Star Trek vs Star Wars Official Blueprint Comparison

[@jordith01]

Good showing all around, and one more critical point: all Federation ships have transporters. The meager deflector shields of Star Destroyers, which don't even encompass the entire ship and aren't even sufficient to protect it when flying through an asteroid field ("Given how much damage we've sustained, they must have been destroyed.") , would not be sufficient to block any torpedo-equipped Starfleet vessel from simply beaming a torpedo beside an Empire power core and detonating. You wouldn't need the Force to kill a Death Star, just a single Klingon bird of prey staying cloaked until it gets within transporter range. Beam a torpedo directly into the main power reactor, give it a 30 second timer, and go to warp. Dead space station. Qapla!

[@Idazmi7]

Yes, but transporters have a much shorter range than weapons: why get within 10,000 km to transport when you can just shoot them from 300,000 km away?

[@missbish1000]

Here's a good question to ask a rabid star wars fan, ask them why does star wars STILL measure their ships weaponry effective ranges in meters whereas star trek measures theirs in multiple kilometers? it's fun watching them trying to pull crap outta their ass trying to explain it.

[@Idazmi7]

Multiple _tens of thousands_ of kilometers for the shortest range ship-to-ship weapons. It's like measuring the range of a knife against the range of a cruise missile.

[@Bleachsoul13]

It's quite funny that people are trying to counter your official evidence with fan analysis. I generally don't agree with your opinions but I gotta side with you here.

[@Bleachsoul13]

***** Production staff are king.

[@homelessend8557]

I just looked below at the comments right now, and looks like they are trying to counter attack the evidence on the video. ColonelRadec246 is ignoring the evidence and saying stuff like a turbolaser shot is 595 megatons, and that's complete bull. 595 megatons is enough to destroy a small moon, and NO WHERE IN SW IS SHOWN THAT A STAR DESTROYER CAN DESTROY A SMALL MOON..

[@Bleachsoul13]

Mario tehtroll He keeps referencing a website that tries to apply science to a series that defies science at every turn. Not to mention that it uses the Legends EU, which is no longer canon. To which I say, boohoo, cry me a river of tears. That shit's tasty.

[@homelessend8557]

Bleachsoul13 I've seen that website multiple times during the past few years, and I always compared it to the real Star Wars (which are the movies) and a SD is nowhere near 595 megatons. I've also read some EU stuff, and it still doesn't look like 595 megatons.

[@Bleachsoul13]

Mario tehtroll I suppose one could try and argue that the energy is transferred into the target but even mundane materials don't display the effects of getting hit by that much power.

[@david2.065]

Nerdiness unite!

[@teraeles4967]

Seen the new, ahem, _"Star Trek"_ trailer? They destroy the Enterprise *again*. Kirk jumps from a ramp with a *motorcycle*. Weird explosions. I don't think this what' boldly going where no man has gone before' means, but I guess Hollywood has a different opinion on that.

[@teraeles4967]

+Idazmi7 I know, right? At least Star Wars gets what it deserves, the new movie was nearly perfect IMO. Have you seen it yet?

[@AsylumEscapade]

+Terae Les Can't beat the original five... (I don't count Final Frontier)...

[@darylteo9983]

there's another trailer that's way better and fans seems to enjoy it more

[@superzer0265]

if one ship on star trek can destroy one continent, imagine an entire fleet!?- and there is more; a fleet capable of destroy planets would be faster, and hightly smaller then the death star.

[@mmyatt9560]

General order 24 is to glass a planet which a single ship is capable of doing easily

[@homelessend8557]

Someone has to show this video to HolyKnightVader, RunningWithRoses, and Thierry Saint-Jour, because I really want to see their reactions.

[@homelessend8557]

Well, OK then. I just wanted to see how stupid their rebuttal was going to be.

[@Bleachsoul13]

They'll find it eventually.

[@homelessend8557]

Bleachsoul13 If they manage to find the video, they'll start their story "But, but George Lucas said (insert bullshit here)".

