Federation shuttle craft vs TIE fighter

[Alyeska]

Incorrect. A battle upgraded Excelsior class starship scored 100% accracy against the Defiant.

Have you seen this episode recently? Poe's clip doesn't show the full battle, and while my memory MIGHT be failiing me, I seem to recall the Lakota making several missed phaser shots towards the Defiant as it banked at close range. I cannot verify this currently as Mike has my DS9 DVD's, but I am fairly sure of it.

Your memory has clearly failed you. The Lakota scores 100% accuracy.

[SirNitram]

Size of these subsystems? Relative velocity of target and firer? Distance? Anything?

Trek subsystems are typicaly not very large. Judging by known examples from various ships the largest systems are the exterior engines and the interior power generation. All other systems appear to be no larger then a turbo lift.

So we have a target which can probably be estimated to 4 square meters or so.

Relative velocity was in the hundreds of meters per second. Distance was aproximately 250-500 meters. The part that makes this exceptional is the ability to retarget and fire again accurately massively off angle from the first shot in a very short period of time. This is what is required to fire accurately and multiple times (because firing against a manevering small target will always mean lower accuracy). With this capability a ship can put enough shots against a manuevering target to down it in a short period of time. Even a mere 25% accuracy rating is more then sufficent to down multiple enemy strike craft.

I hate to break this, Aly, but hitting something with a four meter crossection at a quarter of a kilometer isn't all that hot. The retargetting is nice, but it shows no ability to hit something moving much faster or engaging from farther out.

Obviously, but it'd still be nice if you had something beyond vagueness.

My apoligies for not giving all the necessary information.

No worries.

[Alyeska]

There is, of course, also the widely used excuse that grotesque examples of inaccuracy from OPFOR ships such as Borg or Klingon vessels can be disregarded because it's "not Federation". As if the Klingons would realistically stand a snowball's chance in hell against the Federation if they actually had such a huge tactical disadvantage in every battle.

The accuracy issue typicaly only comes about when combat occurs with ships >150 meters. Another factor is enemy shots appear to do more relativistic damage to Federation ships then do Federation phasers. It would appear OPFOR forces use greater firepower to get by their accuracy issues.

[The Kernel]

There is, of course, also the widely used excuse that grotesque examples of inaccuracy from OPFOR ships such as Borg or Klingon vessels can be disregarded because it's "not Federation". As if the Klingons would realistically stand a snowball's chance in hell against the Federation if they actually had such a huge tactical disadvantage in every battle.

Indeed, the Defiant's straffing run on the Klingon Negh-Var in "Shattered Mirror" yielded a hit ratio of damn near zero. I know this was an alternate universe ship, but come on, they can't really be different considering that the systems on DS9 were so similar that Sisko had free reign of the computer while he was there.

[Darth Wong]

Trek subsystems are typicaly not very large. Judging by known examples from various ships the largest systems are the exterior engines and the interior power generation. All other systems appear to be no larger then a turbo lift.

So you're assuming there is zero area effect of these weapons, even though they must by necessity drill through hull armour to even reach these systems?

[Robert Walper]

Given the number of people in this forum with access to video clips, you could make the remarkable tactic by quoting the episode. Oh yea, you don't even have that, you just 'know it exists'. You probably can't even give the context of the combat, but you 'know it exists'.

I was thinking of examples along Ayleska's one. Another one that comes to mind is STVOY "Dragon's Teeth" where Voyager acquired and hit multiple fighter sized targets. Another one would be STTNG "Conundrum" where the Enterprise D destroyed a half dozen fighter sized craft within a second or two. As to actual examples of shuttle weaponry accuracy, I know of none. However, I am assuming a shuttlecraft's target acquisition and hitting ratio would be similar.

[Alyeska]

So we have a target which can probably be estimated to 4 square meters or so.

I hate to break this, Aly, but hitting something with a four meter crossection at a quarter of a kilometer isn't all that hot. The retargetting is nice, but it shows no ability to hit something moving much faster or engaging from farther out.

