Klingons with X-Wings

[brianeyci]

That's right, because you have no evidence of them being able to target that far out. They should easily be able to hit large,stationary targets at those ranges. All an X-Wing needs to hit the lumbering Fed ships outside effective phaser range is a fucking telescope.

I have already calculated based on no ECM environment (like you wanted) 18k km on X-Wing profile on the side based on Alyeska's 3 meter squared 50 meter distant 100% accuracy figure. Do you want me to spell it out for you again?

3 meter squared area, 50 m distant, 100 % accuracy (Alyeska)

Now suppose X-Wing is 1 meter by 13 meter long target. So 13 meter squared area. 3/50 = 13/x, which comes out to around 200 m. Since it is a long target, compensating gets around 60 m.

Now, with no ECM maximum range is one light-second. ECM lowers the effectiveness down to around 1 kilometer (being generous since we regularly see closer battles). Now that's 3e5/1 = x/6e-2 and we get 18k km.

Get it now? And for your speed argument to work, X-Wings would have to move faster than it would take for the phaser beam to lance out towards it. I've shown fractional c phaser speed from "The Wounded". At least 1/4 c speed.

Who claims thousands of kilometres? Dozens of kilometres is easily enough for the Feds not to be able to accurately shoot back.

I have quantified Federation firepower in no ECM environment (like you wanted) up to 18k km for 100% accuracy on side profile of X-Wing.

Let's play a little game shall we Batman.

Pretend TNG "The Wounded" didn't exist.

"Star Trek ships have long-distance sensors because there are reasons for them to have them (even though they regularly fight at 1 kilometer ranges) like recon. Since phasers have never been seen to dissipate over range, and Star Trek ships have these long-range sensors, they can shoot up to X range."

Now replace Star Trek with Star Wars, and replace phasers with turbolasers, and you get your ad hoc explaination of Wars X-Wing weapons range. Get it? If I claimed the above quote, and The Wounded didn't exist, you would call me troll, idiot, moron, and whatever else you could think of.

All I am asking for is an example of X-Wing fighting at thousands of kilometers. Do you have this? No? Why do you have to keep resorting to this no limits fallacy, "electro-optical can work an unspecified distance so therefore X-Wings can fire at X kilometers." Sure you've changed from light-hour to thousands of kilometers to now dozens of kilometers, but changing the magnitude of your argument doesn't change how silly it is to claim such range without proof. Look at the quotation, replace Star Trek with Star Wars and phaser with turbolaser, and you get what you are saying.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Op states the Klingons do not have torpedoes.

Which has what exactly to ddo with their targeting systems?

Just because proton torpedoes can shoot up to 1k km that does not mean X-Wing cannons is supposed to shoot up to 1k km, or that the targeting computer for the proton torpedo is linked up to the cannons. That's like saying a guided missile on an aircraft carrier has the same guidance system as a main battleship gun. Its not necessarily true.

What are you blabbering about? You have 100 percent accuracy at 60 metres as the X-Wing clearly has ECM. Not that targeting percentages against lumbering Fed ships are relevant to far more maneuverable and fater targets.

See my above post for explaination of math. And don't fucking change the rules in the middle of the game. The X-Wing's ECM doesn't affect Trek like you said, because "Trek ECM doesn't affect Wars and Wars ECM doesn't affect Trek" (your hypothesis, not mine, I conceded it even though I knew better because I couldn't meet the burden of proof) so if you want to change your statement, concede the ECM point.

Which I never said. I said Trek ECM would be ineffective against Wars sensors, thanks to their 25000 year tech advantage.

Don't be a liar. You told me "Prove that Trek ECM can affect Wars." Then I told you "Prove that Wars ECM can affect Trek." Then you said the following,

You're REALLY trying for that VI, Brian. I'm ignoring ECM because in this scenario it doesn't matter..

I AM ignoring ECM

I can say the fucking same thing. The X-Wings are not facing Trek ECM and therefore Trek ECM doesn't apply.

Agreed. As no Trek forces were around for ANH this is relevant why?

You never made clear that you were talking only about Trek ECM affecting Wars sensors, just one word "ECM". And later, you say "Agreed".

Don't be a liar and say you said that Wars ECM would be effective because of the 25k year tech advantage. You never said that. Go back and read your own posts, you never said that ever, you only said that Wars would be able to scan into subspace and never that Wars would be able to jam subspace sensors. You claimed vaguely that Wars would have "more advanced" subspace sensors, but you never brought up subspace jamming.

If you were really only ignoring the affect of Trek ECM on Wars sensors, and not the affect of Wars ECM on Trek sensors, then why when I claim thousands of kilometer ranges did you not say "Nananananana Brian, Wars ECM can affect Trek." Also you never claimed 25k year tech advantage for the ECM point, ever. Only a 25k year tech advantage and never brought up subspace jamming.

IOW, Wars jamming Trek. Which I never contested. Does it say anything about Trek jamming Wars? No? Then I'm afraid you're SOL. Especially as we NEVER see visual jamming on Trek, and since X-Wing targeting sensors appear to be optical...

Of course you never contested it, but when I asked you "Prove that Wars ECM can affect Trek" you said "I am ignoring ECM". Don't be a weasel and say "I never said I was ignoring Trek ECM", the question was clear, I asked you to prove that Wars ECM could affect Trek ECM or ignore it for both sides, and you said you were ignoring it.

But, because I cannot meet the burden of proof and didn't want to make the mistake of appealing to authority fallacy like I did before with the "90%" figure, I ask for assistance now in disproving the "ECM is unique" statement.

Err-what?

In translation, from the beginning I knew that your "Trek ECM doesn't affect Wars" and "Wars ECM doesn't affect Trek" was B.S. because I read DW's sensor page, but didn't have the technical know-how to prove it, so I conceded the point. If Wars ECM can affect Trek sensors, then similarly Trek ECM can affect Wars sensors, and we should just compare the magnitude of jamming. But I didn't have the technical know-how, so I just conceded the point because I didn't really think it mattered anyway since Trek can work to hundreds of thousands of kilometers without ECM.

Brian

[Batman]

That's right, because you have no evidence of them being able to target that far out. They should easily be able to hit large,stationary targets at those ranges. All an X-Wing needs to hit the lumbering Fed ships outside effective phaser range is a fucking telescope.

I have already calculated based on no ECM environment (like you wanted) 18k km on X-Wing profile on the side based on Alyeska's 3 meter squared 50 meter distant 100% accuracy figure. Do you want me to spell it out for you again?

Based on targets with Trek maneuvring and accelleration. Both of which the X-Wing far exceeds.

Now, with no ECM maximum range is one light-second.

Against a capship not maneuvring worth shit. NOT against a Spitfire-size target flitting all over the place at thousands of g's.

ECM lowers the effectiveness down to around 1 kilometer (being generous since we regularly see closer battles). Now that's 3e5/1 = x/6e-2 and we get 18k km.

Against capships prractically sitting still. When have we seen a one-ls attack hit a Peregrine leave alone a Spitfire-size target? Oh, and that one-ls range is photorps. By all means try to hit an X-Wing with a photorp. Really. I

Get it now? And for your speed argument to work, X-Wings would have to move faster than it would take for the phaser beam to lance out towards it.

No you blithering idiot. By your reasoning it is imposibble for an aircraft NOT to be unable to get a lock on another because it's missiles ar far faster than it. The X-Wing doesn't need to dodge the goddamn beam you retard. All it has to defeat is the phaser lock, which doesn't exactly have a stellar record.

I've shown fractional c phaser speed from "The Wounded". At least 1/4 c speed.

Totally irrelevant.

Who claims thousands of kilometres? Dozens of kilometres is easily enough for the Feds not to be able to accurately shoot back.

I have quantified Federation firepower in no ECM environment (like you wanted) up to 18k km for 100% accuracy on side profile of X-Wing.

Based on a formula that totally ignores the targets absurd maneuverability and accelleration advantage. This is not a lumbering Trek ship. Which this formula is based on. Your 1 ls range is for photorps. Against virtuallly nonmoving capships. And the X-Wing DOES have ECM. The Fed ship doesn't have any that will affect the X-Wings targetting sensors.

Pretend TNG "The Wounded" didn't exist.
"Star Trek ships have long-distance sensors because there are reasons for them to have them (even though they regularly fight at 1 kilometer ranges) like recon. Since phasers have never been seen to dissipate over range, and Star Trek ships have these long-range sensors, they can shoot up to X range."
Now replace Star Trek with Star Wars, and replace phasers with turbolasers, and you get your ad hoc explaination of Wars X-Wing weapons range. Get it? If I claimed the above quote, and The Wounded didn't exist, you would call me troll, idiot, moron, and whatever else you could think of.
All I am asking for is an example of X-Wing fighting at thousands of kilometers. Do you have this? No? Why do you have to keep resorting to this no limits fallacy, "electro-optical can work an unspecified distance so therefore X-Wings can fire at X kilometers."

