Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Battles

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
Post Reply
Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Battles

Post by Lucky » Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:35 am

I tried to not post my own personal opinion when typing this up, but i'm not sure I succeeded. I would have provided more evidence, but my computer's Wi-Fi decided to die on me.

http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/ ... gy.278536/
Bellator_Rex
Post: 06
Bellator_Rex wrote: I. Industry- Advantage: Star Wars.
Bellator_Rex wrote: The Empire was able to build a 900km diameter, heavily armed, superlaser-equipped Death Star, with a volume of approximately 3.8e17 meters cubed, in approximately six months, in secret. (Return of the Jedi).
1) Where is it stated how long it took to create the second Deathstar? It is an impressive feat no matter what, but where is it stated how long it took?

2) Why is this vast industrial capability never used for anything other then Deathstars if it exists?
Bellator_Rex wrote: The Empire also contains a million "Member States", which presumably must be of a certain level of advancement to join. (A New Hope Novelization).
1) The quote in question states the Empire is made up of exactly 1 million systems without quantifying anything about said systems. We can't know how many of those systems are near worthless Hoth like hellholes.

2) To take and conquer was the Empire's honor, they did not care if you were weak of soul and mind, and the Republic seems to have stone age spear throwers as member states as shown by clone troopers calling the stone age planet of Aleen "another one of those planets". To assume a certain level of technological advancement is required to become a member of the "Galactic Empire" is rather foolish, and there is no reason to think the Empire educated the stone age spear chuckers once conquered if the "Galactic Republic did not see fit to do so.
Bellator_Rex wrote: In addition, the Trade Federation, a mere shipping company, was able to blockade Naboo with thousands of 3km diameter ships (The Phantom Menace).
1) The Trade Federation was not simply a company, it was a full government that ruled at least one planet and a Republic member state, and on top of that, the Trade Federation seems to be the only shipping company to exist besides smugglers in G and T levels of Star Wars canon.

2) The blockade of Naboo seems to have put a sizable strain on the Trade Federation's resources. A normal blockade is one of those 3 kilometer ships as we see this in Star Wars: The Clone wars(can't recall the episode's name).
Bellator_Rex wrote: In comparison, the Federation expected to recover from the lost of thirty-nine ships at Wolf 359, most of which were smaller than a Galaxy-class, in less then a year ( TNG, Best of both Worlds Part Two).
1) 40 ships on top of what ever number of ships would have been produced weather or not the Borg had attacked.
Bellator_Rex wrote: The volume of a Galaxy-Class starship is approximately 6.5e6 meters cubed, multiplied by forty, which is generous, because most of the ships we saw were smaller than the Galaxy-Class, and assuming that "Less than a year" is six months, also generous, we find that the industrial capacity of the Empire compared to the Federation is approximately 1,461,538,462:1 or about 1.5 Billion to one.
1) We don't know what ship classes would be replacing those destroyed at Wolf 359, and we don't actually know that it was building the ships that was the bottleneck. It could easily be that the problem was training crews which is a problem the Empire has as well.

2) The Empire for reasons never explained has never been shown to be able to apply the industrial might that let it create 2 deathstars to anything else.
Bellator_Rex wrote: The Federation, according to Picard, has 150 planets (First Contact) and, according to Sisko, "Over a hundred planets" (DS9, Battle lines). Even assuming all of these planets are full member states, the Federation is outnumbered in planets 66,667:1.
1) The United Federation of Planets only has full member states that meet certain requirements such as having reached a certain technological level, being united under one government, and having a certain level of "human" rights. This means that Picard and Sisko are not talking about colonies or Hoth like hellholes like Tarken was in many cases.

2) In Kirk's time, Earth already had at least 1000 planets, and it was just a single United Federation of Planets member state(TOS: Metamorphosis). While we don't know how many planets other planets have colonized, it is not unbelievable that they often have similar holdings.
Bellator_Rex wrote: II. Propulsion Technology and Transportation-Advantage: Star Wars.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Sublight travel: In the battle of Yavin the X-Wings covered a distance of approximately 400,000 km circling Yavin in under five minutes, and the massive Death Star covered about 300,000 km in about fifteen minutes in the same battle. Both ships also decelerated very quickly. The X-wings approximate acceleration would be about 17,000 m/s squared in this time period.
1) Where is the circumference for Yavin coming from?

2) Where do the X-Wings or DeathStar decelerate? We only hear about the X-wings exceroating.

3) Do to the fact that huge swaths of distance are covered by cuts we don't know how the X-wings got to where they did. Mini-hyperspace jumps are not unknown in T and C levels of canon.

3) If the fighters have accelerations like Rex claims then why are they never used on screen when they would save the pilot's life?

4) Star Wars C-level canon does talk about mass lowering technologies used that can not be used in combat.
Bellator_Rex wrote: In the Battle of Endor, the Star Destroyers quickly circumnavigated the forest moon and stopped in approximately two second. I have seen this deceleration calculated at 30,000 m/s squared, though I cannot verify this.
1) How the ships get behind the Rebel fleet is never shown on screen, and therefore is uncalulateable.

