Tie Defenders vs a borg tactical cube

[Eleas]

What the...

That has absolutely no basis in this argument...

Im sick of you people, im outta here.

I'll miss you always, oh whiner who bemoans the very debate he chooses to participate in.

[Eleas]

Damn. Two URLs were wrong. The weaponry part and the canon policy part. Here.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... Beam2.html
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Misc/Canon.html

[Slartibartfast]

No one has the right to be flamed, we all deserve a mutual form of respect.

Wrong Sparky. Respect must be earned before it is given.

Being flamed isn't a right, it's a privilege

[Connor MacLeod]

And what I want to be? I am presenting an arguement based on sources at hands as well as mechanical information provided in physics. So tell me, what are your higher sources. Enlighten me, sir.

The 5000 G acceleration in ICS Fighters pulling "high fractions of C" in Star By Star. Coralskippers doing about .95 in Rebel Stand. A frigate, a ship far more massive then a starfighter, blowing up when it's inertial compensators failed while doing .6 C
[/quote]

Ender, I had to nitpick you on this for some corrections on references, not that I think it changes your point any (or that it changes the fact Patton is making alot of claims he bases on nebulous references wihtout proof) but your info needs to be corrected.

We know the YV fighters in Destiny's Way, not Rebel Stand (To my memory, no actual velocity references existed in Rebel Stand) made 3 near-light passes on the Falcon, but only one was stated as an actual number (the "combined velocity" of 90% of c part.) That's actually minor.

About the Frigate at Obroa-skai: Its inertial dampers failed when it tried jumping into hyperspace too close to a gravity well and was pulled out. The ship was not moving at .6c, but rather the crew of the ship were each propelled into the bulkheads of said ship at .6c (whereupon they converted to a plasma and blew out the side of the ship.) Actually one of my favorite segments of the whoel book

[Ender]

Ender, I had to nitpick you on this for some corrections on references, not that I think it changes your point any (or that it changes the fact Patton is making alot of claims he bases on nebulous references wihtout proof) but your info needs to be corrected.

We know the YV fighters in Destiny's Way, not Rebel Stand (To my memory, no actual velocity references existed in Rebel Stand) made 3 near-light passes on the Falcon, but only one was stated as an actual number (the "combined velocity" of 90% of c part.) That's actually minor.

*shrug* I took that bit from another thread here without bothering to verify it and it comes back to bite me in the ass. That'll learn me. But like you said, the exact source does not change my point signifigantly

About the Frigate at Obroa-skai: Its inertial dampers failed when it tried jumping into hyperspace too close to a gravity well and was pulled out. The ship was not moving at .6c, but rather the crew of the ship were each propelled into the bulkheads of said ship at .6c (whereupon they converted to a plasma and blew out the side of the ship.) Actually one of my favorite segments of the whoel book

Agreed, that was about the only decent point out of it (That and learning that the Empire was able to churn out enough ISDs to make it a viable power again and an SSD even though it is suppossedly strapped for resources.

However, I'm pretty sure the frigate still would have been going at .6c. The ship tried to make the jumpo to hyperspace and failed, stopping it dead in space. The failure of the inertial compensator means Newtons 1st law takes over and objects moving at .6 C continue to move at .6 C until they encounter the nearest bulkhead. For them to hit at .6, they would have had to have been going that fast before they stopped and the compensator failed because there was no outside non net zero force acting on thenm, just hte prior accel.

[Connor MacLeod]

Really? What is your evidence. A 478 megaton warhead would do a hell of a lot more damage to a planet than they do in books when Star Destroyers attack and bombard planets (Ex. ISD Whirlwind and fleet attacking Yavin) they would leave an impact crater larger than that of a moderately sized asteroid impacting the surface of the planet at a few hundred miles an hour. Shall I use E=mc^2?

Yet again you make these claims, bu you don't state a source.

