StarDestroyer.Net BBS

How much of it's overall firepower can an ISD direct AFT? (i.e. in a rear facing 90 degree cone, the point of which would be located at the center of the middle main engine).

What sorts of batteries would make up this firepower?

Keep in mind the vast energies put out from the engines, that might be able to inflict damage.

Winston Blake wrote:Keep in mind the vast energies put out from the engines, that might be able to inflict damage.

Only if an enemy ship was so retarded as to actually fly close enough to the ISD to encounter engine wash.

In Rogue Squadron and other Flight Sim type games, at least, the ISD has extremely lesser firepower behind it as far as point defense guns. I would say maybe 10% of the guns as on the top or bottom of the wedge, not counting ones on there that could rotate to fire (which they don't in most games).

However, that's obviously partially game mechanics so that you can have a spot where your fighter won't get utterly raped up the ass like the ISD point guns usually do unless you come in at some strange angle.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:

Winston Blake wrote:Keep in mind the vast energies put out from the engines, that might be able to inflict damage.

Only if an enemy ship was so retarded as to actually fly close enough to the ISD to encounter engine wash.

Meh, IIRC it came up as a reason against me some time ago when i suggested that the rear was the safest place for a Fed ship to attack an ISD. It expect it goes from SWTC's Propulsion article:

Out to some large distance from the ship, the thrust particle streams are likely to remain thin, straight, well-collimated cylinders. Passing through the stream anywhere in this region must be dangerous. Even a peripheral exposure is likely to feel like an intense, possibly lethal cosmic ray shower. A particle shield may provide some protection against such irradiation, but any object standing directly in the beam will experience the stream's thrust. The victim could be blown away downstream at hundreds or thousands of G.

Heat transfer from the stream may also be lethal. Even if the stream particles are ice-cold in their own reference frame, their relativistic impact into a solid surface must cause tremendous shock-heating, as bulk kinetic energy is converted to thermal energy. The post-shock temperature may be orders of magnitude greater than the temperature of the undisturbed flow or the interior of the engine that emitted the stream. Depending on mass and surface area, the transgressing object may be vapourised before it is accelerated appreciably. It therefore seems likely that all small starships have at least some minimal shields (including TIE fighters), whether or not they're battle-worthy.

If one incident from Darksaber wasn't some kind of anomaly, a star destroyer can direct its entire weapons-power through a single barrel.

So to answer your question: All of it.

FTeik wrote:If one incident from Darksaber wasn't some kind of anomaly, a star destroyer can direct its entire weapons-power through a single barrel.

So to answer your question: All of it.

Any barrel at all, or maybe just the heavies? Because I'm having a hard time believing a light point-defense gun could be used to dish out Beams Of Doom like that. Wouldn't it overload or something?

FTeik wrote:If one incident from Darksaber wasn't some kind of anomaly, a star destroyer can direct its entire weapons-power through a single barrel.

So to answer your question: All of it.

No, that is additionally supported with the ROTS:ICS, IIRC. With the description of the Venator and how a "true warship" can put all firepower into one gun. In the same manner, an ISD should be able to put all firepower forward, or broadside. But the lower number of guns that can bear aft should have some complications. For one thing, you can't shoot at as many different targets at once as you can forward. ~10% of the total weapons coverage aft seems to be a loose rule of thumb for most SW ships.

Karza wrote:Any barrel at all, or maybe just the heavies? Because I'm having a hard time believing a light point-defense gun could be used to dish out Beams Of Doom like that. Wouldn't it overload or something?

Most likely just the heavies, though there's no specifics available.

ROTS ICS states it can put all it's firepower into it's heavy guns, not one gun. I'd take that to mena it's 8 HTL turrets each with 2 barrels.

I guess I should rephrase my question:

What guns does the ISD have that can fire into that rear arc? It seems to me that the shape of the ISD restricts a great many of it's weapons from firing into most of the aft "cone" (or at least the majority of the aft cone.)

SVPD wrote:ROTS ICS states it can put all it's firepower into it's heavy guns, not one gun. I'd take that to mena it's 8 HTL turrets each with 2 barrels.