[@Bleachsoul13]

Mario tehtroll George Lucas himself disavowed the EU, which is where a bunch of the fanwank comes from anyways. Plus, the production staff of SW have about as much credibility as Lucas himself. Star Wars wasn't, isn't, and has never been a one-man show.

[@homelessend8557]

Bleachsoul13 What I can't believe is that people believe that EU is canon.

[@Lance-ub6ft]

In a direct confrontation between the Federation of planets and the Galactic Empire. The Federation will always dominate. This is not only because of the superior technology of the Star Trek franchise, but the resolve of the Starfleet crew. Many times Starfleet has Prevail victoriously when the odds were against them. in contrast the Galactic Empire has failed when they had the advantage. An example are the cute little Ewoks armed with archery vs. At-st walkers.

[@Idazmi7]

This is true.

[@tmack4697]

I said this in another video, but if you hadn't noticed, if a Star Destroyer was that powerful, there wouldn't be a movie. The rebellion would be crushed immediately.

[@tmack4697]

***** I never said they were powerful, and compared to other ships in the Star Wars Universe, they were one of the best. To be honest, if the Enterprise wasn't as powerful as fans say it is, the entire crew would of died by now.

[@mmyatt9560]

+LordDante85 lol someones butt hurt

[@mmyatt9560]

+LordDante85 also torpedoes are measured in isotons yield with 52 isotons being enough to destroy a small moon

[@mmyatt9560]

so explain how a few ouces of antimatter can blow away a planets atmosphere and wreak a continent also watch the episode omega directive where its actually harry kim who makes the comment that a 54 isioton gravametric explosion could destroy a small moon given that tuvoc doesn't correct him on the power this is assumed to be correct and there is no evidence to support you calling bullshit because it doesn't help star wars case

[@mmyatt9560]

not quite its used to control the reaction in the warp core

[@gelatinocyte6270]

I remember the Excelcior class being 400+ meters, so even if the Star Destroyer has well above 1 kilometres in length, you can still fit like 3 to 4 excelciors... or even 5 if that wasn't enough for the Star Wars fans.

[@RedShirtGuy96]

"Botanical Section windows" So that's what that was. I just thought it was the Main Engineering deck windows.

[@Bleachsoul13]

Given that I always saw green through that window, I assumed it was some sort of arboretum. Good to know I wasn't far from the mark.

[@stevencohen624]

In Star Trek: The Motion Picture we saw the Enterprise fire one photon torpedo at an asteroid that was roughly size of the ship. That one torpedo incinerated it. Considering that the ship carried many of those plus phasers, we're talking about a LOT of firepower there.

[@Bleachsoul13]

Yes. The one movie that we try and collectively forget has perhaps the most dramatic example of what one ship can do.

[@Bleachsoul13]

***** I wish it hadn't been so damn long. It was great for a Trek episode, but all that padding was just painful.

[@Bleachsoul13]

***** Well he showed it up in terms of how mind-numbingly long a movie can be.

[@carlosco89]

What are you thoughts on the Borg vs The Empire?

[@Idazmi7]

Even more one-sided.

[@YamiFudo]

Nice Job. Nothing but the facts. Thanks.

[@jhmcd2]

I am in your court with the overall assessment. but some of your information has since been modified with the Disney verse, in that a .5 hyperdrive speed is now not .5 times the sped of light but some random number beyond it. This does work for its story lines, making their ships faster at FTL than any standard Federation ship, and makes hyperdrive similar to Transwarp or even Quantum slip stream. Also, their weapons are plasma cannons, similar to the weapons on the NX-01 Enterprise before they installed phasers (look at episode In a Mirror Darkly). But all in all, the ships are bigger, but they aren't badder than a Federation ship and it makes since. Starfleet has been at war with someone for over 200 years. The Empire has only been at war for a little over 20 years, 30 if you include the Clone Wars.

[@arcadio4210]

Star trek probably does have more advanced technology then star wars by a lot but I doubt they'd stand against the forerunners.

[@RedShirtGuy96]

The reactions to this will be......interesting.

[@mikea2363]

as interesting as nuclera war.

[@theloniousMac]

"facts."

