StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Mr Bean wrote:Acutaly the Plantary Shield Generators are at least two magnitudes possibly as much as Five Magnitudes more powerful than an SSD's shields, Or did you fokes miss the fact that some Plantary Shield Stations are bigger than SSDs and they are entirely devoted to Shield Generataion?

I never made that claim. That's what Torpedo Spheres are for.

Mr Bean wrote:Acutaly the Plantary Shield Generators are at least two magnitudes possibly as much as Five Magnitudes more powerful than an SSD's shields, Or did you fokes miss the fact that some Plantary Shield Stations are bigger than SSDs and they are entirely devoted to Shield Generataion?

Bean, if the Soveriegn and Eclipse superlasers could pierce planetary shields according to HDS' work, than it stands to reason that the Pulsar Station's superlasers would likely also be able to pierce planetary shields.

Pulsar Station but combine it with World Devastator technology so it can plow through asteroid fields and make TIE/droids.

I too wish to know more of the Toast Ray

I'd pretty much copy Death Star 2. No reason to suspect that the problems with DS1 weren't fixed in DS2. I WOULD however, be more interested in getting assurances from Darth Wong that he wouldn't be playing bait and switch games with the rebels on this one.

DS2 with several dozen independantly targetable superlaser component beams, spread over the whole station. Throw in a dozen or two ISDs that are permanent parts of the DS's complement.

Howedar wrote:DS2 with several dozen independantly targetable superlaser component beams, spread over the whole station.

All right, I'm getting sick of hearing this. Why the fuck do you need multiple planet-killing beams? WHY? And if you say to fight capships, I'll refer you to my Pulsar Station entry.

I'd start by planning a 32,000 km diameter, with several large SSD docking bays. The Superlasers would be on small 50 km diameter sphereical turrets, that could pivot more quickly. Individaully the 50 or so of these could target and destroy capital ships, or 25 of them at a time could aim to destroy a particularly tough planetary shield.

I think that would be an improvement.

Oh yeah - no exhaust ports that are large enough to fit anthing down, and the exhaust ports would have u-traps and smiliar in them to prevent something flying all the way in unimpeded.

Why not just use the original ds2 without someone at the helm who's just a mite arrogant?


You get an unstoppable Finished Happy fun ball to go bounce off a few star systems with

It wasn't big enough.... Big is good !

Theoretically if they could build DSII in 6 months, that's 160 km in .5 years. Why couldn't they take a bit longer, sure something like 1600 km diameter would only take a few years - and would be way cooler.

I would put three massive holes on the back ... think bowling ball.

smokemare wrote:I'd start by planning a 32,000 km diameter, with several large SSD docking bays. The Superlasers would be on small 50 km diameter sphereical turrets, that could pivot more quickly. Individaully the 50 or so of these could target and destroy capital ships, or 25 of them at a time could aim to destroy a particularly tough planetary shield.

Disregarding the fact that the Empire never has shown the ability to create moving parts fifty kilometers in diameter, what evidence do you have that the Empire could ever create a 16 000 kilometer radius battlestation? The Death Star is about the biggest solid structure the Empire has ever produced, and you're casually proposing something fourty-five thousand times larger?

I think that would be an improvement.

I think it would be lunacy, and fill no function at all.

Well if the DS2 really had 160 kms diameter than a 32000 kms diameter battle station with the same density would be 8 million times bigger.

vakundok wrote:Well if the DS2 really had 160 kms diameter than a 32000 kms diameter battle station with the same density would be 8 million times bigger.

The DS2 was 900 km, not 160.

Darth Servo wrote:The DS2 was 900 km, not 160.

Well then just 8 million times bigger than DS1 which seemed to be big enough to the task!

Which is the higher level? The modeler or the novelization?