:bangshead::bangshead: :bangshead:
Brian a fucking manportable telescope is enough to hit a Trek capship at those ranges. You already HAVE a 1000km targeting system range from ANH.

Sure you've changed from light-hour

For Wars weapon ranges. Never claimed X-Wings can do that.

to thousands of kilometers to now dozens of kilometers,

Hundreds, actually.

but changing the magnitude of your argument doesn't change how silly it is to claim such range without proof. Look at the quotation, replace Star Trek with Star Wars and phaser with turbolaser, and you get what you are saying.

So basically you want proof that an X-Wing's sensors are better than a modern-day telescope. Gotcha.

[brianeyci]

Based on targets with Trek maneuvring and accelleration. Both of which the X-Wing far exceeds.

No, it is based on a pinpoint strike on a life support computer. Maneuverability and acceleration you have never quantified, nor have you attempted to. Now how can I rebuttal your claim when you never ever quantify these figures? I give you the figure that Federation phasers can hit 600 m/s^2 targets, you give no figure whatsoever. How am I supposed to analyze your numbers and figures if you don't provide them?

Not that it matters, as I've shown fractional c speeds of phasers, which means maneuverability is pretty much a crapshot since the ship won't move fast enough to dodge the phaser.

Against capships prractically sitting still. When have we seen a one-ls attack hit a Peregrine leave alone a Spitfire-size target? Oh, and that one-ls range is photorps. By all means try to hit an X-Wing with a photorp. Really. I

What was that last part? For the first part, yes we have. Peregrine chassis is based on a Maquis raider, and Federation ships can hit Maquis. Then you'll bring up "X-Wing is more maneuverable than a Maquis" without any quantification at all. I know it is true, but give me quantification or your statement is just unsupported.

No you blithering idiot. By your reasoning it is imposibble for an aircraft NOT to be unable to get a lock on another because it's missiles ar far faster than it. The X-Wing doesn't need to dodge the goddamn beam you retard. All it has to defeat is the phaser lock, which doesn't exactly have a stellar record.

You're being stupid now. The reason why an aircraft cannot get a lock on another with a missile is because of predictability, which Alyeska mentioned is an important factor. Predictability is not maneuverability. If you want to talk about predictability, go right on ahead. If a plane flies right in front of another plane, no ECM (as you have wanted this to be about), and flies straight but really fast, lock. If an aircraft moves around a lot in a random fashion, it becomes unpredictable and more difficult to lock on.

Totally irrelevant.

It is not.

Based on a formula that totally ignores the targets absurd maneuverability and accelleration advantage. This is not a lumbering Trek ship. Which this formula is based on. Your 1 ls range is for photorps. Against virtuallly nonmoving capships. And the X-Wing DOES have ECM. The Fed ship doesn't have any that will affect the X-Wings targetting sensors.

Maneuverability is based on the X-Wing having enough time to react to the shot and dodging, fractional c speeds are at least as fast as the X-Wing's maneuverability. Acceleration as well. You are talking about predictability when you say that a lock may take time.

:bangshead::bangshead: :bangshead:
Brian a fucking manportable telescope is enough to hit a Trek capship at those ranges. You already HAVE a 1000km targeting system range from ANH.

Based on proton torpedoes, which may not be linked to X-Wing cannons. Trek also can make man-portable telescopes.

So basically you want proof that an X-Wing's sensors are better than a modern-day telescope. Gotcha.

You can't say that just because a telescope can work, X-Wing would work just because it is thousands of years more advanced. Example -- Federation can manufacture 50 MT nukes because it is in their history. Does that automatically mean their photon torpedoes are 50 MT? Of course not. The visual evidence disagrees. Now, the visual evidence disagrees with your proposal too, because we see X-Wings close to really close ranges. You have never tried to quantify the weapons range of an X-Wing in a no ECM environment. You have never given me any figures at all, just a vague analogy with EO sensors which may or may not apply.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Oh, and the one-light second distant is photorps, but with the rings representing weapons ranges, phasers still achieve fractional c velocities. As well, IIRC all we ever see Galors fire is phasers, so when the Cardassian ship fires on the Phoenix they are using phasers, and Federation phasers should be comparable in range to Cardassian phasers for them to be tactically equivalent.

Brian

[Batman]

Op states the Klingons do not have torpedoes.

Which has what exactly to ddo with their targeting systems?

Just because proton torpedoes can shoot up to 1k km that does not mean X-Wing cannons is supposed to shoot up to 1k km

Conceeded.

What are you blabbering about? You have 100 percent accuracy at 60 metres as the X-Wing clearly has ECM. Not that targeting percentages against lumbering Fed ships are relevant to far more maneuverable and fater targets.

See my above post for explaination of math. And don't fucking change the rules in the middle of the game. The X-Wing's ECM doesn't affect Trek like you said,

Too bad I never did that.

because "Trek ECM doesn't affect Wars and Wars ECM doesn't affect Trek" (your hypothesis, not mine, I conceded it even though I knew better because I couldn't meet the burden of proof)

Which I also never said.

so if you want to change your statement, concede the ECM point.

Fine, conceeded. Wars ECM WILL affect Trek targeting. Not vice versa.

Which I never said. I said Trek ECM would be ineffective against Wars sensors, thanks to their 25000 year tech advantage.

Don't be a liar. You told me "Prove that Trek ECM can affect Wars." Then I told you "Prove that Wars ECM can affect Trek." Then you said the following,

You're REALLY trying for that VI, Brian. I'm ignoring ECM because in this scenario it doesn't matter..

I AM ignoring ECM

I can say the fucking same thing. The X-Wings are not facing Trek ECM and therefore Trek ECM doesn't apply.

Agreed. As no Trek forces were around for ANH this is relevant why?

You never made clear that you were talking only about Trek ECM affecting Wars sensors, just one word "ECM". And later, you say "Agreed".

In a scenario where Trek ECM doesn't occur you airhead.[/quote] I WAS ignoring ECM for both sides because even WITHOUT ECM on the Wars side the Feds have no way in hell to hit an X-Wing at range. I never stated Wars ECM didn't affect Trek.

Don't be a liar and say you said that Wars ECM would be effective because of the 25k year tech advantage. You never said that.

I never said I said that. I brought it up as the reason WHY Wars ECM would be effective against Trek sensors. I never stated that they wouldn't. I merely ignored ECM because it wouldn't make a difference.

Go back and read your own posts, you never said that ever, you only said that Wars would be able to scan into subspace and never that Wars would be able to jam subspace sensors.

A jammer that doesn't afect your sensors. Yes that's REALLY useful.

You claimed vaguely that Wars would have "more advanced" subspace sensors, but you never brought up subspace jamming.

Because I made the mistake of expecting you to be able to think. WITHOUT subspace jamming in a universe with subspace sensors a jammer is moderately pointless.

If you were really only ignoring the affect of Trek ECM on Wars sensors, and not the affect of Wars ECM on Trek sensors, then why when I claim thousands of kilometer ranges did you not say "Nananananana Brian, Wars ECM can affect Trek."

Because it doesn't make a difference. Trek can't hit them either way.
However, if you insist in using a highly flawed targegeting propability projection formula, fine. Let's play the hard way.

Also you never claimed 25k year tech advantage for the ECM point, ever. Only a 25k year tech advantage and never brought up subspace jamming.

So? Subspace jamming is a natural part of jamming in a universe with subspace sensors. As for the 'never claimed 25k year tech advantage', so what? OF course I didn't what with me ignoring jamming for the time being. I would have continued to ignore it if you wouldn't cling to that completely baseless targeting formula so much.

IOW, Wars jamming Trek. Which I never contested. Does it say anything about Trek jamming Wars? No? Then I'm afraid you're SOL. Especially as we NEVER see visual jamming on Trek, and since X-Wing targeting sensors appear to be optical...

Of course you never contested it, but when I asked you "Prove that Wars ECM can affect Trek" you said "I am ignoring ECM". Don't be a weasel and say "I never said I was ignoring Trek ECM", the question was clear, I asked you to prove that Wars ECM could affect Trek ECM or ignore it for both sides, and you said you were ignoring it.

Indeed. I was ignoring it. When exactly did I say it wouldn't work? If it didn't, why would there be any need to ignore it in the first place?

But, because I cannot meet the burden of proof and didn't want to make the mistake of appealing to authority fallacy like I did before with the "90%" figure, I ask for assistance now in disproving the "ECM is unique" statement.

