Blast doors vs. forcefields

[Mange]

From TOS onwards, we have seen that Starfleet relies heavily on forcefield technology.
This technology have been seen used in everything from keeping criminals locked in to medical quarantines. One thing that have been astonishing me is how they can be so reliant on forcefields which is prone to fail in the event of major power loss without any visible physical back-up systems.

In Star Wars we see less forcefield technology used in this manner, but instead more practical solutions such as blast doors etc. (however, the Star Wars novelization hints at forcefields is being used in the detention areas of the Death Star and is seen being used in the movies as atmospheric containment in the docking bays of the Death Stars and Star Destroyers).

In an engagement between Starfleet vessels and Imperial ships, which
side would be better equipped to handle vacuums due to battle damage, combat boarding parties etc. with the difference in technlogy in mind?

[The Nomad]

200 GT MTL + Fed ship = who the fuck cares about Feddie forcefield tech ?

[wautd]

200 GT MTL + Fed ship = who the fuck cares about Feddie forcefield tech ?

touché
(but i dont think the topicstarter meant a vs combatwhise )

[HRogge]

Forcefields are a nice ADDITION to blast doors, but it just takes a minor power shortage and all the nice Federation emergency FFs would be gone.

Blast doors are much better.

[Ted C]

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if the power goes out.

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if a droid shorts out a wall panel with its hand.

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if someone plants a small explosive charge against them.

There is no known coin-sized device that an intruder can use to force open a blast door.

[HRogge]

There is no known coin-sized device that an intruder can use to force open a blast door.

A coin sized antimatter charge might be an option, but that's something completely different

[Jon]

Another example of trek trying to be too 'futuristic'- they never seem to use simple old fashioned mesaures which are much more effective.

[Tribun]

Imagine TPM with a force field instead of a blast door.

Qui Gon sees force field.
Simply slams lightsaber into the emitter in the wall, after locating it with the force.
Gunray looks shocked.

TPM made the usefullness of blast doors clear.
Second is ANH.

[Isolder74]

The Blast doors also automatically shut when they detect a blast. The only door like that Star Trek have are inside of engineering. Other than that the doors look like tin foil.

Blast doors can not be opened with the use of normal human strength and are almost a foot thick.

Blasts door are seriously much more effective.

[Mange]

Imagine TPM with a force field instead of a blast door.

Qui Gon sees force field.
Simply slams lightsaber into the emitter in the wall, after locating it with the force.
Gunray looks shocked.

TPM made the usefullness of blast doors clear.
Second is ANH.

Yes, that's true. The feddies seems to hold practical technology in very low regard, though I can't understand why. The simplest solution often works out to be the best.

[Praxis]

Even better- Jedi can use the force to crush the forcefield emitters.

Anyway, I'd go for blast doors. Imagine this scenario:

Your ship is being borded. At the same time, an enemy ship is firing upon you with the intend to disable your ship.

Scenario 1: Enemies board your ship. As they go through, forcefields appear, blocking them. They blast through walls, but you eventually box them in. They open fire, trying to take out forcefields one at a time, to get inside the ship.

If they have any hackers, the hackers can easily disable the force field (we saw an episode of DS9 where O'Brien's security clearance was disabled, he wasn't able to disable force fields, but he was able to turn them on, preventing security from DS9 from reaching HIM).

After a bit, the enemy ship fires, knocks out your power core. Suddenly all the force fields disappear, and the enemies wipe out your ship.

Scenario 2:

Enemies board. You close blast doors. They use a thermal detonator to blow it. They blow the next one. And the next. And the next. Then they run out of detonators and have gotten nowhere.

Your ship takes a hit. You lose power. The blast doors stay closed.

[Crazedwraith]

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if the power goes out.

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if a droid shorts out a wall panel with its hand.

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if someone plants a small explosive charge against them.

There is no known coin-sized device that an intruder can use to force open a blast door.

Blast Doors do spontaneously open or close if someone shoots the control panel with a blaster though.

[Tribun]

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if the power goes out.

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if a droid shorts out a wall panel with its hand.

Blast doors don't spontaneously open if someone plants a small explosive charge against them.

There is no known coin-sized device that an intruder can use to force open a blast door.

Blast Doors do spontaneously open or close if someone shoots the control panel with a blaster though.

Nope, that was a sucurity feature.

The panel is connected with the door in that way, that if it s destroyed, the door closes automattically. That way:
-If widespread destruction is on the way, no one needs to close the blast dor, it does it itself.
-If enemies are on the way, they can't destroy the panels without shutting themselves in. (Otherwise they would destroy them, to hold the doors open)

[Isolder74]

Blast Doors do spontaneously open or close if someone shoots the control panel with a blaster though.

No buddy thay simply shut. They do not open they slam shut!

[Ted C]

Blast Doors do spontaneously open or close if someone shoots the control panel with a blaster though.

