Are the "sensor domes" really shield generators?

[ILikeDeathNote]

I've been thinking, are the sensor domes on a Star Destroyer shield generators after all?

The reason why I'm thinking this is because I'm thinking back to ANH where the Tantive IV gets shot near its radar dish, following by dialog about how the shields are down.

Maybe George Lucas originally intended it to be a shield generator, but that detail got changed, but not the dialog.

[Who is like God arbour]

As you can see in that image,

• • 

the domes above the bridge are not sensor domes but deflector shield generators.

That image is not from me but is used by Wookiepedia. It's not said, from where that image is. Wookeipedia is very economical with references anyway.

I would think, that this shematic was drawn immediately after RotJ. The destroying of such a dome followed by the report, that the bridge deflector shield is lost, indicates very much, that the dome is a deflector shield generator and not a sensor dome.

[Mr. Oragahn]

The match of all EU sources has led the official data to a global unification, with domes housing both shield projectors, maybe even the generators, and long range sensors.

[Cocytus]

I remember the image from the original Essential Vehicles and Vessels Guide. I don't know if it originated with that book, but I remember an earlier, obviously incorrect drawing which gave a length of 900 meters for a Star Destroyer, which is false. The EGV&V was also erroneous with several of its figures, notably an 8000 meter length for the SSD, but all this is irrelevant, as ROTJ makes it pretty clear what's in those domes.

[Mike DiCenso]

The whole conning tower domes are sensor domes, not shield generators thing stems once again from the Saxtonite attempts at revising what we see and hear in the movies. The dome got destroyed by the A-wings, and the bridge deflector is stated as being down. Enough said.

It would actually be poor engineering on the Empire's part, if they allowed for a design on a ship as important as an SSD to have a cascading systems' failures that lets something like the destruction of a sensor dome lead to a critical shield loss. But then again, the crashing of the lone A-wing leading to such a catastrophic series of explosions that leads to the complete destruction of the SSD's conning tower would support the idea that the loss of a sensor dome would lead to a multiple systems failure and the loss of the deflector shield.

And the Warsies complain about the Galaxy class being poorly designed! ;-)
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

I remember the image from the original Essential Vehicles and Vessels Guide. I don't know if it originated with that book, but I remember an earlier, obviously incorrect drawing which gave a length of 900 meters for a Star Destroyer, which is false. The EGV&V was also erroneous with several of its figures, notably an 8000 meter length for the SSD, but all this is irrelevant, as ROTJ makes it pretty clear what's in those domes.

I think you may be confusing the entry for the Victory class SD with the ISD entry, which as far as I know, has always given a 1,600 meter length for an ISD. Even if it did give a 900 meter length, such a length can be justified depending on which scaling of the Millenium Falcon to the ISD Avenger's bridge tower you choose to go with.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

Interestingly enough, whether those domes on top of the ISD and SSD conning towers are for sensors or shields, they do not have any corresponding counterpart on any other starship design seen in the movies. Not even the Republic Cruiser (aka Venators to Saxtonites) SDs have anything like them on their conning towers, nor do the older assault ships (aka Acclamators) have any.
-Mike

[Who is like God arbour]

I have always thought, that the one pylon on the top of the assault ships and the two pylons on the top of the Republic Cruiser are containing predecessors of the shield generators, used at the ISDs.

The shield generator of the ISDs are moderner and smaller and are fitting in the "small" dome, while the shield generators at the beginning of the Clone Wars were still underdeveloped.

Regardless what the EU sources are saying, I have problems to accept that these doms are supposed to contain sensors. That would make sense for a real swimming ship. Contrary to such a ship, that only has to monitor the space above the water via radar (and via sonar the space under the water), a space ship has to monitor the whole surrounding space. In space, there is no above or under.

Insofar, it doesn't seems to make sense to install sensors only on one side of the ship, if it would unproblematic possible to install them on both sides of the ship.

• • • 

[l33telboi]

It's not said, from where that image is.