Err-what?

In translation, from the beginning I knew that your "Trek ECM doesn't affect Wars" and "Wars ECM doesn't affect Trek"

Second part of which I never stated...

was B.S. because I read DW's sensor page,

Which doesn't say beans about Wars ECM not affecting Trek sensors.

but didn't have the technical know-how to prove it, so I conceded the point. If Wars ECM can affect Trek sensors, then similarly Trek ECM can affect Wars sensors,

Because of? No evidence of visual jamming in Trek. No mention of visual jamming in Trek. Trek can not jam hyperspace sensors because they don't know about hyperspace. 25K year tech advantage.

and we should just compare the magnitude of jamming

Which for optical targeting in Trek is none whatsoever.

But I didn't have the technical know-how, so I just conceded the point because I didn't really think it mattered anyway since Trek can work to hundreds of thousands of kilometers without ECM.

With photorps against lumering capships.

[seanrobertson]

We know of Warbird, and we know of D7. They reveal Warbird much later, and Picard would not have been surprised to see the Warbird in later episodes if he encounters it in this episode.

Before I press forward, let me be perfectly clear on this point: you are asserting the "Romulan battlecruisers" had to be D7s, correct?

Data does not explicitly say that the outpost is not under attack, you are correct. But, Data says he has calculated the time the outpost can safely "withstand" a Romulan attack.

He did, but you're jumping to conclusions.

The quote, once more:

To be precise, Commander, you
ordered me to reach the Neutral
Zone "before it is too late."

I have computed the length of time
the border outpost and USS Berlin
can safely withstand a Romulan
attack... deducted our time to
destination at maximum warp speed.

That leaves Doctor Crusher with
forty-eight more minutes to
complete her research and develop
an innoculant to the virus.

This means Enterprise needed to leave for the Neutral Zone in no more than 48 minutes. Data's estimates concerning the outpost's endurance and/or the E-D's transit time to the Neutral Zone remain undefined. Don't assume those things are so closely related simply because he mentioned them in the same breath.

A rough analogy I'd like you to consider: assume that it is 4 p.m., and I have a date at 6. Further assume that my date, a peerless ball-buster, would take great offense if I am more than 5 minutes late.

Finally, imagine that she's very far away from me--we'll say a 1.5 hour drive. (Thank God this isn't real. I hate distance dating enough as is.) Consequently, I must leave here no later than 4:35--35 minutes from now.

However, I must answer e-mail before I leave. Some friends haven't heard from me in some time; should I fail to reach them again today, they'll likely be insulted. Unfortunately, I'm not sure 35 minutes will be enough to write them all.

In Dataspeak:

To be precise, my illusory, testicular
region-wrenching female companion
ordered me to reach the Dating Zone
"before it is too late."

I have computed the length of time she will
safely suffer my tardiness, and deducted my
time to destination at speed limit-friendly velocities.

That leaves me thirty-five more minutes
during which I can interface with my computer
and generate "innoculating" e-mails to
circumvent the possibility of becoming the
target of my friends' exasperations.

Do you follow? 35 minutes has no bearing on how long this overly-punctual woman would "endure" my lateness. Similarly, 48 min. has nothing to do with the outpost's or Berlin's nigh-indefatigable defenses, and so on.

But, Data says he has calculated the time the outpost can safely "withstand" a Romulan attack. For your intepretation to work, Data would have to know exactly when the Romulans planned to attack.

What, exactly, do you think my interpretation is?

For example, Data knows the Romulans would attack in 40 minutes. Then Data knows the outpost can survive for eight minutes. But Data does not know when the Romulans will attack. Therefore the only way Data can come up with a 48 minute figure is if the outpost is already under attack, even though Data does not explicitly say so. This assumes the Battlecruisers are in weapons range.

Whoa, whoa--hang on a minute. Now you're saying the outpost was already under attack?

Stop and think about that for a minute. Do you realize the problems with what you're suggesting?

1--A Federation outpost and starship, "outgunned" and outnumbered 3.5 to 1 by a dangerous enemy, were under attack. The Enterprise crew, fully aware of the outpost's difficulties, decided that about another hour's worth of doughnut-cutting around Angel One was more important.

Don't mistakenly dismiss that as an appeal to ridicule. Think about it: rather than simply leave Riker's away team at Angel One (which, while not Risaesque, posed little threat to the Cmdr.'s team) and get to the Neutral Zone ASAP, the Enterprise was prepared to orbit Angel for damn near 50 more minutes while that outpost and a Federation starship faced uncertain, but very likely unpleasant, fates.

To be blunt, why in the fuck would Riker et al. be so cavalier--so wreckless with other human lives? I imagine you'd agree that, in spite of their many flaws, Riker and company weren't that abominable.

2--This outpost must be remarkably tough. Even when DS9 was up against a roughly equal force (e.g., v. Gowron's task force in "WOTW"), I don't remember it holding up for over 48 minutes. And that's to say nothing of the station's endurance opposite a superior force a'la "Angel One."

And yes, I said well over 48 minutes for a reason. It brings us to...

3--Even if I momentarily assume your interpretation is partially correct, remember that Data gave Crusher 48 minutes to develop that innoculation. When that time was up, innoculation or no, the Enterprise was going to leave Angel One for the Neutral Zone.

Thus, unless you're ready to suggest that the Enterprise could warp from Angel One to this Neutral Zone outpost near-instantaneously, the [already ridiculous] 48 min. is a lower-limit: it doesn't include the E-D's travel time!

4--Since when have any starships, Romulan or otherwise, bombarded space stations from range? I don't remember any such tactics in "WOTW" or "Call To Arms."

5--Later in the season ("The Neutral Zone"), we're told:

RIKER
There's been no direct contact
with the Romulans since the Tomed
Incident.


PICARD
...For half a century there's barely a whisper
about them and now for no apparent
reason they seem to be back with
a roar. Why?


RIKER
This first encounter... coming
so suddenly after all this time.
There's a very good chance it's
a setup.


DATA
Since there has been no contact
with the Romulans for fifty-three
years, seven months, eighteen
days, we must consider that the
information we do have, is out
of date.


PICARD
Prepare as always. If force is
needed we will use it, but that
will mean we have failed. Our
goal here is to establish some
kind of relations with the
Romulans -- failing that -- to
convince them of our resolve and
to do this without resorting to
force. Right now, the general
feeling is that they are seeking
a confrontation. They may want
to test themselves in battle
against a Federation starship to
gauge how much we have advanced.

Curious that the Romulans want to "test themselves in battle against a Federation starship" after fighting that outpost and USS Berlin months earlier.

More curious still is that the highest-ranking officers on the Federation's flagship were all so stupid as to drone on about Romulans' 50-year long isolationism when it obviously ended months before.

We know that photorps can fire from hundreds of thousands of kilometers distant, and thus the D7's lasting 48 minutes by virtue of them pounding on the colony's shields and staying out of range of their weapons is not inconsistent with the D7's endurance.

How so? Please be specific.

Yes very good, but in the thread I read Brandon Bray calculates 600 m/s to be a lower limit for photon torpedo speed actually.

Oh, okay. That might be a little generous--I think I've seen 'em slower--but that's no big deal.

You can't hotlink the image, use your university account or maybe photobucket everybody seems to use =D.

Indeed. My carelessness often proves embarrassing...

And the Maurader didn't have cloak, or didn't appear to, so we can't assume it did.

Correct. I'm not disputing that; my comment was, in the purest sense, the "nitpick" it was labelled

[Batman]

Based on targets with Trek maneuvring and accelleration. Both of which the X-Wing far exceeds.

No, it is based on a pinpoint strike on a life support computer.

*sigh*
On a ship with Trek accelleration and maneuvring.

Maneuverability and acceleration you have never quantified, nor have you attempted to. Now how can I rebuttal your claim when you never ever quantify these figures?

How many more mentions of 1000s of g's of accelleration do you want for Valen's sake?

I give you the figure that Federation phasers can hit 600 m/s^2 targets, you give no figure whatsoever. How am I supposed to analyze your numbers and figures if you don't provide them?

How many more mentions of thousands of g's do you want? So now it's 600m/second squared, eh? Based on what? Oh, that's a grand total of 60g's. I'm flaberghasted.

Not that it matters, as I've shown fractional c speeds of phasers, which means maneuverability is pretty much a crapshot since the ship won't move fast enough to dodge the phaser.

Which it doesn't have to. All it has to do is deny you a targetting lock.

Against capships prractically sitting still. When have we seen a one-ls attack hit a Peregrine leave alone a Spitfire-size target? Oh, and that one-ls range is photorps. By all means try to hit an X-Wing with a photorp. Really. I

What was that last part? For the first part, yes we have. Peregrine chassis is based on a Maquis raider, and Federation ships can hit Maquis.

