Klingons with X-Wings

[brianeyci]

Sure, but if the Klingons decide to take advantage of an X-wing's hyperdrive its out of character and thus unavailiable to them You're a pile of fucking laughs Brian you know that?

That is a strawman. I have consistently said that the Klingons would not take advantage of hyperspace "in the way you suggested". Not hit and run all 150 member worlds in 1 day, but how they usually use their cloaking devices -- hit and hang around to fight, fight more powerful opponents, scouting, and using the X-Wings as a screening force for their capital ships.

Brian

[Junghalli]

Not as opposed to Wars sensors, no. The Klingons have W-Wings, therefore they have Wars sensors. Evidence that Trek jamming affects Wars sensors, please.

Err, at this point I just have to say that unless the laws of physics are radically different in the Wars and Trek universes there's no reason whatsoever to assume that Trek sensors would be very much different from Wars sensors in their basic operating principles.

[brianeyci]

Err, at this point I just have to say that unless the laws of physics are radically different in the Wars and Trek universes there's no reason whatsoever to assume that Trek sensors would be very much different from Wars sensors in their basic operating principles.

This is a good point. From this thread, Mad makes the following comment,

A number of standardized sensors are used by ships across the galaxy. Electro-photo receptors, also known as EPRs, are short-range visual scanners that gather data provided by normal light, infrared, and ultraviolet telescopes; they are also the primary sensors used in targeting computers.

That's right, short-range combat sensors in Star Wars are glorified cameras. And yet they are jammed (quotes from the ANH novelization refering to all short- and long-range scopes being affected). Not really sure how, but we know that Wars has the technology to do so.

Now. Why would a starfighter like an X-Wing have a long-range combat sensor? Since in Wars you can always expect your long-range combat sensors to be jammed, why put extra gear on a one-man craft? This is anagalous to how Wars ships do not have complicated sensor suites on all their capital ships.

Because the Star Wars Galactic civilization completed its understanding of physics eons ago during the era of the decadent Old Republic, we no longer equip our ships with extensive scientific data-gathering arrays like the ones on Federation starships. Our scanner and sensor arrays are therefore limited to tactical data-gathering of enemy ship location and movement.

It is a waste of space to have long-range combat sensors on a one-man craft if they are always going to be jammed.

Therefore, the X-Wing's sensors are probably based on a glorified camera because of the Wars minimalist attitude (or if you prefer, practical attitude) towards getting the job done with the right tools.

What the hell does this all mean? That means that the Klingon piloted X-Wings would be limited to those really short combat ranges we seen in ANH even if they were not jammed because Wars does not waste space putting on useless equipment and would have even less space and more reason not to do so on an X-Wing.

And, by the way, Trek can jam optical sensors. Good examples are ships in visual range, within visual sensor range, yet missing. For example, Equinox vs Voyager. Why does it have to be that Voyager/Equinox have incredibly inaccurate phaser arrays, when we know that phaser accuracy is accurate enough to target 3 meter squared area from 50 meters away? How the hell can you miss Equinox, when it is in your visual sensor range, and far fucking larger than a 3 meter squared area? Easy, sensors based on visual data can be jammed. We know that visual lock doesn't work from ST:II, where you can clearly see the Reliant yet the Enterprise main computer cannot use this visual information to hit the Reliant. This was because of the effect of the Nebula. Now, do you think after one hundred years they would not have learned how to duplicate this effect?

Brian

[Steven Snyder]

It is a waste of space to have long-range combat sensors on a one-man craft if they are always going to be jammed.

But they aren't always going to be jammed now are they? Not every mission is a combat mission and not every combat mission will have craft capable of jamming their sensors.

Therefore, the X-Wing's sensors are probably based on a glorified camera because of the Wars minimalist attitude (or if you prefer, practical attitude) towards getting the job done with the right tools.

In otherwords, I have absolutely no proof that the sensors on an X-Wing are just cameras, but that won't stop me from claiming it.

What the hell does this all mean?

Wait don't tell me...You like to hear yourself type, right?

That means that the Klingon piloted X-Wings would be limited to those really short combat ranges we seen in ANH even if they were not jammed because Wars does not waste space putting on useless equipment and would have even less space and more reason not to do so on an X-Wing.

And if bullshit were gold you would be a millionaire.

And, by the way, Trek can jam optical sensors. Good examples are ships in visual range, within visual sensor range, yet missing.

Occam's Razor:

Because Star Trek ships miss each other in visual ranges they:

1. Have crappy targeting systems/human error.
2. Have some sort of never-mentioned, never-explained ubertechnology of jamming the eyeballs of their opponents.

Optical Jamming...what the fuck do they do? Beam incorrect prescription glasses onto the faces of the enemy gunners!

How the hell can you miss Equinox, when it is in your visual sensor range, and far fucking larger than a 3 meter squared area?

Craptastic targeting systems, human error, or perhaps you would rather go with the "Breaming Glasses on the enemy gunners theory".

Easy, sensors based on visual data can be jammed.

Well I suppose they could shoot really big jars of jelly and jam at the windows and cameras of the enemy vessels. I suppose the gooey, yet sweet, coating would cause them to have difficulty firing.

This was because of the effect of the Nebula. Now, do you think after one hundred years they would not have learned how to duplicate this effect?

Ahh yes the old Mutari Nebula in a torpedo trick.

[brianeyci]

This is what starwars.com has to say about X-Wing sensors/ECM,

The X-wing's main fuselage houses most of its essential electronic components. The nosecone contains the primary sensor array, consisting of a Fabritech ANs-5d "lock track" full-spectrum transceiver, a Melihat "Multi-imager" dedicated energy receptor and a Tana Ire electrophoto receptor. An alternate configuration typically contained a long range Phased Tachyon Detection Array model #PA-9r, and a short range Primary Threat Analysis Grid model #PG-7u. The array feeds information through a shielded multiplexer relay to the ANq 3.6 sensor computer. The unit can track up to 1,000 moving sublight objects, acquire 20 possible targets, and can be programmed for extra sensitivity to 120 specific sensor signatures. At the very rear of the craft is a Fabritech k-blakan mini sensor providing the pilot a view of the ship's rear arc. One of the X-wing's primary weaknesses is a blind spot at the rear of its belly.