It's from "The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels", I have a copy here myself. And on another note, "The New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels" repeat the fact that those are indeed deflector shield generators.

[CrippledVulture]

Using only evidence from the films, it seems pretty clear that they're shield generators. That's what I always thought when I was playing with my Star Wars Micro Machines as a kid. The ROTJ scene is about as clear as the high canon gets on that subject.

Does anyone remember what those domes did in X-wing versus TIE Fighter? It was many years and several computers ago, but I do remember that game let you lock on to individual components on enemy ships and the Star Destroyers had a bunch of them. In Star Wars Battlefront II, you take the shields down by firing on the vessel anywhere until they fall or by boarding it and bombing the generator inside.

Just a thought.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Dead angles for the long range sensors has always been a problem to those who claims these balls are long range sensors. There's a load of information these ships would miss if they didn't roll properly.

[Mike DiCenso]

I have always thought, that the one pylon on the top of the assault ships and the two pylons on the top of the Republic Cruiser are containing predecessors of the shield generators, used at the ISDs.

That might be true of the assault ships design with that single big aerodynamic-looking pod on the top of the tower. However, the twin "T" shaped towers of Republic cruisers may not necessarily be sensor pods given they both have visible sets of windows in at leas the foward sections. On the other hand, what we may be interperting as windows, may not be windows but sensor ports. Which if that is the case, then all bets are off on using them on any SD for scaling purposes since it could throw off deck counts.

Insofar, it doesn't seems to make sense to install sensors only on one side of the ship, if it would unproblematic possible to install them on both sides of the ship.

Unfortunately, if they are sensor domes, it would be really bad design by Imperial engineers, since it locks them into a two-dimenisonal mindset, and would take the whole terrestrial sea-going battleship analogy too far. The large dome on the ventral side often labled as "Solar ionization reactor", would make better sense as being a gigantic long-range sensor dome as much as anything else.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

Dead angles for the long range sensors has always been a problem to those who claims these balls are long range sensors. There's a load of information these ships would miss if they didn't roll properly.

Even as shield generators, they don't work out so well given they would have project the ship's shields in an odd double lobe, like a gigantic magnetic field. On the other hand, given that the Death Star outer shield was described as a magnetic field, and the trash compactor door was sealed with a magnetic lock that could repel and bounce blaster bolts quite effectively. Maybe SW shields are big, high-intensity magnetic bubbles, which would explain why they're really good at stopping energy weapons, but are not so good at stopping kinetic attacks.
-Mike

[Cocytus]

I remember the image from the original Essential Vehicles and Vessels Guide. I don't know if it originated with that book, but I remember an earlier, obviously incorrect drawing which gave a length of 900 meters for a Star Destroyer, which is false. The EGV&V was also erroneous with several of its figures, notably an 8000 meter length for the SSD, but all this is irrelevant, as ROTJ makes it pretty clear what's in those domes.

I think you may be confusing the entry for the Victory class SD with the ISD entry, which as far as I know, has always given a 1,600 meter length for an ISD. Even if it did give a 900 meter length, such a length can be justified depending on which scaling of the Millenium Falcon to the ISD Avenger's bridge tower you choose to go with.
-Mike

No I wasn't, because here's a part of the image I was thinking of. (Sorry about the size)
http://theforce.net/swtc/Pix/kdy/blueisd1.gif

Oddly enough, this image identifies those globes as sensor domes. But since it bears Saxton's watermark, and the appearance of the ship is grossly inaccurate, we can readily discard its assertions. (Here you go, Mr. Oagahn. :)

[Mike DiCenso]

That's where most of the misidentification by Saxton for the domes being sensors, not shield generators, comes from: An old 1970's-era fanwank drawing by Geoff Mandel, which was not in any way an offically licensed piece of Star Wars merchandise. Effectively, we have another example of Saxton ignoring the canon for the offical. Only in this case, he did even worse... by ignoring the canon for the fanon!
-Mike