The retargeting ability is what I consider important. It means that a Starfleet vesel will be able to put multiple shots in that 4 meter area to account for the ships manuvering and size.

[The Kernel]

Incorrect. A battle upgraded Excelsior class starship scored 100% accracy against the Defiant.

Have you seen this episode recently? Poe's clip doesn't show the full battle, and while my memory MIGHT be failiing me, I seem to recall the Lakota making several missed phaser shots towards the Defiant as it banked at close range. I cannot verify this currently as Mike has my DS9 DVD's, but I am fairly sure of it.

Your memory has clearly failed you. The Lakota scores 100% accuracy.

Mike, do you think you could run a quickie check on this for me when you get a chance? It's the episode "Paradise Lost" on DS9 Season 4, near the end of the episode. I am almost POSITIVE that not only the Defiant but the Lakota missed several times.

[SirNitram]

Given the number of people in this forum with access to video clips, you could make the remarkable tactic by quoting the episode. Oh yea, you don't even have that, you just 'know it exists'. You probably can't even give the context of the combat, but you 'know it exists'.

I was thinking of examples along Ayleska's one. Another one that comes to mind is STVOY "Dragon's Teeth" where Voyager acquired and hit multiple fighter sized targets.

....Except they could not even get a targetting lock until chasing it into a planetary atmosphere. Amazing how these major details fall through a Trektard's mind.

Another one would be STTNG "Conundrum" where the Enterprise D destroyed a half dozen fighter sized craft within a second or two.

Yea, target drones which didn't maneuver, didn't even seem to have their own propulsion, and were at even closer ranges than normal combat. Ooo, ahhh.

As to actual examples of shuttle weaponry accuracy, I know of none. However, I am assuming a shuttlecraft's target acquisition and hitting ratio would be similar.

It would most likely being inferior, as you can't pack a sensor suite of the same power into a smaller space. Idiot.

[Alyeska]

Trek subsystems are typicaly not very large. Judging by known examples from various ships the largest systems are the exterior engines and the interior power generation. All other systems appear to be no larger then a turbo lift.

So you're assuming there is zero area effect of these weapons, even though they must by necessity drill through hull armour to even reach these systems?

Phasers show themselves to be far more concentrated then most other weapons. In order to effectively down enemy subsystems one would need to be able to strike very close to the target. Using torpedoes would make your need for accuracy less imporant.

[SirNitram]

So we have a target which can probably be estimated to 4 square meters or so.

I hate to break this, Aly, but hitting something with a four meter crossection at a quarter of a kilometer isn't all that hot. The retargetting is nice, but it shows no ability to hit something moving much faster or engaging from farther out.

The retargeting ability is what I consider important. It means that a Starfleet vesel will be able to put multiple shots in that 4 meter area to account for the ships manuvering and size.

If they're within 500 meters or so and only doing a few hundred meters per second. That's a bit of a limiting factor!

[Alyeska]

There is, of course, also the widely used excuse that grotesque examples of inaccuracy from OPFOR ships such as Borg or Klingon vessels can be disregarded because it's "not Federation". As if the Klingons would realistically stand a snowball's chance in hell against the Federation if they actually had such a huge tactical disadvantage in every battle.

Indeed, the Defiant's straffing run on the Klingon Negh-Var in "Shattered Mirror" yielded a hit ratio of damn near zero. I know this was an alternate universe ship, but come on, they can't really be different considering that the systems on DS9 were so similar that Sisko had free reign of the computer while he was there.

We are specificaly talking about beam phasers. PPCs are not included on the discussion.

[Darth Wong]

Phasers show themselves to be far more concentrated then most other weapons.

Target matter disperses the energy.

In order to effectively down enemy subsystems one would need to be able to strike very close to the target.

In a word, bullshit. If a phaser can blow away the entire interior of a warp nacelle in one shot, it can certainly do more damage than a few feet in every direction around the point of impact, particularly when it must do that simply to get through the hull armour.

Using torpedoes would make your need for accuracy less imporant.