A Bertriak "Screamer" active jammer is the standard sensor jammer employed by X-wing fighters. The Screamer isn't powerful enough to jam capital-scale sensor systems, but it can interfere with homing warheads and jam starfighter sensors.

Primary
1. Fabritech ANs-5d "lock track" full-spectrum transceiver
2. Melihat "Multi-imager" dedicated energy receptor
3. Tana Ire electrophoto receptor
4. Fabritech k-blakan mini sensor
5. Bertriak "Screamer" active jammer

Alternate
6. Phased Tachyon Detection Array model #PA-9r
7. Short range Primary Threat Analysis Grid model #PG-7u

Numbers three and four are probably those "glorified cameras" Mad was referring to from the way they're described. One sounds like an EM scanner. What is two? I don't know what the hell six is, but it is implied to be more advanced than 1, 2, and 3 put together, and seven sounds like a computer more than a sensor.

Brian

[brianeyci]

But they aren't always going to be jammed now are they? Not every mission is a combat mission and not every combat mission will have craft capable of jamming their sensors.

Incorrect. They will always be jammed, all the time. Even one-man starfighters possess powerful jamming. Any ship short of a civilian ship would possess jamming equipment.

In otherwords, I have absolutely no proof that the sensors on an X-Wing are just cameras, but that won't stop me from claiming it.

They're not just cameras, as my post above shows, I was in the middle of typing it when you replied. There are two camera systems. They have EM sensors, and one other sensor system on a standard X-Wing that detects "energy" whatever the hell that means. Heat sensor? None sound like a long-range sensor system to me.

That means that the Klingon piloted X-Wings would be limited to those really short combat ranges we seen in ANH even if they were not jammed because Wars does not waste space putting on useless equipment and would have even less space and more reason not to do so on an X-Wing.

And if bullshit were gold you would be a millionaire.

Too bad, minimalist attitude fits what Wars is. Why carry complicated long-range combat sensor equipment on a one-man starfighter when it is going to be jammed?

Occam's Razor:

Because Star Trek ships miss each other in visual ranges they:

1. Have crappy targeting systems/human error.
2. Have some sort of never-mentioned, never-explained ubertechnology of jamming the eyeballs of their opponents.

Optical Jamming...what the fuck do they do? Beam incorrect prescription glasses onto the faces of the enemy gunners!

Not the eyeballs, the optical sensors. For example Wars jammers can jam electronic optical sensors, but cannot jam organic ones, see the thread which that is discussed in detail in the link. Human error doesn't factor in the equation except in special circumstances such as the Mutara Nebula, and TOS movies at that.

We know Trek uses visual sensors,

DAX
Okay, the ship has been boarded.
Chief, I need visual sensors as
fast as you can give them to me.

Now do you seriously think that Star Trek does not have advanced enough equipment to take advantage of visual sensors?

Craptastic targeting systems, human error, or perhaps you would rather go with the "Breaming Glasses on the enemy gunners theory".

They don't have to beam glasses on enemy gunners. Wars can jam optical sensors as well. Targeting system is accurate enough to target 3 meter squared surface area within 50 meters, so a huge target like a starship should never be missed. Unless it is being interfered somehow. Human error doesn't enter into equation because they rely on computer control.

Well I suppose they could shoot really big jars of jelly and jam at the windows and cameras of the enemy vessels. I suppose the gooey, yet sweet, coating would cause them to have difficulty firing.

Laugh if you want, Wars can jam optical sensors as well so the mechanism exists however inconcievable to us. Its called suspension of disbelief. The mechanism for Wars is not defined either, it is just stated that they can.

Ahh yes the old Mutari Nebula in a torpedo trick.

Fine, maybe that was a little silly.

Brian

[Batman]

This is what starwars.com has to say about X-Wing sensors/ECM,

Last time I checked, that site wasn't particularly canon.

Primary
1. Fabritech ANs-5d "lock track" full-spectrum transceiver
2. Melihat "Multi-imager" dedicated energy receptor
3. Tana Ire electrophoto receptor
4. Fabritech k-blakan mini sensor
5. Bertriak "Screamer" active jammer
Alternate
6. Phased Tachyon Detection Array model #PA-9r
7. Short range Primary Threat Analysis Grid model #PG-7u
Numbers three and four are probably those "glorified cameras" Mad was referring to from the way they're described.

3 yes. 4 Why?

One sounds like an EM scanner.

Full spectrum does not mean full EM spectrum. We know Wars can scan sub- and hyperspace. Could easily include those.

What is two? I don't know what the hell six is, but it is implied to be more advanced than 1, 2, and 3 put together

Based on what exactly, because the only thing you can possibly infer about it is that it's propably a passive sensor.

and seven sounds like a computer more than a sensor.

Agreed.
Not that you need anything beyond EO to be able to target Trek capships at ranges of hundreds of km. Hell, a fucking telescope would depending on circumstances.

[brianeyci]

Last time I checked, that site wasn't particularly canon.

Give me a better site/resource then, I am working with what I have.

3 yes. 4 Why?

Four is mentioned as allowing the pilot to "see" behind him. It is iffy I know, but there has to be an optical sensor system that allows the pilot visual behind him.

Full spectrum does not mean full EM spectrum. We know Wars can scan sub- and hyperspace. Could easily include those.

We know that subspace is 25,000 year old technology. Why should Wars have the capability to scan into subspace when it is thousands of years old and outdated, not being used anymore? Just because it is primitive it does not mean modern mantains a greater ability to work with it. Only a handful of people in the world know how to make stone tools as well as Homo Erectus, 25,000 years is a very long time.

Based on what exactly, because the only thing you can possibly infer about it is that it's propably a passive sensor.

Based on the alternate configuration having only one sensor rather than the other configuration that has three sensors. There's no other information of the role about how this alternate configuration is used, so the default is that the alternate configuration is the same as the standard and thus does the same job.

Not that you need anything beyond EO to be able to target Trek capships at ranges of hundreds of km. Hell, a fucking telescope would depending on circumstances.

