defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 881
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
1. Star Wars Death Star mentions that debris ranging from tiny pebbles to chunks the size of mountains impacted against the Death Star's shields.
2. The Death Star would have to have structural integrity up to 300,000 times that of structural steel to be able to move without ripping itself apart.
3. Star Wars Death Star states that a hypothetical fleet of super star destroyers would pose no threat to the Death Star.
4. The movies show that any full on capital ship assault against the Death Star is suicide.
5. The movies show the Death Star within a 100,000 or so KM of Alderaan's explosion, meaning that the Death Star would be hit with astronomical amounts of debris moving at hypervelocity speeds.
2. The Death Star would have to have structural integrity up to 300,000 times that of structural steel to be able to move without ripping itself apart.
3. Star Wars Death Star states that a hypothetical fleet of super star destroyers would pose no threat to the Death Star.
4. The movies show that any full on capital ship assault against the Death Star is suicide.
5. The movies show the Death Star within a 100,000 or so KM of Alderaan's explosion, meaning that the Death Star would be hit with astronomical amounts of debris moving at hypervelocity speeds.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
StarWarsStarTrek wrote:
2. The Death Star would have to have structural integrity up to 300,000 times that of structural steel to be able to move without ripping itself apart.
Deal with these first:
1. DEATH STAR POWER OUTPUT YOUR CLAIM:
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... &start=180
Not only does this assume the DS came out of hyperspace stationary, it ignores the fact that without mass lightening and inertial dapening the DS would tear itself apart under such thrust.StarWarsStarTrek wrote:The Death Star circumnavigating Yavin 4 in a matter of minutes, calculating out to 67 km/s, requiring about e29 joules of energy assuming a density similar to a GSC.
2. SHIELDING:
1. The ship was at 150,000km for a significant amount of time prior to the flare that caused them to raise the shields.StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Horray!
Star Trek shields
"RELICS" is courtesy of Mike Wong, here:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... ield1.html
So let me get this straight:
The Enterprise was FINE as it was entering orbit of the star. However, a solar flare hit it, and its shields went down to 23%.
At 150,000 km.
2.The ship and its main systems were already damaged so when the shields were raised they were at 23%.
3. It is clearly stated that the solar flares are going to get worse and yet the shields could last 3 hours of pounding from them (so if the flare knocked them down to 23% then how could they last 3 hours of even worse pounding).
- Mr. Oragahn
- Admiral
- Posts: 6865
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
- Location: Paradise Mountain
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
Can't remember where I read that, but I recall some source, perhaps even a drawing, referring to huge vertical pylons going from pole to pole and being responsible of the station's structural integrity by applying a force field.StarWarsStarTrek wrote:2. The Death Star would have to have structural integrity up to 300,000 times that of structural steel to be able to move without ripping itself apart.
SW has not demonstrated using materials 300,000 stronger than steel by the way.
With most of the field stabilizing, there's a chance that the debris didn't actually enjoy their super drifting speed that long. Plus, on RDA's page, there's visual evidence that the planet was partially collapsing.5. The movies show the Death Star within a 100,000 or so KM of Alderaan's explosion, meaning that the Death Star would be hit with astronomical amounts of debris moving at hypervelocity speeds.
We also have some nice evidence of the battle station's firepower against varying targets.
- Mr. Oragahn
- Admiral
- Posts: 6865
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
- Location: Paradise Mountain
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
That's not official, I hope. A detonator? For M/AM? In lieu of a guidance system btw??Picard wrote:Standard torpedoAnd mini-torpedos have never appeared in any way, shape, or form in Star Trek Canon as far as I know.
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/bl ... eet-32.jpg
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 881
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
Do you have a source? Besides, does it really matter if the durability of the death star comes from its structural strength or its technobabble force field integrity boosters?Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Can't remember where I read that, but I recall some source, perhaps even a drawing, referring to huge vertical pylons going from pole to pole and being responsible of the station's structural integrity by applying a force field.
SW has not demonstrated using materials 300,000 stronger than steel by the way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion
With most of the field stabilizing, there's a chance that the debris didn't actually enjoy their super drifting speed that long.
...what? Elaborate, please, what this is supposed to imply.Plus, on RDA's page, there's visual evidence that the planet was partially collapsing.
I am still debating whether this is light hearted sarcasm, or a deliberate attempt to fool me in an insult of my intelligence.We also have some nice evidence of the battle station's firepower against varying targets.
