All About the Eclipse Star Destroyer

[Spartan]

From the Main Sites Planet Killer Page:

Eclipse-class and Sovereign-class Star Destroyer (Star Wars: Dark Empire)

Concept

Eclipse and Sovereign-class Star Destroyers mount smaller versions of the Death Star's fearsome superlaser. There are various conflicting reports on its power. Some sources say that it has two thirds the power of the Death Star's superlaser, while other sources say it has one seventh its power. However, both figures appear to be exaggerated; even one tenth the Death Star's power would easily destroy an entire planet, which is beyond the capabilities of an Eclipse of Sovereign-class ship.

Known Effects

According to the official literature, the Eclipse-class Star Destroyer's superlaser is capable of "cracking the crust" of a targeted world and "searing continents" off its surface. It goes without saying that such a large superlaser should be much more powerful than an Acclamator or an ordinary ISD, and the energy requirement for vapourizing an entire continent is well in excess of the threshold for a global extinction event (1E9 megatons). Figures in the range of 1E10-1E11 megatons are probably more realistic. The radiative heating effect and the enormous volume of ballistic ejecta produced by such an event would undoubtedly heat the entire atmosphere up well beyond the point of total sterilization, so it is unlikely that any forms of life would survive.

Also if you search the archives, their reams of calcs on the Eclipse and its SL as well as the energy capacity of Alderan's planetary sheild.

Breaching a planetary shield is not that hard it merely requires accurate timing and sensitive sensors. Remember that a planetary sheild is composed of interlocking segments and the sheild localized energy fluctuations as well; and both are targetable.

Your are all correct that 2/3 od a DS level SL power is just wrong. Punching through a planetary sheild and searing a continent, however doesn't require DS power levels. I'm sure you'll all agree that shattering a planetary sheild is still pretty damn impessive.

[CmdrWilkens]

Your are all correct that 2/3 od a DS level SL power is just wrong. Punching through a planetary sheild and searing a continent, however doesn't require DS power levels. I'm sure you'll all agree that shattering a planetary sheild is still pretty damn impessive.

Okay here goes one of my personal problems.

Whenever possible all evidence should be saved. No matter what our opinion of the evidence it still outranks what we think. Data always trumps what we think. In other words unless there is absolutely no way to reconcile the 2/3rds statement then we have to accept it.

I think people on this board need to be reminded that we can't just dismiss data we don't think fits, we need to work at integrating it. Now, again, i think the only way for the 2/3rds statement to work is if they are talking about orders of magnitude. Thus if we suppose that the DS1 beam was 1e42J (to overestimate and give some punch through the shield power) then the ESSD superlaser would be 1e28J...now doesn't that sound a bit more realistic?

[nightmare]

And think about that:

If the Eclipse superlaser is truely 2/3 the power of the DS1, whey the heck have they even built the DS? They could have simply built the Eclipse without the DS, since it would do the job as well.
Therefore the 2/3 figure is bullshit and wrong.

The Death Stars were completed first, and the Eclipse's smaller superlaser was said to be the result of advancement in tech. In other words, although I agree with the conclusion, your premise is wrong.

[His Divine Shadow]

On another note, the Axial Superlaser on the Eclipse is stated to have two thirds the firepower of the Death Star's gun, even though it is said to only have the power to crack a planets crust, which would require many orders of magnitude less power then what the Death Star did to Alderaan.

See the Dark Empire Sourcebook p.88. The Axial SL has 2/3 the power of the DS1 SL. It also states that the Axial SL can only crack the crust of a planet after penetrating the planets sheilds.

The quotes are:
========================
Pg. 88: The Death Star's prime weapon was composed of eight individual lasers that could focus together, generating enough power to destroy an entire planet. By comparison, the Eclipse carries only a single laser, but recent focussing and generator advances make this ray much more powerful than the units used on the Death Star. The beam packs enough destructive power to shatter the most planetary shields and sear whole continents in a flash.
========================
-Dark Empire Sourcebook

========================
Pg. 46: The Eclipse was also intended to devastate entire worlds. Its main weapon was a superlaser weapon, although its power was only two-thirds that of the main weapon aboard the first Death Star – it was “merely” powerful enough to crack the crust of a planet rather than destroy it outright.
========================
-The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels

Contradictory? Yes it would seem so at first, however the first quote does mention the presence of a planetary shield, so we could argue that the second example includes one by default as well, hence making the 2/3rds power and the not being able to blow planets up part to work with each other, because the beam wouldn't be powerfull enough to destroy the planet after it has expended the energy to punch through the shield as well.