What you are obivously referring to of course is "Darksaber" the assault by Daala on Yavin 4, a source commonly referenced by those who want to disbelieve teh established high-end capabilities of SW ships. Yet it is neglecting the very fact that they landed troops and intended to occupy the planet (Daala stated as much).

All this is even ASIDE from the fact very little of the scene is not very specific in terms of quantifying its effects AND the fact that it assumes all orbital bombardments are going to be "scorched earth" bombardments. Due to the aforementioned presence of TROOPS on the planet, were you expecting for some reason to see tremendous damage? Case in point, this is NOT contradictory to firepower claims, except in the most narrow of definitions that requires that we ignore any attempts at reconciliation.

And as for the source, I suggest looking up the AotC ICS.

Lastly, E=MC^2 has nothing to do with asteroid impacts, its apart of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity (and describes mass-energy equivalence). What you're probably referring to is the newtonian KE equation (1/2M*v^2). That you mixed the two up would reinforce in my mind you aren't really making an effort to present a decent argument.

Or maybe you think asteroid impacts involve relativistic effects?

And Ender, I am not using game mechanics, I am using from a variaty material.

You're making alot of claims and references to "having" sources, but you do not post them or point where you draw them from. This suggests you're either lying about the sources, that you're basing your claims on arguments and snippets you've heared elsewhere (the fact you used a well-worn and predictibly typical Darksaber reference is proof of this) or you're drawing very heavily from memory rather than consulting the sources directly.

But if you think you are righteous and one who is purely right, than it is you who are flawed. You are casting down on me for presenting my argument than handling it more maturly and calmly. Hrm, I think I am not in the wrong here.

An irrelevant statement. An attack on Ender's character, rather than dealing with his claim with evidence. I do believe this would be a "Style over Substance" fallacy.

The fact is you ARE in the wrong, because you have not provided any proof (despite claims to "having" some nebulous sources.) even when asked (you ignored my requests for proof) and are committing any number of fallacies in the process (not to mention being sanctimonious and arrogant at the same time)

And what I want to be? I am presenting an arguement based on sources at hands as well as mechanical information provided in physics. So tell me, what are your higher sources. Enlighten me, sir.

Almost a burden of proof fallacy, I believe, if not one already. You have not provided any references to us to back up your claims (which appear to either be rehashed arguments only a newbie expects to have any effect, or outright lies and you raelly DON'T have proof) yet you require us to disprove your claims. There is nothing to disprove if you have not brought forth any references to support YOUR end of the argument. Meaningless speculation does not count.

And given the fact you apparently confused E=MC^2 with having something to do with asteroid impacts, I question your "physics" knowledge as well.

The best thing to correct an argument is to show them their wrongs, not berate them. Something else that should be worked on around here.

Eh. More style over substance. You haven't provided anything other than speculation. You HAVE been shown you were wrong in the fact you have quoted no specific sources to back yourself up. I wouldn't be lecturing US on our debating weaknesses when you've shown yourself to be a rather poor debator from the start. (I would think anyone intending to advocate a point would cite sources in support of an argument, not require others to drag it out of them.)

Then agian, I expect you to start berating me for "attacking" you as well. I guess you're just one of those people who take questionign your arguments based on lack of proof as a personal attack.

[Connor MacLeod]

However, I'm pretty sure the frigate still would have been going at .6c. The ship tried to make the jumpo to hyperspace and failed, stopping it dead in space. The failure of the inertial compensator means Newtons 1st law takes over and objects moving at .6 C continue to move at .6 C until they encounter the nearest bulkhead. For them to hit at .6, they would have had to have been going that fast before they stopped and the compensator failed because there was no outside non net zero force acting on thenm, just hte prior accel.

Not neccesarily. Remember a human (or Yuuzhan Vong) body is nowhere near as massive as a frigate. The same amount of force may be acting on both ship and crew, but because the ship masses differ so significantly (assume maybe 80-100 kg average for a Yuuzhan Vong crewmember.. couple hundred thousand couple million tons for the frigate), the respective velocities will differ as well.