[@nicholasjohnson6133]

Lets go Enterprise!!

[@tomcatm16]

I have just thought up a crazy theory based on this video. I believe Enterprise in the videos class configuration could easily and effectively still kill that ISD *without main power.* The scenario that I'm thinking of is based on Star Trek The Wrath of Kahn. Both ships are in opposite orbits of Regulus. The Enterprise is as she was when Kirk orders himself to be beamed up after being stranded there. Based on this video the ISD replaces the U.S.S. Reliant at this point and is at full combat efficiency. Both ships have access to the space as it was in that point. Currently all The Star Destroyer knows The Enterprise is there. The Enterprise is in a similar scenario. I wonder and feel like asking someone more experienced what would happen here? This should be interesting. Yet, laughable because I'm certain there's nothing in the ISD's arsenal that could damage the Enterprise at range or before being detected and outgunned.

[@tomcatm16]

***** Good gosh another one. I'm just going to ignore that guy and be brief and on topic with what you posted. Well, I know the explosive and other properties of space do tend to be explained better in Star Trek. There's almost next to nothing that involves spacial anomalies or anything of the matter that majorly affects Star Wars. Mostly just magic right? I'm currently reading Star Wars Outbound Flight by Timothy Zahn. A fair read, but somewhat too much story. Could have been 100 pages less.

[@WaveForceful]

***** A single photon torpedo has demonstrated trillions of times more power than 595 megatons.

[@homelessend8557]

***** www.st-v-sw.net/STSWvapetown.html

[@tomcatm16]

Mario tehtroll Pretty accurate. Even with high end destruction Trek not only has better firepower, but smarter and more logical weapons. Star Wars struggles to destroy a city completely while Star Trek can promptly wipe out the fact it was even there in numerous ways.

[@homelessend8557]

***** There's lots of good information that on that site, and Idazmi7 makes some good points about on the video which happens to be on the site, too.

[@MrRikersBeard]

Well, now we have a video to redirect the fanboys to. Hooray!

[@Imperialguard82]

According to Star Trek Voyager Warp 10 is the maximum velocity of any ship and it is impossible to reach that speed except for a few isolated incidents. Yet these blueprints say Warp 12.

[@Idazmi7]

_Threshold_ is non canon. The writers apologized and decanonized the Warp 10 limit because it was never supposed to be there in the first place.

[@Imperialguard82]

But Warp 10 does not only appear in Threshold, Journey to Babel has an Orion Scout Ship travelling at Warp 10 because they do not care about crew safety. It is made clear in at least 3 episodes that Warp Factor at certain speed will destroy the ship, before the refit in Journey to Babel and the Changeling and after the refit in That Which Survives, also he keeps referencing the Enterprise before and after the refit but not any mention of the two different Star Destroyer Classes.

[@Idazmi7]

+Ghost Guard The fact is, Warp 10 is a speed like any other.

[@Code_Lin]

They changed how the warp scale worked between the TMP Era and The Next Generation Era, in the TMP era (and before it) there wasn't a warp limit but in TNG they changed how warp speeds were calculated and put a max of warp 10 (infinite velocity).

[@wildfox2797]

Well done on the research. You pretty much closed the debate on this topic. If you ask me the star destroyer dose't look capable of stellar travel. It looks more like it's only capable of inner planetary travel with out the hyper drive . It makes me wonder how the galactic empire dominated the star wars galaxy with ships that slow.

[@Idazmi7]

Well, Star Wars was never meant to be realistic: it was meant to entertain, and it does that very well. The problem arises when people insist on militarily comparing it to Star Trek, and when the obvious happens (Star Wars gets wrecked) they toss out all logic to make Star Wars "win" a debate it has no business entering in the first place. In any unbiased comparison, Star Wars is blatantly deficient in technology compared to Star Trek, in all areas... _because_ it's not meant to be realistic.

[@maclarenschell8855]

how does a phased array of lasers achieve ftl exactly?

