The Earth Ships discussion thread. Spoilers for all seasons and upcomming episodes.

[Gregorius]

Since it seems that having a decent discussion in the Anti-S4 thread is currently not possible, I would like to continue the discussion I had with SGFerrit in here.

Thread rules:
- Post meaningful replies. Posts such as "LOL", or "I SO AGREE!!!11!!" or even smiley only posts are off-topic and I will neg you for it and report you as you are being an arse. I'm asking any other poster who's contributing to this thread to do the same.
- Refrain from "Ad Hominem" arguments, they make you look like an idiot. And again my neg and report comment stands.
- Use arguments to refute someone.

SGFerrit, as I made the last post in the Anti-thread the floor is yours.

[SGFerrit]

I'l post what I posted in the PMs:

The SG railguns have problem to be toys that do little damage and are barely effective. As for Asgard weapons on the back, they barely have enough power to power the shields, are you expecting them to add more weapons, which draw a lot of power, and sacrifice shield strength?

The SG railguns have been updated for Be All My Sins Remembered. Here is a piece of concept art Joe M provided.



You can also see in the MGM BAMSR promo, the railguns cause some good damage to an Aurora Class hull as the Daedalus (or Apollo) flies past.

As for the back, it just looks odd, makes for a huge target and screams out "HIT ME! I'm where the important stuff is!!!!". Not to mention it makes the launch and landing areas for the F302 extremely vunerable, I'd love to have the Earth ships against me if I were an enemy...

You are seriously underestimating the BC-304's shield strength. It is now able to withstand loads of blasts from Ori motherships. And these are shots that are able to destroy Hataks in a single blast. And with the wepons the ships now posses, you would be dead long before you could drain the shields, if it was a 1 on 1. I can understand where you are coming from though, as in the shields weren't that strong when the ships were first designed. But then, Galactica has it's landing bays on the sides of the ships too, so if those were taken out during battle the Vipers wouldn't have much of a chance. I don't think it is just a problem Earth faces in SG. Unless the Vipers can fly back into the built in launch bays that they come out of?

Plus the general design of the ships makes it nearly impossible to have the most powerful guns sliding over rails to gain huge firing arcs.

I know they don't have huge firing arcs, but as you can see from the BAMSR promo they do have a pretty good arc, when the railguns are firing on the Aurora. I'd say just as good as the Galactica, or say... The Enterprise D & E in star trek.

I've seen those. They would be excellent if the ship were to be on the water where it can, in general, only move on two axis...

Well, they obviously work for Stargate ships. I don't know why they don't have more forward thrusters, but for all we know they work differently to regular thrusters. They are alien technology afterall, aren't they?

Which heavy damage, panels falling down, consoles exploding and if even does that with the shields on. Damn, that ship is surely well designed for a warship. Also, where are the outer layers of non-imporant hallways which can be sealed and used and protection for the vital parts?

How often does it do that with the shields up? In Lifeline, The Apollo was under bombardment from the Asuran ship, but consoles weren't exploding and things weren't falling down. I can understand it happening when the ships are hit by Ori weapons as they have massive power. It does the same in Star Trek too, all the time.

Regarding the hallways, I don't know, it's not like I have the schematics. Ask Joe Mallozzi, I'm sure he knows. Or can find out.

Time index of the promo where it's shown?

It is before the half way mark, after Caldwell says fire. [URL="http://stargate.mgm.com/video.php?id=91"]PROMO. (Shows a BC-304 firing an Asgard beam from the underside of the ship, showing they don't just have Asgard beam weapons on the front)

We see two shots from the front of the closest ship, and one shot from the front of the ship further away as well as one from the underside of that ship, just before the clip cuts to the team and Todd in the PJ.

[Gregorius]

The SG railguns have been updated for Be All My Sins Remembered. Here is a piece of concept art Joe M provided.

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f2...rs/RailGun.jpg

That doesn't look like a railgun, for instance where are the rails through which the current is running? Also, where is the projectile inserted into the cannon? It looks more like a single burst beam cannon.

You can also see in the MGM BAMSR promo, the railguns cause some good damage to an Aurora Class hull as the Daedalus (or Apollo) flies past.

That says nothing, we all know how weak Ancient technology is when it is no longer protected by the shields.