Interesting. So, the DS1 was 160 and the DS2 was 900 km in diameter. (According to Saxton's examination.) If they have the same density it means that from the material that was used to build the DS2 nearly 180 DS1s could be built!

vakundok wrote:

Darth Utsanomiko wrote:You implied that this large tunnel (only one was seen, not 'several') is some kind of flaw or exception to the design intention of eliminating large exaust ports. Spanky pointed out the clear likelyhood that it was merely an 'access tunnel', and would not be present once the battlestation was finished. There's nothing that suggest there were any large exaust ports like on the Death Star I, and a single acess tunnel seen does not refute this idea. So what what was it you suggested that wasn't already intended for the completed Death Star II?

So, you read something I did not write and did not even want to write and stated immediately as an error made by me. Nice.
Besides the elimination of the large exhaust ports is only official not canon, is it? That is why I directly did not write anything about the function of the tunnels. Examining the official universe their function as a building acces tunnel was quite clear for me too. Examining the canon their function and the reason that why they couldn't get a "last minute" covering plate or a hidden "comb" system are still a question and the "They are the exhaust ports." answer canot be clearly rejected.
As I remember there was one that Lando went through heading in (with at least one sideway) and an other that he went through heading out. The Falcon did not turn back. So the reactor could be reached from at least three points of the surface. If someone has a screenshot when Ackbar describes the attack the exact number can be counted.
I suggested "independent firing capability for the composite beams". It was not part of weapon system which was already operational, but maybe it was only unfinished.

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/zs/rotj/ds2holo36.jpg
So, four tunnels can be counted besides that unknown ventral thing.

vakundok wrote:http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/zs/rotj/ds2holo36.jpg
So, four tunnels can be counted besides that unknown ventral thing.

Ok, so I made one mistake that still doesn't detract from my main point. There isn't anything in canon sources that contradict the theory that they are access tunnels or that they were exclusively an under-constuction feature, which is what official sources pin them as.

In ANH, it was a big enough of a deal that they managed to find a 2m-wide exaust port to attack, and the major premise of redisigning the Death Star was removing ports that big and instead using a more redundant exuast system of smaller, more numerous ports. The appearance of access tunnels in RoTJ does not contradict this design concept.

Darth Utsanomiko wrote:

vakundok wrote:http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/zs/rotj/ds2holo36.jpg
So, four tunnels can be counted besides that unknown ventral thing.

Ok, so I made one mistake that still doesn't detract from my main point. There isn't anything in canon sources that contradict the theory that they are access tunnels or that they were exclusively an under-constuction feature, which is what official sources pin them as.

In ANH, it was a big enough of a deal that they managed to find a 2m-wide exaust port to attack, and the major premise of redisigning the Death Star was removing ports that big and instead using a more redundant exuast system of smaller, more numerous ports. The appearance of access tunnels in RoTJ does not contradict this design concept.

And, the canon does support the notion that they were there only for construction.

Admiral Ackbar orders a retreat. Lando replies: "We won't get another chance at this Admiral." Clearly, Lando was under the impression that those tunnels would not be open once construction was completed.

Why of why do people keep blathering about Cap Ship Hangers. THEY ARE FUCKING CAPITAL SHIPS FOR FUCK SAKE THEY ARE SUPOSED TO FLY TO PLACES. Putting a Cap Ship in a hanger is a drastic waste of resources and material.

Darth Utsanomiko:
Let's stop for a minute. I still did not write that that theory would be false and they were not build time only access tunnels. I just do not reject the possibility that they can be the exhaust ports in canon.
I felt that your quoted reply only tried to insult every single words I wrote. That was the only reason why I specified the number. Off topic and personal reason it was.
Darth Servo:
Wow! Interesting new (at least to me) point of view. I thought so far that Lando ment that a finished DS would require a vulnerable outer shield generator no more.

vakundok wrote:Wow! Interesting new (at least to me) point of view. I thought so far that Lando ment that a finished DS would require a vulnerable outer shield generator no more.

Well, we know for sure that Lando was pretty confident that they would not get a second chance to attack the DS2. Small Starfighters were able to penetrate the outer shield of the DS1. Don't have any information on whether or not they actually made the DS2's shields impervious to such things or not. Those tunnels were the only way to reach the DS2's reactor. Its all up in the air really, but still a possibility.