[His Divine Shadow]

Whenever possible all evidence should be saved. No matter what our opinion of the evidence it still outranks what we think. Data always trumps what we think. In other words unless there is absolutely no way to reconcile the 2/3rds statement then we have to accept it.

Either it contradicts canon visuals or we fit it in, my way is the only way to fit it in, that I have discovered anyway.
And it does make for a fucking powerfull superlaser.

[SPOOFE]

Unless you're talking about orders of magnitude in which case we could supposse it is 2/3rds of the orders of magntiude less powerful (in other words if the DS1 SL was 1e33J then the ESSD one would be 1e22J)

Dude, that's eleven orders of magnitude you just suggested. What fucked-up math are you using?

[nightmare]

Aside from the superlaser, there's another oddity about the Eclipse. Its heavy conventional armament consists of heavy laser cannons, not turbolasers (which are midrange guns). These HLCs are comparable in power to turbolasers if we are to believe WEG. We had a thread a long time ago about it.

550 Heavy Laser Cannons (200 Forward, 150 Left, 150 Right, 50 Aft)
Crew: 4 Gunners per cannon
Fire Control: 2D
Space Range: 3-15/35/75 Space Units
Atmospheric Range: 6-15/72/150 km
Damage: 8D
500 Turbolaser Batteries (150 Forward, 125 Left, 125 Right, 100 Aft)
Crew: 2 Gunners per battery
Scale: Starfighter
Fire Control: 4D
Space Range: 3-15/36/75 Space Units
Atmospheric Range: 600 metres-1.5 km/7 km/15 km
Damage: 5D

[Illuminatus Primus]

The 2/3rds quote cannot be true.

A superlaser that powerful couldn't be powered by the reactor the Eclipse has by the volume-to-power relation discovered by Ender that Saxton used for ICS scaling from ISD and DS I and DS II.

[SirNitram]

The 2/3rds quote cannot be true.

A superlaser that powerful couldn't be powered by the reactor the Eclipse has by the volume-to-power relation discovered by Ender that Saxton used for ICS scaling from ISD and DS I and DS II.

Unless advances were made to further increase the density and/or extract speed from Hypermatter.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The 2/3rds quote cannot be true.

A superlaser that powerful couldn't be powered by the reactor the Eclipse has by the volume-to-power relation discovered by Ender that Saxton used for ICS scaling from ISD and DS I and DS II.

Unless advances were made to further increase the density and/or extract speed from Hypermatter.

Given the same source says the superlaser works via some bizarre non-DET reaction, and gives pretty specific descriptions that happen to be more representative of the Eclipse's likely power output, and you think we should assume, in a more-or-less technologically stagnant universe, that reactors magically got orders of magnitude better in a couple years. When the searing continents much better lines up with the Eclipse's volume?

Generally you reject oddities when there's a correlation between other evidence. Your assumption requires throwing out the quotes about crust busting and continent searing.

[SirNitram]

The 2/3rds quote cannot be true.

A superlaser that powerful couldn't be powered by the reactor the Eclipse has by the volume-to-power relation discovered by Ender that Saxton used for ICS scaling from ISD and DS I and DS II.

Unless advances were made to further increase the density and/or extract speed from Hypermatter.

Given the same source says the superlaser works via some bizarre non-DET reaction, and gives pretty specific descriptions that happen to be more representative of the Eclipse's likely power output, and you think we should assume, in a more-or-less technologically stagnant universe, that reactors magically got orders of magnitude better in a couple years. When the searing continents much better lines up with the Eclipse's volume?

'More or less technologically stagnant'? Last I checked a good amount of technological advancement was occouring.. Just compare a Droid Starfighter with it's distant descendent, the TIE Defender. Or even a TIE Fighter next to a TIE Defender. There is a massive jump in reactor power, with minimal increase in space.

Generally you reject oddities when there's a correlation between other evidence. Your assumption requires throwing out the quotes about crust busting and continent searing.

Not really. It requires we use the higher-end planetary shield calc's(Mostly derived from how long the shield held out against the DS-1). Simply declaring official statements 'invalid' because they don't match a presumed but unproven limit is a load of bullshit, IP. Does this energy density hold up in all ships we have figures for? If you're declaring it must be the limit for every ship, you have better do the math.