Man, the last reply we are working with hundreds of thousands of kilometer ranges, and light-hour ranges (lol), did you find evidence of X-Wings having this kind of range btw? At last glance the op states that these X-Wings are granted by Q to the Klingons... it is not specific, but if we want to restrict the Klingons from deploying all this equipment onto all of their ships the inference is that Q gifts them to the Klingons, which means standard kit.

Brian

[Steven Snyder]

Incorrect. They will always be jammed, all the time.

You sir, are a moron...
So you are telling me than when an X-Wing goes out to fly CAP, even if nothing is in the area...Their sensors will be jammed? When involved in search and rescue operations, their sensors will be jammed. When trying to locate their mothership to land, their sensors will be jammed.

Even one-man starfighters possess powerful jamming. Any ship short of a civilian ship would possess jamming equipment.

I am sorry, what sort of ship would not have that sort of jamming equipment? A 'civilian ship' something like the MF or pirate vessels. Yes there is absolutely no need for X-Wings for those duties.

And you claim any 'ANY SHIP SHORT OF A CIVILIAN SHIP', give me evidence or shut up. You made the claim, burden of proof on you.

They're not just cameras, as my post above shows, I was in the middle of typing it when you replied.

What? Realized you said something stupid and was busily adding more information for 'damage control'?

There are two camera systems. They have EM sensors, and one other sensor system on a standard X-Wing that detects "energy" whatever the hell that means. Heat sensor? None sound like a long-range sensor system to me.

Purely subjective, the point is that none of that gives you any credence to the 'short-range sensors only argument'.

Too bad, minimalist attitude fits what Wars is. Why carry complicated long-range combat sensor equipment on a one-man starfighter when it is going to be jammed?

There you go again, assuming that they would always be jammed when you know (at least I hope you do, otherwise you would be a village idiot) that they wouldn't always be jammed.

With your logic no modern aircraft would have radar because "it could be jammed".

Not the eyeballs, the optical sensors. For example Wars jammers can jam electronic optical sensors, but cannot jam organic ones,

Why the fuck not? Both are passive sensors on the visible spectrum, you fool one you fool the other. Since it doesn't happen, your argument is bullshit.

Human error doesn't factor in the equation except in special circumstances such as the Mutara Nebula, and TOS movies at that.

Yes we all know that people in the Trekverse don't make mistakes. They don't accidently fire their phasors when the ship is rocked by a disturbance...oh wait that did happen...in STII I might add, in a scene you keep bringing up.

Yeah right...

They don't have to beam glasses on enemy gunners. Wars can jam optical sensors as well.

This isn't about Wars, this is about ST, strop tossing red herrings around and take your beating.

Human error doesn't enter into equation because they rely on computer control.

Then their computers suck, because they miss all the time.

Laugh if you want, Wars can jam optical sensors as well so the mechanism exists however inconcievable to us. Its called suspension of disbelief. The mechanism for Wars is not defined either, it is just stated that they can.

This isn't about Wars, it is about ST. This isn't a fair comparison, now stick to the fucking subject and stop wandering around.

Fine, maybe that was a little silly.

Brian

Like everything else in your argument.

[Batman]

Last time I checked, that site wasn't particularly canon.

Give me a better site/resource then, I am working with what I have.

I don't know. How about the main site, Saxton's Technical Commentaries, the resource books, the goddamned eU?

3 yes. 4 Why?

Four is mentioned as allowing the pilot to "see" behind him. It is iffy I know, but there has to be an optical sensor system that allows the pilot visual behind him.

Why has there to be (especially as the article exolicitely mentiones the X-Wings astern blind spot) and why does it have to be this one?

Full spectrum does not mean full EM spectrum. We know Wars can scan sub- and hyperspace. Could easily include those.

We know that subspace is 25,000 year old technology. Why should Wars have the capability to scan into subspace when it is thousands of years old and outdated, not being used anymore?

Both subspace sensors and communications explicitely mentioned in the EU.
Subspace communications explicitely attributed to X-Wings. Subspace is current for Wars.

Based on what exactly, because the only thing you can possibly infer about it is that it's propably a passive sensor.

Based on the alternate configuration having only one sensor rather than the other configuration that has three sensors. There's no other information of the role about how this alternate configuration is used, so the default is that the alternate configuration is the same as the standard and thus does the same job.

Bullshit without knowing what the purpose of that alternate configuration is. The purpose of that alternate configuration is?

Not that you need anything beyond EO to be able to target Trek capships at ranges of hundreds of km. Hell, a fucking telescope would depending on circumstances.

Man, the last reply we are working with hundreds of thousands of kilometer ranges, and light-hour ranges (lol), did you find evidence of X-Wings having this kind of range btw?

X-Wings use energy weapons. Energy weapons have infinite range in theory, which effects at long ranges determined by beam dispersal. NO beam dispersal noteable on X-Wing weapons. No FLAK effects IIRC, so that isn't a limiting factor either.

[Batman]

Even one-man starfighters possess powerful jamming.

And there go your vaunted Trek long-range targeting abilities...

[brianeyci]

You sir, are a moron...
So you are telling me than when an X-Wing goes out to fly CAP, even if nothing is in the area...Their sensors will be jammed? When involved in search and rescue operations, their sensors will be jammed. When trying to locate their mothership to land, their sensors will be jammed.

The jamming is only relevant to the long-range versus short-range combat discussion. I cannot think of any reason why they would mount long-range combat sensors when even starfighters possess jamming equipment. There's a difference between combat sensors and information gathering. I'm sorry I didn't make my point clearer earlier.

I am sorry, what sort of ship would not have that sort of jamming equipment? A 'civilian ship' something like the MF or pirate vessels. Yes there is absolutely no need for X-Wings for those duties.

And you claim any 'ANY SHIP SHORT OF A CIVILIAN SHIP', give me evidence or shut up. You made the claim, burden of proof on you.

Family cars flying Courscant. Even families in Wars can own interstellar craft and travel between plaents regularly. Occam's Razor tells us they would not mount combat equipment such as jamming. This is what I am referring to when I mean "civilian" not pirates and MF.

What? Realized you said something stupid and was busily adding more information for 'damage control'?

No. I had stated that Wars relies on combat sensors for short-range combat, not long-range combat.

