Kilimanjaro-class dreadnought (Mass Effect) vs Galaxy-class

[Stargazer]

A Kilimanjaro-class dreadnought from Mass Effect and a Galaxy-class starship end up 10,000 km apart in deep space and are hostile to each other. Which wins?

[Swindle1984]

We just had this thread. Use the fucking search function.

[Stargazer]

Um...no? There was a thread about the Federation vs the Mass Effect galaxy in general. Not the same as a single ship battle.

[adam_grif]

Blah blah warp strafing.

In a stand up fight the 38kt slug should be ample to do some serious damage to the Galaxy class. Photorps rated at 64 MT (yeah I know tech manuals etc) would probably kill the ME ships in one hit.

[Stark]

Isn't 10k a bit beyond the range of ME mass drivers, since you'd assume the Galaxy would have a few seconds to just get out of the way?

[Stofsk]

In a stand up fight the 38kt slug should be ample to do some serious damage to the Galaxy class.

Depends on how long the captain of the Galaxy is gonna just sit there and let his ship get raped without raising the shields.

Then whoever is at tactical or ops will go 'lol they don't have subspace sensors' and the captain will be like 'lol warp factor 1 any direction for two seconds engage'

Then they'll go 'open hailing frequencies' because it turns out trek captains aren't assholes and will like to have a chat with people rather than blow them up

But I guess that's not fun or whatever so then they'll just shoot them with photorps and thread closed.

[adam_grif]

Isn't 10k a bit beyond the range of ME mass drivers, since you'd assume the Galaxy would have a few seconds to just get out of the way?

That depends on whether this is debate trek, where they fire weapons at extreme range, always warp strafe and have extremely powerful weapons, or actual trek, where all the fighting goes on at visual range and they would close from the initial distance before firing.

[Stark]

If they're fighting at 10k, ME loses first-strike due to projectile lag. With Galaxy off-axis after they close, what's ME got that can do shit to them? Point defence lasers? Useless blobguns from the games?

And sorry dude ST has 300,000 kilometer pew pews, complain to Paramount if you don't like it.

[Stargazer]

Projectile lag? It should take little more than 2 seconds for the mass accelerator slug to travel 10k km. I've seen ships get hit by torpedoes with longer travel times.

If the Galaxy class closes and gets off-axis, the Kilimanjaro has its 78 gun broadside. Also it's got a load of fighters itching to unload their disruptor torps.

[RedImperator]

Without subspace sensors on the Kilimanjaro, a Galaxy can effectively appear and disappear at will, at any angle and direction. The chief limitation will be how fast a Galaxy can get back into warp after dropping out for pewpews.

[Stark]

Projectile lag? It should take little more than 2 seconds for the mass accelerator slug to travel 10k km. I've seen ships get hit by torpedoes with longer travel times.

And how many hits is it going to take to kill a Galaxy? If it's more than 'one', they lose, even if they hit (astonishingly unlikely).

If the Galaxy class closes and gets off-axis, the Kilimanjaro has its 78 gun broadside. Also it's got a load of fighters itching to unload their disruptor torps.

It doesn't have to 'close in' to get off axis, it can do whatever it wants. I love how you say '78 gun broadside' like it's supposed to impress me with zero numbers. Why the fuck do they have broadsides anyway?

And fighters? Roffle.

[Omeganian]

Depends on how long the captain of the Galaxy is gonna just sit there and let his ship get raped without raising the shields.

Shields won't change much. The structure of the ship won't stand such a kinetic strike.

Photorps rated at 64 MT (yeah I know tech manuals etc) would probably kill the ME ships in one hit.

ME ships are built to withstand rather powerful explosions - there is ablative armor, for example (which is rather useful in ST). I don't think they are any easier to blow up than a mostly hollow asteroid of similar size; probably harder. Since destroying a 5 km such asteroid would have taken over 200 torpedoes (which is a more canonical statement than the TM), I think a 1 km long dreadnought is likely to withstand an explosion or two.

[Stark]

Oh man, did you just say 'they're pretty tough, torps won't work'?