2) The Battle of Ryloth had ships perform a similar ambush by waiting just outside of sensor range, and then making a short hyperspace jump to reenforce the C.I.S. fleet
Bellator_Rex wrote: For the Federation, firing impulse engines for several seconds accelerated them to a speed of 132m/s. (TNG, Booby Trap). Even assuming it was one second, this is only 132m/s squared. In many others episodes, even at full impulse, in combat the ships rarely move at more than a few hundred m/s.

1) I've never heard of anyone using Booby Trap to obtain an acceleration for the Enterprise-D before. Where can I find the scalings?

2) Given there were devices sucking energy from the impulse engines, I fail to see any use of Booby Trap to be an example of what the Enterprise-D can actually do. It's like testing a car on sand, and then assuming that it would not have a higher top speed on flat tarmac.

3) Because a starship has to accelerate to about 1C to reach the "warp threshold" we must conclude that Star Trek ships have much higher accelerations. The Phoenix went from 20,000 kilometers a second to 1c in about 5 minutes in "Star Trek First Contact". This is a modified missile, a peace of junk, and the Enterprise-E was keeping pace with ease.
5*60=300

300,000-20,000= 280,000

280,000/300= about 933.333333

The Phoenix had an average acceleration of a little over 933 kilometers per second for 5 minutes before reaching about 300,000 kilometers a second and using its warp drive.

4) In order to assume often questionable visuals are correct, we must assume that everything the characters say and do is wrong, and we must throw out the plot points that require them to be correct.
Bellator_Rex wrote: For space stations, it was said it would take DS9 two months to cover 160 million km (DS9, Emissary) but only a day with "Mass-lightening fields" which correlates to an acceleration of about 40 m/s squared.
Deep Space Nine only had 6 working thrusters, and was not designed to move around much. The fact it held together shows how well built even things that are considered trash in Star Trek are.

Bellator_Rex wrote: This puts Star Wars accelerations at at least 125 times Star Trek accelerations.
Not really.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Faster-than-light travel:
Bellator_Rex wrote: The Rebel Fleet was hundreds of light-years from the Death Star before they jumped into hyperspace (Return of the Jedi Novelization). The scene showing the fleet takes place after Luke has been captured by Vader, and the fleet arrives shortly after Luke arrives in the Emperor's room. We know that ships can achieve orbit extremely quickly, as the X-Wing pilots prepared their fighters, got to their ships, left orbit, and flew about 400,000 km around Yavin in a half-hour (A New Hope). Even if we assume the process somehow took an entire half-hour, and hundreds of light-years is only 200, and ignore the following quote that "In hyperspace, all time was a moment, and the deadliness of an attack was measured not in distance but precision" (Return of the Jedi Novelization) the fleet still travels 400 light-years per hour, which calculates to about 3.5 million times the speed of light.
1) If it happens off screen we don't know how much time has past, or how it was achieved.

2) We do not know the size of Yavin.

3) The speeds for Star Wars FTl are only for well mapped hyperlanes, and without those well mapped lanes, a hyperdrive can be slower then an STL drive as shown in the "Destroy The Malevolence Trilogy".
Bellator_Rex wrote: Meanwhile, it would take sixty-seven years for the Federations "Fastest starship" to travel 70,000 light-years, (DS9, Battle Lines) which is slightly over 1000 times the speed of light. As further evidence, the Hera had been missing for three days and was found 300 light-years away (TNG, Interface). That would be a speed of about 270,000 times the speed of light, and Picard has no idea how the ship could have gotten there, further evidence that such speeds are well beyond their reach. This puts Star Wars Faster-than-light travel at at least 3,500 faster than the Federations.
1) And yet ships casually cross the thousands of light years the Federation covers in weeks to months while not going full speed as seen repeatedly in pretty much every season, or TNG: the chase to be more specific.
Bellator_Rex wrote: III. Power Generation-Advantage: Star Wars.
Bellator_Rex wrote: The energy necessary to destroy a planet with enough force to prevent it from pulling itself back together with its own energy is about 2e32 joules. The Death Star, however, generates much more power than this. The debris cloud from Alderaan covered about 10,000 km in about .83 seconds via frame analysis. This is an average speed of 1.2e7 m/s. This ignores the farthest out parts, so it is a somewhat low estimate. However, there is a small amount of debris inside the main cloud, so we can take the average of speeds between the debris that has not moved, and that is at 1.2e7 m/s, for an average of 6e6 m/s. Assuming Alderaan has the same mass as earth, this is a kinetic energy of about 1e38 joules. (A New Hope) The second Death Star is 900km compared to 160km for the first, which means it has 125 times the volume. Since power generation is tied to volume, it is not unreasonable to assume it can produce 125 times the power. However, even if that is ignored, the beam can be recharged and ready to fire again in minutes (Return of the Jedi) and putting an unreasonably high reload time of five minutes the power output of this is 3.3e35 watts, or 1E23 Terawatts.
1) The Deathstar does not scale down. If it did scale down then there would not be a need for a Deathstar in the first place.

