Most Intimidating Spaceship.

[LordVader]

Warhammer 40k Imperial Navy Emperor- class battleship. This thing would gobble up Star Destroyers for breakfast.

http://www.wargames.co.uk/Pending/Ar...s/bfgcover.jpg

Unfortunately, the 40k artwork/models don't make the ships nearly as scary as they would be on a full screen.

[ChronicLunacy]

/thread






-

[Jack Squat]

*snip, snip, snip the unneccessarily large image*

why's a rubix cube in orbit?

[Destro_Yersul]

You can't see the whole thing here, but the thing is 10,000 km in diameter.

Spoiler

Show

[kpenguin]

You can't see the whole thing here, but the thing is 10,000 km in diameter.

Spoiler

Show

Wait... is that the supergate from Stargate SG-1?

[factotum]

Star Destroyer engines are only in the rear and cannot change the tilt, pitch or yaw of the ship, only move it forward and turn it left or right. A Star Destroyer cannot even slow down without turning around.

Not sure where you're getting that from. Let's see:

Yaw--this is the same as turning left or right, which you admit a Star Destroyer can do, so why do you list it in the things it can't?

Pitch--if the engines can thrust sideways in order to turn the ship left and right, there's absolutely no reason why they shouldn't be able to thrust up or down in order to change the pitch of the ship, so that one's wrong too.

Tilt--I assume you mean roll, as in rotate the ship about its longitudinal axis. Well, again, a Star Destroyer ought to be able to do that, because it has three engines; if the left engine thrusts upward while the right engine thrusts downward, the ship will roll, no question about it.

So, with the known engine layout of the Star Destroyer, it can manoeuvre in any axis. Given the way the fleet was approaching Hoth near the beginning of Empire Strikes Back, it also seems likely the ship can decelerate without having to turn round; they would have been approaching the planet backwards in order to avoid crashing straight into it otherwise.

[Destro_Yersul]

Wait... is that the supergate from Stargate SG-1?

Nope, it's a Halo. Installation 05, to be specific. When activated it destroys all sentient organic life within 25,000 light years of itself.

[Archonic Energy]

Xenon destroyers from X3: Reunion...

QFT.

that and a Kaakh cluster... i want me one of those M3's

[Eldan]

The Lexx. I mean, what else.

[warty goblin]

Not sure where you're getting that from. Let's see:

Yaw--this is the same as turning left or right, which you admit a Star Destroyer can do, so why do you list it in the things it can't?

Pitch--if the engines can thrust sideways in order to turn the ship left and right, there's absolutely no reason why they shouldn't be able to thrust up or down in order to change the pitch of the ship, so that one's wrong too.

Tilt--I assume you mean roll, as in rotate the ship about its longitudinal axis. Well, again, a Star Destroyer ought to be able to do that, because it has three engines; if the left engine thrusts upward while the right engine thrusts downward, the ship will roll, no question about it.

So, with the known engine layout of the Star Destroyer, it can manoeuvre in any axis. Given the way the fleet was approaching Hoth near the beginning of Empire Strikes Back, it also seems likely the ship can decelerate without having to turn round; they would have been approaching the planet backwards in order to avoid crashing straight into it otherwise.

OK, I admit it was wrong about the yaw thing. But it has three engines mounted in a colinear fashion, all of them in the same plane as its center of gravity. This does allow it to turn, though not quickly, but I really don't see how it can rotate or change its pitch given this engine arrangement unless the tubular engines sticking straight out the back can somehow be tilted, which is never shown and there is no apparent mechanism for. It certainly cannot strafe up and down (change its Z-coordinate without altering its pitch) or side to side, which is pretty crappy design right there.

It could be worse though- they could be designed like the Tie fighters, which don't even look like they can turn around...

[Dervag]

I know they look like rocket nozzles, but are Star Wars engines supposed to be reaction drives? Your argument is ironclad for any ship powered by reaction drives (such as any ship we can realistically imagine building in real life), but it doesn't apply to anything but a reaction drive.

[Arang]

I know they look like rocket nozzles, but are Star Wars engines supposed to be reaction drives? Your argument is ironclad for any ship powered by reaction drives (such as any ship we can realistically imagine building in real life), but it doesn't apply to anything but a reaction drive.

Star Wars ships are fueled by antimatter reactions, I think. So they wouldn't be all too well off.

[Alex Knight]

Star Wars ships are fueled by antimatter reactions, I think. So they wouldn't be all too well off.

Star Wars ships have artificially generated internal gravity and likely do not use standard reaction drives. I mean, the Falcon doesn't have its decks oriented towards the rear of the ship where that large bank of engines are, and it also obviously has no problems in maneuverability.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Star Wars ships are fueled by antimatter reactions, I think. So they wouldn't be all too well off.

Nope, that's Star Trek. Star Wars is usually presented as rather efficient fusion.

[webgem]

The suncrusher I think, even better than halo since it has more maneuverability

[thorgrim29]

I'm gonna second..... third Spaceball one

[factotum]

But it has three engines mounted in a colinear fashion, all of them in the same plane as its center of gravity. This does allow it to turn, though not quickly, but I really don't see how it can rotate or change its pitch given this engine arrangement unless the tubular engines sticking straight out the back can somehow be tilted, which is never shown and there is no apparent mechanism for.