That doesn't make sense. The medium and light guns have almost no firepower compared to the heavies. It's like saying you can add the firepower of the point defence machine guns on a battleship to its main batteries, which has no practical effect whatsoever.

SVPD wrote:I guess I should rephrase my question:

What guns does the ISD have that can fire into that rear arc? It seems to me that the shape of the ISD restricts a great many of it's weapons from firing into most of the aft "cone" (or at least the majority of the aft cone.)

The two aft heavy turrets. Ion cannons. We don't really know what other weapons it has that can fire aft.

I have a massive poster of a Star Destroyer Mk 1 on my wall, showing clearly its aft sections (its the blockade runner chase by the way). I can see several locations of interest. Firstly, there is a dish shaped object located on the upper port side, above and between the port and central engine banks. It seems to be very similar to another object I have seen before in another discussion, located in front (?) of the main hanger bay, and the hypothesis was that this was some sort of weapon, but I'm not sure. There is no duplicate weapon on the starboard side.
Secondly, there are four objects located on each side of the command tower 'neck' section, close to the primary hull. There are in a straight line, located under the hull section which extends out from above the lowest tier on the superstructure. To me, they have always seemed very similar in design to turrets; they have a main elongated six sided polygonal shape, and are based vertically. From each, two 'barrel' like shapes extend upwards. I don't have any sort of screen shot, so my apologies if this is a poor description.
Furthermore, there are a variety of spaces which could house warhead launchers, notably where the upper and lower hull meet to port and starboard of the engines. Obviously, lighter turbolasers etc are not visible, so where these are positioned is anyones guess.

nightmare wrote:

SVPD wrote:ROTS ICS states it can put all it's firepower into it's heavy guns, not one gun. I'd take that to mena it's 8 HTL turrets each with 2 barrels.

That doesn't make sense. The medium and light guns have almost no firepower compared to the heavies. It's like saying you can add the firepower of the point defence machine guns on a battleship to its main batteries, which has no practical effect whatsoever.

Ok, what it says verbatim is that it can channel "almost it's entire reactor output to it's heavy guns when required". I'd take that to mean it can channel the reactor output from shields and thrust to weapons. My bad on the poor wording.

SVPD wrote:I guess I should rephrase my question:

What guns does the ISD have that can fire into that rear arc? It seems to me that the shape of the ISD restricts a great many of it's weapons from firing into most of the aft "cone" (or at least the majority of the aft cone.)

The two aft heavy turrets. Ion cannons. We don't really know what other weapons it has that can fire aft.

The 2 ion cannon turrets don't mask the 2 aft heavy turrets?

There are definately blind spots in the aft, but given how quickly ISDs can turn - a few seconds - you'd have difficulty keeping in them for long enough to get an advantage with an equivalent ship.

NecronLord wrote:There are definately blind spots in the aft, but given how quickly ISDs can turn - a few seconds - you'd have difficulty keeping in them for long enough to get an advantage with an equivalent ship.

They can turn that fast? I was under the impression that they had good acceleration forward/backward, but poor turning speeds.

Also I was thinking more along the lines of getting into that arc with a smaller warship (something somewhere between a Corellian Corvette and a Nebulon B), which might be part of the impetus for fighters?

Their missiles might be effective against smaller warships with less shield power?

SVPD wrote:They can turn that fast?

Yeah. Look at how fast the one struck by the ion cannon at hoth starts spinning when its engines misfire. Someone on here calced it a while back.

nightmare wrote:That doesn't make sense. The medium and light guns have almost no firepower compared to the heavies. It's like saying you can add the firepower of the point defence machine guns on a battleship to its main batteries, which has no practical effect whatsoever.

Could it mean the ship is significantly overgunned so to speak so that the reactor isn't able to power all the heavy guns at full power? Such a situation would seem to help explain why the density of fire isn't heavier.

NecronLord wrote:Someone on here calced it a while back.

That would be Howedar: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=50380

SVPD wrote:The 2 ion cannon turrets don't mask the 2 aft heavy turrets?

