| Subject: Re: New poll (Nebula v Nebulon) |
Author:
Warspite
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 09:53:19 10/17/02 Thu
Author Host/IP: ipd54b1d0f.free.wxs.nl/213.75.29.15
In reply to:
The Divine Shadow
's message, "Re: New poll (Nebula v Nebulon)" on 04:05:57 10/17/02 Thu
>>True, but I think the comparison is flawed. Trek
>>systems are far better than the manually aimed guns on
>>a B17. Look at Voyager:Dragons Teeth. In that episode,
>>Voyager still fired very accurately at fast and
>>manouverable enemy fighters, depsite being in a high
>>radiation environment that interfered with sensors,
>>and having the auto-targetting system fail. If they
>>can do well with those problems, then this should be a
>>breeze.
>
>The thruster placement on the TIE Defenders is similar
>to those of the Star Fury (Babylon 5), one of the most
>if not THEE most manuverable fighter ever produced.
I don't disagree, but I just don't think it makes much of a difference. The targeting systems and scanners are all FTL, so the fighter simply could not move far enough to generate a miss in the time available. Manouverability is only really a factor when you are dealing with systems (human or machine) that are not fast enough to adjust to the change. Once the target is nominated by the tactical officer, most targeting is done by FTL systems on Fed ships, they would be plenty fast enough.
>If you've ever seen an episode that involves fighters
>fighting, you get to see some of that insane
>manuverability, stop on a dime, spin on any axis with
>little or no change in the orientation on the other
>two, and the Defender has shields.
The manouverability is impressive I agree, and against STL computers or humans reflexes it would be a major advantage. But we know that in Trek systems, the tactical officer normally nominates the target and the computer calculates everything else.
>By the way, their shields are peirced after several
>hits from fighter grade weapons. It should be noted
>that Star Wars energy weapons (on Captiol ships) are
>more powerfull than Star Trek energy weapons, a single
>TL shot has totaly sublimated an X-wing with full
>shields up and continued on with no drop in yeild,
>while the Star Trek energy weapons, after destroying
>their target do not continue, lower energy output. A
>TL shot with a minimum yield of 200 gt would de-shield
>and sublimate a shuttle, perigrin, or runnabout in 1
>shot aswell.
So now the 'minimum' firepower of a turbolaser is 200GT? This is what I was saying in the post on Spacebattles recently, when I complained that a single quote from a single book was being placed above all the films and other books. You do realise that level of firepower is never shown anywhere in the films. All the evidence from the books and films points to MUCH lower yield numbers. 200GT is only stated once in one book, and even there (ICS) it is very vague as to whether it relates to one weapon or the entire broadside.
As for the whole 'subliminating' argument, I think you are wrong. We have seen at least a couple of examples where phasers have punched through a target and continued. The first would be TNG:Q Who against the Borg cube and the second in TNG:All good things against a Negh'Var.
However, phasers generally do not work in the same way as turbolasers. Generally we have seen that phasers transmit their energy into the targets structure, and then spread out through it, but do not continue on into nearby structures. We see a very good example of that in TNG:Ensigns of Command, where Data vaporises all the water in an aquaduct, without damaging the aquaduct itself. Therefore, a phaser would not necessarily blow out the other side, since all the energy would be sent into the target. This actually makes it much more efficient than a turbolaser.
>
>>Why? There was no suggestion that FTL speeds were not
>>possible. In fact, the Enterprise does to warp inside
>>the Nebula. The only problem would be finding the
>>enemy again afterwards, but even that should not be a
>>problem with modern trek sensors since they don'y have
>>the same problems as they did in Kirk's time. Either
>>way, warp speed would be a useful tactical card to
>>have.
>
>FTL is possible, but not advisable. The targetting
>problems would be huge, like trying to shoot a quarter
>with a .50 calibre machine gun from a Blackbird at
>mach 3. And the probibility of hitting one or more of
>the TIE Defenders would stop any other than Tom Paris
>or Han Solo from attempting to do it, as even glancing
>impact rip both to sub-atomic particles.
Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that they could fight at warp inside the nebula, just that warp speed is possible. It would be useful for escaping a poor position, or avoiding missiles etc.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 