You cannot justify your claims of a mere few feet of area-effect by saying that torpedoes have even more area effect.

[Alyeska]

So we have a target which can probably be estimated to 4 square meters or so.

I hate to break this, Aly, but hitting something with a four meter crossection at a quarter of a kilometer isn't all that hot. The retargetting is nice, but it shows no ability to hit something moving much faster or engaging from farther out.

The retargeting ability is what I consider important. It means that a Starfleet vesel will be able to put multiple shots in that 4 meter area to account for the ships manuvering and size.

If they're within 500 meters or so and only doing a few hundred meters per second. That's a bit of a limiting factor!

The retargeting ability makes the speed less of a factor. It means the ship is capable of rapid recalculation for relatively pinpoint fire. This means it can score hits on smaller and more rapid targets. Hit ratio will decrease but with the relative defense of size the capitalship can take on a fair strike force.

[SirNitram]

The retargeting ability is what I consider important. It means that a Starfleet vesel will be able to put multiple shots in that 4 meter area to account for the ships manuvering and size.

If they're within 500 meters or so and only doing a few hundred meters per second. That's a bit of a limiting factor!

The retargeting ability makes the speed less of a factor. It means the ship is capable of rapid recalculation for relatively pinpoint fire. This means it can score hits on smaller and more rapid targets. Hit ratio will decrease but with the relative defense of size the capitalship can take on a fair strike force.

Within the context of a Trek on Trek fight, you are very right, as 'strike craft' are still near a hundred meters long and aren't much faster than caps. I was more pointing out against a TIE, particularly a late model one, it's not much of a crutch.

[Alyeska]

Target matter disperses the energy.

I'm not sure what your trying to say here.

In a word, bullshit. If a phaser can blow away the entire interior of a warp nacelle in one shot, it can certainly do more damage than a few feet in every direction around the point of impact, particularly when it must do that simply to get through the hull armour.

You have to take into account the ships internal makeup. You strike its fuel, it go boom. You strike it in the most armored part, not much affect. This is why a phaser can blow up a warp nacele or just leave scorch marks over the engineering section.

You cannot justify your claims of a mere few feet of area-effect by saying that torpedoes have even more area effect.

Torpedoes are demonstrated area affect weapons and typicaly cause greater distributed damage to a ship. This gives it the natural ability to cause specific damage with less accuracy to the firing of the torpedo.

[Alyeska]

Within the context of a Trek on Trek fight, you are very right, as 'strike craft' are still near a hundred meters long and aren't much faster than caps. I was more pointing out against a TIE, particularly a late model one, it's not much of a crutch.

Starfleet ships have had to fire on relatively fast and small craft in the past. One thing with a fast vehicle. The faster it goes, the more predictable its course will be because it can not manuever as quickly. This is a limiting factor for the Tie.

[SirNitram]

Within the context of a Trek on Trek fight, you are very right, as 'strike craft' are still near a hundred meters long and aren't much faster than caps. I was more pointing out against a TIE, particularly a late model one, it's not much of a crutch.

Starfleet ships have had to fire on relatively fast and small craft in the past. One thing with a fast vehicle. The faster it goes, the more predictable its course will be because it can not manuever as quickly. This is a limiting factor for the Tie.

A presumed limiting factor, one that doesn't always hold true. We both know the extent of the silly that is the percentage-C maneuvering in NJO.

[Darth Wong]

Target matter disperses the energy.

I'm not sure what your trying to say here.

When a tight energy beam hits solid matter, the exploding matter tends to widen its area of effect. Clear enough?

You have to take into account the ships internal makeup. You strike its fuel, it go boom. You strike it in the most armored part, not much affect. This is why a phaser can blow up a warp nacele or just leave scorch marks over the engineering section.

In TWOK, it didn't just leave scorch marks over the engineering section; it knocked out main power and warp drive. If you can get through the armour, you must have caused a sufficiently violent explosion at the hull to blow your way through, so you must be causing more than a mere 4m wide damage area.

You cannot justify your claims of a mere few feet of area-effect by saying that torpedoes have even more area effect.

Torpedoes are demonstrated area affect weapons and typicaly cause greater distributed damage to a ship. This gives it the natural ability to cause specific damage with less accuracy to the firing of the torpedo.

Did you even read what I wrote? Does the phrase "red herring" mean nothing to you?

[Alyeska]

Within the context of a Trek on Trek fight, you are very right, as 'strike craft' are still near a hundred meters long and aren't much faster than caps. I was more pointing out against a TIE, particularly a late model one, it's not much of a crutch.

Starfleet ships have had to fire on relatively fast and small craft in the past. One thing with a fast vehicle. The faster it goes, the more predictable its course will be because it can not manuever as quickly. This is a limiting factor for the Tie.

A presumed limiting factor, one that doesn't always hold true. We both know the extent of the silly that is the percentage-C maneuvering in NJO.

The fighters are not orders of magnitude above what we have seen in the movies. percentage-C manuevering of any significant degree is impossible. This is a limiting factor placed on every other foe that is pit against SW (Andromeda being one of them). NJO high speed manuevering is not possible because of the movies.

[SirNitram]

Starfleet ships have had to fire on relatively fast and small craft in the past. One thing with a fast vehicle. The faster it goes, the more predictable its course will be because it can not manuever as quickly. This is a limiting factor for the Tie.

A presumed limiting factor, one that doesn't always hold true. We both know the extent of the silly that is the percentage-C maneuvering in NJO.

The fighters are not orders of magnitude above what we have seen in the movies. percentage-C manuevering of any significant degree is impossible. This is a limiting factor placed on every other foe that is pit against SW (Andromeda being one of them). NJO high speed manuevering is not possible because of the movies.

So your base assumption is there can be zero advancement in a thirty year period because we don't see any TIE attempt a turn and fail. Do I even need to point out this is nonsense?

[Alyeska]

When a tight energy beam hits solid matter, the exploding matter tends to widen its area of effect. Clear enough?

Yes, I see what you mean now.

In TWOK, it didn't just leave scorch marks over the engineering section; it knocked out main power and warp drive. If you can get through the armour, you must have caused a sufficiently violent explosion at the hull to blow your way through, so you must be causing more than a mere 4m wide damage area.

Originaly I was going to say it could very well have gone all the way through the hull to damage engineering, but we know this is false because engineering was not vented to space. This means phasers can cause some internal explossive affects. Point conceded. This means accuracy does not have to be as tight. More examples of subsystem attacks are needed before I can progress this line of reasoning. Might take some time so I have to concede the issue as a whole. This of course boads poorly for the shuttle debate.

Did you even read what I wrote? Does the phrase "red herring" mean nothing to you?

That I didn't think of. Mentioning torpedoes is indeed a red herring on the debate about phaser accuracy.

[The Kernel]

We are specificaly talking about beam phasers. PPCs are not included on the discussion.

Excuse me, but the Klingon flagship was using beam disruptors, not pulse disruptors.

[Alyeska]

A presumed limiting factor, one that doesn't always hold true. We both know the extent of the silly that is the percentage-C maneuvering in NJO.

So your base assumption is there can be zero advancement in a thirty year period because we don't see any TIE attempt a turn and fail. Do I even need to point out this is nonsense?

What you are talking about requires advancements of what look like orders of magnitude. And these are advancements that appear to be suddenly on ALL fighters because the likes of near ancient Z-95s still seem to opperate. For the NJO to be correct it requires a sudden advance that breaks newtonian science and have the advance be so blindingly simple that suddenly even old outdated fighters can easily and readily updated.

The fighters are not orders of magnitude above what we have seen in the movies. percentage-C manuevering of any significant degree is impossible. This is a limiting factor placed on every other foe that is pit against SW (Andromeda being one of them). NJO high speed manuevering is not possible because of the movies

[Alyeska]

We are specificaly talking about beam phasers. PPCs are not included on the discussion.

Excuse me, but the Klingon flagship was using beam disruptors, not pulse disruptors.

I see, you were talking about OPFOR ships.