At one ls? Really? Where, pray tell?

Then you'll bring up "X-Wing is more maneuverable than a Maquis" without any quantification at all. I know it is true, but give me quantification or your statement is just unsupported.

How many more mentions of 1000s of g's do you want?

No you blithering idiot. By your reasoning it is imposibble for an aircraft NOT to be unable to get a lock on another because it's missiles ar far faster than it. The X-Wing doesn't need to dodge the goddamn beam you retard. All it has to defeat is the phaser lock, which doesn't exactly have a stellar record.

You're being stupid now.

One of us certainly is. I doubt it's me, though.

The reason why an aircraft cannot get a lock on another with a missile is because of predictability, which Alyeska mentioned is an important factor.

But by no means the only one.

Predictability is not maneuverability.

Thank you for that astonishing bit of insight.

If you want to talk about predictability, go right on ahead. If a plane flies right in front of another plane, no ECM (as you have wanted this to be about), and flies straight but really fast, lock.

And promptly fail to get that lock as the target's speed changes dramatically in a very short time. You know, accelleration. The target suddnly isn't where your sensors expected it to be. Oops.

If an aircraft moves around a lot in a random fashion, it becomes unpredictable and more difficult to lock on.

Why don't you plug the accellerations derived from the movies into the maneuverability shown in them and come back at me about predictability.

Totally irrelevant.

It is not.

What a striking rebuttal.

Based on a formula that totally ignores the targets absurd maneuverability and accelleration advantage. This is not a lumbering Trek ship. Which this formula is based on. Your 1 ls range is for photorps. Against virtuallly nonmoving capships. And the X-Wing DOES have ECM. The Fed ship doesn't have any that will affect the X-Wings targetting sensors.

Maneuverability is based on the X-Wing having enough time to react to the shot and dodging, fractional c speeds are at least as fast as the X-Wing's maneuverability

Complete and utter garbage. The X-Wing does not have to dodge the beam any more than an F-16 has to dodge the fucking enemy's fucking missile idf it can deny him a target lock.

Acceleration as well. You are talking about predictability when you say that a lock may take time.

No, I'm saying Trek targeting systems are unable to compensate for 1000's of g's worth of accel on such small a target.

:bangshead::bangshead: :bangshead:
Brian a fucking manportable telescope is enough to hit a Trek capship at those ranges. You already HAVE a 1000km targeting system range from ANH.

Based on proton torpedoes, which may not be linked to X-Wing cannons. Trek also can make man-portable telescopes.

Already conceeded the targeting computer. Trek apparently doesn't use visual targeting.

So basically you want proof that an X-Wing's sensors are better than a modern-day telescope. Gotcha.

You can't say that just because a telescope can work, X-Wing would work just because it is thousands of years more advanced. Example -- Federation can manufacture 50 MT nukes because it is in their history. Does that automatically mean their photon torpedoes are 50 MT?

No, because all the evidence in existence shows that not being the case.

Of course not. The visual evidence disagrees. Now, the visual evidence disagrees with your proposal too, because we see X-Wings close to really close ranges.

The evidence ALSO shows that somehow, Wars can jam visual sensors without the expected clearly visible phenomena. Hence the need to get this close.
The evidence does NOT show that Trek can.

You have never tried to quantify the weapons range of an X-Wing in a no ECM environment. You have never given me any figures at all, just a vague analogy with EO sensors which may or may not apply.

Vague anology. Yeah. Sure.

[brianeyci]

Before I press forward, let me be perfectly clear on this point: you are asserting the "Romulan battlecruisers" had to be D7s, correct?

They don't have to be D-7's. But seeding reasonable doubt is not a theory. The theory that the Battlecruisers are D-7's is superior because it explains why Picard was later surprised at the appearance of a Warbird talking about them "showing themselves", and we know of no other classes of Battlecruiser. Ship hulls regularly last hundreds of years in Trek as the Miranda, Constitution in BOBW, and so on. Just need a little spit-shine every now and then.

He did, but you're jumping to conclusions.

The quote, once more:

To be precise, Commander, you
ordered me to reach the Neutral
Zone "before it is too late."

I have computed the length of time
the border outpost and USS Berlin
can safely withstand a Romulan
attack... deducted our time to
destination at maximum warp speed.

That leaves Doctor Crusher with
forty-eight more minutes to
complete her research and develop
an innoculant to the virus.

This means Enterprise needed to leave for the Neutral Zone in no more than 48 minutes. Data's estimates concerning the outpost's endurance and/or the E-D's transit time to the Neutral Zone remain undefined. Don't assume those things are so closely related simply because he mentioned them in the same breath.

Well the only other explaination is that Data knew when the Romulans would attack. Because we know nothing about the location of the Romulan Battlecruisers, we cannot assume that Data meant "40 minutes until Romulan Battlecruisers get to colony, 8 minutes the colony can last" and the most elegant explaination is that the colony is already under attack. Seeding reasonable doubt is not a theory. This theory is most elegant and introduces least extra variables.

A rough analogy I'd like you to consider: assume that it is 4 p.m., and I have a date at 6. Further assume that my date, a peerless ball-buster, would take great offense if I am more than 5 minutes late.

Finally, imagine that she's very far away from me--we'll say a 1.5 hour drive. (Thank God this isn't real. I hate distance dating enough as is.) Consequently, I must leave here no later than 4:35--35 minutes from now.

However, I must answer e-mail before I leave. Some friends haven't heard from me in some time; should I fail to reach them again today, they'll likely be insulted. Unfortunately, I'm not sure 35 minutes will be enough to write them all.

In Dataspeak:

To be precise, my illusory, testicular
region-wrenching female companion
ordered me to reach the Dating Zone
"before it is too late."

I have computed the length of time she will
safely suffer my tardiness, and deducted my
time to destination at speed limit-friendly velocities.

That leaves me thirty-five more minutes
during which I can interface with my computer
and generate "innoculating" e-mails to
circumvent the possibility of becoming the
target of my friends' exasperations.

Do you follow? 35 minutes has no bearing on how long this overly-punctual woman would "endure" my lateness. Similarly, 48 min. has nothing to do with the outpost's or Berlin's nigh-indefatigable defenses, and so on.

It does, because by saying the Romulans are waiting or out of sensor range however probable and plausible you have no proof for, so therefore the theory with the least excess variables is the best. We know nothing about Romulan negotiations, Romulans being distant from the colony, and so on. Therefore, using Occam's Razor tells us 48 minutes withstanding an attack is the most elegant solution. Seeding reasonable doubt, as you have, is not a theory. You need evidence to support that Data knew the Romulans would wait, or evidence that Data knew the distance of the ships to the colony, so on.

What, exactly, do you think my interpretation is?

That the Romulans attack later, and the 48 minutes is some sort of addition of different periods other than an attack.

1--A Federation outpost and starship, "outgunned" and outnumbered 3.5 to 1 by a dangerous enemy, were under attack. The Enterprise crew, fully aware of the outpost's difficulties, decided that about another hour's worth of doughnut-cutting around Angel One was more important.

Perfectly acceptable if Data knew the shield strength of the colony.

Don't mistakenly dismiss that as an appeal to ridicule. Think about it: rather than simply leave Riker's away team at Angel One (which, while not Risaesque, posed little threat to the Cmdr.'s team) and get to the Neutral Zone ASAP, the Enterprise was prepared to orbit Angel for damn near 50 more minutes while that outpost and a Federation starship faced uncertain, but very likely unpleasant, fates.

To be blunt, why in the fuck would Riker et al. be so cavalier--so wreckless with other human lives? I imagine you'd agree that, in spite of their many flaws, Riker and company weren't that abominable.

Perfectly acceptable if the colony's shields are related to the 48 minute figure.

2--This outpost must be remarkably tough. Even when DS9 was up against a roughly equal force (e.g., v. Gowron's task force in "WOTW"), I don't remember it holding up for over 48 minutes. And that's to say nothing of the station's endurance opposite a superior force a'la "Angel One."

DS9 is not a Federation colony.

And yes, I said well over 48 minutes for a reason. It brings us to...

3--Even if I momentarily assume your interpretation is partially correct, remember that Data gave Crusher 48 minutes to develop that innoculation. When that time was up, innoculation or no, the Enterprise was going to leave Angel One for the Neutral Zone.

Thus, unless you're ready to suggest that the Enterprise could warp from Angel One to this Neutral Zone outpost near-instantaneously, the [already ridiculous] 48 min. is a lower-limit: it doesn't include the E-D's travel time!