You are seriously underestimating the BC-304's shield strength. It is now able to withstand loads of blasts from Ori motherships. And these are shots that are able to destroy Hataks in a single blast. And with the wepons the ships now posses, you would be dead long before you could drain the shields, if it was a 1 on 1. I can understand where you are coming from though, as in the shields weren't that strong when the ships were first designed.

They had Asgard shields the entire time, the only problem was power. So adding new, more power draining, weapons would decrease shield strength, unless all ships suddenly have new power cores and ZPMs powering them.

But then, Galactica has it's landing bays on the sides of the ships too, so if those were taken out during battle the Vipers wouldn't have much of a chance. I don't think it is just a problem Earth faces in SG. Unless the Vipers can fly back into the built in launch bays that they come out of?

]

I dislike the landing bays on BSG, but that's off-topic, but I think they could try and land there if the battle was over. Also keep in mind that the BSG landing bays openings are by far less exposed than the SG ones and can be retracted if needed, thus eliminating that vunerability.

I know they don't have huge firing arcs, but as you can see from the BAMSR promo they do have a pretty good arc, when the railguns are firing on the Aurora. I'd say just as good as the Galactica, or say... The Enterprise D & E in star trek.

Galactica has a better weapons spread (And they're more difficult to hit) and has, from what I can tell, no blind spots when it comes to coverage of the ship. As for Star Trek ships, don't get me started about how poorly designed they are especially for battle...

Well, they obviously work for Stargate ships. I don't know why they don't have more forward thrusters, but for all we know they work differently to regular thrusters. They are alien technology afterall, aren't they?

But even alien technology must obey the laws of Newton.

How often does it do that with the shields up? In Lifeline, The Apollo was under bombardment from the Asuran ship, but consoles weren't exploding and things weren't falling down. I can understand it happening when the ships are hit by Ori weapons as they have massive power. It does the same in Star Trek too, all the time.

As I said before, don't get me started on Star Trek since it would require a completely new topic to discuss that.

Anyway, it happens quite often in battle that when the shields get hit or have reduced strength that consoles start to explode etc.., while in fact, with the shield holding back the beams, the ship should just move in the direction the beam is pushing it.

It is before the half way mark, after Caldwell says fire. [URL="http://stargate.mgm.com/video.php?id=91"]PROMO. (Shows a BC-304 firing an Asgard beam from the underside of the ship, showing they don't just have Asgard beam weapons on the front)

We see two shots from the front of the closest ship, and one shot from the front of the ship further away as well as one from the underside of that ship, just before the clip cuts to the team and Todd in the PJ.

No, from what I can tell that last beam is also from the side of the ship (In the viewers' case the right side of the ship on the right).

[SGFerrit]

That says nothing, we all know how weak Ancient technology is when it is no longer protected by the shields.

No, we know how weak Atlantis is behind it's shield, but then that shield is totally inpenatrable as long as it has power. The Aurora hulss are able to take more damage.

They had Asgard shields the entire time, the only problem was power. So adding new, more power draining, weapons would decrease shield strength, unless all ships suddenly have new power cores and ZPMs powering them.

The Asgard weapons and upgrades on the Odyssey did not infringe on the ZPM, like Thor said it was all down to the new Asgard core.

I dislike the landing bays on BSG, but that's off-topic, but I think they could try and land there if the battle was over. Also keep in mind that the BSG landing bays openings are by far less exposed than the SG ones and can be retracted if needed, thus eliminating that vunerability.

But the bays are more vulnerable in battle considering they don't have a defence in the form of shields, so they need that extra protection much more than the Stargate ships do. But I agree, they could have added it aswell.

Galactica has a better weapons spread (And they're more difficult to hit) and has, from what I can tell, no blind spots when it comes to coverage of the ship. As for Star Trek ships, don't get me started about how poorly designed they are especially for battle...

But Galactica has considerably weaker weapons and defences, as such Stargate ships have considerably more time to get the enemy within their line of fire, especially consdidering the Daedalus class ships are pretty manuve. From what I have seen, Galactica has the forward firing projectiles, and the side cannons. I don't think they have any cover on the back either.

But even alien technology must obey the laws of Newton.

What I meant was, it is possible those engines 'suck' instead of just thrusting the ship forward, or something like that, but that is just theory.

As I said before, don't get me started on Star Trek since it would require a completely new topic to discuss that.

