DS Question

[Techno_Union]

doubtful.

of course, that a ds could be created in sececy shows even more production capability - if the empire was going all out ds every 2 days, why bother with secrecy?

by the time you hear that one is being built, its being guarded by several

Could you imagine a DS in every system? *evil laugh*

[Illuminatus Primus]

Pre-fabrication is the most likely answer.

One rather large problem with my figures is that while they do fit within the capabilities of the entire empire, they do not fit within the capabilities of Endor. We observed no heavy manufacturing equipment in orbit around the sanctuary moon. One explanation for this is that the DS2 was built in small prefabricated sections.

Another point to consider is how much of the DS2 and DS1 were hollow.

No, SOTE establishes firmly that the Death Star II was essentially fabricated from raw materials on site by construction droids and such.

[Enforcer Talen]

doubtful.

of course, that a ds could be created in sececy shows even more production capability - if the empire was going all out ds every 2 days, why bother with secrecy?

by the time you hear that one is being built, its being guarded by several

Could you imagine a DS in every system? *evil laugh*

definitly.

imagine *that* as a intergalactic strike force? several thousand deathstars with world devastators in the bays?

[The Original Nex]

Just want to make another point on the DSII. The ITW states:

"Only Vader and a few of the Emperor's advisors grasped that Palpatine's planin leaving so much of the base unfinished was to decieve the Alliance into thinking that the Superlaser would not be operational when the Rebels launched their attack"(p.43).

This would suggest that it could have been finished even faster, but Palpatine had construction slowed (all the while terrifying Jerjerrod into thinking he was doing something wrong), in order to further his trap for the Rebels.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Why do you think "the base" would refer to the Death Star II over the groundside shield generators and support structure?

[Enforcer Talen]

what other base would have a superlaser?

[nasor]

just for comparison, iirc, the usa during ww2 built 10 destroyers in 10 days.

one might expect a cvilization on such a higher scale to be capable of similar feats.

True, but they always had far more than ten destroyers in production at any one time. I believe the record for start-to-finish assembly of a destroyer during WWII was one week. It was something of a publicity stunt in which they carefully gathered all the prefabricated parts beforehand, then rushed the assembly through as quickly as possible with 24 hour shifts.

[Questor]

doubtful.

of course, that a ds could be created in sececy shows even more production capability - if the empire was going all out ds every 2 days, why bother with secrecy?

by the time you hear that one is being built, its being guarded by several

Could you imagine a DS in every system? *evil laugh*

definitly.

imagine *that* as a intergalactic strike force? several thousand deathstars with world devastators in the bays?

Read David Weber's Dahak series.

A Utu class planetiod could vaporize the Earth.

[The Original Nex]

Why do you think "the base" would refer to the Death Star II over the groundside shield generators and support structure?

It has a superlaser, and the fact that was part of the analysis on the Death Star's construction.

[consequences]

Could you imagine a DS in every system? *evil laugh*

definitly.

imagine *that* as a intergalactic strike force? several thousand deathstars with world devastators in the bays?

Read David Weber's Dahak series.

A Utu class planetiod could vaporize the Earth.

Except Weber had about two hundred planetoids per major system. Of course, their ftl sucked badly enough that they need it.

[Kuroneko]

If the 900KM diameter DSII would have been completed in 10 months, tops, how long would it take to build the 160KM diameter DSI? I'd like to know.

Well, with a radius of 450,000 m, the DS2 has a volume of 2.8 E17 cubic meters. The DS1, with a radius of 80,000 m, has a volume of 1.5 E15 cubic meters. If we assume equal construction rates, we know that they can build at a rate of 2.8 E16 cubic meters per month. Divide 1.5 E15 by 2.8 E16, and you get, if I've done my math correctly, about 0.05.

Under those assumptions, the ratio of volume is (8.0e4/4.5e5)³ = 0.0055, not 0.05. Although not essential here, the corresponding volume figures are 3.8e17 and 2.1e15, for DSII and DSI, respectively; you've left out a factor of 4/3.

Multiply that number by 30 and you get about 1.6.

That would be multiplying by 300 (10 months); interestingly, your errors cancel each other.

So, assuming equal construction rates (and that I did the math correctly), the first Death Star took roughly a day and a half to build.

Yes.

As this is a rather short period, I suspect that the construction rates were not equal.

Absolutely.

[Questor]

If the 900KM diameter DSII would have been completed in 10 months, tops, how long would it take to build the 160KM diameter DSI? I'd like to know.

Well, with a radius of 450,000 m, the DS2 has a volume of 2.8 E17 cubic meters. The DS1, with a radius of 80,000 m, has a volume of 1.5 E15 cubic meters. If we assume equal construction rates, we know that they can build at a rate of 2.8 E16 cubic meters per month. Divide 1.5 E15 by 2.8 E16, and you get, if I've done my math correctly, about 0.05.

Under those assumptions, the ratio of volume is (8.0e4/4.5e5)³ = 0.0055, not 0.05. Although not essential here, the corresponding volume figures are 3.8e17 and 2.1e15, for DSII and DSI, respectively; you've left out a factor of 4/3.

I knew I forgot something in the volume formula. Thanks.

Multiply that number by 30 and you get about 1.6.

That would be multiplying by 300 (10 months); interestingly, your errors cancel each other.

[/quote]

I had multiplied by ten earlier in the equation, to convert to months. That's why that part cancels out.

[The Dark]

just for comparison, iirc, the usa during ww2 built 10 destroyers in 10 days.

one might expect a cvilization on such a higher scale to be capable of similar feats.

True, but they always had far more than ten destroyers in production at any one time. I believe the record for start-to-finish assembly of a destroyer during WWII was one week. It was something of a publicity stunt in which they carefully gathered all the prefabricated parts beforehand, then rushed the assembly through as quickly as possible with 24 hour shifts.

There was a Liberty ship that was built in twenty days, but I don't know of any ship being built quicker than that. The quickest destroyer I know of was the Heywood L. Edwards, built in Charleston. 200 days from keel-laying to commissioning. If we go from keel-laying to launch, the Charrette and Conner took 93 days.