Assuming those glowing things on the back of the ship are standard reaction drives--which we don't know for sure, as others have pointed out--then you don't need to tilt the entire engine to change its direction of thrust; you just need to change the direction of whatever it's kicking out the back. If that stuff happened to consist of charged particles, for instance, a magnetic field would allow the thrust to be deflected without having to physically move the engines at all.

Anyway, we know for a fact that Star Destroyers can manoeuvre in all three axes, because we've seen them do it. As an example, the ISD that is hit by an ion cannon in Empire turns sideways and also pitches down at the back. Another example: the Executor, after having its bridge destroyed in RotJ, turns very rapidly downward; either this is due to its own engines misfiring, or, if the effect is somehow due to the "gravity" of the nearby Death Star, the ship was capable of COUNTERACTING that force before it got hit. Either way, its manoeuvring capability is just as good.

[Closet_Skeleton]

The suncrusher I think, even better than halo since it has more maneuverability

The Suncrusher is a completely ridiculous mistake that shouldn't have been published. It can destroy stars and is itself indestructable. It's a Mary Sue spaceship.

Still, the Halo does more damage at once when activated. The Suncrusher destroys one Solar System per torpedo while a Halo just wipes out everything at once. Still, the Suncrusher is wasting less energy since the Halo is expending massive amounts of energy in order to destroy empty a lot of space.

[Maroon]

The Archangels from Dan Simmons' Hyperion Cantos. Just about the only time it requires to destroy a solar system is the time it takes for it to ressurect its crew after travel. It takes about twenty Ergs (forcefield-creating aliens) to barely withstand its firepower, while two Ergs are enough for a (wooden) ship to hide in a sun.

[Amotis]

It can destroy stars and is itself indestructable.

It was destroyed though.

[Tallis]

Star Destroyer engines are only in the rear and cannot change the tilt, pitch or yaw of the ship, only move it forward and turn it left or right. A Star Destroyer cannot even slow down without turning around.

I realize this is applying Newtonian physics to a universe that staunchly ignore them, but even ignoring the Z-axis, a Star Destroyer can't cut its forward speed easily- plus they don't seem to mount many weapons on their underside.

Could it even turn outside of an atmosphere if all the engines were in the rear? There'd be no drag working against it...

I would venture to assume that it does have maneuvering thrusters, probably hundreds of them. Only the main drive engines are rear mounted, just like space capable vessels built on Earth.

[13_CBS]

It was destroyed though.

Eh, more like tossed into a black hole. It's pretty much unretrievable, but destroyed? hmm...

[Amotis]

Eh, more like tossed into a black hole. It's pretty much unretrievable, but destroyed? hmm...

Point. I really hope they use the "black holes are the sci fi magic" ideal and it crosses series and ends up in Star Trek.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Could it even turn outside of an atmosphere if all the engines were in the rear? There'd be no drag working against it...

I would venture to assume that it does have maneuvering thrusters, probably hundreds of them. Only the main drive engines are rear mounted, just like space capable vessels built on Earth.

Clearly, all Star Wars battles take place in an atmosphere. How else would there be friggin' sound?

My point is, everyone, please please please don't try to apply physics to Star Wars. It just doesn't work.

[ZombieRockStar]

why's a rubix cube in orbit?

The Borg aren't really assimilating because they're destructive. They just want to see if anyone can figure out this damn thing!!!

You can just imagine the hive mind now:

"Rotate the middle one that way."
"Which way?"
"No...he should move that there so he's got those three reds lined up."
"Yeah, but this way he can sort out the yellow side."
"Maybe..."
"Yeah, but which way should I move it?"
"No...you guys are doing it all wrong. Here, just move these two rows around here."
"No, you can't do that. That'd mess up the whole pattern he's got going"
"But which way should I move this middle row?"
"I don't think so. Maybe if you rotated the top here this way..."
"No, really. Just rotate the top like I said?"
"BUT WHICH WAY???!!!"

My point is, everyone, please please please don't try to apply physics to Star Wars. It just doesn't work.

Physics in D&D kill catgirls. Physics in Science Fiction kill green-skinned alien women.

[LordVader]

Point. I really hope they use the "black holes are the sci fi magic" ideal and it crosses series and ends up in Star Trek.

If you want the entire ST universe to die to one starship, go for it.

[Talkkno]

Clearly, all Star Wars battles take place in an atmosphere. How else would there be friggin' sound?

.

Those are just noises generatored for the benfit of th pilot,
From the raido adapation of ANH
"Your sensors'll give you an audio simulation for a rough idea of where those fighters are when they're not on your screen. It'll sound like they're right there in the turret with you."

[Talkkno]

Nope, that's Star Trek. Star Wars is usually presented as rather efficient fusion.

According to the new novel "Death Star" they use tachonyns for energy, which are faster then light particles for "potienlly unlimted energy."

[Amotis]

Those are just noises generatored for the benfit of th pilot,

I read that as "Those are just noises generated by the pilot.

Lmao.

"Pew pew pew beeeerap rap rap neeeerrrrooowowwww pew pew pew"

[LordVader]

If there was only a 40k space movie...
Those cubes would be fleeing for their lives from the sheer BAness of some ships in 40k.

*bangs head on keyboard in frustration*