[@Idazmi7]

By Photon accelerator. Take a look: www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/sftm/01-08-52.jpg

[@mikemalo47]

The Enterprise as a class came in after the major up-grade at the start of the first movie , Want for a Heavy cruiser to a Battle cruiser. Something not shown in the blue prints , But seen the shows then selves. Fire control , Range and weapon speed , In star trek the ships are fighting ships of similar ability's. Enterprise scores hits at other ships maneuvering at Warp speed and very long ranges. My guessamate would be that a trek ship would out range a star destroyer by a wide margin . And with much better accuracy . Trek phasers are a rifle , Star destroyers lasers at more like a shot gun , they can barely hit a planet.

[@Idazmi7]

_"The Enterprise as a class came in after the major up-grade at the start of the first movie , Want for a Heavy cruiser to a Battle cruiser."_ Very true. Either version would have little trouble with an ISD, though.

[@matthewleto1180]

The number refers to class of hyper drive. The closer it is to 0, the faster it is. The falcon had a .5.

[@matthewleto1180]

They don't use lasers. They use condensed beams of plasma. Lasers are made of light

[@Idazmi7]

_"They don't use lasers."_ That's not what Han Solo or the Blueprint said. _"The number refers to class of hyper drive. The closer it is to 0, the faster it is. The falcon had a .5."_ Non-canon.

[@matthewleto1180]

It was a continuity error. Star Wars was still in development at the time Star Wars was being made and released

[@matthewleto1180]

Take this with a grain of salt, but it was taken from the canon section of wookipedia. "Hyperdrives were rated by "classes"; the lower the class, the faster the engine. With its Class One hyperdrive, the Carrion Spike was the fastest ship in the Imperial Navy,[3] while top-of-the-line battlecruisers such as the Imperial I-class Star Destroyer featured Class 2 hyperdrives. The T-14 hyperdrive generator equipped on J-type 327 Nubian starships was rated Class 1.8.[10] Some exceptional ships, like Nakari Kelen's Desert Jewel or Han Solo's Millennium Falcon, had exceptionally fast hyperdrives-Class 0.8[11] and 0.5 respectively.[12]"

[@matthewleto1180]

Idazmi7, again, a excerpt from the canon section "A blaster was any type of ranged weapon that fired bolts of intense plasma energy, often mistaken as lasers. Operating under the same principles as laser weaponry, blasters converted energy-rich gas to a glowing particle beam that could melt through targets."

[@cedricdesmeules-alain372]

A M-class planet does not mean earth-sized rather it means that the planet is capable of supporting life

[@Idazmi7]

Has to be roughly Earth-sized to support Humanoid life.

[@cedricdesmeules-alain372]

classes of planets capable of supporting life: class H Diameter 8,000-15,000km class L Diameter 15,000-30,000km (however the scarce water supply makes natural evolution of these populations unlikely.)class M Diameter 10,000-20,000km class O Diameter 10,000-15,000kmclass P Diameter 8,0000-15,000kmclass Q Diameter 4,000-15,000km (however the extreme conditions makes evolving more advanced life is virtually impossible.)class R Diameter 8,000-30,000kmsttff.net/planetaryclass.html(I'm not saying that your wrong but only that you use the wrong terms.)

[@Idazmi7]

Cedric Desmeules-Alain A fanmade site? Please.

[@cedricdesmeules-alain372]

1 have you look at this site and 2 if it is than earth is not a M-class planet and mars is not a K-class planet its ether that you don't like researching the web

[@Idazmi7]

Cedric Desmeules-Alain No, I research the web. Fanmade sites just annoy me.

[@stephens7136]

I believe Star Wars uses some sort of inverted non-linear scale for measuring ftl speeds, as the Falcon makes "0.5 past light speed" and is "twice as fast as imperial ships" (possibly the star destroyer's 0.65, although which ship is unspecified) while the death star has a much slower "class 4" hyperdrive. Although it's still extremely vague, and considering that Star Wars is confined to a single galaxy, while star trek is not, it would make sense that Star Trek's ships are both faster and have much longer endurance.

