StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Eternal_Freedom wrote:That was indeed Forces of Corruption. But IIRC the "official" result of that battle was that the superlaser fired and one-shotted the Annihilator, an SSD. At any rate, we know the DSII could fire in lower-powered mode at intervals of a few minutes, I see no reason why Eclipse couldn't do the same.

DSII did have a massively oversized reactor as compared to the DSI. Eclipse was obviously much smaller.

Eternal_Freedom wrote:Old EU material did say that the MC80B's (the class Mon Remonda belonged to) was the first purpose-built warship rather than civilian conversions, so this might fit.

And Mon Cals were built for durability over firepower. Notably they lack garrison forces in the same fashion as SDs.

Eternal_Freedom wrote: That is possible. However, SSD's clearly require either a shitton of firepower (an entire fleet) or a great deal of luck to take out.

True. And fighter attacks like that are suicidal at best. Of the Rebel fighters that attacked Executor, only one of two that we saw made it to the bridge and that was by an uncontrollable high speed dive.

This is certainly true. Though if the Empire had actualy had the thousands of TIEs it shoudl have had the swarm attack may have been more successful. Or if they included the bombers that were suspiciously absent on-screen.

Especially against the smaller corvettes and frigates in the Rebel fleet. While ships like that can be effective against SDs when they maneuver in close enough, they are much more vulnerable to bomber attacks.

And they largely did. They had one extra class of star destroyers, the Nebulas, and the rest were things liek the fleet carriers, heavy cruisers, Bothan Assault Cruisers etc.

Well the New Republic did use converted ex-Imperial SDs. Solo's fleet against Iron Fist featured several.

Either explanation would work I think. The third possibility is that the various Admirals, being veterans of the Clone Wars, are building ships to fight the last war, as large numbers of Executors would have come in quite handy in those battles I would think.

That is an excellent explanation.

For the Malevolence case, it was probably "what have we got that's ready to go fight right now" rather than assembling an optimum task force.

True, but it still indicates a lack of FTL capable heavy ships. One would also expect ships that heavy in orbit of Kamino or Coruscant given the strategic value of both of those worlds. But we only saw Venators.

Since we agree on most points, I'll just reply to these:

Adamskywalker007 wrote:

And they largely did. They had one extra class of star destroyers, the Nebulas, and the rest were things liek the fleet carriers, heavy cruisers, Bothan Assault Cruisers etc.

Well the New Republic did use converted ex-Imperial SDs. Solo's fleet against Iron Fist featured several.

In the old EU the New Class program came later than the X-wing books. But IIRC they only kept captured/surrendered ISDs in service, the Nebulas were the only new builds referred to as "star Destroyers."

For the Malevolence case, it was probably "what have we got that's ready to go fight right now" rather than assembling an optimum task force.

True, but it still indicates a lack of FTL capable heavy ships. One would also expect ships that heavy in orbit of Kamino or Coruscant given the strategic value of both of those worlds. But we only saw Venators.

I don't think it's a lack of FTL-capable heavy ships. It's more that the heavy ships they did have just weren't fast enough in hyperspace to keep up with the Venators. Old EU sources state that the Kuati Mandators, for instance, had only short-range hyperdrives. Given the relative short span of the Cone Wars, the Republic may have decided that refitting them with longer-ranged hyperdrives woudl take too long to be worth it.

As for why none were seen over Coruscant, well, we mainly only see ships from the reinforcement fleet, it's possible that Coruscant's defenders were occupied elsewhere, or had already been taken out by focused attacks. The battle was going on long enough for Obi-Wan to get the word, gather his 1000+ Venators and reach Coruscant from the Outer Rim after all.

Eternal_Freedom wrote:Since we agree on most points, I'll just reply to these:

Adamskywalker007 wrote:

And they largely did. They had one extra class of star destroyers, the Nebulas, and the rest were things liek the fleet carriers, heavy cruisers, Bothan Assault Cruisers etc.

Well the New Republic did use converted ex-Imperial SDs. Solo's fleet against Iron Fist featured several.

In the old EU the New Class program came later than the X-wing books. But IIRC they only kept captured/surrendered ISDs in service, the Nebulas were the only new builds referred to as "star Destroyers."

For the Malevolence case, it was probably "what have we got that's ready to go fight right now" rather than assembling an optimum task force.

True, but it still indicates a lack of FTL capable heavy ships. One would also expect ships that heavy in orbit of Kamino or Coruscant given the strategic value of both of those worlds. But we only saw Venators.

I don't think it's a lack of FTL-capable heavy ships. It's more that the heavy ships they did have just weren't fast enough in hyperspace to keep up with the Venators. Old EU sources state that the Kuati Mandators, for instance, had only short-range hyperdrives. Given the relative short span of the Cone Wars, the Republic may have decided that refitting them with longer-ranged hyperdrives woudl take too long to be worth it.