Good point. Travel time may add a little bit or a lot of time, depending on the distance to the colony. As we don't know the distance, you can't use it as a counter-argument because it can just as easily be one light year or fifty light years. If you knew the distance was really far, then you'd have a case.

4--Since when have any starships, Romulan or otherwise, bombarded space stations from range? I don't remember any such tactics in "WOTW" or "Call To Arms."

Klingons close to really close so that they can board DS9 with transporters. We know of hundred of thousand kilometer ranges from "The Wounded." A colony is not a space station.

5--Later in the season ("The Neutral Zone"), we're told:

RIKER
There's been no direct contact
with the Romulans since the Tomed
Incident.


PICARD
...For half a century there's barely a whisper
about them and now for no apparent
reason they seem to be back with
a roar. Why?


RIKER
This first encounter... coming
so suddenly after all this time.
There's a very good chance it's
a setup.


DATA
Since there has been no contact
with the Romulans for fifty-three
years, seven months, eighteen
days, we must consider that the
information we do have, is out
of date.


PICARD
Prepare as always. If force is
needed we will use it, but that
will mean we have failed. Our
goal here is to establish some
kind of relations with the
Romulans -- failing that -- to
convince them of our resolve and
to do this without resorting to
force. Right now, the general
feeling is that they are seeking
a confrontation. They may want
to test themselves in battle
against a Federation starship to
gauge how much we have advanced.

Curious that the Romulans want to "test themselves in battle against a Federation starship" after fighting that outpost and USS Berlin months earlier.

More curious still is that the highest-ranking officers on the Federation's flagship were all so stupid as to drone on about Romulans' 50-year long isolationism when it obviously ended months before.

This can be explained as the Romulans testing their newest designs, and Picard thinking that they've never seen a Romulan ship, only those Klingon ones. The Romulans using D7's means they retain their secrecy of their Warbird (which is what I suggested), explaining this dialogue.

How so? Please be specific.

"The Wounded" shows hundred of thousand kilometer ranges. Now D-7's shooting torpedoes, makes sense, since the colony could not either shoot the D-7's down as easily because they are not a stationary target, while the colony is stationary. If a D-7 can be taken out by lets say five photon torpedoes from what we see in "WOTW", then this presents a problem with the 48 minute figure if the colony is defended. I propose that the D-7's move around, dance in and out of range and fire their own photorps, or bombard from far distant and thus solve this endurance problem to be consistent with the 48 minute shield hypothesis.

Oh, okay. That might be a little generous--I think I've seen 'em slower--but that's no big deal.

I can give you linky if you want, there's some interesting stuff there including hypothesis that photon torpedoes are canonballs, the most elegant theory I've seen.

Indeed. My carelessness often proves embarrassing...

I'm careless a lot too.

Correct. I'm not disputing that; my comment was, in the purest sense, the "nitpick" it was labelled

Lol okay.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Okay Batman, I am getting tired of the debate because we are running in circles. First we use a no-ECM environment, and then for four pages talk like that, and then you go about face and then say Wars can jam Trek sensors meaning the past four pages of debate are meaningless. Why didn't you make your argument clearer before? I have some ideas about how to debate the ECM argument, but I have decided to play my final card in hopes of ending this thread quickly. You're probably tired of this thread too, so here it goes.

Okay, Klingons are as good as any pilots as the op creator states. But he does not state that the Klingons would violate their character. They can be good pilots, as good as any pilots which one assumes refers to a standard Federation Peregrine pilot, and still stay in-character.

We know of hundreds of thousand kilometer torpedo ranges. Klingons close to point-blank range to attack DS9, despite the Klingons being able to bombard it from afar.

Klingons in many Dominion battles regularly use ramming tactics.

Other engagements with Klingons show that they like to get up close and personal, probably because they want a chance to ram if their ship gets fucked. Everything from Klingon capital ships to their BOP ram IIRC.

So, even if the Klingons are able to fight the ST capital ships from the distances you're talking about, they would get up close and personal so that they could ram.

Good enough? Klingons would not shoot from a distance where their opponent could not strike back. That is dishonorable. Fucking Klingons use melee weapons. That and the ramming should be enough to convince you that Klingons would do close quarters combat with the ST ships. A change in technology does not automatically mean a wholesale change in tactics -- that's like saying if you give Klingons blasters they'll suddenly start using them rather than Bat'leths. And like Silence and I said, close quarters gives a fighter craft a lot of options long distance does not, and allows the fighter craft to be far less predictable.

And I have never disputed that X-Wings would be useful. Combined arms with BOP and X-Wing would be great, as it would give the Klingons a more than sufficient counter to the Peregrine. Of course the Klingons would use X-Wings, but just because they have X-Wings it does not mean they would be able to run rampant across the Federation given their tactics.

Game over.

Brian

[Batman]

Okay Batman, I am getting tired of the debate because we are running in circles. First we use a no-ECM environment, and then for four pages talk like that, and then you go about face and then say Wars can jam Trek sensors meaning the past four pages of debate are meaningless.Why didn't you make your argument clearer before?

Why don'T YOU use an inapplicable hit rate projection theory? If you're obstinate, I',m obstinate.

Okay, Klingons are as good as any pilots as the op creator states. But he does not state that the Klingons would violate their character. They can be good pilots, as good as any pilots which one assumes refers to a standard Federation Peregrine pilot, and still stay in-character.

Let me guess. You're about to claim they won't use the X-wings superior capabilities . Oh please.

We know of hundreds of thousand kilometer torpedo ranges. Klingons close to point-blank range to attack DS9, despite the Klingons being able to bombard it from afar.

Oh, now this is a no-ECM environment too? Of course. The Feds install a shitload of weapons but somehow don't bother to give DS9 jammers. Yeah, right.

Klingons in many Dominion battles regularly use ramming tactics.

Good. Ramming with a craft capable of 1000s of g's of accelleration is going to do a shitload of damage.

Other engagements with Klingons show that they like to get up close and personal, probably because they want a chance to ram if their ship gets fucked.

Or maybe because of ECM?

Everything from Klingon capital ships to their BOP ram IIRC.

So they ram with X-Wings, too. Your point?

So, even if the Klingons are able to fight the ST capital ships from the distances you're talking about, they would get up close and personal so that they could ram.

And as Trek has never shown the ability to track targets that fast and maneuverable that only means the Klingons will lose X-Wings at a staggering rate, NOT that the Feds can shoot them down. Not that the Klingons had a choice in any of your scenarios since thanks to ECM they had to get up close and personal.

Good enough? Klingons would not shoot from a distance where their opponent could not strike back.

As evidenced by what? Trek is lousy with incidents of Klingons disregarding that supid honour system of theirs. They usually get up close and personal because ECM denies them the long-range approach.
But fine, let's assume they DO. Evidence of Trek hitting Spitfire-size accellerating at 1000s of g's targets at single-digit kilometre ranges, please.

That is dishonorable. Fucking Klingons use melee weapons.

In ship-to-ship combat? Well, I guess you could call ramming that...

That and the ramming should be enough to convince you that Klingons would do close quarters combat with the ST ships.

No, as the presence of ECM forces them to go to knifefighting range.
Not that I think Trek has much of a chance of hitting them even at km ranges.

A change in technology does not automatically mean a wholesale change in tactics -- that's like saying if you give Klingons blasters they'll suddenly start using them rather than Bat'leths.

Their ship-to-ship tactics are dictated by the need to go to close range thanks to ECM. Not that I think the Feds can hit them at close range, mind you. For the record, yes, the Klingoffs might actually be stupid enough to close to knifefighting range with the Feds. I mean they regularly lose to Starfleet. How much more pathetic does it get?

And like Silence and I said, close quarters gives a fighter craft a lot of options long distance does not, and allows the fighter craft to be far less predictable.

Sorry, no. No basis for that whatsoever.

And I have never disputed that X-Wings would be useful. Combined arms with BOP and X-Wing would be great, as it would give the Klingons a more than sufficient counter to the Peregrine. Of course the Klingons would use X-Wings, but just because they have X-Wings it does not mean they would be able to run rampant across the Federation given their tactics.

As the Feds still can't target them, yes. Unless you want to claim that the Klingon's wouldn't use the X-Wings superior capabilities because it's 'dishonourable' (they seem to have no qualms using their cloaking technology).

[The Silence and I]

They have mostly fixed weapons in the forward arc--to hit the distant Federation ship the pilot MUST be pointing his nose at that ship within a few degrees of play room.

Agreed.What he does not need to do is actually fly in that direction as X-Wings have been shown to rotate around their z-axis without changing direction.

