StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Didn't see this posted yet, so here it is...

http://www.merzo.net/10mpp.htm

Not sure how accurate it is, though. IE users, try hovering the ISD's bridge tower over the Executor's. Executor's looks significantly larger, but aren't they supposed to be the same size?

No, the Executor has always had a large tower, that's the way the movies showed it. The components of the tower are part of a more modular set, though.

Finally (although he hasn't updated the size of DSII yet, it's still the "official" 160 km figure).

Galvatron wrote:Didn't see this posted yet, so here it is...

http://www.merzo.net/10mpp.htm

Not sure how accurate it is, though. IE users, try hovering the ISD's bridge tower over the Executor's. Executor's looks significantly larger, but aren't they supposed to be the same size?

The modelmakers made them the same size for a 17.6 kilometer long Executor, but since the ship is now 19 kilometers long ...

Hot damn! Had no idea the Peacekeeper Command Carrier was THAT big!

The Executor has a taller tower than an ISD, depending on where you measure the base, but the features should share the same size. E.g., the globes should be the same size, the tower face should be the same height and width, etc. You'll notice that the tower on Chad Wilson's SSD drawing is not only too large, but it's also not proportional to the ISD tower. It appears to have been stretched lengthwise. You'll also notice that the outline of the cortex does not quite properly represent the actual model. A redrawing of the cortex, and the replacement of the current tower with the one drawn for the ISD, would make the drawing reasonably accurate.

Looking at the detailed cutout in ITW:OT and SW:CL, I don't get the impression that the Executor tower is as small as the ISD tower. It also appears bigger in ROTJ when the shuttle is passing by it. (In ESB, the Falcon, of a similar size, perches on the back of the Avenger and the tower looks alot smaller.)

It could also be that his Exec profile is taken from the incorrectly proportioned and drawn EG shit.

It's hilarious that that guy is so spineless. Executor was even updated on the official sites to 19km a few months ago, right? He just can't handle debate on his starship scaling forum.

He even got rid of his forums because he couldn't handle the debates and criticisms.

Why, that Saxtonite rabid warsie fandalorian rebel against Lucas...!!

Frankly many of these problems originate in Lucas' refusal to take any kindof active role in the EU. He's content to let it grow and expand, running rampant, flooded with hack writers (you know who i mean), crappy comics and terribly badly written books. But he's just as content to take in the huge gobs of cash it generates for him. And yet he refuses to take a hand in making sure it doesnt suck and people get the numbers right.

Really, thats his job, making sure the numbers are laid in concrete, not our job. But he prefers to lay the burden on the fanbase to handle his problems--if it werent for people like Curtis Saxton, for example, and others who actually give a shit all we wouldnt even have the real length of the SSD in canon. And whose fault is that?

Does someone want to drag and drop an AT-AT next to a Space 1999 eagle... is that right? are eagles that big?? I remember seeing pilots in the cockpit windows of eagles (which gives a better idea of scale than just seeing them sitting in the cockpit, the pilots wouldn't fit in the head of an AT-AT if that scaling is right.

18-Till-I-Die wrote:Frankly many of these problems originate in Lucas' refusal to take any kindof active role in the EU. He's content to let it grow and expand, running rampant, flooded with hack writers (you know who i mean), crappy comics and terribly badly written books. But he's just as content to take in the huge gobs of cash it generates for him. And yet he refuses to take a hand in making sure it doesnt suck and people get the numbers right.

Really, thats his job, making sure the numbers are laid in concrete, not our job. But he prefers to lay the burden on the fanbase to handle his problems--if it werent for people like Curtis Saxton, for example, and others who actually give a shit all we wouldnt even have the real length of the SSD in canon. And whose fault is that?

Agree... though it could be worse.. he could not care AND make concrete statements about ship lengths and clone numbers and go minimalist.

In a way it would be better if he went minimalist and actually took up the burden that is his obligation. As it is now, everyone but Lucas is burdened to "figure it out on their own".

I'll put it this way, Tolkien went to the trouble of writing a whole language and prehistory back to the beginning of time for his universe. And he had a miniscule fraction of the resources Lucas had. Even if Lucas just threw out some basic scale and numbers, and let others handle the EU from there, it would be better than what it is now which is letting writers make it up as they go along with barely any quality control.

What i'm saying is, its not your job, or mine, or Saxton's, or this guy's site, or Karen Traviss, etc to make sure these numbers are accurate to the vision of Lucas...its the guy with the vision's job. If he cant be bothered, he shouldnt allow them to build an EU in his vision.

But we all know why he allows the EU to run rampant dont we? If i were making tens or hundreds of millions a year off some tripe and i had to maybe release a trilogy every twenty or thirty years to back it up, you think i would be working at Burger King?

I think it's rather idiotic to blame Lucas personally for the errs of others.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:I think it's rather idiotic to blame Lucas personally for the errs of others.

I'm not, i'm saying that the way it is the fans do a lot of the actual work in the EU, while hack writers like Traviss throw out bull, and because there s no device inplace to regulate it beyond the canon scale--which lumps almost everything into C-canon--and no word from the top on what is and isnt allowed. He's created the basis for the universe and the entire framework, but the fans built the rest with sites like this, and people like Saxton who do the ICS books.

Meanwhile, Traviss pops around spouting her crap, and we, the fans, cant do anything about it because there is no checks and balances for the EU because no one bothered to make sure this stuff was accurate to the original vision.

So the hard work of people like Saxton and hundreds of other fans gets tossed aside by idiots with crap stories like Odds and the word from the top goes as far as a shrug and an explicit "Meh, whatever".

But this is going way off topic and i dont want to hijack the thread, so i'll concede the point to end the hijack, sorry.

Now just to get those death stars fixed and we can rest in peace

And the AT-AT.

Stas Bush wrote:And the AT-AT.

Well, he puts it at a height of 20 meters (which is shy of 22.5 meters).

Awesome site. It really gives some perspective on the ship sizes. I never realized the Jem Hadar Battlecruiser and the Romulan D'Deridex were nearly as big as an ISD. Plus I always thought the Galactica was a lot bigger.

I too was under the impression that a Colombia class battlestar was 1.61 kilometers long. Has he simply dropped the 1? Then again, he often seems to frefer 'offical' figures, both for the sake of simplicity (much easier to just look up the length of a ship than to scale it up from windows and decks and such) and to at least have some authority backing him up. He does provide warnings for when a ships size is in doubt.

I remember another site with scale pictures that got the size of the Mon Calamari ships right. I can't find it, though. Are there any others?

Huh, I thought the Battlestar Galactica was bigger than that.

Wow, V'Ger is 96km ? Even with the Excutor at 19km, it's still more then 5times it size... Heck of an impressive ship.