2) Alderaan stopped expanding just like everything shot by the superlaser: http://web.archive.org/web/200602020015 ... les/endor/

3) The superlaser is not a D.E.T. weapon, and therefore can not be accurately quantified do to the fact we the viewers do not understand the physics involved. If we go with the C-canon explanation then most of the energy comes from Hyperspace which has a seemingly different set of physical laws then normal space.
Bellator_Rex wrote: The Enterprise-D's Warp Core is the most powerful in Starfleet (TNG, The Masterpiece Society). In that episode Geordi claims that it "kicks plasma into the Terawatt range", meaning between 1-999 Terawatts. However, Riker stated that a Terawatt-level communications array produced more power than "The entire ship can generate" (TNG, The Dauphin). These can be harmonized, it is possible that the core does generate extremely low Terawatt-range power, but the efficiency is low to the point that there is less than a Terawatt of usable power.
The examples listed contradict each other, and as Rex interprets, conflict with the vast majority of the evidence.

1) So you are arguing that the Enterprise-D' warpcore has an output that is comparable to the impulse engines of the NX-01? Phase Cannons are pulse weapons just like phasers that evolved from them. Each pulse from a single phase cannon was suppose to be 500 gigajoules, but that was boosted to 10 times that in "Silent Enemy" for a second or two. I'm sure anyone can see the problem.

2) Why ignore Data's statement about the warpcore having an output of 12.75 billion gigawatts in "True Q"?

3) Laforge has a rather notable track record of doing and saying stupid stuff when flirting.

4) Riker was likely talking about communication systems given they are able to beam down which requires sensors to able to see see where you are beaming to, and the transporter requires enough power to beam, and the context of the statement was the communication system.

5) Why ignore Harry Kim's statement to Seven of Nine about conduit she was about to stick her hand into?
Bellator_Rex wrote: In any case, even if the Federation had 50 billion Galaxy-Class Starships, in order to equal the volume of the Death Star, they would produce only about 50 billion Terawatts, compared to The Death Star's 100 sextilllion Terawatts. If one wants to talk about Imperial Starships, Dodonna stated that the Death Star "Carried a firepower greater than half the starfleet" ( A New Hope). In order for Imperial ships to generate the same power as a Galaxy-Class starship, the Imperial Navy must consist of 100 Sextillion ships.
1) Reactor output is not very relevant to weapon output as most energy weapons get their power from capacitors, and the Turbo in torbolaser comes from a turbine generator(New Hope Script), and the reactor output will always be divided.

2) Ignoring the majority of evidence for two conflicting outliers.
Bellator_Rex wrote: IV. Computers-Advantage: Star Wars.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Data is the most advanced Android in Starfleet, and extremely unique and valuable, to the point where the Borg were extremely interested in getting him, and were unable to assimilate him (First Contact), and Starfleet does not even understand his construction (TNG, Datalore). He has 100,000 Terabytes of memory and can perform 60 trillion operation per second. This is compared to Google's current active memory of approximately 10 exabytes. (1 exabyte=1000000 Terabytes). Tianhe-1A, the world's fastest computer,'s 2,500 trillion operations per second. Now, unfortunately we do not have reliable numbers such as these for Star Wars, however, we do know that droids are so common and efficiently constructed that a prepubescent slave boy can create one out of junk (The Phantom Menace) and that this was not seen as a massive anomaly like the creation of Data. We do know, however, that Data is not at all infallible. In TNG Evolution he states there is no precedent for a synthetic image of a ship, despite seeing one three episodes early, in TNG Evolution. Later in the same episode, he states that there has not been a system-wide technological failure on a Federation starship in 79 years, however 13 episodes early in TNG Contagion, both the Enterprise and the Yamato experience such a failure. He describes force in units of Tons per Meter instead of Newtons TNG, Final Mission). He cannot beat another crewmate in Chess, despite that crewmate showing no direct skill in the game. (TNG, The Masterpiece Society). Meanwhile, an Astromech droid, R2-D2, was able to defeat Chewbacca at Dejarik (A New Hope). Data also incorrectly calculates a simple surface area equation by a order of magnitude. (TNG, Relics) There are several other examples, but I see no need to go on. Data seems to make mistakes often, and is very unique, whereas Star Wars droids are extremely commonplace, and I do not believe have made such mistakes (Discounting B1 Battle Droids, which were manufactured as cheaply as possible). As for other computers, it takes several hours for the Enterprise's main computer to run a simple search on the phrase of "People showering while clothed" (TNG, The Naked Now). We also know that Star Wars navicomputers such as those on the Millenium Falcon can sift through all the data from a several light-year at minimum hyperspace path, and plot a safe course through that path, in minutes. (A New Hope). Though this is harder to tell than the other categories, I believe Star Wars has the advantage.
1) Data's capabilities are irrelevant. The hardware and software used on starships is completely different from what Data uses.

2) Making robots on par with an abnormally high functioning Star Wars droid like R2-D2 is easy for the Federation as shown by Exocomps.

3) A.I. are easy for the Federation as they can stick two human level A.I.(Moriarty) in a box the size of Data's head.

4) Navicomputers in Star Wars simply read maps someone else has updated. It's basically a GPS

5) B-1s are the norm for Star Wars droids.

6) R2-D2 mistakes an electrical outlet for a computer port in one of the OT.
Bellator_Rex wrote: V. Shields-Advantage(Power): Star Wars- Advantage (Flexibility): Unknown/Neither.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Power of shields can be done quickly. The shields of an Imperial Star Destroyer can take hundreds or more likely thousands or more hits from multi-million ton asteroids, with an impact force in the Terajoules or possibly Petajoules, before failing. (The Empire Strikes Back).
1) Where are theses numbers coming from?

