Hull breach contaiment techs

[Lone_Prodigy]

.......

Fuck.

What I meant was:
Power failure removes the forcefield, while power failure does NOT remove the blast doors. Simple.

[Instant Sunrise]

Lets hope for the Imperial's sake the blast doors shut if they lose power. Otherwise, if you have a breach after a power loss, not pretty.

The other alternative is having them be self-powered and can be manually closed in the event of an emergency. But, I think I will go with the idea of the closing in a power loss.

[Zed Snardbody]

Lets hope for the Imperial's sake the blast doors shut if they lose power. Otherwise, if you have a breach after a power loss, not pretty.

The other alternative is having them be self-powered and can be manually closed in the event of an emergency. But, I think I will go with the idea of the closing in a power loss.

Even if an imp ship losses power, with the majority of the gas tight doors already closed, save for those in between areas that require movement back and fourth (See Mr Beans response to me) most of the ship will be safe.

A magic bullet breaches the hull in trek and takes out power to that area or the whole ship, those delightful long winding hallways are now sucking hard vacuum.

Dog your damn hatch!

[Gordonfrost]

Power failure removes the forcefield, while power failure does remove the blast doors. Simple.

And yet the forcefields never fail.

[Gordonfrost]

Never mind, I forget what i meant.

[Darth Wong]

Power failure removes the forcefield, while power failure does remove the blast doors. Simple.

And yet the forcefields never fail.

Are you seriously suggesting that a power failure is impossible on a Fed starship just because one never happened during the handful of breach/forcefield incidents?

[Gordonfrost]

Are you seriously suggesting that a power failure is impossible on a Fed starship just because one never happened during the handful of breach/forcefield incidents?

No, just that the forcefields seem to be very reliable even when the rest of the ship is fucked up.

[Darth Wong]

Are you seriously suggesting that a power failure is impossible on a Fed starship just because one never happened during the handful of breach/forcefield incidents?

No, just that the forcefields seem to be very reliable even when the rest of the ship is fucked up.

Fucked up how badly? If there's no power, there are no forcefields. Why do you think there was no atmosphere on USS Pegasus until they got the power back up and running? That whole crew died because of this.

[Gordonfrost]

Ok

[Gordonfrost]

You're probably right about that then. Sorry for mentioning that thingf

[wilfulton]

Ah, the Pegasus incident. I was wondering why the Enterprise never suffered a full-scale power failure. Of the quantum fuckulations floating around space, you'd think they'd hit upon that plot device at some point. But since it turns the ship into a tomb in rather short order, I suppose this makes sense.

[Kaintukee_Bob]

I've only got one statement: Trek ships are *very* vulnerable to treknobabble, especially their warp cores/power systems. In addition, their warp nacelles tend to be easy to hit, and when they are hit, it tends to wreak havoc with the warp core.

Imperial power cores are buried behind meters of armored plating, and are generally stabler than their Trek counterparts.

Suffice to say, if an Imperial ship is having power trouble, they have much more serious issues than a few stormtroopers (inheriently expendable, at the height of the Empire) and petty officers getting spaced.

Imperial officers and enlisted men, as Vader often demonstrated, were expendable. The Empire would rather loose a few men (who had obviously been murdered inhumanely by a vicious enemy, and thus would feed the propoganda machine) than design a power wasting, finiky countermeasure that *could* *possibly* save a few men (who happened to survive whatever ripped through meters of ship-grade armor).

'course, Trek could design a better hull breach countermeasure: "How many redshirts does it take to fill the breach?" Ah, Star Trek, proving once and for all that wave after wave of expendable people can solve any problem.

[Bounty]

I was wondering why the Enterprise never suffered a full-scale power failure.

It did in Disaster (TNG). The forcefields in the cargo bays were still working.

In addition, their warp nacelles tend to be easy to hit, and when they are hit, it tends to wreak havoc with the warp core.

Not this tripe again...

The Pinto nacelles and cough 'n' boom warp core are found only in the first batch of Galaxy's. Earlier (1,2) and later (1) ships could take hits to their nacelles just fine.

And you don't see the irony is saying

Suffice to say, if an Imperial ship is having power trouble, they have much more serious issues than a few stormtroopers (inheriently expendable, at the height of the Empire) and petty officers getting spaced.

and

Ah, Star Trek, proving once and for all that wave after wave of expendable people can solve any problem.

than design a power wasting, finiky countermeasure that *could* *possibly* save a few men (who happened to survive whatever ripped through meters of ship-grade armor).

