their area of space if filling with huge
> amounts of gamma radiation- far more than the Falcon's ray shields can
> take.
>
> "Our shields are down, hotshot," Leia says. "What are we going to do
> now?"
"Watch this." Han says, palming the hyperdrive controls.
The Millennium Falcon disappears as if it were never there.
On the Defiant...
Worf: "Huh?"
Joe Schulte
Thorin (tho...@erie.net) wrote:
: I'd like to point out that the Millenium Falcon is a very cool ship,
: *way* out of touch, the Falcon uses laser cannons as its main
: armaments. These would have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the
: shields of the Defiant. The Defiant, on the other hand, uses phasers.
: To a phased energy beam like a phaser, the Falcon's shields might as
: well not even exist. If the ships did fight, the Defiant would win
: inside
Oh please tell us in non-Trekdork bullshit terms what a 'phased energy
beam' is and how it differs from a regular energy beam.