Purely subjective, the point is that none of that gives you any credence to the 'short-range sensors only argument'.

Unless there is evidence of long-range sensors, they aren't there. Short range sensors are proven to be there by evidence. I cannot refute a negative like "prove there are no long range sensors", that is illogical.

There you go again, assuming that they would always be jammed when you know (at least I hope you do, otherwise you would be a village idiot) that they wouldn't always be jammed.

With your logic no modern aircraft would have radar because "it could be jammed".

My jamming is specifically referring to short-range combat sensors as opposed to long-range combat sensors, not all sensors and definitely not scanners. I'm sorry I didn't make that clearer.

Why the fuck not? Both are passive sensors on the visible spectrum, you fool one you fool the other. Since it doesn't happen, your argument is bullshit.

Incorrect, not supported by canon, and not supported by Mad's quotation and the information discussed in the thread I link to. Here's the link again. Mad, The Silence and I, and everybody else in the thead accepts it. Specifically,

We don't know exactly. However, this is the effect that is observed, so we must accept that SW can jam/distort the reception of a technological camera while biological sensors appear to remain relatively unaffected. (The ANH novelization also suggested that the jamming affected engine performance... "flying through soup" and reducing maneuverability. Now, reducing the maximum safe speed because of sensor readings and actually reducing manuverability are two diferent things. How could jamming accomplish this? We don't know, but it's canon.) This is the concept of "Suspension of Disbelief," and you should know that the debators here are pretty big on it

So the mechanism does exist for jamming optical sensors.

Yes we all know that people in the Trekverse don't make mistakes. They don't accidently fire their phasors when the ship is rocked by a disturbance...oh wait that did happen...in STII I might add, in a scene you keep bringing up.

Yeah right...

The ship is rocked by a disturbance can be easily explained as the computer operating the phaser lock, but the operator telling when to fire the phaser. And, ST:II is irrelevant, because phaser lock was inoperative and they were working on manual, so why are you using this one situation to explain all phaser inaccuracies?

This isn't about Wars, this is about ST, strop tossing red herrings around and take your beating.

If Wars has a mechanism to jam optical sensors, Trek may too. You laugh at the idea that Trek can because "there's no way and you need to beam bad glasses in front of someone's eyes". I show you that the mechanism is irrelevant and you retort with the claim of a red herring?

Then their computers suck, because they miss all the time.

Their computers are more advanced than ours.

TAU: A computer that could co-ordinate the systems of an entire colony. That's no small order, but I think I might have something that will interest you. Hello, computer, and how are you today?
COMPUTER: All systems are functioning within normal parameters.
JANEWAY: Verbal interface. Impressive.
TAU: Computer, tell us your technical specifications.
COMPUTER: Simultaneous access to forty seven million data channels, trans-luminal processing at five hundred seventy five trillion calculations per nanoseconds.
TAU: Interested?
COMPUTER: Operational temperature margins from ten degrees kelvin to one thousand seven hundred ninety degrees kelvin.
TAU: I could sell it to you, but I could hardly let it go for anything less than a warship. Or we could find something else in your price range.

This isn't about Wars, it is about ST. This isn't a fair comparison, now stick to the fucking subject and stop wandering around.

Of course it is about ST, but you mock the idea that Trek cannot jam optical sensors and have to resort to "beaming prescription eyeglasses" so I show you that mechanism is irrelevant. If we are to suppose that ST computers and targeting are not more primitive than our own, ST being able to jam optical sensors is a reasonable assumption. If you mock it just because of the mechanism, then you have no case. If you want to mock it because "there is no evidence", then say so, and I shall bring on the quotes.

Brian

[brianeyci]

I don't know. How about the main site, Saxton's Technical Commentaries, the resource books, the goddamned eU?

Main site doesn't give as specific information as exactly what targeting sensors an X-Wing has.

Why has there to be (especially as the article exolicitely mentiones the X-Wings astern blind spot) and why does it have to be this one?

There is no other system mounted in the rear, and it is a logical inference. What is your theory then? Creating "reasonable doubt" is not a theory. Make a superior theory.

Both subspace sensors and communications explicitely mentioned in the EU. Subspace communications explicitely attributed to X-Wings. Subspace is current for Wars.

My knowledge of the EU is non-existent, and I was basing my 25,000 year old fact from main site,

The ludicrous nature of the Federation cultists' sensor claims is most apparent when one realized that their most advanced sensor technology is subspace-based (ref. TM). However, not only do we possess subspace technology (which we still use for inexpensive short-range communications gear) but subspace sensors were used in our galaxy during the time of Xim the Despot, before the dawn of the Old Republic 25,000 years ago, as described in Han Solo and the Lost Legacy:
"mytag crystals were used in old subspace common and detection gear; you needed lots and lots of them for any spacefleet or planetary defenses."
Therefore, Federation sensor technology is at least 25,000 years behind our own.

Short-range communications equipment does not mean that they have as much subspace ability as the Federation which uses subspace for everything -- think of the rock tool analogy. Everybody has seen choppers and bifaces, but I give you a rock and you'll probably end up smashing it. Try for a whole day and you'll get the hang of making a rock tool, but it will be nowhere near how Homo Erectus made his rock tools. Unless you are an expert. Wars should have less subspace mastery in general because subspace technology is antiquated, not just by ten or fifty but 25,000 years. Wars could make superior subspace scanning and jamming equipment, but we could make rock tools superior too, it is just not standard kit.

Bullshit without knowing what the purpose of that alternate configuration is. The purpose of that alternate configuration is?

See we don't know, so Occam's Razor tells us it is the same purpose just an "alternate configuration". You cannot just seed reasonable doubt and call it a theory.

X-Wings use energy weapons. Energy weapons have infinite range in theory, which effects at long ranges determined by beam dispersal. NO beam dispersal noteable on X-Wing weapons. No FLAK effects IIRC, so that isn't a limiting factor either.

And phasers should have infinite range in theory. Come on man, show me evidence, it has to exist somewhere, I will be happy to concede the point to you if you do (light-minute range is pretty impressive). What kind of accuracy do they have at that range? Anything?