Hence, while hte crew is being propellled forward at a substantial portion of lightspeed, the ship will be propelled along at a significantly lower rate.

[Master of Ossus]

Doesn't that assume that the ship's thrust is being distributed equally among the ship and crew? Shouldn't they be treated as one object for the purposes of acceleration/deceleration, as the crew is actually being propelled by the ship around them (which, in turn, is being propelled by the ship's engines), until the ship decelerates?

[Connor MacLeod]

I combined all the posts into one, but then broke them up into two large ones, Sean. I figure though we've mostly hashed out the details, its just largely tactical considerations

To my knowledge, the smallest craft the Borg have
successfully targetted include the following:

1--Delta Flyer at unknown distance--probably between
1-10 km. (?).

The script is as follows:

KIM: "Our forward shields are down!"
CHAKOTAY: "The Flyer?"
PARIS: "They're closing, 50 kilometers."
CHAKOTAY: "Maintain fire."

(VGR is struck)

PARIS: "30 kilometers, twenty..."


The cube then fires four greenish spheres at the Flyer,
all of which connect.

So basically we're lookign at an ability to target small craft (say 20 meters or less in length) at ranges less than 100km.. examples of good accuracy at only a couple tens of km, at best. Sound right to you, Sean?

Of course, TIE defenders are a WEE bit smaller, and alot of their "volume" is mostly empty space (compared to the more boxy fed shuttles) - Solar panels make up most of that volume/surface area, and they aren't neccesarily critical damage components

Comments: this is at extreme close range, but given the
timing inherent to Paris' dialogue, the Flyer was
moving at a relative velocity of about 10 km/s, albeit in a
straight line. The torpedos themselves overcame the DF
rather easily, suggesting an acceleration on the order of 5x
the Flyer's if not a bit more.

I'm guessing you mean the torpedoes move 5x faster than the Delta Flyer (or 50km/s)

Are these "torpedoes" physical weapons or energy weapons? Can they track a target or not?

If unguided, the range might be a 100-150 km at best (assuming that the "reaction" time for a pilot is only a couple seconds) , but its implied that they may have trouble against a manuvering target. Have we had any examples of them firing on a manuvering target?

I think you also mentioend that its possible the range limitation is because they have lousy threat prioritization. This might possibly be an advantage in the Defender's favor (at least until they launch those missiles)

2--Federation "tactical probes" at the Mars Perimeter
defense, no more than 10 km away (and moving in a
straight line no less). All three were destroyed with direct hits
from what appeared to be disruptor bolts;

how large were these probes? Have we had any measure of effectiveness of these probes against other ST targets (its possible they were rated as low priority targets again. Of course this might also prove that Borg would simply rate small craft or fighters as nonthreatening targets, which would favor the TIE Defenders in the opening few volleys)

3--Federation shuttlecraft on at least two occassions,
including Data and Worf's pod in "BOBW," as it slowly
accelerated away from the cube again in a straight line
at no more than few hundred meters/sec. Range: ~5 km.
It, too, was destroyed with a direct hit...by a Borg cutting laser,
no less. (Trek's prodigal son episode itself shoots down the
"nav deflectors are immune to lasers" argument .)

So we see a pattern developing. They can hit targets about the size/volume of a shuttlecraft with a high degree of accuracy, but in most cases it seems to be targets moving in a predictable path no more than several tens of km away. Possibly they could hit them much farther out (a few hundred or thousand km..) but accuracy would probably suffer, especially once manuvers are factored in.

Which brings to mind another question - are these "small" calbire borg weapons or large calibre? I dont know whhat the output of each weapon might be... can you provide that as well?

So, basically, we have several instances in which craft roughly
comparable in size to TIEs have been destroyed with direct hits,
but they're all at very close range, all of the shuttles were
moving directly toward the cubes, and all but one involve rather
meager relative velocities. (The cube approaching the Mars
defense "probes" was actually moving at least as fast as the
probes it shot down.) Therefore, to conclude anything positive
for the cube based solely on direct observation is...tough. I
daresay, impossible.

So we're thinking the same thing. I'd guess the ideal threat envelope for the TIEs against Borg weapons is maybe a few thousand km at most.. but with low accuracy (since its probable the TIEs would be manuvering quite a bit faster, and would probably be employing whatever EW measures were available to them.) Of course, acquiring a missile lock on might take some time, so THAT could possibly be long enough for a Borg craft to draw a bead on the ship... again depending on how close they have to get to launch missiles.

All other depictions of combat with Borg ships shows small fleets,
like the one at Wolf 359, harrassing a cube at a few kilometers to
perhaps 10-20 km. It's worth noting that at those ranges, the cube's dedicated *weapons* rarely miss their mark, though we are dealing with targets some 150-250m wide or more as a rule. (I make this distinction because tractor beams sometimes do completely miss their targets,
just as the cube tried to grab the E-D and missed badly at one point.) Some of the aforementioned targets demonstrated impressive acceleration, particularly in the FX shots from Sisko's "flashback" in the DS9 premiere. However, they did not attempt any noteworthy evasive tactics and, indeed, most of the ships seemed to fly straight *toward* the cube. Same story with "First Contact."

This may indicate that despite their long-range capabilities (or the potential for long range) they typically do not employ it unless an enemy has shown itself to be particularily dangerous (esp if they show a preference for getting up close and always hitting their target when they are - consider it an efficiency issue.) This may work in the TIE Defender's favor intitially as I said, but if they inflict any substnatial damage on the Cube, it may very well deem them a threat and respond accordingly.

Or perhaps large scale engagements force them to engage at closer ranges than at longer (at least where its a single cube against a more numerous foe.) How would combat against Species 8472 differ regarding range/targeting/etc. in contrast to how they engaged the Federation? Or how they handled Voyager in contrast to say, Wolf 359?

That covers target sizes and rough linear accelerations, but as I said,
that's all extreme close-range combat. I hesitate to conclude that
the Borg are limited to such ranges, though, especially given their odd
combat ethos (taking time to assimilate people from the Wolf system,
apparently during or shortly after fighting the fleet itself). It might be
the case that they wouldn't perceive the TIE squadron as a threat
*until* they closed to PBR. And what they perceive as a potential threat,
they usually try to assimilate, further implying that they would probably
allow the squadron to close to within several dozen kilometers (if not
less) before making said determination.

As I said, we're thinking along the same lines (naturally). Although as I said, they probably wouldn't be considering the TIEs threatening unless they knew of the power of their missiles (which might be too late, by then, depending on yield). And if they try for assimilation first, rather than outright destruction, they may give the TIE pilots enough time to unload all their missiles into the cube.

Another thing I wonder about would be self-repair. Its obvious that the missile supply for each defender would be severely limited.. how quickly would the Borg cube repair its damage?

The fact that we're dealing with a tactical cube complicates things somewhat...the drones onboard those things are easily capable of
assimilating people, but we've never observed a tactical cube try to
do anything *but* blast its opponents with disruptors, torpedos,
and perhaps something similar to the Jem'Hadar's phased polaron
weapons. As such, this ship might or might *not* wait for the TIEs
to get close...assimilation not being high on their list of priorities,
ranged attacks are a possibility.

Probably better for the Borg. If they concern themselves more with attack, that gives the TIE pilots less of a chance to hammer at it before the Cube decides on retaliating. Of course, if the TIE pilots were that wary, they could just use the hyperdrive to jump in close, strafe, and then jump out. Hell, if they really get close enough they wouldn't neccearily even NEEd a lock on (esp if we use Mike's accel figures for a protorp)

That possibility requires that we investigate ranges involved in
other, presumably lesser ships. Off the top of my head, I have
three examples involving weapons similar to those used by the
tactical cube's: photon torpedos (photonic missiles), Klingon
disruptors (Borg disr.), and Jem'Hadar polaron weapons (possible
Borg equivalent--FX had been recycled from DS9). BUT, I must
operate under the arguable assumption that the Borg can match
these ranges and accuracy. Given their vastly superior technology,
I think that's not too detestable of an assumption, but someone
might know why it's not cogent.

ok

Anyway:

Borg torpedo
Range: extrapolating from the USS Phoenix's ability to hit a Cardassian warship with photorps at approx. 300,000 km
("The Wounded"), cubes should be able to obtain target locks at
similar ranges.

Accuracy: The weapons in "The Wounded" scored at least two direct
hits. This is not observed, but is necessary given the likely target, for
reasons I'll expound upon later if need be.

It's likely that the warship in question was Galor-class, some 480m long, ~240m wide, and 100m tall. (The DS9 TM's measurements are smaller, but they're inconsistent with FX for the most part. Besides, this will
help lend some measure of credibility to what I'm saying .) Such
a ship, even with bubble shields, should have a profile of no more
than 50,000 m^2.

With further extrapolation of Borg targetting ability from this example, we can say that a cube could score direct hits on a target area of 50,000 square meters. That's not necessarily an upper-limit, but it could be, given that Phoenix herself might've *missed* the Cardassian warship with a photorp or two. It also depends on how much interstellar targetting
abilities are alike, of course.

I need to run, but I'll be back for more later!

Ok. All of that sounds like valid assumption, but I still have some concerns. Do we know of examples where photorps (and hence photonic missiles) were used against small shuttle/runabout sized targets? Hitting a ship hundreds of meters long is not much compared to one a few tens of meters long. This also begs teh question of how fast the torp might be moving, how long it takes to reach said range, and how well it manuvers.

Conversely, we know some Protorps have a range of some 700 km (ref: BTM CD, proton torpedo entry) but I recall some indirect examples implying multiple LS ranges (Star by Star - X-wings moving at near-c velocities ttargeting a Yuuzhan Vong warship.). Then again, there are versions that only have 2 km or 6 km ranges too (though int he case of the 2km, the vessels in question had been outfitted for ground attack roles most likely, - they hadn't been expecting to engage capital ships.) 700 km, if we used your earlier examples of weapons range as a comparison, may give the Defenders an effective chance of damaging/destorying the Cube without all being destroyed by return fire.

[Connor MacLeod]

Part 2:

I didn't address this in my last post--sorry man!

No problem

The only knowledge I have of Borg electronic warfare is something maybe
intimated in "Best of Both Worlds." Data and Worf mention something
about the cube's "electromagnetic field," something also alluded to
in "Q Who?" IIRC. It could've just as easily been a kind of shield...
it's vaguely possible that it interfered with a shuttlecraft's ability to fly close to the cube fully powered (they had to drift in, perhaps so as not to get
the cube's attention), but it didn't impair transporter function. Therefore,
their EM field shouldn't be a problem, and one must make assumptions
as to whether or not the tactical cubes even operate such fields. (Evidently not.)

So basically, EW is probably not much of an issue for the Borg. Its possible stealth or masking systems might help make the TIEs harder to hit. Jamming might perhaps as well, but I'm less certain about this.

Microjumps could change everything. These are observed, whereas
a comparable move on the cube's part isn't to my knowledge.

What about sensors? Could the Borg possibly track/detect the TIE Defenders at range?
They probably couldn't track them in hyperspace, but they could tell when they disappeared, and hence expect an attack from hyperspace.

Yeah...that's a potential FUBARed cube, right there, depending on the
missile's yield (and, of course, how powerful the cube's shields might
be).

Agreed. I'd say that the TIE Defenders HAVE the potential to take down the cube, its just really a matter of calcs (missile yield, shield values, and effecitve ranges)

I tend to think so, too...I've never known TIEs, even shielded models,
to rely very heavily on taking hits of that magnitude.

True, although TIE Avenger and Defender models had better shielding than most, IIRC.

I really don't think shielding is neccesarily the major issue. They may be able to take one or two hits perhaps.. but I would expect the TIEs count on staying out of range and avoiding hits to begin with. I expect they'll be significantly more manuverable, possibly accelerate better than the cube (do we know Cube accelerations?), especially if the apparently short ranges against small, linear-moving targets proved accurate. Even moreso if the EW factor weighed in on the Imperial side.

Sounds good. The Borg have never been observed to destroy something
of that size, let alone moving at that rate, though they do have the
technology onboard to potentially stop the missiles before impact.
It's mostly a question of whether or not they'll use them. If this is
"how things should be," I'd say absolutely yes. As it is, we don't have
a relevant comparative context, so I'd probably vote "no."

So its *probably* safe to assume that whatever missiles are launched *probably* would not get shot down (although if they accelerate constantly and in a straight line... I mean they KNOW where its gonna land, they should be able to predict it, and an active drive tail should give it away). I expect the TIE pilots to engage at a range that allows the TIE pilots enough time to evade Borg weapons, but gives the missiles the shortest drive time possible (to minimzie reactiont imes.) possibly around the high hundreds - low thousands of km range, if we use Mike's 72,000g figure for protorps (or more if its concussion missiles )

I'd say they're pretty bad. I mentioned their electromagnetic field
above, which didn't even interfere with transporter function. It *might've*
interfered with the shuttle's navigation systems but I kind of doubt that.

Then it seems likely that the Defenders could engage outside of probable/effective range of their weapons (or at least otuside the effective range of a probable hit)- but of course firing may also prevent TIEs from acquiring an effective target lock (especially if we draw upon the computer game/stackpole targeting example, rather than say, targeting computers, or the "smart" missiles Jango used.) Realistically, I expect the TIE Defenders would need afew seconds to acquire lock, which means they WOULD be moving in a straight line.. and well.. we saw how they were against targets moving in a straight line

That would give the TIE pilots reason to "dumb fire" their missiles of course

If the TIEs' don't slow to attack speed, they should be pretty safe from
ever taking a direct hit (unless caught in a tractor beam, which would
probably be a lucky snare for the Borg). They could, as you said,
make some very snappy attack runs...and if we're looking at 191 megatons
times four protorps per fighter, and 12 fighters, that's 9.1 gigatons.

True. As I said, the problem of course is an effecitve lock on will probably require the TIes moving relatively slower and in a straight line, which makes them vunlerable to borg weapons.

Possibly, what they might try doing is launching the first salvo or two dumb fired after a quick microjump to close range to knock down shields. Then, with shields down, use lasers to strafe the target an strip the cube of weapons ports, or at least thin them out. Third, once the threat of weapons is diminished, go for dedicated lock ons and concentrate a dedicated missile barrage at a single point (sort of like in First Contact).

Of coures, an alternative tactic is to use dumb-fired missiles in strafing runs exclusively, and use one or two flights as "decoys" to draw off fire while a third hits the cube with a missile barrage. Especially if and when shields are down.

Can a cube take that much energy? I don't know. My own estimate
of photon torpedos puts them at an effective yield of 3.3 megatons
or thereabouts, based on shield resistance to solar EM. The cube
in "BOBW" supposedly took a blast that was "greater than our phasers
and photon torpedos could ever provide" for about seven seconds.
(Basically, it was routing warp 9.6 level power straight through the
deflector dish.) If the beam delivered that level of energy each
second, the BOBW cube had shields on the order of 5.7 gigatons (825 MT/sec.).

Though this estimate might be high for several reasons, it did only strike one axis of the cube and it had no effect on the cube's shield. To defeat
the shields, one would think you'd need to dump a fair amount more
energy into them...by how much, though, I don't know (what else is
new?). Several times more? Picard didn't even flinch, and his "bridge" didn't even shudder from the impact.

Still.. we're talking low GT range. That would and should certainly be within the capabilities of the TIE Defender's missile armament, depending on the exact armament employed.

We could just as easily assume photorps have an effective yield of 500 kilotons apiece, and that 250 of them would only amount to 125 megatons, etc.

Even then, a single shield axis might still stand up to a gigaton or two. It also has a hull far stronger than a standard cube's: VGR was able to
score direct hits to the non-armored portions of the cube's dorsal axis
(*after* a Borgified Torres lowered the shields in that area), and there
was no visible damage. It couldn't withstand a gigaton unshielded--not
a chance--but it could rather easily attempt to present the TIEs with
fresh shield axes (something for which we do have a precedent,
"Scorpion II"). The cube can turn rather rapidly, so this might be
a viable tactic.

True, but I expect the Defenders would still accelerate to comeinat that angle. The best advantage is for the Defenders to concentrate on one side.. esp if they can strip it of weapons and shields. Of course, turning raidus would favor the cube at longer ranges too (because the farther away the Defenders are, the larger their own turn radius becomes).

Note: As I said, we pretty much seem to be at an understanding of how the situation stands, aside from a few uncertainties and variables. ITs certainly possible for the TIE Defender squadron to take the cube, depending on its armament, but it will require some planning and tactics on the TIE's part to avoid taking any losses (and depending on circumstance, they may take losses anyways). But even if they lose 11 out of 12 defenders, the loss of the cube would still rate more, IMHO.

[Master of Ossus]

Question for you two duelists: why would the TIE Defender's missiles not track the Borg cube? I don't think that the Borg have ever shown any ability to dodge missile fire, and the TIE Defender has missiles that are well known to be homing weapons.

[Connor MacLeod]

Doesn't that assume that the ship's thrust is being distributed equally among the ship and crew? Shouldn't they be treated as one object for the purposes of acceleration/deceleration, as the crew is actually being propelled by the ship around them (which, in turn, is being propelled by the ship's engines), until the ship decelerates?

Well, here's the quote:

--------------

"One Alien frigate, surrounded by enemies, jumped into hyperspace too soon and was dragged back into realspace by Obroa-held gravity. The inertia-damping dovin basals failed at the shock, and every individual on the ship was flung into the nearest bulkhead at nearly six-tenths speed of light. The result was a superheated plasma that ruptured the enemy hull as it blasted outward."

Destiny's Way, p 60-61.

---------------

I myself originally thought it had referred to the frigate, but a person I showed the quote to (and whose opinion I normally trust in these matters) pointed out what I said to Ender. I suppose the ship MIGHT have been moving at that speed initially, but its engines were able to stop the ship rapidly enough. But without the ID to compensate, the crew would still be moving forward at .6c, having the described results.)

At this point, I'm really not sure myself, but as I said, I consider the opinion of the person I discussed it with to be reliable.

[Connor MacLeod]

Question for you two duelists: why would the TIE Defender's missiles not track the Borg cube? I don't think that the Borg have ever shown any ability to dodge missile fire, and the TIE Defender has missiles that are well known to be homing weapons.

Depends on the kind of missile used. If we're talking about the types of fighter missiles used in the X-wing/TIE fighter games or the stackpole/Allston novels, they probably require the "gunsight lock on" before firing.. or perhaps using a targeting computer like in ANH (which would suggest as well a "straight line" movement while acquiring the target.) Once the lock on is acquired the missiles will certainly TRACK, but you need to get that lock on first, which generally hampers mobility (which gives the Cube a chance to nail the Defenders)

If its more of a "smart" missile like the one we saw Jango use in AOTC (I believe other examples have been used, even on something like an X-wing), then the missile probably would home in on its own.

The problem is of course, the Slave-1 missiles are far larger than anything the TIE-D is likely to carry (those are large, meter long missiles.. the protorps on an X-wing, as I said, are the size of a human head at most).. the larger size can easily accomodate the better tracking as well as the enhanced payload.. but can we say the same of the head-sized protorp (or the same-sized concussion missile?) You might be able to achieve greater tracking (or self guidance) - but what would this require in terms of warhead yield or acceleration/propulsion capability?