Whose tech is better: 'Star Trek' or 'Star Wars'?

page: 10
9
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Eryiedes
reply to post by buster2010
 


Any ship with with even a lowly x2 Hyperdrive could arrive at a warp ships destination (providing they knew it) long before they even dropped out of FTL. It could cross the galaxy in 6 monthes.


I have made a Boo-Boo again.
It's more of a technical thing but in order to cross the galaxy in 6 monthes actually requires a x0.5 Hyperdrive. This was exactly the type of engine that the Falcon was boasted to pocess by Solo.
A x2 Hyperdrive (that I cited) would take four times longer.
I stand corrected by myself.
Doesn't alter the point I was trying to make about Hyperdrives being superior to Warp Drives.

-Live Long and Prosper-
edit on 30-1-2014 by Eryiedes because: Typo
edit on 30-1-2014 by Eryiedes because: Correction
edit on 30-1-2014 by Eryiedes because: Added Emphasis
edit on 30-1-2014 by Eryiedes because: Because Jack Danials is Yummy!




posted on Jan, 31 2014 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Eryiedes
reply to post by buster2010
 

tractor bean projectors...




Just saw this (and a few other typos) but it was far too late to fix it. "Tractor Bean"...which I would surmise is capable of inflicting mud butt in anyone you aim it at?

-Live Long and Prosper-



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Morning,

Admitted that a Federation level of technology is inferior to Borg technology, this next post is to remove doubt about effective weapon ranges:

"Vessels of the Federation and her opponents all seem to have effective beam weapons range easily exceeding 1000 kilometers, even against small runabout-size ships. Even against a stationary one-meter target, the Enterprise of the 2260's was able to score a torpedo hit at about 90,000 kilometers. Against other capital vessels, ranges in the thousands and tens of thousands of kilometers are quite common, impressive given the maneuverability of most of the ships."

I have even seen 190000 km quoted in one instance.
When set to proximity detonation, a Photon Torpedo does has greatly increased range by sacrificing relative explosive force...at best it doubles their range. So, even 380000 km can effectively be considered long range for a target the size of a small moon. Sources found range between 160-900 km's...so, let's guestimate 500?
The sole observed exception to this rule is a Nistrom-Krenim Torpedo with a range 4.5 million kilometres.
Sounds pretty intense doesn't it?
It's also fair to assume the Borg would have assimilated a similar technology and even improved upon it...for the sake of arguement, let's say the Borg increased it's effectiveness by 100% to an even 9 million clicks...I feel generous.

Now, the DS I's superlaser had a optimum range of 2 million kilometres but a maximum range of 47.5 million kilometres! (WEG's D6 system was used as a source)
The improvements made to the DS II's composite superlaser included a vastly improved recycle time and improved targeting...enabling it to track and destroy even capital ship sized targets instead of simply planetary-sized bodies. Even assuming that it could only target a ship-sized target at half the range it could destroy a planet from, 23.75 million kilometres would still be superior enough ensure a one-shot kill against a Borg Cube/Sphere...and I'm fairly certain it could effectively target ship-sized targets at ranges beyond half.
A single shot held power on the order of 7000 times the output of the sun!
There would be no suvivors.

Finally, the completed DS II wouldn't have had that annoying fly a single fighter to the exhaust port flaw. It's unconnected to range but I thought I'd throw that out there.

Now, had you only said: V'ger...



-Live Long and Prosper-


edit on 2-2-2014 by Eryiedes because: Typo
edit on 2-2-2014 by Eryiedes because: ETA
edit on 2-2-2014 by Eryiedes because: ETA



posted on Apr, 28 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Star Wars is space fantasy, Star Trek is Sci-Fi. Going from canon, the power of the Star Wars weaponry and hulls, would mean certain defeat for Trek....but it is comparing apples and oranges.

Of course, if you involve Q, then it all goes out the window, too.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Do think star trek would win tech wise.
Always thought the borg ship/cube was cool since I was a little kid. But hand to hand combat, force users would win easily.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: ratcals

Without a doubt startrek has better tech.

Sheilds, replicators, all sorts of torpedoes, phasers, and pulse Phasers, temporal weaponry, teleporters, holograms with tactile interface, medical technology, advanced cybernetics and robotics, phase cloak, regular cloak, wormhole propulsion, amblative armour, advanced super computers, self replicating mine fields, nano tech...and so much more.
Star wars has about the level of tech as the talarians in star trek. They would get tossed about.

Death star? Project Genesis....omega particles ....ect
edit on 5 25 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2014 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ratcals


Galactica.



posted on Jul, 10 2014 @ 05:00 AM
link   
Star Trek. Replicators and Transporters and Phasers. Nuff Said.





top topics
 
9
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum