Question from a friend/Bacta War/Shields/Torpedoes

[McC]

ITW OT says the mass difference between the two is over a hundred, which means its only slightly mroe then that, otherwise it would have been 110x, or 105x etc. I presume this statemetn comes from the evidence and a constant density.

So instead it's 500 times the volume, but only 100 times the mass, meaning it's only about 1/5th as dense. This could make sense, though, given the huge amount of fighter bay area and such.

Bear in mind, these figures are slightly generous, in that they more or less represent what largely flat-faced skin-tight shield would be like. The actual numbers will be smaller, but not by a factor 5 in any case.

[Ender]

but altering the density alters the "constant density" assumption.

Something to figure later. Now I shall focus on the shield stuff.

[McC]

but altering the density alters the "constant density" assumption.

Isn't this sort of to be expected, though? A ship's internal arrangement is going to differ wildly depending on the role of the ship. Executor has an enormous portion of its internal space squared away for hangar usage, which is going to be inherently empty. Compare that to an ISD, which has a (comparatively) small hangar and dense command structure.

[Illuminatus Primus]

but altering the density alters the "constant density" assumption.

Isn't this sort of to be expected, though? A ship's internal arrangement is going to differ wildly depending on the role of the ship. Executor has an enormous portion of its internal space squared away for hangar usage, which is going to be inherently empty. Compare that to an ISD, which has a (comparatively) small hangar and dense command structure.

Its an assumption allowing for basic estimations. All of these at heart are still back-of-the-envelope solutions.

[Ender]

but altering the density alters the "constant density" assumption.

Isn't this sort of to be expected, though? A ship's internal arrangement is going to differ wildly depending on the role of the ship. Executor has an enormous portion of its internal space squared away for hangar usage, which is going to be inherently empty. Compare that to an ISD, which has a (comparatively) small hangar and dense command structure.

Yeah, but you also have to think about fuel, which should even it out.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Yeah, since the fuel is orders of magnitude denser than the ship's dry bulk, and occupies a not inconsiderable volume of the ship, it shouldn't make that much difference.

[Ender]

Yeah, since the fuel is orders of magnitude denser than the ship's dry bulk, and occupies a not inconsiderable volume of the ship, it shouldn't make that much difference.

Right. For the same deployment and EFPH times, the fact that the Executor is larger and more powerful means it is going to need far more fuel, which should make up the difference, if not exceed.

[Mr Bean]

Yeah, since the fuel is orders of magnitude denser than the ship's dry bulk, and occupies a not inconsiderable volume of the ship, it shouldn't make that much difference.

Right. For the same deployment and EFPH times, the fact that the Executor is larger and more powerful means it is going to need far more fuel, which should make up the difference, if not exceed.

Not nessarly, just because a ship is larger, does not mean its going to carry the excat same ratio of fuel

Sure you can get an idea of how much Fuel the SSD carries by mulitpling up from an ISD.
But if the ISD is designed to go everywhere and do everything and do it for a year its going to do one, thing
A Flagship of fleet is not going to be designed the same way, so it can have more or less fuel
(For example, what if they only want the SSD to be able to go anywhere do anything for six months? Thats a huge fuel diffrence, it IS a flagship after all)

[Ender]

Yeah, since the fuel is orders of magnitude denser than the ship's dry bulk, and occupies a not inconsiderable volume of the ship, it shouldn't make that much difference.

Right. For the same deployment and EFPH times, the fact that the Executor is larger and more powerful means it is going to need far more fuel, which should make up the difference, if not exceed.

Not nessarly, just because a ship is larger, does not mean its going to carry the excat same ratio of fuel

True, but given the differences in scale here unless there is a massive difference an Executor class should still have much more fuel then an Imperator.

Sure you can get an idea of how much Fuel the SSD carries by mulitpling up from an ISD.
But if the ISD is designed to go everywhere and do everything and do it for a year its going to do one, thing
A Flagship of fleet is not going to be designed the same way, so it can have more or less fuel
(For example, what if they only want the SSD to be able to go anywhere do anything for six months? Thats a huge fuel diffrence, it IS a flagship after all)

So is the Truman, and it has plenty of fuel.

But Bean, you are way overestimating things here for months. At peak power and accel, Imperial warships are going to tap themselves out in hours.

[Connor MacLeod]

True, but given the differences in scale here unless there is a massive difference an Executor class should still have much more fuel then an Imperator.

Bean isn't disagreeing. His point is though that the Executor does not neccesarily need a comparable (or even greater) fuel ratio than an ISD.

But Bean, you are way overestimating things here for months. At peak power and accel, Imperial warships are going to tap themselves out in hours.

Yeah, but one of the reasons they usually need peak power is for fighting (true, sustained acceleration as well, but given the AOTC:ICS referencec its unlikely they always zip around at max acceleration, even for inter-system travel.) Its not impossible for the ship to operate at a lower output for sustained periods (and there is some debate on the Executor's firepower as well.. it may not need full reactor power to use all its weapons at once.)

[Mr Bean]

Connor Macleod already covered the first part pretty well
I'll just toss in this point, the ISD is less a strait up battleship and more a Hybrid Carrier/Crusier/Pocket Battleship. Its design at least seems to be around having the ability to go anywhere, do anything from Naval Engagement to landing a decent size invasion force, to scouting new terrian, to doing convy and warship escourting duty.
And the only real quote we have on fuel consumpition is from the X-wing book series(Think its Wraith Sq) when we have Wedge comment that sublight engiens gulp fuel but hyperdrive barley sipps it

But Bean, you are way overestimating things here for months. At peak power and accel, Imperial warships are going to tap themselves out in hours.

Do you mean that I am overestimating things by how many months a warship can go go for? Or I've been overestimating things for many months of debate now?

[Connor MacLeod]

Connor Macleod already covered the first part pretty well
I'll just toss in this point, the ISD is less a strait up battleship and more a Hybrid Carrier/Crusier/Pocket Battleship. Its design at least seems to be around having the ability to go anywhere, do anything from Naval Engagement to landing a decent size invasion force, to scouting new terrian, to doing convy and warship escourting duty.

It might be more along hte liens of a hybrid "battleship/carrier" (it carries some big fucking guns according to SOTE and the SOTE comic.)

Alternately it might be like some of the earlier "carriers" (like IIRC the Japanese Akagi-class, or the US LExington-class carriers) that carried cruiser-scale guns (8" guns) in addition to lighter guns.

And the only real quote we have on fuel consumpition is from the X-wing book series(Think its Wraith Sq) when we have Wedge comment that sublight engiens gulp fuel but hyperdrive barley sipps it.

First novel actually, Rogue Squadron. And I think it was Corran Horn. (Yeah, its a stackpole novel.) Mad probably has the quote.

Do you mean that I am overestimating things by how many months a warship can go go for? Or I've been overestimating things for many months of debate now?

How long a warship can go I think. But thats going to depend on what level the powerplant operates at. (as Is aid, one of the main things requiring maximum output typically is weaponry.)

[hypernova]

i know this is a slight off topic, but some of my friends and i were discussing the size of the stardestroyers, and we came to out unscientific conclusion that Vaders flag ship the executer was bigger then other in its own class, that it was "hot rodded" or "modded" to be a bit bigger and a bit more powerful then a standard SSD, would you guys believe we would be correct in that assuption

[Spartan]

hypernova wrote:

i know this is a slight off topic, but some of my friends and i were discussing the size of the stardestroyers, and we came to out unscientific conclusion that Vaders flag ship the executer was bigger then other in its own class, that it was "hot rodded" or "modded" to be a bit bigger and a bit more powerful then a standard SSD, would you guys believe we would be correct in that assuption

Sorry, that is simply not true. The Executor and her sister ships were virtually identical in all respects, when they were commissioned. Indeed two vessels were built under he name Executor , to keep the second SSD a secret. Now going by the later EU entries for these vessels, it appears that many were modified; mostly due to shortages during the Galactic Civil War.

Now the Eclipse II was indeed supermodded from the basic Eclipse design, but that was the Emperor's personal flagship.