Newtonian maneuvering? Let me guess: EU right?
Not supported by the movies--any of them. Ever wonder why a pilot, desperately trying to get a TIE off his tail, mere moments from certain death with little to loose, has never fired thrusters and spun around to face the TIE? I do not find your counter supportable--and even more relevent: Even assuming these X-Wings can spin on their Z axis without affecting velocity they will not be able to accelerate laterally relative to their target. Simply put: If their centerline is pointing at the target they can manage limited acceleration away from this centerline. And velocity has no bearing on weapon targeting, only accel.

Basically, in order to fire on the Federation ship at long range the X-Wing needs to expose itself to return fire.

Which has not a chance in hell of hitting it.

Right now I see two ways to break up this concern of yours; Time For Weapon Lock, and Ability To Hit Small Objects, addressed in order.

As of Nemesis phaser and torpedo lock can be achieved in significantly less than a second. The opening Enterprise E volley: Phaser spread lashes out, one beam strikes the Scimitar. One more strikes immediately after, probably a lucky hit. There is a pause of 12 frames between the first frame of the first hit and the first frame of 5 more beams, followed by torpedoes. The phasers then need to recharge and stop firing.

Based on this evidence I feel confident claiming Federation tactical systems can achieve phaser lock within the time an X-Wing pilot needs to make his attack run.

Next is Ability To Hit Small Objects.
The Enterprise D is able to target and hit precise ground locations from geosync orbit (~40,000 km). The episode name escapes me, but precise phaser drilling was needed to relieve geological stresses or something like that. In "THE PRICE" the Enterprise, flat footed at the time, targets and destroys a Ferengi missile. It is unlikely a missle will be even half the size of an X-Wing, and it was destroyed at great range (The missile was heading for the wormhole and nearly arrived before the Enterprise destroyed it. They were dozens of km away at the least, if only for practical reasons).

What this means is a small window is enough for phaser lock, and those phasers can hit a small target at great range. With those requirements met, there is nothing stopping the Feds from getting near misses and hits while an X-Wing is making a relatively predicable attack run.

At close range you lose the speed but you can do something very important: deny the Federation ship the time to obtain phaser lock, simply by flying circles around it.

The X-Wing can do that at range, too. Given that the window for the Feds to shoot back is a second or two either way, I fail to see why this is a problem.

Unless the range is 100s of km, the Fed's window, counting phaser propagation time, will be enough to return fire. And with the ability to fill an area with fire (Nemesis) a "perfect" lock isn't necessary. I think it goes without saying it will take many brief attack runs to take down captital shielding, and that means many chances to get "close enough."

Further more, based on X-Wing scanners they probably cannot engage at more than ~1000 km, so phaser propagation time will on the order of 1E-3 seconds (assuming 1/3 c or thereabouts). An X-Wing on full burn can still dodge that beam (barely), but on an attack run, lateral accel will be very low for at least 1-2 seconds in all likelyness. Lateral speed means nothing. At that range, an attack run requires a small window of vulnerability. Federation ships can target and hit objects that size within that window. Depending on the amount of lateral accel present (it will be low but there can still be some) a phaser lock will either hit quickly or after a few tries. But the Fed ship can wait until it gets lucky.

At long range you can deny phaser lock by using huge velocity and acceleration, but you cannot fire unless you give up that advantage.

Wrong.

Wrong and wrong (if I may be so bold worded). Wrong because newtonian maneuvering exists purely in the EU, and wrong because even if it didn't the main engines cannot provide the needed accel along an axis significantly off the centerline.

Make sense?

I'm afraid not.

well that sucks

I'll summarize:

1) X-Wings cannot perform Z axis rotation like that
2) If they could it would not make or break the battle. The moment they twist around to face to target they lose lateral acceleration. 0.5 seconds later phasers come their way.
3) Phasers post DS9 have been observed achieving lock in about 1/2 second.
4) Phasers are known to be capable of hitting X-Wing sized targets at long range.
5) X-Wing scanners indicate possible maximum targeting range of 1000 km, well within known phaser potential combat range. Also allows phaser propagation to be considered nearly immediate; only full or near full accel can avoid accurate return fire at this range.
6) Phaser fire volume is known to be very high potentially. Rapid refire increased odds of scoring a direct hit.


Uhg. I hate long posts like these. Take too long to type.

One last point Batman for this post:

We have been going on and on about X-Wing maneuvering and accel, but it should be remembered Federation sublight accel might be superior, and certainly is within an order of magnitude (depending on how they feel about it--it's a per-episode kind of thing).
BOBW II, the Enterprise requires IIRC 6-7 order magnitude accel to intercept the Borg. "Booby Trap," a 'microsecond' of impulse burn gives the ship 135 m/s for an accel of 1.35E8 m/s^2. Even a millisecond (longest it can be within Geordi's wording) gives 1.35E5 m/s^2. Shuttles often display crazy ass accel etc.

Whatever their accel is, it is very high when not countered by opposing vessels, and a lone X-Wing lacks the power (or the warp drives) to slow down a Federation capital ship. Hell, even The Wounded offers high accel; the Phoenix is zig-zagging all over the place on a map where 300,000 km is relatively small. If the Federation ship needs to close the range, I think it can. At the very least it can take evasive maneuvers--at that range (1000+ km) even the X-Wing will miss for all the same reasons.

[brianeyci]

We have been going on and on about X-Wing maneuvering and accel, but it should be remembered Federation sublight accel might be superior, and certainly is within an order of magnitude (depending on how they feel about it--it's a per-episode kind of thing).
BOBW II, the Enterprise requires IIRC 6-7 order magnitude accel to intercept the Borg. "Booby Trap," a 'microsecond' of impulse burn gives the ship 135 m/s for an accel of 1.35E8 m/s^2. Even a millisecond (longest it can be within Geordi's wording) gives 1.35E5 m/s^2. Shuttles often display crazy ass accel etc.

I have already brought the 1.35e5 m/s^2 figure, but Batman ignored it.

Brian

[Batman]

Argh. Those monster posts are getting out of hand.

1. EU shown X-Wings doing Z-axis rotation. Nothing in the movies to override it.
2. Nemesis does not require them to get a phaser lock period. Chances are they did, but that does not neccessarily follow, as all the needed to do was fire down the same direction that happened to connect. Was at point-blank range, a capship, at ridiculously low relative velocities. Doesn't say beans about Spitfire size targets at 100s of km changing speed like mad.
3.Geosynchronus orbit shot. Is against a stationary target. Your not shooting at a lock, your shooting at set of grid coordinates. By your reasoning if the Iowa can hit a specific house in a city block, it therefore can hit a same-size aircraft in flight.
4. The Price-missile is likely moving in a straight line and was going how fast?
Does not indicate ability to hit maneuvering target. A dozen or two km is no great range in a space fight. BTW, modern SAMs can do that too, and at greater ranges...
5. 'Many' attack runs. 20KT per second, 12 X-Wing squadron, 240KT per attack run. Range is in excess of 100km. Depends on how you define many I guess.
6. Phaser Death Blossom. Improves their odds but not by much. Assuming they fill a 10° cone around the X-wing, at a measly 1 km range assuming facing of 12 m^2 for the X-Wing requires ca 2000 shots in 1 second into that cone. 1 km is well inside heavy ECM fighter-vs range for X-Wings
Goes down to 19 or so for 1-degree cone. At a single kilometre.
Goes up to 80 at 2 km, still X-Wing heavy ECM fighter-vs range.
Death Blossom doesn't make a difference.
7. BOBW pt2 is useless as evidence as that was either FTL and/or time dilated. Crossing that distance in the stated time is impossible STL.
8. 'Booby Trap' accel depends entirely on dialogue. Observed impulse burn time? Doesn't make a difference either way. Did somebody shoot at and hit the Enterprise during that? No? Doesn't say beans about being able tock lock and track, then. At best this denies the X-Wing the ability to target the Feds, IF they choose to make use of the ability. Which we never see them do.

[brianeyci]

Argh. Those monster posts are getting out of hand.

My thought earlier. Why didn't you just concede that Klingons would use ramming and therefore wouldn't have that great of an advantage? I don't want to run into Silence's territory since he is debating you right now, but I'll try with shorter post this time so its easy to reply.

1. EU shown X-Wings doing Z-axis rotation. Nothing in the movies to override it.

Unless you suppose that pilots in the movies are stupid and don't use thrusters to rotate around to kill whoever is tracking them.

2. Nemesis does not require them to get a phaser lock period. Chances are they did, but that does not neccessarily follow, as all the needed to do was fire down the same direction that happened to connect. Was at point-blank range, a capship, at ridiculously low relative velocities. Doesn't say beans about Spitfire size targets at 100s of km changing speed like mad.

Batman, this is what you do.

