which ship would win

[deleted]

This post is the end of the thread. Comparing that clunky Falcon to the refit Enterprise/Enterprise A is a disgrace.

http://www.libertydwells.com

LOL! I know I am chiming in a bit late but I thought I take the plunge just the same. Anyway, I will address your comments accordingly.

"For being 8000 years in the future, Andromeda is pretty poorly designed. Both her computer and internal security are routinely compromised, and she has nothing even remotely resembling a force field, which both the various incarnations of the Enterprise and the Stargate ships have, which means any damage taken goes directly to her structure. That doesn't seem particularly advanced - certainly not 8000 years advanced, when both modern day ships (Stargate, but based on alien technology) and roughly 500 years in the future (Star Trek) ships can avoid taking direct damage."

If you have watched Star Trek: The Next Generation series, you would not believe how many times the Enterprise D's shields went down just after one or two hits. One of the things that Star Trek got wrong about technology (among other things) is that there is no such thing as a force field can that protect you from all types of weapons. Some weapons are more effective in penetrating force fields compared to others, which is why you need both force fields and ablative armor as well. This is one of the few things that Star Wars got right. Think of them like the shoes on your feet. You can walk further with both than you can with just one.


"Let's not ignore her reliance on slower-than-light weaponry. Andromeda relies heavily on missiles while the Star Trek and Stargate ships have lightspeed weaponry. Missiles are fairly primitive for an 8000 year advanced technology."

Although lightspeed weaponry or rather direct energy weapons such as lasers and particle weapons are very effective weapons in terms of accuracy and speed, they are not without their drawbacks such as needing to recharge, giving off a lot of heat waste, and unable to change direction. Projectile weaponry also have their benefits too. Unlike direct energy weapons, projectile weapons do not give off as much heat waste and can pack a more devastating blow compared to their direct energy counterparts, and can change direction if it misses the target. Again, having both direct energy weapons and projectile weapons are like the shoes on your feet. You can walk further with both you can with just one.


"It's also poorly designed in terms of layout. All the swooping, disassociated curves may look nice, but consider the time it would take to travel, inside the ship, from the upper drone bay to the main body, or from the main body to what appears to be the bridge beneath the ship. Neither is directly connected to the main body of the ship, so you have to travel WAY out of your way to get anywhere. Factor in the lack of automated travel (the Enterprise had turbo lifts, but the Andromeda only has LADDERS?!), and travel time within the ship is, frankly, not only beyond what it should be, but RIDICULOUS. I like the show, but the ship design is, frankly, stupid."

Actually, Andromeda is a by far a much better design than the Enterprise in terms of practicality and efficiency. Andromeda is a balanced design with those arching rings that enable it to create a wormhole to travel faster than light and it is the only sci-fi starship that has heat radiators, which is a must or your crew will cook into a fried egg roll. On the other hand, there are many reasons why the Enterprise is an unrealistic design. For instance, it is unbalanced, ungainly, and front-heavy, specifically, it’s center of gravity axis is off-balanced, the ship would roll forward even in space. To better illustrate this point, take any fat, thick book and set it standing vertically on a table. Pretend that this book represents a spaceship. Take your index finger and touch the center of the spine, this represents the center of gravity axis. Next, give it a gentle but firm push forward with your finger. What happened? The book moved in an even direction. Now, repeat the process, only this time, place your index finger on the top section of the spine. What happened? That’s right, it tipped over. The same would happen to the Enterprise.

In addition, it lacks heat radiators and the neck section and those warp pylons are so thin and fragile, they would snap off like twigs when traveling at maximum acceleration, structural integrity field or no. And if that wasn’t enough, the decks were stacked horizontally instead of vertically. Keep in mind that Matt Jefferies was an aviation and mechanical artist and knew about the principles of air flight, but he was not an aero engineer, thus, space flight is a whole different environment.

If anything, the most realistic science fiction spaceships are the Discovery from 2001 and the Leonov from 2010. Unlike the Enterprise, the Discovery and Leonov were designed by real-life aero engineers. Their design obeyed the basic engineering principles such as portionality, evenly balanced, and the Leonov, in particular, had heat radiators. An interesting thing to note is that in the 2001: A Space Odyssey novel, the Discovery had heat radiators and the movie version initially also had heat radiators, but director Stanley Kubrick decided to do away with them because he thought that the general audiences would confuse them for wings, much to the consternation of author Arthur C. Clarke. Hence, the Discovery and Leonov are way more realistic than the Enterprise and they can be build right now, providing if money was not an issue. But you don’t have to take my word for it.

Check out the following comment by a NASA engineer named Jim, followed by the link about the Enterprise design:

"It can't, period. It can't meet the requirements you impose on it.

The structure and design is totally wrong for the task.
it is unbalanced
it has no room for propellant.
it has no radiators
The propulsion system can not meeting the 90 day to Mars requirementl
The 'magnetically suspended gravity wheel' which I take to mean a centrifuge, is in the wrong plane for control of the vehicle."

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28821.0

And lastly, NASA recently created their own realistic version of the starship Enterprise entitled the “IXS Enterprise” starship. Instead of warp nacelles, it has a warp ring that is based on the Alcubierre Warp Drive Concept. Personally, I find this design a much cooler and realistic incarnation of the starship Enterprise.

Check it out:

http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/13/5806104/nasas-warp-drive-spaceship-concept-enterprise

Neat, eh? :) 

Something to take into consideration when comparing with Ancient warships is that, they have NEVER in the series been fully operational. The 'history' goes that the ships used to be powered by ZPM's and fully loaded with hundreds of droids. The ships that are currently in operation now would most likely lack or have an extinguished ZPM making the shields very weak.

[deleted]

proof or stfu

Clearly you have zero understanding of physics and theoretical science.

[deleted]

Answering and then putting someone back on ignore to avoid rebuttal as well as writing this about your opponent's mother:
"Welcome to *IGNORE* by the way your mother is a *WHORE*"

You are, indeed, one impressive person!

[deleted]

If you consider anything in this abortion of a thread to be "scientifically quantifiable" then you need to go back to college...and get a refund.




-----
Interesting point on the game mechanics. But again that can't really be used for differing technology spanning multiple shows.