[Spartan]

IP

Given the same source says the superlaser works via some bizarre non-DET reaction, and gives pretty specific descriptions that happen to be more representative of the Eclipse's likely power output, and you think we should assume, in a more-or-less technologically stagnant universe, that reactors magically got orders of magnitude better in a couple years. When the searing continents much better lines up with the Eclipse's volume?

IP we have an official statement that the generators and the focusing equipment used in the Eclipse are a recent advance.

Pg. 88: The Death Star's prime weapon was composed of eight individual lasers that could focus together, generating enough power to destroy an entire planet. By comparison, the Eclipse carries only a single laser, but recent focussing and generator advances make this ray much more powerful than the units used on the Death Star. The beam packs enough destructive power to shatter the most planetary shields and sear whole continents in a flash.
========================
-Dark Empire Sourcebook

So technological stagnation maybe a general trend, advance can still be made. They may have always had the underlying capabilty to field the technology used in Eclipses; but no incentive to fund a project to do so. Remember the tech for the galaxy gun had been existence for along time, but no one had thought to use it as a weapon.

[Connor MacLeod]

Your are all correct that 2/3 od a DS level SL power is just wrong. Punching through a planetary sheild and searing a continent, however doesn't require DS power levels. I'm sure you'll all agree that shattering a planetary sheild is still pretty damn impessive.

Okay here goes one of my personal problems.

Whenever possible all evidence should be saved. No matter what our opinion of the evidence it still outranks what we think. Data always trumps what we think. In other words unless there is absolutely no way to reconcile the 2/3rds statement then we have to accept it.

I think people on this board need to be reminded that we can't just dismiss data we don't think fits, we need to work at integrating it. Now, again, i think the only way for the 2/3rds statement to work is if they are talking about orders of magnitude. Thus if we suppose that the DS1 beam was 1e42J (to overestimate and give some punch through the shield power) then the ESSD superlaser would be 1e28J...now doesn't that sound a bit more realistic?

That works, but I have also always considered the fact that the Eclipse SSD superlaser was also not a compound superlaser. I believe it only used one of the tributary beams. The DS superlaser was a compound weapon of tremendous complexity (compare the tributary beams "inside" to the ones on the outside, to the final beam... they're vastly different.) The Eclipse no doubt uses a much smaller "trributary beam" tube, but with more refined generation and targeting systems (The axial nature would give it more benefit, I believe.)

Aside from the difficulties in power generation, the Eclipse has an infinitesimal volume for an axial superlaser, compared to what the DS could mount. That would almost certianly dictate that whatever "tributary beam" it has is in fact a much smaller one contributing to one of the much larger ones (meaning it very likely only has a small fraction of the power of the Superlaser.)

I suspect E28 is probably quite a reasonable estimate for the firepower, though.

[Ender]

Nitram is right that an increase in power density in the reactor could explain it. The problem her is the scale of the increase

TO fire a SL shot 2/3rd the power of DS1 once a day, the reactor needs an output of 7.7E32 watts. Given the power density of the DS1 core, that means that the volume required be 6.65E13 cubic meters.

If the Eclipse is 17.5 kilometers long, 13 kilometers wide, and 3.2 kilometers tall then it only has a volume of 7.28E11 cubic meters. And thats ignoring that it is not a cube. If that entire space is a reactor, then the pwer density must be 1.06E21 watts per cubic meter.

Thats 91 times more dense. And thats assuming that the entire ship is a rector, when its not. We are talking an increase in several oreders of magnitude here. And given the construction time, that increase happens in less the half a decade. That is just not a reasonable conclusion.

With the 1E28 explanation you could run the thing off a very small reactor. Infact running it off an ISD one would allow for multiple shots per day. The larger reactors one would expect on such a ship could easily power that type of SL and the rest of the ships functions.

[nightmare]

DexenGrid's new bullpup superlaser.. now in even smaller format, for all your planet-busting needs.

[Spartan]

Ender:

TO fire a SL shot 2/3rd the power of DS1 once a day, the reactor needs an output of 7.7E32 watts. Given the power density of the DS1 core, that means that the volume required be 6.65E13 cubic meters.

True, but we also don't the DS1 actual power density, we only know the lower limit. It maybe that these higher power densities were always avalible, and simply unnecessary expense on vessels, that don't have power requirements that high. Remeber there are many power intensive technology that require more power than a typical starship needs. Planetary hyperwave trancievers for instance.

[Lord Jax]

Which is bigger, SSD or ESD?