[@SirBroadsword]

+Stephen S SW ships being much slower than is commonly claimed also jives better with what we see in the movies. If Star Destroyers can cross the galaxy like I'd hop in my car and take a jaunt to the seaside for the afternoon, why was the Emperor only able to scrape together 27 ships for the Empire's most important battle at the end of Return of the Jedi, a battle he'd had plenty of time to plan in advance? Meanwhile, 40 ships was, by Federation standards, a hastily cobbled together scratch-force to take on the sudden and unexpected threat posed by the Borg cube in BOBW. Additionally, a mere six ships was referred to as a "great space armada" in the novelization of TESB, and even the battle above Coruscant in ROTS didn't appear to involve as many ships as were involved in some of the battles we saw during the Dominion War in DS9.

[@yep9557]

I CAN'T READ THE SLIDES FAST ENOUGH!!!!!!!! GREAT VIDEO! :D

[@FallingStar-lr9nf]

Well, that settles it once and for all. Only the trolls and rabid fanboys/fangirls will argue about this. Star Wars < Star Trek when it comes to technology. You can't get better irrefutable proof than the canonical diagrams of the ships. The more rabid Star Wars fans are going to have rage aneurysms over this video ......

[@WaveForceful]

***** I remember at one point it was 100 teratons per second. Guess they cant make their minds up these warsies.

[@WaveForceful]

Lol, I think it's closer to 800 Gigajoules, more realistically.

[@Bleachsoul13]

***** My main question is *where the fuck is all that energy going?* The laws of thermodynamics didn't just fuck off because it's science fiction, and *nothing* is so dense that it can just shrug off 800 gigatons, unless you're talking neutron star material, and that would turn any nearby organic into chunky salsa. The energy isn't blowing off into space, it's a DEW, it's going into the target... So the armor is capable of distributing 800 gigatons across the hull *without* cooking the crew alive? Nah, I don't fucking think so. Everyone from Firmus Piett to Brian Young has told me "It doesn't matter how it does it, it just does." No, No. It does fucking matter. You don't just get to say "I used science to get this number. How was this number achieved? Who cares." *How* is just as important as *what*! If you make a claim, you have to back it up, at the very least using an in-universe explanation, but Warsies don't even have that! You guys claim the shields can shrug off 800 gigatons? Okay, but how? Where the hell is that energy going?! It isn't going off into space, that's for sure, and it isn't going into the hull! *SO WHERE THE FUCK IS IT GOING?!?!* Ideally, you'd analyze using a secondary source, but both Trek and Wars fails that criteria...

[@Bleachsoul13]

***** Well, you could, but the target had better well be completely annihilated. And it isn't. So we call bullshit. Fuck the fact that it takes x amount of energy to turn an asteroid into gas, Star Wars *doesn't do debris*. Even when the ISD tower was *completely destroyed* by a kinetic impact there was no debris, even though there should have been. Are they saying that the Bridge tower was vaporized by an asteroid? That's fucking ridiculous. All those calculations are taken from *limitations of that era's SFX*.

[@WaveForceful]

Thats pretty much it, limitations in SFX technology. But even still, the most combat intensive scene in SW seen between two vessels was at the beginning of episode 3 between a Venator and Grevious' warship, both ships were nothing more than megajoules, the NX-01 would cause far more damage with a single phase cannon. And judging from the range that all the ships were at which was a couple of dozen meters, an 800 Gigaton blast would of obliterated all of them instantly.

[@matixdegaulle8109]

The most frustrating thing about Star Wars (or one of them) is that the straight-up official speeds given for spacecraft like the starcruisers absolutely cannot be correct, if you go by the movies. Given that it's taking Voyager, what, somewhere between fifty and seventy years to get back to Fed space at high warp speeds, but you can get from Tatooine to Coruscant in.... has to be less than a month. Maybe as little as a few days to a week... they simply cannot be going at less than light speed. Unless the .65 lightspeed is... not hyperspace? urgh. Or hyperspace is 'smaller' and so speeds translate to more distance covered.... *throws up hands* I have no idea. =/

[@Bleachsoul13]

Even though I personally use onscreen observation rather than blueprints, this was a pretty good video. The only part of your video that was opinion was the "might as well be tinfoil" since we don't know exactly what durasteel is, but I find it hard to imagine a ship built like a Second World War ship of the line without any way to maneuver would pose any threat to... damn, even the space shuttle. Even the Apollo capsules had RCS thrusters. Just fly straight into their blind spot and sit there, firing away. Wouldn't matter if you were firing a 21st Century Pulse laser, that armor will give eventually.