Brian

[Batman]

I don't know. How about the main site, Saxton's Technical Commentaries, the resource books, the goddamned eU?

Main site doesn't give as specific information as exactly what targeting sensors an X-Wing has.

How about checking the others, then?

Why has there to be (especially as the article exolicitely mentiones the X-Wings astern blind spot) and why does it have to be this one?

There is no other system mounted in the rear, and it is a logical inference. What is your theory then? Creating "reasonable doubt" is not a theory. Make a superior theory.

I don't need a theory. As a theory your theory works just fine. For it to become more then a theory you need evidence, which you don't have. I don't need to counter a completely unsupported theory.
Gods was that bad english.

Both subspace sensors and communications explicitely mentioned in the EU. Subspace communications explicitely attributed to X-Wings. Subspace is current for Wars.

Short-range communications equipment does not mean that they have as much subspace ability as the Federation which uses subspace for everything

Moving the goalpost. You claimed they no longer use subspace. YES THEY DO.

-- think of the rock tool analogy. Everybody has seen choppers and bifaces, but I give you a rock and you'll probably end up smashing it. Try for a whole day and you'll get the hang of making a rock tool, but it will be nowhere near how Homo Erectus made his rock tools. Unless you are an expert. Wars should have less subspace mastery in general because subspace technology is antiquated, not just by ten or fifty but 25,000 years. Wars could make superior subspace scanning and jamming equipment, but we could make rock tools superior too, it is just not standard kit.

Are you on drugs, Brian? THEY HAVE BEEN USING IT FOR 25,000 YEARS!!!
They STILL use it. If anything that means their subspace technology is orders of magnitude ahead of the Feds.

Bullshit without knowing what the purpose of that alternate configuration is. The purpose of that alternate configuration is?

See we don't know, so Occam's Razor tells us it is the same purpose just an "alternate configuration".

Occam is propably turning in his grave right now. Occam's razor says the right theory is the one with the least variables that fits the facts. Yours doesn't, because there canonically is a different purpose that sensor suite could serve: Reconnaissance. Which has rather different sensor requirements than tactical engagements.

X-Wings use energy weapons. Energy weapons have infinite range in theory, which effects at long ranges determined by beam dispersal. NO beam dispersal noteable on X-Wing weapons. No FLAK effects IIRC, so that isn't a limiting factor either.

And phasers should have infinite range in theory.

Absolutely.

Come on man, show me evidence, it has to exist somewhere, I will be happy to concede the point to you if you do (light-minute range is pretty impressive). What kind of accuracy do they have at that range? Anything?
Brian

I gave you a real-world physics explanation for X-Wing weapons range. I gave you evindence that they can easily attack from outside effective phaser range with the sensors you gave them. IF I ever claimed they could do so at light-minute ranges you'd have a point.(btw, I agree bringing up that light-hour ISD example was stupid).
All I WANTED to show was that there's no reason for them to close to the ranges were you claim Trek can reliably hit them (any counters for their accelleration by now?). I admit I propably did a bad job on making that clear.

[brianeyci]

Okay Synder, here it is.

Evidence of Trek possessing optical sensors and linking it to their weapons systems,

GUL EVEK
Shut down your drive and come to a
full stop. We're beaming an
inspection team aboard.

O'BRIEN
We're nowhere near the Cardassian
border... you have no authority
here...

GUL EVEK
We'll argue about authority later.
For now, you will either comply, or
we will take preemptive action.

COMPUTER VOICE
Warning. Sensors are reading photo
lock-on activation.

Evidence of jamming,

PICARD
A 'research' station within arm's
reach of three Federation
sectors... ? Cargo ships running
with high energy subspace fields
that jam sensors?

Put the two together, and if you are to suppose that Trek has more advanced computers and targeting equipment than modern day equivalents (how the hell can you miss a starship-sized vessel at point-blank range with weapons under computer control?), Trek can jam optical sensors. Again, like Wars, the mechanism is irrelevant.

Brian

[Steven Snyder]

The jamming is only relevant to the long-range versus short-range combat discussion. I cannot think of any reason why they would mount long-range combat sensors when even starfighters possess jamming equipment. There's a difference between combat sensors and information gathering. I'm sorry I didn't make my point clearer earlier.

Bullshit A difference between "combat sensors" and "information gathering sensors". Brian you do realize that the whole point of sensors is to GATHER INFORMATION.

What the fuck are combat sensors anyway? Sensors that only detect combat?

This is what I am referring to when I mean "civilian" not pirates and MF.

So now you are claming that a small smugglers vessel has powerful ECM that can jam the sensors of combat fighters. The burden of proof is on you.

Unless there is evidence of long-range sensors, they aren't there. Short range sensors are proven to be there by evidence. I cannot refute a negative like "prove there are no long range sensors", that is illogical.

Wrongo jackass, you provided proof of sensors, but then you claim that they are short-ranged only without providing a damn bit of evidence.

So the mechanism does exist for jamming optical sensors.

Doesn't do your Trek argument a bit of good does it?

The ship is rocked by a disturbance can be easily explained as the computer operating the phaser lock, but the operator telling when to fire the phaser. And, ST:II is irrelevant, because phaser lock was inoperative and they were working on manual, so why are you using this one situation to explain all phaser inaccuracies?

You claimed that human error wasn't a factor, I just proved it was. Simple as that, your argument is shot down. SUCK IT.

[Batman]

Okay Synder, here it is.
Evidence of Trek possessing optical sensors and linking it to their weapons systems,

GUL EVEK
Shut down your drive and come to a
full stop. We're beaming an
inspection team aboard.

O'BRIEN
We're nowhere near the Cardassian
border... you have no authority
here...

GUL EVEK
We'll argue about authority later.
For now, you will either comply, or
we will take preemptive action.

COMPUTER VOICE
Warning. Sensors are reading photo
lock-on activation.

Actual dialogue or script? Because I have the nagging suspicion that this was supposed to read 'photon lock-on activation' which would refer to PTs.

Evidence of jamming,

PICARD
A 'research' station within arm's
reach of three Federation
sectors... ? Cargo ships running
with high energy subspace fields
that jam sensors?