- Mr. Oragahn
- Admiral
- Posts: 6865
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
- Location: Paradise Mountain
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
If I had one I'd have given it. But I'll try to find it.StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Do you have a source?Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Can't remember where I read that, but I recall some source, perhaps even a drawing, referring to huge vertical pylons going from pole to pole and being responsible of the station's structural integrity by applying a force field.
SW has not demonstrated using materials 300,000 stronger than steel by the way.
It's more a question of consistency.Besides, does it really matter if the durability of the death star comes from its structural strength or its technobabble force field integrity boosters?
Debunked by the movie's technobabble and Solo's ship entering the edge of an asteroid field precisely where his ship came out of hyperspace, which is generally quite close to a planet, with that same field suddenly stopping to exist as the Millennium Falcon pursues a TIE fighter.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motionWith most of the field stabilizing, there's a chance that the debris didn't actually enjoy their super drifting speed that long.
Easy, it implies that some bizarro phenomenon generates a force that pulls matter towards the planet's core....what? Elaborate, please, what this is supposed to imply.Plus, on RDA's page, there's visual evidence that the planet was partially collapsing.
You're not asked to accepte all he says, but you can find the relevant bit on his Death Star pages.
http://st-v-sw.net/STSWdeathstarindex.html
Debating? With whom?I am still debating whether this is light hearted sarcasm, or a deliberate attempt to fool me in an insult of my intelligence.We also have some nice evidence of the battle station's firepower against varying targets.
It's neither sarcasm nor insult. Just chill.
-
- Bridge Officer
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
Not sure where that'd be. Main tech sources on the DEath Star are AFAIK, the old WEG Tech Companion, Technical Journal and the ICS. But I'm sure there are others.Mr. Oragahn wrote:StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Can't remember where I read that, but I recall some source, perhaps even a drawing, referring to huge vertical pylons going from pole to pole and being responsible of the station's structural integrity by applying a force field.
SW has not demonstrated using materials 300,000 stronger than steel by the way.
From what I remember of our discussions though you have all these. Or am I wrong?
The Saxtonian ICS books (for what they're worth around here) make it quite clear most capships are supported by forcefields ("tensor fields" is their term for it) rather than metal bulk alone. Incidentally this is also the Warsie excuse why thousand gees accels are oll korrekt even if the big ugly cruiser in Episode 3 breaks apart on reentry.
- Praeothmin
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 3920
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
- Location: Quebec City
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
Thread split...
Please continue Photon Torp discussions in new thread...
Please continue Photon Torp discussions in new thread...
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 881
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
Mr. O, until you can find the source, or prove that Alderaan was not "blown into space dust" as both the novel and the script say; whether it's through DET or technobabble is not relevant to t his thread, it can be stated that the Death Star was right next to a planet when it blew up, and it was completely fine.
Also, its shield. The Death Star's shield being projected from Endor was so powerful that the Rebel fleet did not even try and stop it. And:
Also, its shield. The Death Star's shield being projected from Endor was so powerful that the Rebel fleet did not even try and stop it. And:
TASHA (over comm): Excuse the interruption, Captain, but this may be worth it. We're now receiving a signal from the probe.
PICARD: We'll take it here, please.
(Viewscreen shows forcefield being projected from planet, holding both the Enterprise and the Ferengi vessel in place)
GEORDI: Incredible!
RIKER: That's our mysterious "something," Captain. It is a forcefield of some kind...
PICARD: Reaching up from the planet surface. What amazing power! How does the legend describe the end of the Tkon Empire?
DATA: By their Sun going supernova, sir.
-
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: defensive capabilities and durability of the deathstar
Do yourself a favor and watch ANH again, (given that alderaan is earth sized) it is clear that from the cameras position that it is in front of the DS and the distance between the DS and planet is greater than that of earth and the moon (the size of alderaan from that position is about what thw earth looks like from the moon).StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Mr. O, until you can find the source, or prove that Alderaan was not "blown into space dust" as both the novel and the script say; whether it's through DET or technobabble is not relevant to t his thread, it can be stated that the Death Star was right next to a planet when it blew up, and it was completely fine.
The explosion itself does not even reach the cameras position so it obviously did not reach the DS position either as the DS was behind the camera, the reason for this is quite obvious and consistent with most of the planets mass getting shunted into hyperspace and having a relatively small amount left to actually explode.