The Executor is bigger also i have some evidence that proves the Executor might also be 20km instead of 18km the Executor is about 12.5 times the length of a destroyer. From some of the views in the movie Empire Strikes Back. Also it is a custom job for Lord Vader. Eclipse does have greater mass though. PS:Im the friend

[Techno_Union]

Which is bigger, SSD or ESD?

The Executor is bigger also i have some evidence that proves the Executor might also be 20km instead of 18km the Executor is about 12.5 times the length of a destroyer. From some of the views in the movie Empire Strikes Back. Also it is a custom job for Lord Vader. Eclipse does have greater mass though. PS:Im the friend

No offense to you, but i have not seen any actual cannon evidence that says anything like 20km, 8km(bunch of crap), 12.8/12.5(do not remember, but this seems reaosnable,NEGVV), and 17.8(not cannon but it might be the length). If you could post written facts then I would like to see it or put the picture of the Executor and ISD on the site.

[Tribun]

Which is bigger, SSD or ESD?

The Executor is bigger also i have some evidence that proves the Executor might also be 20km instead of 18km the Executor is about 12.5 times the length of a destroyer. From some of the views in the movie Empire Strikes Back. Also it is a custom job for Lord Vader. Eclipse does have greater mass though. PS:Im the friend

No offense to you, but i have not seen any actual cannon evidence that says anything like 20km, 8km(bunch of crap), 12.8/12.5(do not remember, but this seems reaosnable,NEGVV), and 17.8(not cannon but it might be the length). If you could post written facts then I would like to see it or put the picture of the Executor and ISD on the site.

See here:
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/ssd/ssdisd_.gif
And here:
http://www.daltonator.net/fanfics/multi ... Ships2.gif

[Techno_Union]

Awesome, thanks for the pics. Also, does this mean that the 12.8/12.5km measure from the NEGVV is wrong? Or is there Executor Class and a regular command ship class? Knight Hammer was said to be 8km. I have wondered this question.

[Ghost Rider]

Awesome, thanks for the pics. Also, does this mean that the 12.8/12.5km measure from the NEGVV is wrong? Or is there Executor Class and a regular command ship class? Knight Hammer was said to be 8km. I have wondered this question.

I believe Saxton went into saying there is the possiblity of a 8/12.5 KM class, but that the Executor is a 17.5 KM ship.

This is because of the FUBAR of WEG by claiming that the 8 KM is the SSD class of vessel and then the official FUBAR of the 12.5(which is a in-between of the two).

[His Divine Shadow]

TO fire a SL shot 2/3rd the power of DS1 once a day, the reactor needs an output of 7.7E32 watts. Given the power density of the DS1 core, that means that the volume required be 6.65E13 cubic meters.

Suppose we argue that the Eclipse superlaser itself can fire a beam 2/3rds that of the original superlaser, but, this says only what the superlaser would be capable of, it doesn't say anything about the ship that powers it, that would make the apparently contradictory quotes fit.
Due to advances in superlaser tech it means that something as small as the Eclipse SL can channel 2/3rds the energy of the vastly larger Death Star SL, assuming it could be fed enough power.

With the 1E28 explanation you could run the thing off a very small reactor. Infact running it off an ISD one would allow for multiple shots per day. The larger reactors one would expect on such a ship could easily power that type of SL and the rest of the ships functions.

Assume the ESSD-SL is run of a dedicated ISD reactor, the official material says a max-power shot can be fired every 24 hours IIRC, this is probably not the limit of the energy that the ESSD-SL can channel but instead the limits of the ESSD's superlaser capacitors.

[Lord Jax]

Would the Eclipse be able to ram sn SSD and sill live to talk about it.

I dont think so it will most likely be destroyed or severaly damaged.

[Howedar]

Which is bigger, SSD or ESD?

The Executor is bigger also i have some evidence that proves the Executor might also be 20km instead of 18km the Executor is about 12.5 times the length of a destroyer. From some of the views in the movie Empire Strikes Back. Also it is a custom job for Lord Vader. Eclipse does have greater mass though. PS:Im the friend

Don't get jittery Luke, there are a lot of command ships.


Canon > you

[Techno_Union]

Also it is a custom job for Lord Vader

Ya I never heard that it was a custom job. I know that it was the first but as for special I do not know. And do not forget that the Lusankya was supposed to be a "sister" ship to the Executor, meaning it was the same. But there could be minor changes in the Executor such as the medition chamber.