It'd be a real bummer for ME if the Galaxy had a system custom designed for the detection of and deflection or destruction of high-speed kinetic impactors, hey?

Oh wait!

[Stofsk]

Depends on how long the captain of the Galaxy is gonna just sit there and let his ship get raped without raising the shields.

Shields won't change much. The structure of the ship won't stand such a kinetic strike.

Based on what? Shields in Star Trek have taken hits from photorps, which have a much larger yield than the kinetic slug the Dreadnought can fire. Besides which, all the captain of the Galaxy needs to do is jump to warp at any heading for a couple seconds and the ME ship can't do shit to it.

Seriously, we still arguing about this? They even had an episode on TNG about how a Starfleet ship defeated another ship which had lightspeed-lag sensors only.

[Lord of the Abyss]

Photon torpedoes are antimatter weapons, which means they'll put out a whole lot of gamma rays that will ignore Mass Effect antikinetic shields. And since they lack Star Trek style shields, there's always the trick where you just beam a torpedo onboard your unshielded opponent and watch them go boom. Or just beam the dreadnaught's crew into the Galaxy's cargo bay.

Why the fuck do they have broadsides anyway?

To attack multiple smaller, weaker targets that the main gun is overkill for.

Depends on how long the captain of the Galaxy is gonna just sit there and let his ship get raped without raising the shields.

Shields won't change much. The structure of the ship won't stand such a kinetic strike.

The same structure that has stood up to ship-to-ship impacts (with shields up) and to planetary re-entry and impact (several occasions)? Starfleet hulls with those "structural integrity fields" can evidently take a whole lot of punishment.

[Stark]

I was questioning the broadside layout; if he meant 'secondary battery' he's been playing too much BFG. Emphasising lateral firepower seems strange for ME ships.

[Stargazer]

And how many hits is it going to take to kill a Galaxy? If it's more than 'one', they lose, even if they hit (astonishingly unlikely).

One, if the Ent-E's collision with the Scimitar is any indication.

It doesn't have to 'close in' to get off axis, it can do whatever it wants. I love how you say '78 gun broadside' like it's supposed to impress me with zero numbers. Why the fuck do they have broadsides anyway?

For the very situation you suggested- enemy ships getting "off-axis" of the main gun.

Codex/Ships and Vehicles/Mass Accelerators:
"A ship's main gun is a large spinal-mount weapon running 90% of the hull's length. While possessing destructive power equal to that of tactical nuclear weapons, main guns are difficult to aim. Because ships must be able to point their bows almost directly at their targets, main guns are best used for long-range "bombardment" fire.

Approximately 40% of the hull's width, broadside guns inflict less damage and can be mounted with greater numbers and more flexibility. The modern human Kilimanjaro-class dreadnoughts mount three decks with 26 broadside accelerators apiece for a total salvo weight of 78 slugs per side, firing once every two seconds."

As for photorps, if they hit, indeed the Kilimanjaro will be in big trouble. It has to get through the whole GARDIAN system first, though.

[Stark]

Still no numbers. How can they be 40% of the ship's width and still flexible, anyway? The ships don't visually have such huge weapons. Can they fire up and down?

Turns out saying 'lol infinite point defence' makes your setting really stupid.

Oh man, Scimitar? Seriously? Lol. Anyway, have fun hitting at 10,000kms.

[Stargazer]

Still no numbers. How can they be 40% of the ship's width and still flexible, anyway? The ships don't visually have such huge weapons. Can they fire up and down?

We haven't actually seen a Kilimanjaro class dreadnought. Presumably the guns aren't extremely wide themselves- they likely don't fire projectiles any bigger than the main gun's 20 kg slugs.

Turns out saying 'lol infinite point defence' makes your setting really stupid.

Good thing it's never said that GARDIAN is infinite. Just really good.

Oh man, Scimitar? Seriously? Lol. Anyway, have fun hitting at 10,000kms.

"Lol" isn't an argument. And you do realize that a dreadnought's main gun is meant to have a range of several tens of thousands of kilometers?

[Stark]

Uh, dude, if the guns are lateral, being 40% of the width is a description of their length, not diameter.