2) We see a light peppering of asteroids
Bellator_Rex wrote: . Meanwhile, the Enterprise-D's shields would utterly fail against a chunk of a star moving at several m/s at most (TNG, the Naked Now). Even if the chunk is assumed to be the size of the Enterprise, the energy would still be no higher than the Terawatt range, more likely the Gigawatt range.
1) A chunk of star? Really, stars are made out of plasma, and the only way to get a chunk of star is if the chunk has become something rather exotic first.
Bellator_Rex wrote: The shields also will be dispatched in a single blow with 400 Gigawatts of particle energy (TNG, Survivors).
1) Kevin was the one bringing down the shields.

2) The "weapon" is both shown and stated to interact with the shields in a way never seen before or after.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Shield power being in the Gigawatts is reinforced by Scotty saying he could "Squeeze a few more Gigawatts out of these babies" (TNG, Relics) which would be pointless if the shield power was above the very low Terawatt range.
1) Why would it be pointless to want all the power you can get when you think every joule will matter no matter how much power you normal pump to a system?

2) Why should Scotty's comment be taken literally?
Bellator_Rex wrote: If we assume the Star Destroyers were only in the asteroid field for an hour, and that the impacts only average 1 Terawatt (Both of which are incredibly low, the impacts we saw were in the very high Terawatt and up to the Petawatt range, and all indications put the Star Destroyers in the field for days) Then we get 1 impact per two second (The Empire Strikes Back) times 3600 seconds= 1800 impacts=1800 Terawatts= 1800000 Gigawatts= 4500 times stronger than Star Trek shields.
And you have given us no reason then your own questionable judgement to expect your word. You aren't very convincing.
Bellator_Rex wrote: For Flexibility, Star Wars shields can be angled for peak efficiency (A New Hope). Star Trek shields can be extended up to 5 km ahead of the ship, but at a severe drop in power. (TNG, The Defector). Until I can find more information on this, I do not see any real advantage in flexibility by either, though I personally think more efficient shielding via angling is better.
Rex seems to be saying that Star Trek shields can do what Star Wars shield can do, but does not seem to admit it?
Bellator_Rex wrote: VI. Sensors-Advantage: Star Wars.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Star Wars sensors can detect a life-sign and determine roughly what species it is from inside an escape pod that is 300,000 km away, on a ship with no specialized sensors. (Revenge of the Sith Novelization).
1) And? Not only is this unimpressive by most Sci-Fi setting, but No ship class, No ship name, No page, and No quote, what is Rex hiding?

2) Why wouldn't a ship or the escape pod have sensors that tell if there is a person alive inside, and what species? It seems like very useful information.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Here are just some of the things Starfleet cannot detect A Starship in a Moon Crater (TNG, The Battle) Hostages being held underground (TNG, Too short a season) Determine whether there are humans among a settlement (TNG, Angel One) A dismantled ship (TNG, Survivors) Detect a ship that is behind an asteroid (TNG, The Hunted) A ship over a planet’s magnetic pole (TNG, The Hunted), Individuals without combadges (TNG, The High Ground) A ship in a Nebula (TNG, Best of Both Worlds) (TNG, Pre-emptive Strike)an active escape pod that is underground (TNG, Legacy) Whether air is toxic underground (TNG, Future Imperfect) A life form that has skin with Mimetic capabilities (TNG, Identity Crisis) Someone on their own ship without a combadge (TNG, The Naked Now) A ship behind a moon (DS9, Past Prolouge)
1) The lack of quotes makes it seem as if Rex is copying a list someone else made.

2) A dismantled ship would look like a pile of stuff surrounded by more stuff. Ships in Star Trek are made from naturally occurring materials after all.

3) It would be rather hard to get a proper scan of a life form that constantly copies things. Has Rex bothered to look up what changelings can do?

4) The nebula in Best of Both Worlds was not normal. Far less exotic nebula block Star Wars sensors as well(Malevolence trilogy)