Anyway, it happens quite often in battle that when the shields get hit or have reduced strength that consoles start to explode etc.., while in fact, with the shield holding back the beams, the ship should just move in the direction the beam is pushing it.

Well, all I can say is that Stargate isn't the only show to have that problem. It is for dramatic effect and to add a sense of greater danger for the audience.

No, from what I can tell that last beam is also from the side of the ship (In the viewers' case the right side of the ship on the right).

To me, it definately looks like it is on the underside and would have a much larger firing arc. You can see it come from the same place in this clip, 20 seconds in.

[Gregorius]

No, we know how weak Atlantis is behind it's shield, but then that shield is totally inpenatrable as long as it has power. The Aurora hulss are able to take more damage.

I still need to see that since the strength of the Aurora class seems to depend heavily on how strong it needs to be in order to service the plot.

The Asgard weapons and upgrades on the Odyssey did not infringe on the ZPM, like Thor said it was all down to the new Asgard core.

I thought that core powered only the Asgard computer core, but I might be mistaken as I try to block out those poor episodes.

But Galactica has considerably weaker weapons and defences, as such Stargate ships have considerably more time to get the enemy within their line of fire, especially consdidering the Daedalus class ships are pretty manuve. From what I have seen, Galactica has the forward firing projectiles, and the side cannons. I don't think they have any cover on the back either.

The Daedalus class barely manouvers during battle, it's like a sitting duck. As for the weapons, you can't really compare BSG and SG weapons where the former only has projectile weapons and the latter beam cannons. I don't know about the back of the Battlestars, but one can assume those are also probably well protected. But what I meant was that the BSG weapons are better placed upon the ship and thus are usuable in a number of different ways.

What I meant was, it is possible those engines 'suck' instead of just thrusting the ship forward, or something like that, but that is just theory.

What is there to suck in space? They need to apply a force to the ship to comply with Newton's third law.

Well, all I can say is that Stargate isn't the only show to have that problem. It is for dramatic effect and to add a sense of greater danger for the audience.

True, but as Stargate is a show that likes to remind people that they try to be realistic those things are unneeded and break down that image.

To me, it definately looks like it is on the underside and would have a much larger firing arc. You can see it come from the same place in this clip, 20 seconds in.

It doesn't to me, but I guess we'll see it in the episode.

[thekillman]

What is there to suck in space? They need to apply a force to the ship to comply with Newton's third law.

ever heard of dark matter. dont know much about it.

also:
in a vacuum at 0K there still is a chance for energy particles appearing. so it would be sucking those particles. also makes me wonder why ZPM drain vacuum energy from subspace. you can draw zero point energy from a normal vacuum too...

[Gregorius]

ever heard of dark matter. dont know much about it.

We don't know the properties of dark matter so for all we know it might clog a "sucking engine". Besides that, if an engine suck something up it needs to store it somewhere and the engines must be capable of switching from propelling to sucking which would result in a rather complex and fragile system.

in a vacuum at 0K there still is a chance for energy particles appearing. so it would be sucking those particles. also makes me wonder why ZPM drain vacuum energy from subspace. you can draw zero point energy from a normal vacuum too...

According to the episode "Trinity" of SGA, it would create tropical particles which the Ancient couldn't contain. In the end this resulted in the destruction of 5/6 of a solar system.

[thekillman]

but again it was drawing power from our subspace. while ZPM energy is about drawing power from a vacuum. so i dont quite understand that part.

[SGFerrit]

The Daedalus class barely manouvers during battle, it's like a sitting duck.

In Unending it looks to be very manouverable.

What is there to suck in space? They need to apply a force to the ship to comply with Newton's third law.

We don't know that much about space, and this is science fiction. It, like alot of other shows or films, requires you to suspend belief in order to be entertained. Obviously, that is harder to do for some people that study these things, which is understandable.

[Gregorius]

In Unending it looks to be very manouverable.

I'll need to see that episode again since I've decided it has been banned from my mind due to it being too deus ex machine.

Anyway, my comment is more about the lack of manouverability in the attacks, they're all fly at target, fire, take enemy hits. Instead of firing while avoiding enemy fire. (Seriously, watch the battles in B5 since they're so much better)

We don't know that much about space, and this is science fiction. It, like alot of other shows or films, requires you to suspend belief in order to be entertained. Obviously, that is harder to do for some people that study these things, which is understandable.