Can you prove that ME ships firing at long range expect direct hits in 'bombardment mode'? Call me nuts but with no FTL sensors against anything with any delta-v, plinking with a mass driver at 10,000kms is going to be pot luck. And comparing the crash of an unshielded, heavily-damage ship into a far larger ship is hardly relevant to deflecting shots with shields, deflectors, etc.

[Stargazer]

No, "40 percent of the hull's width" refers to how long they are. If interpreted your way, that would mean the main gun is as wide as 90% of the hull's length. That's clearly impossible.

Why would the lack of FTL sensors matter at 10,000 km? That's nowhere near lightsecond range.

The Scimitar's shields were still at 70% when Ent-E rammed it.

[Stark]

How can they be 40% of the ship's width and still flexible, anyway? The ships don't visually have such huge weapons. Can they fire up and down?

Presumably the guns aren't extremely wide themselves- they likely don't fire projectiles any bigger than the main gun's 20 kg slugs.

Uh, dude, if the guns are lateral, being 40% of the width is a description of their length, not diameter.

What the fuck are you talking about? I'm well aware that 40% of the ships' width is a description of the gun's length - your hint is that I just fucking said that.

With regular sensors, do you even know what resoultion they have at 10,000kms? What's the spread on the mass driver? OH WAIT YOU DON'T KNOW LOL

Are you now seriously comparing an entire ship to a mass driver round? Are you aware of what that glowy orange thing on the Galaxy does?

[Stargazer]

What the fuck are you talking about? I'm well aware that 40% of the ships' width is a description of the gun's length - your hint is that I just fucking said that.

Ok, my mistake. Your tone was that of disagreement, but there wasn't any disagreement, so that threw me off.

With regular sensors, do you even know what resoultion they have at 10,000kms? What's the spread on the mass driver? OH WAIT YOU DON'T KNOW LOL

The only limiting factor on sensors apparently is light lag. Here's the whole codex entry on sensors:

""Light lag" prevents sensing in real time at great distances. A ship firing its thrusters at the Charon Relay can be easily detected from Earth, 5.75 light-hours (six billion kilometers) away, but Earth will only see the event five hours and 45 minutes after it occurs. Due to the light-speed limit, defenders can't see enemies coming until they have already arrived. Because there is FTL travel and communications but no FTL sensors, frigates are crucial for scouting and picket duties.

Passive sensors are used for long-range detection, while active sensors obtain short-range, high quality targeting data.

Passive sensors include visual, thermographic, and radio detectors that watch and listen for objects in space. A powered ship emits a great deal of energy; the heat of the life support systems; the radiation given off by power plants and electrical equipment; the exhaust of the thrusters. Starships stand out plainly against the near-absolute zero background of space. Passive sensors can be used during FTL travel, but incoming data is significantly distorted by the effect of the mass effect envelope and Doppler shift.

Active sensors are radars and high resolution ladars (LAser Detection And Ranging) that emit a "ping" of energy and "listen" for return signals. Ladars have a narrower field of view than radar, but ladar resolution allows images of detected objects to be assembled. Active sensors are useless when a ship is moving at FTL speeds."

Obviously resolution at 10,000 km is enough to target a ship, otherwise combat at that range would be pointless. And it's not pointless.

Are you now seriously comparing an entire ship to a mass driver round? Are you aware of what that glowy orange thing on the Galaxy does?

I'm comparing the kinetic energy imparted by them, yes. Physics apply the same to both.

[Omeganian]

[quote="Destructionator XIII"]A big difference between ramming and a kinetic penetrator is that the ramming object maintains its forward force; instead of bouncing off, it keeps pushing inward.

Yes, the engines do keep working, but it's only a factor if enough time passes. Can't see that time here, nor any time at all. Nor does the relative speed look significant, BTW.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eeb1X26IaOE[/youtube

[Stargazer]

The idea that the Ent-E having continued motion to break through would hold weight- if the shields had resisted the Ent-E upon contact but later buckled. But no, there is no resistance at all, no temporary stop as the Ent-E struggles for a moment to break the Scimitar's shields. It just goes through.