When somebody mentions accuracy, you mention maneuverability.

When someone mentions maneuverability, you mention accuracy.

You simply cannot combine maneuverability, accuracy, predictability, acceleration and speed into one analysis. You have to break it down into parts like Silence is. Silence says it takes one second to achieve phaser lock against targets which accelerate at 1.35e5 m/s^2. Then you reply with maneuverability, or ability to move off-axis. Wtf? You have to break down the points.

3.Geosynchronus orbit shot. Is against a stationary target. Your not shooting at a lock, your shooting at set of grid coordinates. By your reasoning if the Iowa can hit a specific house in a city block, it therefore can hit a same-size aircraft in flight.

Main battleship guns (what you're referring to?) cannot hit aircraft by their nature not because they are too inaccurate, so your analogy is flawed. Phasers can hit both ground and air targets.

4. The Price-missile is likely moving in a straight line and was going how fast?
Does not indicate ability to hit maneuvering target. A dozen or two km is no great range in a space fight. BTW, modern SAMs can do that too, and at greater ranges...

You have to break it up. You can't counter "size" with "maneuverability" and then "maneuverability" with "size". They can hit ships that small size, means they can achieve a lock on a small sized ship. Then deal with accuracy separately. You keep wanting to combine all factors, maneuverability, accuracy, size, speed, acceleration into one factor and use each component to rebuttal the other, which is ridiculous.

5. 'Many' attack runs. 20KT per second, 12 X-Wing squadron, 240KT per attack run. Range is in excess of 100km. Depends on how you define many I guess.

The Klingons will not be able to maintain a 12 to 1 advantage on virtue of BOP being as expensive as X-Wings. Use combined arms, and you have even less X-Wings. I'd say 2 or 3 to one, at most.

6. Phaser Death Blossom. Improves their odds but not by much. Assuming they fill a 10° cone around the X-wing, at a measly 1 km range assuming facing of 12 m^2 for the X-Wing requires ca 2000 shots in 1 second into that cone. 1 km is well inside heavy ECM fighter-vs range for X-Wings.

Depends on how heavily the Klingons concentrate their X-Wings. From Dominion war, BOP fly in tight formation closely together.

Goes down to 19 or so for 1-degree cone. At a single kilometre.
Goes up to 80 at 2 km, still X-Wing heavy ECM fighter-vs range.
Death Blossom doesn't make a difference.

Again, depends on how they concentrate their X-Wings.

7. BOBW pt2 is useless as evidence as that was either FTL and/or time dilated. Crossing that distance in the stated time is impossible STL.

No it isn't, its called suspension of disbelief. They dropped out of warp in the system. No evidence it was FTL so it is STL since we see evidence of that. By your reasoning, we should just disregard everything we've said because it is all impossible by STL. Impulse is not Newtonian as you have pointed out many times yourself. Do you have any contradictory evidence to this acceleration? No, then too bad its canon.

8. 'Booby Trap' accel depends entirely on dialogue. Observed impulse burn time? Doesn't make a difference either way. Did somebody shoot at and hit the Enterprise during that? No? Doesn't say beans about being able tock lock and track, then. At best this denies the X-Wing the ability to target the Feds, IF they choose to make use of the ability. Which we never see them do.

Again you mix locking, tracking, and acceleration. You have to treat them separately like Silence and I.

Why don't you try proving that X-Wings can hit capital ships Batman?? So far we've treated this like an axiom, but why so. Since you're being anal about not breaking down the factors, when you mention size, I'll mention acceleration. When you mention maneuverability, I will mention speed. Maybe I'll mention shield strength and shield recharge rates. See how annoying that is eh? In other words, prove that X-Wings can hit ST capital ships while dodging fire with this 1000 g's acceleration. All the evidence from the movies shows that X-Wings have to make an "attack run" on capital ships rather than continually "sidestep" to dodge phaser fire like you suggest. They will be moving in a predictable course while making this attack run.

Brian

[Batman]

1. EU shown X-Wings doing Z-axis rotation. Nothing in the movies to override it.

Unless you suppose that pilots in the movies are stupid and don't use thrusters to rotate around to kill whoever is tracking them.

X-Wing keeps going in a straight line during the turn. Doable against the Feds. Very risky against Wars targeting.
I think he managed the turn by going full astern on two of his engines but don't quote me on that.

When somebody mentions accuracy, you mention maneuverability.
When someone mentions maneuverability, you mention accuracy.
You simply cannot combine maneuverability, accuracy, predictability, acceleration and speed into one analysis.

I hate to tell you but all those come together where targetting is concerned.

You have to break it down into parts like Silence is. Silence says it takes one second to achieve phaser lock against targets which accelerate at 1.35e5 m/s^2.

Which we never ever see. At best, we know Trek capships can speed up that fast. That accel is never evident in combat situations.
Note that I'm not saying the X-Wings can neccessarily do it either. They likely are capable of doing so but until I have evidence of that that's meaningless. Since Trek never does so in combat, it's a non-factor.

Then you reply with maneuverability, or ability to move off-axis. Wtf? You have to break down the points.

Was there a board announcement to that effect that I missed? You have a target that is rather small, rather fast, rather maneuverable, and could be rather unpredictable if the pilot weren't a total Moron (has anybody ever analysed how predictable Klingon flight patterns are)?
You can't claim that since the Feds can hit small but immobile, or fast but nonmaneuvering targets they can therefore hit targets that are all three at the same time.

3.Geosynchronus orbit shot. Is against a stationary target. Your not shooting at a lock, your shooting at set of grid coordinates. By your reasoning if the Iowa can hit a specific house in a city block, it therefore can hit a same-size aircraft in flight.

Main battleship guns (what you're referring to?) cannot hit aircraft by their nature not because they are too inaccurate, so your analogy is flawed.

Really. DO elaborate. What pray tell is this fundamental difference between a 40,6cm/L50 and any other modern propellant-based projectile weapon?

Phasers can hit both ground and air targets.

Please do tell me what makes the Iowa's main guns physically incapable of hitting aerial targets.

4. The Price-missile is likely moving in a straight line and was going how fast?
Does not indicate ability to hit maneuvering target. A dozen or two km is no great range in a space fight. BTW, modern SAMs can do that too, and at greater ranges...

You have to break it up. You can't counter "size" with "maneuverability" and then "maneuverability" with "size". They can hit ships that small size, means they can achieve a lock on a small sized ship.

That is not maneuvering. Ask a competent marksman to hit a target at-say, 50 metres. No prob. NOW ask him to hit the same taget when it's circling him at say 20mph. He can't hit it? But how can that be? It's still the same size, and he hit it before. What's the problem?

Then deal with accuracy separately. You keep wanting to combine all factors, maneuverability, accuracy, size, speed, acceleration into one factor and use each component to rebuttal the other, which is ridiculous.

They all occur at the same time, therefore you must show that Trek targeting can deal with all of them at the same time. I can't believe I have to explain this to you.

5. 'Many' attack runs. 20KT per second, 12 X-Wing squadron, 240KT per attack run. Range is in excess of 100km. Depends on how you define many I guess.

The Klingons will not be able to maintain a 12 to 1 advantage on virtue of BOP being as expensive as X-Wings.

Not overall, I agree. There's no way for there to be 12 X-Wings for every Fed ship. Doesn't prevent them from doing so for specific engagements. As they can move from engagement to engagement much faster than the Fed's, it works.

Use combined arms, and you have even less X-Wings. I'd say 2 or 3 to one, at most.

Overall. Not in any single engagement. I rember their being a shitload of Klingon ships attacking DS9 vs no Fed ones defending it. Does that mean the Klingons have an infinity to one numerical superiority?

6. Phaser Death Blossom. Improves their odds but not by much. Assuming they fill a 10° cone around the X-wing, at a measly 1 km range assuming facing of 12 m^2 for the X-Wing requires ca 2000 shots in 1 second into that cone. 1 km is well inside heavy ECM fighter-vs range for X-Wings.

Depends on how heavily the Klingons concentrate their X-Wings. From Dominion war, BOP fly in tight formation closely together.

How close? You ARE aware that this also increases the width of the cone of fire, yes?
Let's assume they're all in that same 10° cone just to humour you. Wow. You're down to 166 shots.

Goes down to 19 or so for 1-degree cone. At a single kilometre.
Goes up to 80 at 2 km, still X-Wing heavy ECM fighter-vs range.
Death Blossom doesn't make a difference.

Again, depends on how they concentrate their X-Wings.

Because we've never seen Klingon ships attack from several angles. Oh wait we have.

7. BOBW pt2 is useless as evidence as that was either FTL and/or time dilated. Crossing that distance in the stated time is impossible STL.