I'd like to point out that the forcefields on Trek ships are backed up by physical doors, as seen in TUC and Starship Down (ds9).

[Darth Wong]

I was wondering why the Enterprise never suffered a full-scale power failure.

It did in Disaster (TNG). The forcefields in the cargo bays were still working.

You're full of shit. The Enterprise-D still had power. Data actually got fried trying to work his way through a passage which was blocked by an enormous electrical arc for fuck's sake. And one of the main plot points of that episode was their race to keep the warp core from breaching. The Enterprise-D suffered widespread system failures, but the power never went out.

[Kaintukee_Bob]

And you don't see the irony is saying

Suffice to say, if an Imperial ship is having power trouble, they have much more serious issues than a few stormtroopers (inheriently expendable, at the height of the Empire) and petty officers getting spaced.

and

Ah, Star Trek, proving once and for all that wave after wave of expendable people can solve any problem.

Laughing

I noted the irony, but remember: In SW, the side with the large number of faceless, expendable minions LOSES, thanks to plot devices and character shields. It happened with the Droid armys, it happened with the stormtroopers.

You did catch me in an error though: I meant 'when the nacelles are *repeatedly* hit. I was attempting to point out that a ship having its power knocked out in Trek was a fairly common occourence, while in Wars it rarely happens (excepting strikes from Ion Cannons, which we've only seen happen once).

[The Grim Squeaker]

I noted the irony, but remember: In SW, the side with the large number of faceless, expendable minions LOSES, thanks to plot devices and character shields. It happened with the Droid armys, it happened with the stormtroopers.

Guess we found out now why Stormies get ass kicked, especially by Jedi

[Darth Yoshi]

Hush. That was a counter plot device.

I'd like to point out that the forcefields on Trek ships are backed up by physical doors, as seen in TUC and Starship Down (ds9).

Of course, STVI takes place during the TOS era, when the Federation wasn't plagued by stupid engineering.

[Bounty]

You're full of shit. The Enterprise-D still had power.

Indeed it did...

O'BRIEN
The computer's down, looks like
we still have impulse power...
but not much else...

Sorry, my mistake. I honestly thought they had lost all power...

[frogcurry]

Am I the only person to have heard of these things called "batteries"?

Forcefield power drains are unknown - these are not military fields to stop heavy weapons (I'm not referring to those fields used in corridors where that IS part of the role), they are holding back 1 bar of atmosphere and nothing else. Ignoring the issues of solid matter (people) and the rush of air that needs to be slowed (with the kinetic energy and resulting "pressure" from the force applies as its made to stop moving through the field) the power requirement might be very low compared to other energy field types. Taking these issues into account raises it a lot, but not continually - one is a peak load that occurs if anything hits it, the other a peak load at the start.

Logically the system would be designed to have an energy store independent of ship power (and we know that energy storage density in SF is often stupid, and Star Trek does love its techno toys) which has enough juice for a set period of operation with worst case scenario of rushing air and flying redshirts. If all other power is down, get away before the battery runs out, but if there is outside power it would be used first before the internal store is drained.

The power argument is a fallacy - the Star Wars systems still need power as well, which would also need to be internally stored as precaution against system failure. The only difference is the amount of stored energy, but just because its harder does not mean it is impossible to do by any means. The artifical gravity seems to do fine when the juice is off.

Regarding the security role wall type field in corridors, the above can all still apply, it would just be done as a secondary role (the weapon/ Klingon stopping stuff would be done using primary external source power).


The other issue is that the field can restore itself after failures (i.e. 100 redcoats pile into it in a row) while any further damage to a physical barrier leaves it useless. For fields the generator creates a weak spot (partic. circumference type fields that are generated locally like used in Trek corridors), but a more remotely generated field (like the ones on the Voyager and Ent-E bridges) would presumably be designed in a logical universe (i.e. not Trek) to be located in secure locations with redundancy and overlap (assumption - the size of each generator is not so large as to render this impractical - again given Treks nature thats not too big a leap to make).

And a blast door itself might get warped and jam from the damage...remotely generated forcefields would not (locallly generated fields would probably fail completely in this sort of case though).