5) This list reads as things Star Trek sensors sometimes have trouble with, but Star Wars can never deal with.
Bellator_Rex wrote: And here are some things that completely disrupt Federation ships's X-Rays from a Solar Flare (TNG, Symbiosis) Naturally occurring and livable in Hyperonic Radiation (TNG, Ensigns of Command) Thallium Compounds (TNG, Who watches the Watchers) Ambient Radiation (TNG, Booby Trap) Mild Electrical Storms (TNG, The Enemy) Natural Electromagnetic Interference (TNG, The Enemy) (TNG, Future Imperfect) (TNG, Power Play) (TNG, Rascals) (TNG, Descent Part 1 and 2) Starithium Ore (TNG, Hollow Pursuits) Magnetic Field of a Moon (TNG, Final Mission) Meklinite (TNG, Galaxy’s Child) Actinium, Thorium, Protactinium, Uranium, Neptunium, Plutonium, Americium, Curium, Berkelium, Californium, Einsteinium, Fermium, Mendelevium, and Nobelium. It should be noted, all of these are real, naturally occurring elements (TNG, The Mind’s Eye) A random Moon’s Crust (TNG, Ensign Ro) Strong gravitational forces (TNG, Hero Worship) Stellar Radiation (TNG, I, Borg) A Star’s Chromosphere (TNG, I, Borg) A Plasma Stream (TNG, Realm of Fear) A Nebula (TNG, Chain of Command Part 2) Magnetic Field of a Planet (TNG, Descent Part 1) Interference in an atmosphere (TNG, Interface) Tetryon Field (TNG, Force of Nature) Magnesium Carbonate (TNG, Firstborn) A Binary Star System (TNG, Pre-emptive strike) Duranium Composite (DS9, Captive Pursuit) Delta Radiation (DS9, Battle Lines)
1) Given Rex lists "Hero worship" I doubt he/she actually knows what he/she is listing. The strong gravitational forces are such that they crack ships in half, and then push the cracked ship out of the area. Those strong gravitational forces have the same effects on a starship as disruptors fire from 3 kilometers away. The entire area is simply so abnormal scientists come to study it. This really hurts Rex's credibility.
Bellator_Rex wrote: There are 15525 Substances that are invisible to the Enterprise's sensors (TNG, Hollow Pursuits)
1) And? There are a huge number of things that disrupt Star Wars sensors. Given top of the line sensor in Star Wars are radar and inferred(Cat and Mouse)
Bellator_Rex wrote: As for searching through Asteroid Fields, an Imperial Star Destroyer was able to flush out the tiny Millenium Falcon from an incredibly dense field within days or hours. (The Empire Strikes Back) Meanwhile, it will take a week for the Enterprise to find a 400m starship in a much less dense asteroid field (TNG, Pegasus), and once they have found the asteroid in which it is hiding it will take six hours to detect where in asteroid the ship is, with the Enterprise waiting right outside.
1) How is a fleet of large capital ships, and hundreds of fighters closely following the Falcon through a sparse asteroid field remotely the same thing as finding an invisible and intangible ship that could have gone in any direction and then ended up in an exotic asteroid?
Bellator_Rex wrote: VII. Cloaking-Advantage: Star Trek via movies, Star Wars via EU.
Except the EU lacks anything that Star Trek can't do better.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Star Trek cloaked ships can be detected by Subspace listening posts, Tachyon detection grids, and Gravitic sensors, if there is a magnetic field inside a cloaked ship it can be detected, and radiation must be actively suppressed. (TNG, Face of the Enemy).
1) Technology in Star Trek is not stagnant like it is in Star Wars. Something that was used to spot a cloaked ship may not work even hours later
Bellator_Rex wrote: Star Wars cloaking devices are not seen in the movies, and thus cannot be remarked on by using only the movies and novelizations. However, in the Extended Universe, the only way to detect a cloaked ship is via the Force, or Gravitic sensors, with the Gravitic sensors required needing to be much more intricate then the Trek version.
1) How can Rex not know about Cat and Mouse? We see a cloaked ship in action. The standard way to detect them.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Cat_and_Mouse

2) Why should we assume that Star Wars gravitic sensors are better then those in Star Trek? Gravity is Star Trek's bread and butter. Star Trek uses gravity manipulation for everything.

3) A Federation starship just turning on the shields would likely count as cloaking in Star Wars given what we see in "Tomorrow is Yesterday", and "Future's End". We know that when Dak was invaded during the clone war that its interplanetary sensors consisted of radar and sonar, and thermal sensors seem to be what is used in homing missiles give flares are fired as decoys in Cat and Mouse.
Bellator_Rex wrote: VIII. Communications-Advantage-Star Wars.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Star Wars communications are fast enough to allow real-time communication from the Outer Rim to the Core Worlds (The Empire Strikes Back). Meanwhile, Star Trek communications would take over 50 years to travel 2.7 million light-years, for a speed of about 52,000 times the speed of light. They also can be blocked by X-Rays and Gamma Rays (TNG, Menage a Troi), Energetic Ions (TNG, Darmok), A random asteroid (TNG, Silicon Avatar) Electrical Storms (TNG, Power Play) Ionizing Radiation (TNG, Quality of Life) Surface Firestorms (TNG, Lessons) The bulkhead of a ship (TNG, Power Play) A binary star system (TNG, Pre-Emptive Strike) and anti-lepton interference (DS9, Emissary). Assuming the Star Wars communications took a full second to travel to the Outer Rim, which is absurdly high, the number needs to be much lower for real-time communication, and that the Star Wars Galaxy is the same size as the Milky Way, we get Star Wars communications being at least 18 million times faster than Star Trek's.
1) And? Every map and description i have ever seen puts the Star Wars Galaxy in the low tens of thousands of light years across, and often making the Star Wars galaxy only few thousand light years larger then the tiny United Federation of Planets. Funny how that works out that Earth calling Deep Space Nine is comparable to Corasont calling the outer rim.

2) To achieve the stated feat, Star Wars powers have created an extremely complex communication system... ...Just like the United Federation of Planets is building and has throughout the Alpha quadrant.