[@Bleachsoul13]

Gotta point out that they do maneuver though. How? I don't fucking know, space magic.

[@Bleachsoul13]

***** Sci Fi franchises with RCS thrusters: Mass Effect Firefly Star Trek Halo even the slice of life *ANIME BODACIOUS SPACE PIRATES*. They fucked up the fact that RADAR does not work in space but at least they got thrusters down. and virtually every other one out there. They may not all obey newtonian physics, but at least they acknowledge the need for maneuvering thrusters in space. I mean, for fuck's sake, Macross Do You Remember Love has thrusters in space. Project A-KO, which is a NONSENSICAL FANTASY/SCI FI STORY INVOLVING GIANT SPACE BATTLESHIPS, LOVE TRIANGLES, AND THE LOVE CHILD OF WONDER WOMAN AND SUPERMAN... MADE BY HENTAI ANIMATORS NO LESS.... IN 1986... *EVEN THEY HAD THRUSTERS ON THEIR SPACESHIPS. I MEAN WHAT THE FUCK. HOW DOES STAR WARS NOT HAVE ANY THRUSTERS ON THEIR SHIPS?!?!?!* I once heard the explanation that repulsorlifts do the work of thrusters... that would work... *IN A GRAVITY WELL. OUT IN SPACE YOU WILL BE FLOATING DEAD*. So yeah.

[@Bleachsoul13]

***** I'm more referring to the fact that people assume that RADAR systems will just... work in space. They require modifying and a high degree of specialization. Usually in Sci-Fi films, LADAR is a better option. I'm also kind of pointing out that in Bodacious Space Pirates, they say "Radar" but the ships send out some kind of light wave... so it's LADAR. Kind of. It's anime. The only scientific part of it that is right is they obey newtonian physics.

[@Bleachsoul13]

***** Huh. Well, fuck me for not double checking that. Anyways, I would suggest watching the series, but I found it a bit hard to enjoy. I stuck around because I kept expecting something to happen... but... nothing really does. They don't offer much explanation to things, and even skip over things which would have made great episodes...

[@marsh84722]

Bleachsoul13 There's no longer any canon evidence that the star wars universe uses durasteel

[@yep9557]

Love this video, but even though phasers are more advanced, Star Wars fans keep claiming that the weapons power is far greater than the Constitution-class starship. Just wondering, but wouldn't that kind of outmatch phasers? Like putting .01 milicochrane ( I LOVE USING MILICOCHRANES, idk why. Not like it's real... ) phasers against 100000000000 milicochrane lasers, wouldn't that tip the "balance" in the other direction?

[@yep9557]

:D

[@tigdamch.6321]

I do agree that star trek would win however I don't think it would be as much of a complete stomp as you think, star wars ships weapons seems like plasma cannons rather than lasers so nx enterprise [pre phase cannons] of firepower. It would be more like a pack of wolves verses a bear, later star trek ships like the Galaxy or sovereign would be far more affective but constitution vs star destroyers may be a closer fight. Would have to be star destroyers though 3/4/5?

[@Idazmi7]

We see a Constitution Class ship fight the NX Enterprise Era. It stomped.

[@cedricdesmeules-alain372]

Enterprise class? Don't you mean constitution class refit

[@Idazmi7]

I mean _Enterprise_ Class. "constitution class refit" is a fanmade designation.

[@cedricdesmeules-alain372]

curious have you played Star Trek Online?

[@Idazmi7]

Cedric Desmeules-Alain Yes I have played Star Trek Online. It started out well enough, but dissolved into bullshit pandering. It's just a non-canon joke, now. It never got the starships right either: in Star Trek canon you can go to Warp Speed or cloak at any time, but STO doesn't let you for bullshit game mechanic reasons. I quit: you can find better Star Trek games from publishers outside of Paramount and CBS nowadays than you can ever get from the main company. It's sad.