Put the two together, and if you are to suppose that Trek has more advanced computers and targeting equipment than modern day equivalents (how the hell can you miss a starship-sized vessel at point-blank range with weapons under computer control?), Trek can jam optical sensors.

Err-what? You have potential evidence of optical targeting, and you have evidence of jamming. That's not evidence of jamming of optical targeting. The subspace sensor jamming field nixed the Ent-Ds attempts to
determine their defensive systems. Pray tell me how you do that with optical sensors. Especially as the ship was clearly visible on the bridge screen.

[brianeyci]

How about checking the others, then?

I doubt they will discuss exactly what the mechanisms behind the sensors. here is Saxton's page on X-Wing, doesn't discuss sensors.

I don't need a theory. As a theory your theory works just fine. For it to become more then a theory you need evidence, which you don't have. I don't need to counter a completely unsupported theory.
Gods was that bad english.

I did not expect this from you Batman.

EVOLOUTION is a scientific theory. That is, it is a theory that explains observations. This MUST NOT (but is often) confused with the lay definition of 'Theory' which is more along the lines of 'one possible explanation of any number of possible explanations for an observation'

When we are talking about theory, we are obviously not talking about the layman's definition of theory. Theory explains observations, and as such is as good as fact until we have more observations to destroy the theory. The only observation we have so far (that has been discussed) is that the X-Wing alternate configuration is an "alternate configuration" to the standard kit, nothing else, so my theory that the alternate configuration does the same thing but with different components is the best possible explaination. You can't just seed reasonable doubt.

Moving the goalpost. You claimed they no longer use subspace. YES THEY DO.

Fine I concede the point. But, a new point is that they do not use subspace to the extent of the Federation.

Are you on drugs, Brian? THEY HAVE BEEN USING IT FOR 25,000 YEARS!!! They STILL use it. If anything that means their subspace technology is orders of magnitude ahead of the Feds.

They do not use subspace for combat sensors, or standard kit combat equipment. Only cheap, short-range communications. Its not like they spent the last 25,000 years developing the latest in subspace equipment, they discarded it. Laugh all you want at the Fed being better at making the equivalent of "stone tools", but the point is that the Fed can make these tools better just like ancient man can make their bifaces better, and thus jamming and sensors based on subspace would probably be inferior on a standard kit X-Wing.

Occam is propably turning in his grave right now. Occam's razor says the right theory is the one with the least variables that fits the facts. Yours doesn't, because there canonically is a different purpose that sensor suite could serve: Reconnaissance. Which has rather different sensor requirements than tactical engagements.

Show me where it says in the article that that specific alternate configuation is a reconnaissance fighter. We are working only with that article. By the way,

Later, with the introduction of new fighters like the A-9 Vigilance Interceptor and the E-wing fighter, the X-wing was pushed from the limelight. Eventually, after years of research and modification, Incom unveiled a new faster Incom T-65AC4 fighter that can compete on its own in the modern starfighter combat arena. The older X-wings are being refitted into T-65BRs, or reconnaissance X-wings.

The recon fighters have their missile weapons replaced with advanced sensors and communication gear. In addition, these X-wings are equipped with sophisticated self-destruct sequence that wipes the ship's computer, destroys the astromech with a shaped charge, kills the pilot with a lethal injection and then finally detonates a baradium charge that not only destroys the X-wing, but is powerful enough to cripple a nearby ship.

So in fact, the alternate configuration we are talking about is not recon, they create a third alternate config for recon later. The fluff says nothing about the second configuration other than it being an alternate configuration so you cannot conclude it is reconnassiance. It may be reasonable, even plausable, but it is not evidence and not a fact.

I gave you a real-world physics explanation for X-Wing weapons range. I gave you evindence that they can easily attack from outside effective phaser range with the sensors you gave them. IF I ever claimed they could do so at light-minute ranges you'd have a point.(btw, I agree bringing up that light-hour ISD example was stupid). All I WANTED to show was that there's no reason for them to close to the ranges were you claim Trek can reliably hit them (any counters for their accelleration by now?). I admit I propably did a bad job on making that clear.

You did, but not to me. You claimed that the ISD proved that X-Wings could hit at light-minute ranges, if not explicitly then implicitly. If you withdraw that then fine. What is X-Wing weapons range without ECM on, with the X-Wing having reliable accuracy or any accuracy at all given that the evidence and methodology of Wars would not mount long-range combat sensors on a one-man craft designed for short-range combat? I am still waiting for that.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Bullshit A difference between "combat sensors" and "information gathering sensors". Brian you do realize that the whole point of sensors is to GATHER INFORMATION.

I didn't put combat in front of the word sensor in my initial post. Do you think I really meant "SW ships will always be jammed" even during missions where there was no combat going on? I'm silly sometimes, but not that silly. I'm sorry I created the confusion.

What the fuck are combat sensors anyway? Sensors that only detect combat?

Sensors linked to your fire control systems and used to target enemy craft rather than your navigational computer.

So now you are claming that a small smugglers vessel has powerful ECM that can jam the sensors of combat fighters. The burden of proof is on you.

Easy. ANH, TIE fighters closing into visual range of MF.

Wrongo jackass, you provided proof of sensors, but then you claim that they are short-ranged only without providing a damn bit of evidence.

Sure I did. I provided proof that Wars has a practical attitude towards sensor equipment, and then I showed that out of the four sensors on standard kit X-Wing (based on starwars.com, I know it is not canon but that is what I am working for until you have a better idea), two are probably optical in nature, one is probably EM spectrum, and the last one is undefined so we leave it undefined. None of those are long ranged sensors conclusively. Two of those are short range sensors. EM sensor may be long or short range but we leave it undefined. Therefore, there is no proof of long-ranged sensors.

Doesn't do your Trek argument a bit of good does it?

Of course not, but I was countering your mocking that "they have to beam glasses in front of a person", countering your mechanism point.

You claimed that human error wasn't a factor, I just proved it was. Simple as that, your argument is shot down. SUCK IT.

Human error is not a factor in normal situations where computer phaser lock isn't disabled. How hard is that to understand? How can Tuvok lock on phaser on a target with one button, and then fire with pressing another button if human error was the problem? What, depends on how hard he presses the button? Please.