3) I take it perfect conditions cause problems for Star Wars communications? I can't recall a single communication in Star Wars that was of good quality while the United Federation of planet has perfect real time holo communication.
Bellator_Rex wrote: IX. Special Technology-Advantage-Star Trek.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Star Wars technology is almost entirely war-based. Star Trek, on the other hand, has replicators, holodecks, and transporters, none of which are very militarily useful, but all of which are helpful for comfort and convenience (If one ignores the ethical ramifications of transporters).
Generally Star Wars technology is flashy but little substance. Most of it is good for scaring stone age spear chuckers, but where it matter it seems Star Wars is often less advanced then the late 1970s to early 1980s. Targeting systems on Earth seem to be better then what are commonly used in Star Wars, and E.T. takes place in the distant future of Star Wars implying that you don't have to have horribly advanced technology to match Star Wars.

Conversely to build Star Trek technology you seem to need an advanced understanding of physics, and seem to need to understand higher dimensions and particle physics specifically. We also seem to see characters adjusting things on the molecular or lower levels.
Bellator_Rex wrote: This should be sufficient. It should be noted, however, that I have entirely (and intentionally) ignored the Expanded Universe, or EU. This is because some people insist that it is not canon, though it is, and I sought to avoid controversy. In the EU one will find that these numbers are backed up, and indeed even conservative for Star Wars, and will add new information, such as that on Star Wars special technology.
1) If this is the case then why make such grand claims that require a larger galaxy then is shown in the G and C levels?

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Picard » Wed Dec 11, 2013 3:31 pm

Lucky wrote:1) The Deathstar does not scale down. If it did scale down then there would not be a need for a Deathstar in the first place.

2) Alderaan stopped expanding just like everything shot by the superlaser: http://web.archive.org/web/200602020015 ... les/endor/

3) The superlaser is not a D.E.T. weapon, and therefore can not be accurately quantified do to the fact we the viewers do not understand the physics involved. If we go with the C-canon explanation then most of the energy comes from Hyperspace which has a seemingly different set of physical laws then normal space.
4) First Death Star is 120 km in diameter, second one 160-185 km.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:06 pm

This looks like a direct copy of one of Wong's webpages, or a summary of SDN's best SW threads.
The "thousands of ships" blockading Naboo never was substantiated.

Anyway, the whole list is the same odd claims regarding many topics.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:27 pm

Here's the bit about the scanning of some escape pod:
Tantive IV swept through the Kashyyyk system on silent running; this was still a combat zone. Captain Antilles wouldn't even risk standard scans, because they could so easily be detected and backtraced by Separatist forces.
And the Separatists weren't the only ones Antilles was worried about.
"There's the signal again, sir. Whoops. Wait, I'll get it back."
Antilles fiddled some more with the controls on the beacon. "Blasted thing," he muttered. "What, you can't calibrate it without using the Force?"
Bail stared through the forward view wall. Kashyyyk was only a tiny green disk two hundred thousand kilometers away. "Do you have a vector?"
"Roughly, sir. It seems to be on an orbital tangent, headed outsystem."
"I think we can risk a scan. Tight beam."
"Very well, sir."
Antilles gave the necessary orders, and moments later the scan tech reported that the object they'd picked up seemed to be some sort of escape pod. "It's not a Republic model, sir-wait, here comes the database-"
The scan tech frowned at his screen. "It's . . . Wookiee, sir. That doesn't make any sense. Why would a Wookiee escape pod be outbound from Kashyyyk?"
"Interesting." Bail didn't yet allow himself to hope. "Lifesigns?"
"Yes-well, maybe . . . this reading doesn't make any ..." The scan tech could only shrug. "I'm not sure, sir. Whatever it is, it's no Wookiee, that's for sure . . ."
For the first time all day, Bail Organa allowed himself to smile.
"Captain Antilles?"
The captain saluted crisply. "On our way, sir."
Yoda's species is some rare thing so it's understandable why there's no info to correlate with from any database.
However, do we know if the escape pod wouldn't broadcast any detailed emergency signal, since at least it did broadcast one (the Tantive IV was on passive sensors)?

Another interesting bit on Jedi Force Sense, picked a bit earlier in the book:
Clone Wars have always been, in and of themselves, from their very inception, the revenge of the Sith.
They were irresistible bait. They took place in remote locations, on planets that belonged, primarily, to "somebody else." They were fought by expendable proxies. And they were constructed as a win-win situation.
The Clone Wars were the perfect Jedi trap.
By fighting at all, the Jedi lost.
With the Jedi Order overextended, spread thin across the galaxy, each Jedi is alone, surrounded only by whatever clone troops he, she, or it commands. War itself pours darkness into the Force, deepening the cloud that limits Jedi perception. And the clones have no malice, no hatred, not the slightest ill intent that might give warning. They are only following orders.
I guess Yoda trumped that by feeling Jedi die and he knew only clones could be behind that. So when he sensed the two other swamp clones approach, he acted boldly.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Mike DiCenso » Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:02 am

It is almost word for word, if not actually a direct cut and paste copy of Wong's pages. There is nothing in that about SW:TCW at all, which no Warsie would ever dare include too much of in any assessment of Trek vs Wars, otherwise Wars starts looking pretty awful.
-Mike

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Praeothmin » Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:16 pm

This part:
And the clones have no malice, no hatred, not the slightest ill intent that might give warning. They are only following orders.
Is the dumbest explanation ever...
Because if it is true, then the Jedi should never, ever be able to feel any danger from the droids attacking them, since droids also don't feel malice, and are only following orders...

