| Subject: Re: Imperial fleet Vs Federation fleet |
Author:
TrekGOD
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 05:28:05 10/01/02 Tue
Author Host/IP: NoHost/65.163.170.130
In reply to:
caon hayes
's message, "Re: Imperial fleet Vs Federation fleet" on 02:04:47 10/01/02 Tue
>>>Now, let's imagine for a moment being in F18
>traveling
>>>at Mach 2. Your mission: Kill Sad'am Hussan.. and
>>>only Sad'am Hussan while he is on his morning
>>>routine outside of his palace. What is the likly
>>>hood of actuall being able to hit him and only
>>>with your mounted M61 Vulcan without slowing down?
>>>Let's put this in context with Star Trek Strafing.
>>>Umm no.
>>
>>Of course that would seem to make it rediculous.
>>However, that is because your argument is fatally
>>flawed. You wouldn't be surprised if I said that an
>>aircraft cannot be shot down with an axe. Of course it
>>can't, because the axe wasn't designed to do that.
>>Also, the M61 was never designed to hit a two meter
>>target at mach 2. However, just because the M61 cannot
>>do the job, it doesn't mean the job cannot be done.
>>
>>In the Gulf war, Patriot missiles were able to
>>successfully intercept (about 60% hits) and destroy
>>incoming Scud missiles. A Patriot travels at mach 3,
>>and the incoming scud at mach 5. Therefore the
>>combined closing speed was around mach 8 (four times
>>faster than your example). Many of these kills were
>>nose to nose, meaning that the Patriot hit the Scud on
>>the nose. The nose of a Scud is no more than 2 meters
>>in diameter. See the point? You can't point to one
>>systems inability to do the job, as an indication that
>>the job cannot be done at all. Federation ships have
>>FTL computers and sensors. We know the navigational
>>deflector can hit fist sized targets with a closing
>>speed of at least 1516 times the speed of light. There
>>is no reason why the same systems could not guide a
>>torpedo to an impact on a 1.6 KILOMETER object, at
>>speeds that might not exceed just over light speed.
>
>
>Looks like TrekGOD aint the only one "fataly flawed"
>he ONE thing you missed the POINT on with your
>examples was this. Yes it is true about the success or
>railure rate of Patriot missles BUT what you failed to
>consider and what makes your comparison FLAWED is
>this, The missles you talk about had the time to close
>the distance between the launch point and the targets
>positios! If the distances were say 500 feet from
>lauch point until the missle was detected and was
>within firing range your 60% kill ratio would drop
>dramaticly, and 60% hit also means 40% misses. See the
>point? You also don't have it right about nav
>deflectors remamber the projected force field that
>extends 2 km out in front of the ship, the second is a
>tractor deflector that extends thousands of km in
>front of the ships pushing things aside, NOT targeting
>objects as you suggest. Its like a snow plow that
>simply plows the road ahead of the ship ANY "fist"
>sized object would be thrown clear of the ships flight
>path because of the tractor/pressor beam being aimed
>in its general direction. There is even a cute little
>picture to illstrate it on pg. 88 of the TM. Please
>try to get the info right. It helps to lesson the
>confusion. Although you can argue the point because
>the TM isn't "canon". As far warp strafing I don't
>beleive it is possible in the manner you trekkies
>suggest, given what we know about the range of trek
>weapons and the time it takes for torpedoes to arm
>themselves. At warp 2 they would only have about a
>quarter of a second to get in firing range target the
>ship and fire the torpedo with any hope of it arming
>itself in time to detonate. The TOS examples you
>mentioned are even worse examples to use the range of
>klingon disruptors on those old klingon battle
>cruisers was only 100,000 km at warp 6 that's
>.00085034 seconds to react. torpedoes of the day had
>ranges of 750,000 km this gives a whopping .006377551
>seconds to react. Don't ya think maybe its a little
>implauseable. Just maybe the writers of the show back
>then were tring to make warpdrive seem to make the
>ships more maneuverable. Maybe the ships speed wasn't
>that fast but maybe the warp fieild made them lighter
>more agile like space-time driver coils on modern
>impulse drives. A non-propulsive static warp bubble
>wouldn't give them FTL speed but would give them alot
>more maneuverability so they could be as agile as a
>fighter but the size of a cruiser. It would also
>explain why with modern 24th century impulse drives
>they don't use the warpdrives in the manner showmn on
>TOS. This is complete conjecture and BS I realize, but
>it does fit with the dialog and would explain weapon
>range "mistakes" if the whole time they were infact at
>sub-light but generating a warpfield equal to 392
>cochranes in a static warp bubble to reduce the
>aparent mass of the ship so as to increase
>maneuverability.
hey now, I just sited an example
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 