As Tribun and Isolder74 have already pointed out, blast doors do not open if someone blasts the control panel. We know of at least one blast door that will close if you blast the control panel, but that's a sensible "failure activation" effect. In the particular case (the blast door leading from the Death Star docking bay into the station), damage to the blast door control panel might coincide with something like a ship crashing in the bay -- a situation that might lead to fires, depressurization, chemical hazards, or other dangers that you'd want to isolate.

[Howedar]

A mix of both blast doors and forcefields is probably the ideal system. There are some things forcefields can do that blast doors are poorly suited towards (ie the atmospheric forcefields over the docking bays). Having to choose one, though, I'll go with blast doors.

[Tribun]

A mix of both blast doors and forcefields is probably the ideal system. There are some things forcefields can do that blast doors are poorly suited towards (ie the atmospheric forcefields over the docking bays). Having to choose one, though, I'll go with blast doors.

Actually, the hangars of Star Destroyers have giant blast doors, or metal shutters. So when the atmosphere shield is turned off (if the hangar is not used, or the shield needs to be maintained), the blast door covers the opening.
Note:I don't mean the giant opening in the underside, but the hangars itself, which are inside of it.

[Zac Naloen]

Those Forcefields at the end of TPM are capable of stopping a lightsaber, they'd probably be a nice addition to the blast door.

[Darth Wong]

Those Forcefields at the end of TPM are capable of stopping a lightsaber, they'd probably be a nice addition to the blast door.

Mind you, Qui-Gon was content to wait until they opened, because he knew they would shortly. If he'd really wanted to get through that forcefield and they wouldn't open soon, he could have simply sliced up the projectors on either side.

In order to visualize how stupid the use of mission-critical forcefields are, ask yourself why the Federation doesn't switch to hull-less starships, by replacing the entire hull with a huge forcefield. Hey, why not replace decks too? The whole ship can be a forcefield-hologram, and all of the crew will just walk around on forcefield-hologram decks (of course, I expect that if Rick Berman envisions a 28th century Fed ship, that's precisely what it will be like). It would be pretty fucking funny for an EMP bomb to wipe out an entire 28th century Fed fleet and instantly space all of its crews ...

[Howedar]

A mix of both blast doors and forcefields is probably the ideal system. There are some things forcefields can do that blast doors are poorly suited towards (ie the atmospheric forcefields over the docking bays). Having to choose one, though, I'll go with blast doors.

Actually, the hangars of Star Destroyers have giant blast doors, or metal shutters. So when the atmosphere shield is turned off (if the hangar is not used, or the shield needs to be maintained), the blast door covers the opening.
Note:I don't mean the giant opening in the underside, but the hangars itself, which are inside of it.

Yes I am aware of that, and you should have those. But it's hard to launch ships through 12" steel plate.

[The Third Man]

Yes, that's true. The feddies seems to hold practical technology in very low regard, though I can't understand why. The simplest solution often works out to be the best.

So it would seem, but to be fair, we don't know the constraints under which the designers of the ST ships operate. One of the constraints on the designers might be mass - if so, then the forcefield might be the simplest solution possible within the given mass parameter.

Looked at this way, your OP is a little unfair when you ask which is the better approach; obviously solid blast doors are better if your starship can cope with the extra mass.

The Fed use of "structural integrity fields" in place of massive structural members could be due to similar reasons. It seems the Feds might have (relatively speaking) power to spare whilst mass savings are critical.

[Mange]

Those Forcefields at the end of TPM are capable of stopping a lightsaber, they'd probably be a nice addition to the blast door.

Mind you, Qui-Gon was content to wait until they opened, because he knew they would shortly. If he'd really wanted to get through that forcefield and they wouldn't open soon, he could have simply sliced up the projectors on either side.

In order to visualize how stupid the use of mission-critical forcefields are, ask yourself why the Federation doesn't switch to hull-less starships, by replacing the entire hull with a huge forcefield. Hey, why not replace decks too? The whole ship can be a forcefield-hologram, and all of the crew will just walk around on forcefield-hologram decks (of course, I expect that if Rick Berman envisions a 28th century Fed ship, that's precisely what it will be like). It would be pretty fucking funny for an EMP bomb to wipe out an entire 28th century Fed fleet and instantly space all of its crews ...

But then you wouldn't need a crew, just a bunch of holograms (including their forcefields).
No, the technologies should complement each other in those instances it's needed. The starships of Starfleet could use more physical and practical technology. The TNG episode Brothers is a good example where other technology other than forcefields should have been used. One funny thing, in ST VI we see crewmembers on Excelsior (?) closing physical doors during battle, something that is almost never seen in the TNG era.

[Tribun]

We also see blast doors in ST II.

[HRogge]

There are a lot of things which happened in TOS but seemed to be forgotten in TNG...

[Howedar]

The Fed use of "structural integrity fields" in place of massive structural members could be due to similar reasons. It seems the Feds might have (relatively speaking) power to spare whilst mass savings are critical.

This is nonsensical. The only reason mass is a big deal is due to the limits it places on acceleration. Of course, all you need to compensate for the extra mass is... more powerful engines.