As for why none were seen over Coruscant, well, we mainly only see ships from the reinforcement fleet, it's possible that Coruscant's defenders were occupied elsewhere, or had already been taken out by focused attacks. The battle was going on long enough for Obi-Wan to get the word, gather his 1000+ Venators and reach Coruscant from the Outer Rim after all.

here's a thought, even if we can't be sure if the asteroid actually destroyed the bridge of the ISD in ESB (though it is heavily implied) we DO now have conon evidence of the structural integrity (or hardiness) of the ISD, the crashed ISD seen in the released footage of EP VII, how much of an impact would the ISD have to have survived if we assume an earthlike gravity for the planet, and it landing in dry sand? I mean, that must have been a hell of a crash right? Yet here the thing is in one piece (sorta). How much energy would it have to have been able to withstand?

How do you know that crash was unpowered or from orbit? Thanks to Rebels we know ISDs are atmosphere-capable.

cmdrjones wrote:here's a thought, even if we can't be sure if the asteroid actually destroyed the bridge of the ISD in ESB (though it is heavily implied) we DO now have conon evidence of the structural integrity (or hardiness) of the ISD, the crashed ISD seen in the released footage of EP VII, how much of an impact would the ISD have to have survived if we assume an earthlike gravity for the planet, and it landing in dry sand? I mean, that must have been a hell of a crash right? Yet here the thing is in one piece (sorta). How much energy would it have to have been able to withstand?

As with real plane crashes it depends entirely on the details of the crash. In some situations the damage is limited to collapsing the landing gear and ruining the paint on the bottom of the plane, in others you get a pile of aluminum scraps that might be identifiable as a plane if you look really carefully. If the star destroyer came in mostly under control and executed an off-starport landing then it suffered much weaker impact forces than an uncontrolled free-fall from orbit.

Yeah, we simply don't have enough detail about the ISD crash to comment on what it means for ISD durability. For all we know, it was coming in for a gentle landing when its port repulsors started giving out, hence the list to the side it has on the ground.

Also, 'dry sand' is slightly meaningless to something that big. It'd just have compacted and been little different from soft rock.

Elheru Aran wrote:Yeah, we simply don't have enough detail about the ISD crash to comment on what it means for ISD durability. For all we know, it was coming in for a gentle landing when its port repulsors started giving out, hence the list to the side it has on the ground.

Also, 'dry sand' is slightly meaningless to something that big. It'd just have compacted and been little different from soft rock.

Gotcha. Here's to hoping they put something about it into the upcoming film. So far, all we have is some clips of it resting canted at an angle and the obligatory TIE fighter chase through the interiors which looked relatively intact.

The TIE fighter chase actually appears to be a different ship, likely a Super Star Destroyer.

Elheru Aran wrote:The TIE fighter chase actually appears to be a different ship, likely a Super Star Destroyer.

https://static-ssl.businessinsider.com/ ... -chase.png

http://i.imgur.com/4fR7XZ2.png

it shows three engines, which could be one SIDE of an SSD (correct me if I'm wrong but they have 3 large ones to a side and the ISD's have three proportional engines across the centerline of the aft), as the second image shows. In any case, it looks like a fantastic shot. The interior looks like mostly empty space, which means that huge components may have been salvaged/removed. I read on another spoiler thread that the crashed ships in EP VII had been used as sources of scrap for a long while before this scene takes place, so flying through one may not be TOTALLy nuts....

I guess this is one piece of circumstantial evidence to support the theories put forward in the "star destroyers' garbage" thread that ISDs are modularly designed multirole ships that may need lots of regular maintenance to keep in the field and that can regularly be scrapped, stripped, chopped, melted and reformed into new ships. It also goes with that 1930s/1940s WWII kinda feel Lucas was going for. The Shermans for example were notoriously easy to slap back together and send back into the field.

cmdrjones wrote:https://static-ssl.businessinsider.com/ ... -chase.png

http://i.imgur.com/4fR7XZ2.png

it shows three engines, which could be one SIDE of an SSD (correct me if I'm wrong but they have 3 large ones to a side and the ISD's have three proportional engines across the centerline of the aft), as the second image shows. In any case, it looks like a fantastic shot. The interior looks like mostly empty space, which means that huge components may have been salvaged/removed. I read on another spoiler thread that the crashed ships in EP VII had been used as sources of scrap for a long while before this scene takes place, so flying through one may not be TOTALLy nuts....

The second image you link to clearly shows six engines rather than three. That is why the assumption was made that it was an SSD.

Though you are right that it was salvaged. In particular Rey had done this for a living before the events of the film. That would allow her to know that it would be safe to fly though.

Adamskywalker007 wrote:

cmdrjones wrote:https://static-ssl.businessinsider.com/ ... -chase.png

http://i.imgur.com/4fR7XZ2.png

it shows three engines, which could be one SIDE of an SSD (correct me if I'm wrong but they have 3 large ones to a side and the ISD's have three proportional engines across the centerline of the aft), as the second image shows. In any case, it looks like a fantastic shot. The interior looks like mostly empty space, which means that huge components may have been salvaged/removed. I read on another spoiler thread that the crashed ships in EP VII had been used as sources of scrap for a long while before this scene takes place, so flying through one may not be TOTALLy nuts....

The second image you link to clearly shows six engines rather than three. That is why the assumption was made that it was an SSD.

Though you are right that it was salvaged. In particular Rey had done this for a living before the events of the film. That would allow her to know that it would be safe to fly though.

aha, thanks again.

The MOTHER LODE!!

http://www.maritime.org/doc/pdf/damagecontrolman.pdf