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Lucky » Sun Dec 15, 2013 6:22 am

Mike DiCenso wrote: It is almost word for word, if not actually a direct cut and paste copy of Wong's pages. There is nothing in that about SW:TCW at all, which no Warsie would ever dare include too much of in any assessment of Trek vs Wars, otherwise Wars starts looking pretty awful.
-Mike
Am I off on anything? With my computer not working correctly i had a hard time fact checking which would normally be relatively easy.

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Lucky » Sun Dec 15, 2013 6:23 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote: This looks like a direct copy of one of Wong's webpages, or a summary of SDN's best SW threads.
That is what I thought when I read it.
Mr. Oragahn wrote: The "thousands of ships" blockading Naboo never was substantiated.
The Trade Federation being able to field a few thousand ships is not hard to believe given they are a major shipping company, and their warships are also their main transports. Look at the number of trucks and planes UPS has, and then picture what it would be like if UPS had to fight off robbers regularly.

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Lucky » Sun Dec 15, 2013 6:25 am

Picard wrote: 4) First Death Star is 120 km in diameter, second one 160-185 km.
I realize that, but if you are arguing against someone who is using the Deathstars to claim industrial capability, then the exact size is not very relevant.

theta_pinch
Bridge Officer
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by theta_pinch » Wed Apr 09, 2014 6:07 pm

Lucky wrote:I tried to not post my own personal opinion when typing this up, but i'm not sure I succeeded. I would have provided more evidence, but my computer's Wi-Fi decided to die on me.

http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/ ... gy.278536/
Bellator_Rex
Post: 06

Bellator_Rex wrote: IV. Computers-Advantage: Star Wars.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Data is the most advanced Android in Starfleet, and extremely unique and valuable, to the point where the Borg were extremely interested in getting him, and were unable to assimilate him (First Contact), and Starfleet does not even understand his construction (TNG, Datalore). He has 100,000 Terabytes of memory and can perform 60 trillion operation per second. This is compared to Google's current active memory of approximately 10 exabytes. (1 exabyte=1000000 Terabytes). Tianhe-1A, the world's fastest computer,'s 2,500 trillion operations per second. Now, unfortunately we do not have reliable numbers such as these for Star Wars, however, we do know that droids are so common and efficiently constructed that a prepubescent slave boy can create one out of junk (The Phantom Menace) and that this was not seen as a massive anomaly like the creation of Data. We do know, however, that Data is not at all infallible. In TNG Evolution he states there is no precedent for a synthetic image of a ship, despite seeing one three episodes early, in TNG Evolution. Later in the same episode, he states that there has not been a system-wide technological failure on a Federation starship in 79 years, however 13 episodes early in TNG Contagion, both the Enterprise and the Yamato experience such a failure. He describes force in units of Tons per Meter instead of Newtons TNG, Final Mission). He cannot beat another crewmate in Chess, despite that crewmate showing no direct skill in the game. (TNG, The Masterpiece Society). Meanwhile, an Astromech droid, R2-D2, was able to defeat Chewbacca at Dejarik (A New Hope). Data also incorrectly calculates a simple surface area equation by a order of magnitude. (TNG, Relics) There are several other examples, but I see no need to go on. Data seems to make mistakes often, and is very unique, whereas Star Wars droids are extremely commonplace, and I do not believe have made such mistakes (Discounting B1 Battle Droids, which were manufactured as cheaply as possible). As for other computers, it takes several hours for the Enterprise's main computer to run a simple search on the phrase of "People showering while clothed" (TNG, The Naked Now). We also know that Star Wars navicomputers such as those on the Millenium Falcon can sift through all the data from a several light-year at minimum hyperspace path, and plot a safe course through that path, in minutes. (A New Hope). Though this is harder to tell than the other categories, I believe Star Wars has the advantage.
1) Data's capabilities are irrelevant. The hardware and software used on starships is completely different from what Data uses.

2) Making robots on par with an abnormally high functioning Star Wars droid like R2-D2 is easy for the Federation as shown by Exocomps.

3) A.I. are easy for the Federation as they can stick two human level A.I.(Moriarty) in a box the size of Data's head.

4) Navicomputers in Star Wars simply read maps someone else has updated. It's basically a GPS

5) B-1s are the norm for Star Wars droids.

6) R2-D2 mistakes an electrical outlet for a computer port in one of the OT.
7) If you had to search through the combined databases of 150 worlds AND analyze every response to the inquiry with AI programs it would take you quite awhile too.

8)Sifting through starmaps is nothing compared to the USS Enterprise-D's capability to transport more than 50 people at the same time; it takes 2x10^45 bits just to do one person.





Bellator_Rex wrote: IX. Special Technology-Advantage-Star Trek.
Bellator_Rex wrote: Star Wars technology is almost entirely war-based. Star Trek, on the other hand, has replicators, holodecks, and transporters, none of which are very militarily useful, but all of which are helpful for comfort and convenience (If one ignores the ethical ramifications of transporters).
Generally Star Wars technology is flashy but little substance. Most of it is good for scaring stone age spear chuckers, but where it matter it seems Star Wars is often less advanced then the late 1970s to early 1980s. Targeting systems on Earth seem to be better then what are commonly used in Star Wars, and E.T. takes place in the distant future of Star Wars implying that you don't have to have horribly advanced technology to match Star Wars.