Brian

[brianeyci]

Actual dialogue or script? Because I have the nagging suspicion that this was supposed to read 'photon lock-on activation' which would refer to PTs.

That would make sense. It is the script, but until someone comes in with confirmation I'm treating it as what the actors said.

Err-what? You have potential evidence of optical targeting, and you have evidence of jamming. That's not evidence of jamming of optical targeting. The subspace sensor jamming field nixed the Ent-Ds attempts to determine their defensive systems. Pray tell me how you do that with optical sensors. Especially as the ship was clearly visible on the bridge screen.

I have evidence of one kind of jamming. Other kinds of jamming have been present before that totally disable a ship's sensors. Optical sensors would be part of a ship's sensor equipment. If Trek cannot jam optical sensors, then we are left with the conclusion that their computer technology is pathetic and can't hit a capital ship within visual range, which is retarded.

Brian

[Batman]

How about checking the others, then?

I doubt they will discuss exactly what the mechanisms behind the sensors. here is Saxton's page on X-Wing, doesn't discuss sensors.

Fine, so my selection of sources was flawed. Sue me.

I don't need a theory. As a theory your theory works just fine. For it to become more then a theory you need evidence, which you don't have. I don't need to counter a completely unsupported theory.
Gods was that bad english.

I did not expect this from you Batman.

EVOLOUTION is a scientific theory. That is, it is a theory that explains observations. This MUST NOT (but is often) confused with the lay definition of 'Theory' which is more along the lines of 'one possible explanation of any number of possible explanations for an observation'

When we are talking about theory, we are obviously not talking about the layman's definition of theory. Theory explains observations, and as such is as good as fact until we have more observations to destroy the theory.

That would be X-Wings doing recon missions, which require a rather different sensor suite than tactical engagements.

Moving the goalpost. You claimed they no longer use subspace. YES THEY DO.

Fine I concede the point. But, a new point is that they do not use subspace to the extent of the Federation.

Are you on drugs, Brian? THEY HAVE BEEN USING IT FOR 25,000 YEARS!!! They STILL use it. If anything that means their subspace technology is orders of magnitude ahead of the Feds.

They do not use subspace for combat sensors, or standard kit combat equipment.

As evidenced by what?

Only cheap, short-range communications.

Evidence, and wrong to boot. ISD's have subspace sensors as per EGWT.
There's no reason to assume they use subspace because it's cheap. How about it has higher resolution? Is less detectable? Less prone to jamming?
Fact is, we don't know why they keep using it. Yet they keep using it.

Its not like they spent the last 25,000 years developing the latest in subspace equipment, they discarded it.

NO THEY DIDN'T you moron. They STILL use subspace comm, they STILL use subspace sensors. Are we to assume that after 25,000 years of not using it they just picked it up again just because?

Laugh all you want at the Fed being better at making the equivalent of "stone tools", but the point is that the Fed can make these tools better just like ancient man can make their bifaces better, and thus jamming and sensors based on subspace would probably be inferior on a standard kit X-Wing.

Complete and utter garbage. Have you actually read what I posted? Wars STILL uses subspace. There's no reason to assume they ever STOPPED using subspace. Therefore it's safe to assume that if anything, they're BETTER at using subspace. What part of this was beyond you?
Not that the Feds are known for making the best use of their technology in the first place, mind you.

Occam is propably turning in his grave right now. Occam's razor says the right theory is the one with the least variables that fits the facts. Yours doesn't, because there canonically is a different purpose that sensor suite could serve: Reconnaissance. Which has rather different sensor requirements than tactical engagements.

Show me where it says in the article that that specific alternate configuation is a reconnaissance fighter.

Show me the part where it explicitly says it DOESN'T.

SNIPPY useless drivel from a non-canon source

I gave you a real-world physics explanation for X-Wing weapons range. I gave you evindence that they can easily attack from outside effective phaser range with the sensors you gave them. IF I ever claimed they could do so at light-minute ranges you'd have a point.(btw, I agree bringing up that light-hour ISD example was stupid). All I WANTED to show was that there's no reason for them to close to the ranges were you claim Trek can reliably hit them (any counters for their accelleration by now?). I admit I propably did a bad job on making that clear.

You did, but not to me. You claimed that the ISD proved that X-Wings could hit at light-minute ranges, if not explicitly then implicitly.

Really. Where? I already agreed that lighthour-range ISD bit was stupid.

If you withdraw that then fine. What is X-Wing weapons range without ECM on, with the X-Wing having reliable accuracy or any accuracy at all given that the evidence and methodology of Wars would not mount long-range combat sensors on a one-man craft designed for short-range combat? I am still waiting for that.

Weapons range on X-Wings without ECM approaches infinite. Long-range as you define it sensors are not needed as EO enables X-Wings to attack Fed ships from outside effective phaser range with impunity. I'm still waitnig for you to explain how Trek tracking deals with Spitfire-size targets with 4-figure-g accelleration.

[Batman]

So now you are claming that a small smugglers vessel has powerful ECM that can jam the sensors of combat fighters. The burden of proof is on you.

Easy. ANH, TIE fighters closing into visual range of MF.

Because of the jamming of theDeath Star. Next.

Sure I did. I provided proof that Wars has a practical attitude towards sensor equipment, and then I showed that out of the four sensors on standard kit X-Wing (based on starwars.com, I know it is not canon but that is what I am working for until you have a better idea), two are probably optical in nature, one is probably EM spectrum,

pure speculation

and the last one is undefined so we leave it undefined. None of those are long ranged sensors conclusively.

Gar-bage. As optical sensors can detect things billions of lightyears away TODAY (they're called telescopes) that doesn't say beans about their range. Especially as one of them is explicitely called a tachyon detector. What exactly is the use of a short-range FTL particle detector?

Two of those are short range sensors.

Says you.

EM sensor may be long or short range but we leave it undefined.Therefore, there is no proof of long-ranged sensors.

None is needed. Proof that those sensors CAN'T be long range.

[brianeyci]

That would be X-Wings doing recon missions, which require a rather different sensor suite than tactical engagements.

No evidence that that specific alternate configuration is used for recon missions so I don't know what you are trying to push. Like you said earlier, all we are told is "alternate congfiguration" so I don't know why you move the goalpost now.