Admittedly I'd still prefer blast doors, but I wouldn't consider force fields useless by any means - more of a second choice though.

[Lord Revan]

A forcefield will need a constant drain, a door doesn't

a single Ion could disable all forcefield on a ship with massive damage to physical structure of the ship (like the ISD in TESB).

Blastdoorws cannot be made useless by Ion cannons or other EMP weapons.

[Batman]

Am I the only person to have heard of these things called "batteries"?
Forcefield power drains are unknown

Meaning it is impossible to tell how long the batteries would last.

Logically the system would be designed to have an energy store independent of ship power (and we know that energy storage density in SF is often stupid, and Star Trek does love its techno toys) which has enough juice for a set period of operation with worst case scenario of rushing air and flying redshirts.

Assuming building such a system is within their power. Which, thanks to not knowing the power drains of forcefields, we can't judge.

If all other power is down, get away before the battery runs out, but if there is outside power it would be used first before the internal store is drained.

And if there isn't and the batteries can only keep the forcefield up for mere seconds you're still screwed.

The power argument is a fallacy - the Star Wars systems still need power as well, which would also need to be internally stored as precaution against system failure.

Complete garbage. Not only is it entirely possible to construct blast doors in such a way that they need power to stay open, but even blast doors that need power to close need it once. Forcefields need power to stay closed.
NTM that we have a fairly good idea of the power needed by a blast door.
We have no clue for the forcefield.

The only difference is the amount of stored energy, but just because its harder does not mean it is impossible to do by any means. The artifical gravity seems to do fine when the juice is off.

No it doesn't. I can't recall a single incident of Trek having AG when they had no power. Besides, what has AG to do with forcefields?

The other issue is that the field can restore itself after failures (i.e. 100 redcoats pile into it in a row) while any further damage to a physical barrier leaves it useless.

Except that 100 redshirts piling into a blast door won't do jack shit to it. Unlike the forcefield. So while the blast door still stays closed, the forcefield breaks down. Oops.

And a blast door itself might get warped and jam from the damage...remotely generated forcefields would not (locallly generated fields would probably fail completely in this sort of case though).

Completely baseless assumption. Blatantly assumes that the forcefield will automatically be much stronger than the blast door.

Admittedly I'd still prefer blast doors, but I wouldn't consider force fields useless by any means - more of a second choice though.

Useless,no, by no means. But definitely a stupid choice if you use them instead of blast doors, as opposed to in addition to them.

[Lord Revan]

One thing we remember that in real life (and also SW) Blastdoors failure condition triggered passive systems (meaning they must be kept open), were as forcefields are active systems (meaning that they must be kept "closed" (this cannot be changed as it's part of the nature of forcefields)). If all other things are equal (which they're not in this case), a passive system is better.

Forcefields are not without any use though (it's quite hard to fly thru a blastdoor), but to use instead of a physical barrier to seal of a hull breach is stupid.

[Darth Wong]

Am I the only person to have heard of these things called "batteries"?

I suppose it doesn't occur to you that any damage sufficient to tear a fucking hole in the ship could also tear the wires leading to said batteries, damage emitters, etc? I know there have been precedents where so little extra energy got through that people sitting ten feet from the breach weren't burned or killed by shrapnel, but that's simply a freak event unless the hull is made of paper mache.

[Phyre]

... unless the hull is made of paper mache.

Aren't all Fed ships like that?

[aerius]

Forcefield power drains are unknown - these are not military fields to stop heavy weapons (I'm not referring to those fields used in corridors where that IS part of the role), they are holding back 1 bar of atmosphere and nothing else.

Would you like to figure out how much force that is? Let's put it this way, one standard atmosphere is about 14.7psi, that's pounds per square inch. A standard sized door is about 30"x80", which means there will be about 35,280 pounds of load on that door. That's about half the weight of a fully loaded tractor trailer. Now if you need to close off a small hanger bay, let's say 10x30 metres on the open end, you're looking at something that needs to resist over 3000 tons of force. That's a good sized freight train.

From that you can ballpark how much power the forcefields would need, figure out how much power it takes to put up a forcefield and how much it takes to keep that forcefield in place against the air pressure. Now my math could be wrong since I've been out of school too long, but it'll take roughly 157kW to keep a door sized forcefield in place and about 29.5MW for the hanger bay. That's a shitload of power.