Conversely to build Star Trek technology you seem to need an advanced understanding of physics, and seem to need to understand higher dimensions and particle physics specifically. We also seem to see characters adjusting things on the molecular or lower levels.
Replicators, holodecks, and transporters are very militarily useful.

Replicators can recycle most organic material which allows them to use the same raw material multiple times lowering the amount of food required to be stored.

Holodecks can run simulations of an actual battle without harming the person training, and learns the persons attack style forcing them to constantly adapt. It also can prevent the mental effects of being confined on a starship for years at a time.

Transporters would allow entire troops to be moved from one location to another and if the enemy isn't using magnetic shielding they can transport right to where the enemy is hiding.
Bellator_Rex wrote: This should be sufficient. It should be noted, however, that I have entirely (and intentionally) ignored the Expanded Universe, or EU. This is because some people insist that it is not canon, though it is, and I sought to avoid controversy. In the EU one will find that these numbers are backed up, and indeed even conservative for Star Wars, and will add new information, such as that on Star Wars special technology.
1) If this is the case then why make such grand claims that require a larger galaxy then is shown in the G and C levels?[/quote]

User avatar
Mith
Starship Captain
Posts: 765
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:17 am

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Mith » Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:00 am

I think that pointing out scientific errors that Data has made because the people who wrote him made a mistake or were ignorant is pretty much the most basest example of a dishonest debater. Data is written to be smart and exact. Not perfect of course (And why would anyone assume that Troi had no talent or skill at chess? I know she wasn't written very well, but she's supposed to be an accomplished counselor, not some dumb bimbo), but we shouldn't really assume he's mistaken unless he's supposed to be mistaken.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Apr 11, 2014 3:18 am

I've seen the same tactic applied to Spock, which I agree is pretty low. If we applied the same to Star Wars characters, the same people would likely scream bloody murder. and call us uneducated cretins, etc.

Take, for example, Spock in "The Doomsday Machine" referring to the planet killer's hull as "solid neutronium". There Warsies like to claim that Spock is wrong because current theory (read theory, not fact) says that neutronium in neutron and pulsar stars might be fluid, not solid. However, what Spock says is not in anyway at odds with the visuals which shows the conical hull of the planet killer in both the original and remastered versions to be pretty solid looking:

Image
Yup, looks solid to me!

And even if that weren't the case, we can assume that Spock was speaking in colloquial terms to drive home to Commodore Decker that the situation was hopeless from the current tactical standpoint, and that the best course of action would be to get as far away from the berserker machine and its subspace interference to warn Starfleet command and get help.

Spock, however, does not have time to give a physics lesson to Decker, especially since the Enterprise was in immediate danger of attack by the planet killer.

So Spock is not necessarily wrong given what is shown in the episode and the context of the situation.
-Mike

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Picard » Sat Apr 12, 2014 5:01 pm

Praeothmin wrote:This part:
And the clones have no malice, no hatred, not the slightest ill intent that might give warning. They are only following orders.
Is the dumbest explanation ever...
Because if it is true, then the Jedi should never, ever be able to feel any danger from the droids attacking them, since droids also don't feel malice, and are only following orders...
If my memory serves me, Jedi never, ever, noticed a Trade Federation droid being in the area without physically seeing (or hearing) them. Only time they did sense a danger was when a droid was carrying poisonous bugs.
Mike DiCenso wrote:I've seen the same tactic applied to Spock, which I agree is pretty low. If we applied the same to Star Wars characters, the same people would likely scream bloody murder. and call us uneducated cretins, etc.

Take, for example, Spock in "The Doomsday Machine" referring to the planet killer's hull as "solid neutronium". There Warsies like to claim that Spock is wrong because current theory (read theory, not fact) says that neutronium in neutron and pulsar stars might be fluid, not solid. However, what Spock says is not in anyway at odds with the visuals which shows the conical hull of the planet killer in both the original and remastered versions to be pretty solid looking:

Image
Yup, looks solid to me!

And even if that weren't the case, we can assume that Spock was speaking in colloquial terms to drive home to Commodore Decker that the situation was hopeless from the current tactical standpoint, and that the best course of action would be to get as far away from the berserker machine and its subspace interference to warn Starfleet command and get help.

Spock, however, does not have time to give a physics lesson to Decker, especially since the Enterprise was in immediate danger of attack by the planet killer.

So Spock is not necessarily wrong given what is shown in the episode and the context of the situation.
-Mike
There is also a possibility that some kind of gravity or nuclear force manipulation is used to keep the hull solid even if (a big if) neutronium's "natural" state is that of a liquid.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: Star Trek Technology vs Star Wars Technology: Space Batt

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:19 am

Mith wrote:I think that pointing out scientific errors that Data has made because the people who wrote him made a mistake or were ignorant is pretty much the most basest example of a dishonest debater. Data is written to be smart and exact. Not perfect of course (And why would anyone assume that Troi had no talent or skill at chess? I know she wasn't written very well, but she's supposed to be an accomplished counselor, not some dumb bimbo), but we shouldn't really assume he's mistaken unless he's supposed to be mistaken.
Pushing this to the extreme, the near never wrong Data would actually be... testing his comrades' knowledge and intelligence?

Post Reply