As evidenced by what?

As evidenced by Wars relying on short-range visual sensors rather than subspace sensors. And I cannot prove a negative, "they do not use subspace sensors in combat", show me evidence that they do, I have already given evidence that they use other sensors.

NO THEY DIDN'T you moron. They STILL use subspace comm, they STILL use subspace sensors. Are we to assume that after 25,000 years of not using it they just picked it up again just because?

No proof that they use subspace beyond communication. NX-01 uses subspace for communication, are we supposed to believe that it has more advanced subspace scanning equipment on virtue of it using subspace? Please. The rock tool analogy is a good one.

Complete and utter garbage. Have you actually read what I posted? Wars STILL uses subspace. There's no reason to assume they ever STOPPED using subspace. Therefore it's safe to assume that if anything, they're BETTER at using subspace. What part of this was beyond you?

No, its safe that they use subspace for short-range communications. That is the only thing we know, unless you have evidence that standard kit X-Wing still uses subspace sensors. And you keep strawmanning my position to refer to Wars in general, when I am obviously referring only to the X-Wing.

Not that the Feds are known for making the best use of their technology in the first place, mind you.

So are Klingons, who don't use cloak to its full potential to annihilate the Federation.

Show me the part where it explicitly says it DOESN'T.

In other words, prove a negative. Impossible. It does not mention recon, so it is not recon unless we have evidence otherwise. I don't know why you keep pushing this point, I've already conceded that the site is non canon so this is all academic anyway.

Weapons range on X-Wings without ECM approaches infinite.

Incorrect, unless you can show long-range combat sensors as standard kit on X-Wings.

Long-range as you define it sensors are not needed as EO enables X-Wings to attack Fed ships from outside effective phaser range with impunity.

Still moving the goalposts aren't you. Federation effective range is 18k km from the previous calculations on X-Wing sized craft, and phasers move at fractions of c according to TNG "The Wounded". You have given no figures other than "theoretically they should have infinite range". You have given no range for a no ECM environment, which was your idea. Your abilities are undefined, you have no numbers, and keep spouting this abstract EO idea without providing any quantification.

Brian

I'm still waitnig for you to explain how Trek tracking deals with Spitfire-size targets with 4-figure-g accelleration.[/quote]

[brianeyci]

Because of the jamming of theDeath Star. Next.

Okay. Use Occam's Razor. If small one-man craft possess jamming equipment, then Han Solo who regularly wants to run Imperial blockades and escape from hairy situations would have jamming equipment. Unless you think he is stupid. If he didn't, enemies could fire on him from thousands of kilometers away, beyond the range of his quad cannon turbolasers.

Pure speculation.

No it isn't. I have provided proof that two sensors are optical based, and you have no proof that the others are long-range combat sensors.

Gar-bage. As optical sensors can detect things billions of lightyears away TODAY (they're called telescopes) that doesn't say beans about their range. Especially as one of them is explicitely called a tachyon detector. What exactly is the use of a short-range FTL particle detector?

Just because they have these sensors, it does not mean they are not strictly for navigation or scouting purposes. It does not prove that they are long-range combat sensors. The Tachyon sensor is alternate configuration, if we take Q giving them standard kit X-Wings then they are standard configuration by default.

None is needed. Proof that those sensors CAN'T be long range.

You really don't understand that it is logically impossible to prove a negative don't you? See argument from ignorance fallacy. Just because there is no proof that sensors can't be long range, doesn't mean that they are long range.

Brian

[Batman]

That would be X-Wings doing recon missions, which require a rather different sensor suite than tactical engagements.

No evidence that that specific alternate configuration is used for recon missions so I don't know what you are trying to push. Like you said earlier, all we are told is "alternate congfiguration" so I don't know why you move the goalpost now.

No evidence that it doesn't, either. And your evidence comes from a completely non-canon source.

As evidenced by what?

As evidenced by Wars relying on short-range visual sensors

Evidence that visual sensors are short-range, please.

rather than subspace sensors. And I cannot prove a negative,

Indeed you can't. I conceed the point.

NO THEY DIDN'T you moron. They STILL use subspace comm, they STILL use subspace sensors. Are we to assume that after 25,000 years of not using it they just picked it up again just because?

No proof that they use subspace beyond communication.

Bzzt. Wrong. They use subspace sensors as per the EGWT if nothing else. I mentioned that earlier, you know.

NX-01 uses subspace for communication, are we supposed to believe that it has more advanced subspace scanning equipment on virtue of it using subspace? Please. The rock tool analogy is a good one.

It would be, if it applied. Too bad its canon that current Wars uses subspace for comm AND sensors. 25,000 years vs what? 250?

Complete and utter garbage. Have you actually read what I posted? Wars STILL uses subspace. There's no reason to assume they ever STOPPED using subspace. Therefore it's safe to assume that if anything, they're BETTER at using subspace. What part of this was beyond you?

No, its safe that they use subspace for short-range communications.

And sensors. You obviously HAVEN'T read what I posted.

Weapons range on X-Wings without ECM approaches infinite.

Incorrect, unless you can show long-range combat sensors as standard kit on X-Wings.[/quote]
I don't have to.You already did by giving them EO sensors.

Long-range as you define it sensors are not needed as EO enables X-Wings to attack Fed ships from outside effective phaser range with impunity.

Still moving the goalposts aren't you. Federation effective range is 18k km from the previous calculations on X-Wing sized craft, and phasers move at fractions of c according to TNG "The Wounded"

No they don't. That was photorps for the Phoenix and an undefined weapon system for the Cardies.

You have given no figures other than "theoretically they should have infinite range".

Not should.Do. That's the nature of beam weapons.

You have given no range for a no ECM environment, which was your idea.

Because there's no evidence of Trek jamming optical targeting systems. And that's assuming they are the only kind X-Wings have.

Your abilities are undefined, you have no numbers, and keep spouting this abstract EO idea without providing any quantification.

What abstract EO idea? What quantification? 20 KT per second burst if not sustained, 4-figure-g accelleration. When exactly have you shown Trek hit Spitfire-size targets accellerating at 1000s of g's?