Actually, almost everyone wit half a brain cell knows or can deduce that in space there is a vacuum and that, as a consequence, ships will not slow down but move at the same speed in the same direction until it receives a force in the opposite of it's direction which slows it down to no speed.

The fact that writers tend to ignore this, in the earlier seasons of SG-1 it wasn't ignored, proofs that they either think the viewers are idiots or that they themselves don't know what they are writing about.

[JSPuddlejumper]

Small spoiler from Ark of Truth (regarding shield strength):



The Odyssey with it's shield upgrades = close to Atlantis like shield strength with 1 ZPM. This was shown in the Ark of Truth.

[SGFerrit]

The fact that writers tend to ignore this, in the earlier seasons of SG-1 it wasn't ignored, proofs that they either think the viewers are idiots or that they themselves don't know what they are writing about.

But they aren't ignoring it though, they are atleast making an effort by putting forward thrusters on the ships.

[Gregorius]

Small spoiler from Ark of Truth (regarding shield strength):

Spoiler:

The Odyssey with it's shield upgrades = close to Atlantis like shield strength with 1 ZPM. This was shown in the Ark of Truth.

Spoiler:

I still need to see AoT so I can't yet comment on this, but rest assured to I will once I watched it. Until that time I consider the shields to be the same as in Unending.

But they aren't ignoring it though, they are atleast making an effort by putting forward thrusters on the ships.

In the wrong place. It's just half an effort, they might've as well left them out since this way there is more to discuss. Not to mention that they are never used on screen to change the direction of the ships, all we see are the main thrusters firing and never the forward aimed thrusters, so technically the Daedalus class shouldn't be capable of the manouvers they make (If they manouver at all and don't fight ST type of battles).

[Gregorius]

Since this thread is a bit unreadable if you don't know what was discussed before, here is the first series of posts:

First post:

Spoiler:

Apparently Prof Stephen Hawking was given a tour of the Star Trek set and said that their warp engines could probably work in a few years time, I wonder what he'd say about the Daedalus, it's not sleek enough IMO anyway it's not aerodynamic enough, still at least they didn't try and make a space shuttle out of a Reliant Robin

In space aerodynamics are the least of your concern since there is, for the lack of a better term, nothing that can cause induced and profile drag which in turn eliminate the need for an aerodynamic shape.

What bugs the most about the ships on SG (ST ships suffer from a lot of problems also when looked at from a design and construction perspective) are where the bridges are located; they are located on the top of the vessel instead of a reinforced part in the center of the ship where they by far vunerable for attack. The bridge is one of the most important areas of a space ship and you don't place it on top of you vessel, it's too risky in case of an attack and besides that it's useless because what does the bridge crew have to look out for in space where it's dark (The reason the bridge is on top in sea ships is due to visibility so the crew can look outside and remain watchful)? That's one problem.

One of the other problems is the shape and armour of the vessels, they're so inefficient and poorly designed for a warship. The Battlestars from BSG are much better designed, as are most ships in B5 and SW, when you look at their intended usage. The SG ships have little to no armour and thus always rely on their shields, the moment it collapses the ship is done for. This is a bad design call, as a warship, especially in space, should be heavily armoured so that while the shields are down it can still perform in battle without sustaining critcal damage. The long, ugly, thing that runs up to the front is a defence liability and it's pointless, there is no reason why it should be there. If you widen it, it can house more people, more weapons, more cargo and more fighters. Plus it will be less of an obvious target and will be more difficult to destroy.

I'll make a remark about how poorly the weapons are placed: Argard beam cannons at the narrow front, it's insane ... they can't have have a sphere are a firing arc this way because the back's much larger and thus blocks their range.

And lastly I'll complain about the lack of thrusters in the front of the vessel. How on Earth do those ships slow down?

We actually have Fleet Air Arm base near us called HMS Daedalus. One of the most interesting DVD extra that I saw was on Sharpe's Eagle they had guys from one of the re-enactment societies on set all the time and all the actors had to have lessons in how to use the rifles which paid off because you can't see any flaws in the battles on screen even down to the powder burns and the loading and firing of a musket and/or rifle depending on your regiment

TPTB should consult engineers, preferably those who worked for the military and have experience with spacecraft, and ask them to design the ships...