No it isn't, its called suspension of disbelief. They dropped out of warp in the system. No evidence it was FTL so it is STL since we see evidence of that.

You're kidding, right? They covered seventysomething lightminutes of distance in twentysomething minutes. That's FTL by definition.
SoD requires us to accept that they DID it, NOT that the speed of light in the trekverse is fundamentally different from ours.

By your reasoning, we should just disregard everything we've said because it is all impossible by STL.

Come again?

Impulse is not Newtonian as you have pointed out many times yourself. Do you have any contradictory evidence to this acceleration? No, then too bad its canon.

But not STL you moron. And never evidenced in combat. Not a single instance of ships being hit doing that kind of stuff.

8. 'Booby Trap' accel depends entirely on dialogue. Observed impulse burn time? Doesn't make a difference either way. Did somebody shoot at and hit the Enterprise during that? No? Doesn't say beans about being able to lock and track, then. At best this denies the X-Wing the ability to target the Feds, IF they choose to make use of the ability. Which we never see them do.

Again you mix locking, tracking, and acceleration. You have to treat them separately like Silence and I.

Quite the opposite, actually, as they all play together in your ability to hit a target. I don't give a flying fuck if this is to difficult for you.

Why don't you try proving that X-Wings can hit capital ships Batman?? So far we've treated this like an axiom, but why so.

*sigh* ROTJ, the Thrawn trilogy, Rogue/Wraith Squadron novels, NJO, Black Fleet crisis, Thrawn duology...

Since you're being anal about not breaking down the factors,

Because they do not occur one at a time. They occur all at once
In other words, prove that X-Wings can hit ST capital ships while dodging fire with this 1000 g's acceleration.[/quote]
Funny, I could have sworn they'd stop doing that for the second or two of the actual attack.

All the evidence from the movies shows that X-Wings have to make an "attack run" on capital ships rather than continually "sidestep" to dodge phaser fire like you suggest.

a second or two is 'continually'? I like it how you totally ignore the EU. And they have to do so in the presence of Wars ECM, against Wars tracking systems. Neither of which Trek had last time I checked.

They will be moving in a predictable course while making this attack run.

Correct. For a second or two.

[brianeyci]

They will be moving in a predictable course while making this attack run.

Correct. For a second or two.

Well finally. Federation phaser lock takes less than a second, and firing phasers at fractional c. Therefore Federation ships will be able to shoot X-Wings on their attack runs.

Brian

[Batman]

He still doesn't get it.He STILL doesn't get it.
Brian those locks are against far larger far slower targets at much shorter ranges. That time is NOT an absolute. It does NOT apply to every phaser lock imaginable.
The stupidity quotient of this thread is approaching critical levels.

[brianeyci]

He still doesn't get it.He STILL doesn't get it.
Brian those locks are against far larger far slower targets at much shorter ranges. That time is NOT an absolute. It does NOT apply to every phaser lock imaginable.
The stupidity quotient of this thread is approaching critical levels.

You just said they would line up for an attack run like in the movies and be vulnerable for one to two seconds.. Acceleration is relevant for targeting, not speed. Speed is easily compensated for, proven by ships being able to target straight moving X-Wing sized targets. If you are accelerating in a straight line, you become predictable.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Let me put this another way Batman.

You agree that the Federation can hit small 13 meter craft if they are moving in a straight line?

Then you agree that the Federation can hit X-Wings if they are moving in a straight line. When they line up for their attack run and accelerate, they are acting the same as a shuttle. A shuttle can approach speeds and acceleration of an X-Wing, it just doesn't have the maneuverability, which is inapplicable in this specific case since the X-Wing is making an attack run.

Brian

[Batman]

He still doesn't get it.He STILL doesn't get it.
Brian those locks are against far larger far slower targets at much shorter ranges. That time is NOT an absolute. It does NOT apply to every phaser lock imaginable.
The stupidity quotient of this thread is approaching critical levels.

You just said they would line up for an attack run like in the movies and be vulnerable for one to two seconds.. Acceleration is relevant for targeting, not speed.

Have you any idea how incredibly stupid that was?

Speed is easily compensated for, proven by ships being able to target straight moving X-Wing sized targets.

At what speed? Speed can be compensated for, no doubt about that.
Certainly easier than the target moving every which way. That does not automatically mean that you are capable of compensating for it in the time you have.

If you are accelerating in a straight line, you become predictable.
Brian

Absolutely. Now show me evidence of Trek tracking being able to make use of that.
For the umpteenth time-1 to 2 second window, 100s km range, target is still moving laterally at considerable speed, 12 m^2 target area. When did Trek hit that?

[brianeyci]

Have you any idea how incredibly stupid that was?

Acceleration is relevant to targeting, because it throws off the Fed targeting sensors. Speed is not.

At what speed? Speed can be compensated for, no doubt about that. Certainly easier than the target moving every which way. That does not automatically mean that you are capable of compensating for it in the time you have.

What's the speed of an X-Wing? Is it any greater than the speed of a ship at impulse? No?

Absolutely. Now show me evidence of Trek tracking being able to make use of that.

This one is simple. NX-01 targeting was unable to hit the Maurader in Unity. The next epsiode, the pilot was tired. The ship moved in a predictable path, and was hit by NX-01. Predictability obviously increases targeting accuracy, as stated by Alyeska, so I do not know why you dispute this.

For the umpteenth time-1 to 2 second window, 100s km range, target is still moving laterally at considerable speed, 12 m^2 target area. When did Trek hit that?

We are going with single digit kilometer ranges remember? I hate how you keep changing the figures. What if I go back to my thousands of kilometers figure, an X-Wing making an attack run from that far away becomes even more predictable because the phaser just has to make smaller degree corrections rather than large ones. Peregrines are based on Maquis, Peregrines are 15 meters, and Federation can hit a Maquis on impulse on an attack run towards it. Therefore they can hit an X-Wing that does not take advantage of off-axis movement, or maneuverability, during an attack run.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Obviously you don't grasp,

Lateral speed means nothing.

And it doesn't. The faster you are moving in a straight line towards your target, the larger your target profile becomes, so it becomes easier to lock on. Couple this with fractional second phaser lock-ons and fractional c phasers, and we have destroyed X-Wing.

Brian

[Batman]

Have you any idea how incredibly stupid that was?

Acceleration is relevant to targeting, because it throws off the Fed targeting sensors. Speed is not.

And you know that because?

At what speed? Speed can be compensated for, no doubt about that. Certainly easier than the target moving every which way. That does not automatically mean that you are capable of compensating for it in the time you have.

What's the speed of an X-Wing? Is it any greater than the speed of a ship at impulse? No?

Fractional c if the Kloingon's make use of it. Now are we discussing the capabilities of the ship or the propabilities of it's pilot taking advantage of it?
Trek ship at impulse in combat hardly move at all.

Absolutely. Now show me evidence of Trek tracking being able to make use of that.

This one is simple. NX-01 targeting was unable to hit the Maurader in Unity. The next epsiode, the pilot was tired. The ship moved in a predictable path, and was hit by NX-01. Predictability obviously increases targeting accuracy, as stated by Alyeska, so I do not know why you dispute this.

And once more Brianeyci approaches black hole density. Of course it increases targeting accuracy. The question is does it so by a large enough factor for the Feds to hit the X-Wing.

For the umpteenth time-1 to 2 second window, 100s km range, target is still moving laterally at considerable speed, 12 m^2 target area. When did Trek hit that?

We are going with single digit kilometer ranges remember?

So, do you want this to be about targetting or do you want this to be about wether or not the Klingons are morons? 'I' want to discuss the ship's capabilities.

I hate how you keep changing the figures. What if I go back to my thousands of kilometers figure, an X-Wing making an attack run from that far away becomes even more predictable because the phaser just has to make smaller degree corrections rather than large ones.

And has a much much smaller target to hit.
We seem to have two overlapping discussions here.
1. Can an X-Wing attack a Fed ship from outside phaser range?
2. Will the Klingons make use of that?
As I participated in both, I can hardly blame you for wanting me to adhere to both sets of standards. What I REALLY want to get off the table is wether or not an X-Wing can attack from outside effective phaser range using its guns. I'll happily conceed the Klingon stupidity subdebate.

Peregrines are based on Maquis, Peregrines are 15 meters, and Federation can hit a Maquis on impulse on an attack run towards it. Therefore they can hit an X-Wing that does not take advantage of off-axis movement, or maneuverability, during an attack run.

You are aware that a Peregrine has a much larger silhouette and moves a lot slower.And usually closes to ranges even lower than Wars fighter vs scenarios.

[Alyeska]

This mess isn't going anywhere. Thread locked.

I don't want to see another like it any time soon.