The huge difference between DS1 and DS2 is still beyond me. What would cause this huge upsizing (nearly 180 times)?
In my opinion:
The DS1 weaponry was adequate to the task (to destroy any planet and threaten the galaxy). The only problem with it (quite a problem ) was that the rebells were able to destroy it.
The only design flaw was that the fighters were able to pass the shields. The exhaust port was already so small that only a force sensitive being was able to hit it impressing Solo who was one of the best pilots.
Now I think that the main reason for the upsizing was to incrise shield power and efficiency. Now I do not think the exhaust ports needed to be changed at all. Micronization of the exhaust ports could cause maintenance and cleaning problems.

IG-88E wrote:

Howedar wrote:DS2 with several dozen independantly targetable superlaser component beams, spread over the whole station.

All right, I'm getting sick of hearing this. Why the fuck do you need multiple planet-killing beams? WHY? And if you say to fight capships, I'll refer you to my Pulsar Station entry.

I would question the ability of a component beam to destroy a planet. Kill, certainly, but not bloe to hell.

How to make a Death Star... Should be fun.

I would think in the lines of modular design by dividing the DS3 into several sectors.

Both Death Stars were destroyed by a "failure" in the main reactor. So I would eliminate that weakness by removing the main reactor.

Instead several smaller reactors would be distributed around the Death Star. Two for each sector, a primary and a backup. Each sector would also be sealed off from eachother to help in potential damage control. To get from sector to sector you would have to use a shuttle. This would probably be the fastest way around anyway. The "DS3 Public Transport System" would have to be very efficient and properly escorted, though.

The Superlaser and shield generators would have their own sets of reactors so they would function independantly of the rest of the station. The Superlaser would, of course, have a variable strength. No need to overkill too much... In emergencies Superlaser power would be redirectable to the shields and vice-versa.

In the unlikely event that someone takes out a reactor the worst case scenario is that a sector would be destroyed. The DS3, however, would be still be fully funtional and able to retaliate. If nessesary it would then retreat and repair.

The size would be a little bigger than the DS1. I would round it up to 200 km due to the increased volume of extra reactors and still keep the efficiency of the DS1. IMHO the DS2 was too much showing off and too little military sense.

On the surface there would be several Turbolaser batteries in all sizes. Anti-Air guns would also have to be abundant. Further more each sector would have a full wing of TIEs, mostly of the Space-superiority types.

In service it would always be escorted by a complete system fleet including an Executor-class SSD.

And that is how I would design a Death Star...

vakundok wrote:The huge difference between DS1 and DS2 is still beyond me. What would cause this huge upsizing (nearly 180 times)?

How about these possibilities:

1) Less charging time between shots(don't have any actual evidence unfortunately).
2) Off-axis firing.

I felt that your quoted reply only tried to insult every single words I wrote. That was the only reason why I specified the number. Off topic and personal reason it was.

I quote your posts and respond to what's said in them, and you think it's not only misinterpretation but being personal? Jesus, this is worse than the 'Abrams vs AT-ST' thread. That there is the first personal responce I've made, since you assumed I had made one before.

vakundok wrote:Let's stop for a minute. I still did not write that that theory would be false and they were not build time only access tunnels. I just do not reject the possibility that they can be the exhaust ports in canon.

What canon source hints that they could be exaust ports? Every official source says the DS2 was designed to fix the errors made with the DS1 (but that's the whole damn point of redesigning, anyway), and that included de-centralizing the exaust ports into smaller, more numerous ports. Why would they make the deal that 2m exaust ports were the largest openings they had, if the redesigned, less penetrable DS2 has friggin' 30m-wide 'exaust' ports that could be flown through? Or did you fail to also notice that more than 40% of the structure was unfinished, and that the huge gaps in the side would be built over as well?

Nothing in canon either suggests they are exaust ports or that the offical material on the DS2 design used a system of mirconized ports is incorrect. Official material is only ignored if canon contradicts it. The fact you are tiredly hanging onto the unsupported notion that they could be exaust ports implies you are rejecting the fact that they were construction-access tunnels.