"The two aft heavy turrets. Ion cannons." I was talking about the two aft heavy ion cannon turrets, not the HTLs. So yeah, they do.

FOG3 wrote:Could it mean the ship is significantly overgunned so to speak so that the reactor isn't able to power all the heavy guns at full power? Such a situation would seem to help explain why the density of fire isn't heavier.

Although I would object to such a simple explanation, I would be in the wrong since Dr.Saxton, who pretty much singlehandedly defined these things, clearly believe as you do, if you take a look at his power technologies page:

Dr. Saxton wrote: However size is not the only important factor limiting firepower. Heavy guns benefit from dedicated capacitors to collect energy from a ship's main reactor and store it for an intense discharge. The SPHA-T gun lacks a continuous feed to a ship's reactor, and therefore it inevitably exhausts itself long before a comparable ship-mounted gun would. The prime weapons of a well-designed warship are optimally designed so that their power feeds can fully exploit the main reactor. When the captain directs full power to recharging the main guns, the maximum sustainable firepower must be comparable to the reactor's total output. However the total firepower of secondary weapons, such as anti-fighter screening guns, may be a more limited fraction of the reactor output.

Ity really doesn't make much sense otherwise, especially if you compare with the Battlestar Galactica, a ship with a considerably lower technology base, which manages to create a nigh on impenetrable flak cloud around it. ISD's, and indeed any other SW warship, don't seem to make use of this tactic, when they supposedly have the capability to do so (not necessarily just flak, a haze of fire would be equally effective)

FOG3 wrote:

nightmare wrote:That doesn't make sense. The medium and light guns have almost no firepower compared to the heavies. It's like saying you can add the firepower of the point defence machine guns on a battleship to its main batteries, which has no practical effect whatsoever.

Could it mean the ship is significantly overgunned so to speak so that the reactor isn't able to power all the heavy guns at full power? Such a situation would seem to help explain why the density of fire isn't heavier.

Quotes from the BFC and ROTS ICS make that unlikely. Cooling the barrles is more likely the limiting factor, which is supported by real life, the ROTS novel, and tangentally by AOTC ICS

Lazarus wrote:Ity really doesn't make much sense otherwise, especially if you compare with the Battlestar Galactica, a ship with a considerably lower technology base, which manages to create a nigh on impenetrable flak cloud around it. ISD's, and indeed any other SW warship, don't seem to make use of this tactic, when they supposedly have the capability to do so (not necessarily just flak, a haze of fire would be equally effective)

You are aware that you are comparing projectile weapons to DEW. Not that Galactica put up a flak 'cloud', she seemed to put up a 'wall' facing the approaching enemy rather than an omnidirectional barrier. Good luck trying that vs an opponent with Wars mobility.

Winston Blake wrote:snip

Might this suggest that is unwise to maneuver any more than necessary in fleet or carrier combat, lest you vaporise your fighters and strain other ships' shields?

Alan Bolte wrote:

Winston Blake wrote:snip

Might this suggest that is unwise to maneuver any more than necessary in fleet or carrier combat, lest you vaporise your fighters and strain other ships' shields?

that, and you also draw energy away from you main weapons, and manuvering is less important when the relative accelerations are that near.

You are aware that you are comparing projectile weapons to DEW. Not that Galactica put up a flak 'cloud', she seemed to put up a 'wall' facing the approaching enemy rather than an omnidirectional barrier. Good luck trying that vs an opponent with Wars mobility.

that, and you also draw energy away from you main weapons, and manuvering is less important when the relative accelerations are that near.

So therefore my point about BSg style point defense stands? The capital ships have certainly never been quoted as or been seen doing flips and immelman turns during an engagement. Stark, are YOU aware that turbolasers can in fact use a flak-burst ability, and also flak guns are shown to be equipped on many warships (RotS ICS)?
Regardless, using full weapon capability to defend the ship would surely make more sense than picking our individual targets. If a fighter squadron launches a couple dozen torps, why not simply fire all the point defense weapons on that vector, in the same way modern day warships do.