SGFerrit's reply:

Spoiler:

The back is only big because it has the f302's attached to it. they could put them on the bottom and top instead of the sides, but that wouldn't overcome the supposed problem of the weapons not having a large arc. Who is to say they don't have Asgard weapons on the back? And plus they have the new improved railguns which have a pretty good arc of fire.

The thrusters on the front are beneath the 'narrow bit'. You can see them between the hangars here. And here. And we don't know how thick the hull is. We have seen the ship take multiple Wraith blasts while unshielded and survive.

I personally don't see what is so bad about them. They obviously do their job well as only one has been destroyed in the run of the class so far, despite the fact that they have gotten into loads of 'situations' and are usually out-numbered or face stronger opponents. They look good, at least that was the general concesus of everyone who cared when the design was first seen on screen. The show ain't a documentary, it's entertainment.

EDIT:

Just checked the BAMSR promo on the Stargate MGM site, and there is an Asgard laser on the underside of the 'narrow bit', so it does have a wider firing arc.

[Gregorius]

My reply:

Spoiler:

The back is only big because it has the f302's attached to it. they could put them on the bottom and top instead of the sides, but that wouldn't overcome the supposed problem of the weapons not having a large arc. Who is to say they don't have Asgard weapons on the back? And plus they have the new improved railguns which have a pretty good arc of fire.

The SG railguns have problem to be toys that do little damage and are barely effective. As for Asgard weapons on the back, they barely have enough power to power the shields, are you expecting them to add more weapons, which draw a lot of power, and sacrifice shield strength?

As for the back, it just looks odd, makes for a huge target and screams out "HIT ME! I'm where the important stuff is!!!!". Not to mention it makes the launch and landing areas for the F302 extremely vunerable, I'd love to have the Earth ships against me if I were an enemy. I'd target the launch areas from the F302s, preventing those from launching, landing and re-arming. With those fighters out of the way I'd only have to focus on targetting the areas that are obvious to house control centres (They stick out) and I've disabled the ship without destroying it. Also, if I target the landing bays, where there is sure to be live ammo and fuel stacked, I could trigger a chain reaction and destroy the ship.

Plus the general design of the ships makes it nearly impossible to have the most powerful guns sliding over rails to gain huge firing arcs.

The thrusters on the front are beneath the 'narrow bit'. You can see them between the hangars here. And here.

I've seen those. They would be excellent if the ship were to be on the water where it can, in general, only move on two axis. For a spaceship, however, they're placed on a nearly useless position since they, from what I can tell, lack thrust vectoring (Besides in that position thrust vectoring is nearly useless because they can't propell in half a sphere because the narrow bit block propulsion directed upwards) which results in them propelling in only one direction. The same goes from the main engines. So the ship can accellerate and perhaps even brake, fun. Where are the small thrusters that allow it to manouver properly? Plus ... it shows a lack of redundancy, which is very important in spacecraft and especially in warships, the moment those engines are hit the ship can't stop since it, from what I can tell manouvering thrusters (With those thrusters you could try, in a desperate attempt to make a "looping" with the ship and then use the main engines to slow down).

And we don't know how thick the hull is. We have seen the ship take multiple Wraith blasts while unshielded and survive.

Which heavy damage, panels falling down, consoles exploding and if even does that with the shields on. Damn, that ship is surely well designed for a warship. Also, where are the outer layers of non-imporant hallways which can be sealed and used and protection for the vital parts?

I personally don't see what is so bad about them. They obviously do their job well as only one has been destroyed in the run of the class so far, despite the fact that they have gotten into loads of 'situations' and are usually out-numbered or face stronger opponents.

Personally I, and with me a lot of my friends, see what's bad about them. If we were to hand in such a design we'd fail our classes, can you guess what happens when an engineer at a military contactor hands in such a design?

They look good, at least that was the general concesus of everyone who cared when the design was first seen on screen. The show ain't a documentary, it's entertainment.

This show tries to be realistic thus its designs should emulate that. As for "everyone who cared", they probably have no background in engineering or the military. Making things looks good is only a luxery, the primary focus should be on what it is supposed to do and what would be the optimum design for it.

Just checked the BAMSR promo on the Stargate MGM site, and there is an Asgard laser on the underside of the 'narrow bit', so it does have a wider firing arc.

Time index of the promo where it's shown?