[@cedricdesmeules-alain372]

I find the game fun although their is some glichtis that needs to be fix like theirs no one on screen were their suppose to be

[@thefirstprimariscatosicari6870]

Idazmi7 One of thing that I hate of Star Trek Online is the range. LET ME FIRE FROM 9k km, like what the ship are supposed to do.

[@BubblegumCrash332]

we could only imagine what the technology is the StarvWars universe looks like now. It's sort of a unfair comparison. everything we see in star wars is ancient from a galaxy fa far away a long time ago.

[@AsylumEscapade]

+M Pesce Technology is nothing compared to the Q...

[@BubblegumCrash332]

That's because Star Wars is not science fiction which is another reason its kinda a unfair comparison. But idk Star Wars does have the fuckin Death Star wtf powers that thing.....George Lucas's bank account!!

[@AsylumEscapade]

M Pesce A massive power generator and a shitton of plasma.

[@BubblegumCrash332]

I thought it was the spice from Dune

[@SirBroadsword]

+M Pesce Well, people argue bitterly about whether the Federation or the Galactic Empire would win in a fight, so that's kinda of what we're stuck with even if it does put the SW universe at a massive disadvantage. As for the Death Star, it might be superficially impressive, but keep in mind that the Defiant was able to render an entire planet uninhabitable with just a couple of torpedoes in "For the Uniform", and the Klingons performed a similar trick in "The Chase". So by building a moon-sized space station to house their planet-busting weapon, all the Emperor is doing is wasting a galaxy's worth of resources that he could have used to build thousands more Star Destroyers. As for how it works, they revealed in an unfinished episode of one of the animated series that there are giant versions of the crystals that Jedis build their lightsabres around, which amplifies any energy that is pumped into it through a technobabble process. Such crystals are implied to be at the heart of the death star's superlaser, but are also exceedingly rare to find at the required giant size.

[@nick85358]

You do realize that your blueprints aren't from the star destroyer shown on screen, right?

[@sci-figuy9711]

www.ditl.org/article-page.php?ArticleID=24&ListID=Weapons Woah, these are some pretty big torpedo calculations, looks like Star Trek has more against Star Wars in a war.

[@sci-figuy9711]

***** He does say, that, "Like the TNG TM, the Deep Space Nine Technical Manual is a non-canon book and we do not need to take it into account should it become inconvenient to do so." He even claims,"Another question is whether we need to incorporate the Technical Manuals at all. Since we have a canonical indication of a 30+ Megaton yield for the photon torpedoes of Enterprise, 45 Megatons for the TNG era seems low - and the only source for this number is the non-canon tech manual. If we disregarded this, and took the "Skin of Evil" 500 Megaton torpedo as a standard yield for a TNG torpedo, things would be somewhat simplified. We would, however, lose the non-canon yield figures for the Quantum torpedoes from the DS9 TM. For the moment I tend to favour keeping the TMs in, and have written this article with this in mind", so even he knows the books are non-canon, but I do believe his calculations were right with the 20 billion megaton yield.

[@marsh84722]

a star destroyer's turbolasers won't even penetrate navigation shields, don't they know that? :)

[@missbish1000]

Here you go, from the TNG episode, The outrageous Okona. Captain, they are now locking lasers on us." "Lasers!?" "Yes, sir." "Lasers can't even penetrate our navigation shields. Don't they know that?"

[@matthewleto1180]

Lisa winn, blasters shoot condensed plasma, not lasers, which is light

[@missbish1000]

A laser is still a laser no matter what spin you try to put on it. And yes, Blasters DO shoot condensed light beams , NOT plasma beams as contended by so many NON canon sites like stardestroyer.net the owner of which is well known for banning people that show canon fact in direct defiance of his falsehoods and outright lies from his site. Plasma weapons in star wars are so large and bulky AND rare they are relegated to ship weapons and assault ships, NOT hand held weaponry. You may not like it, but that IS star wars canon. it's like those contending that the use of tibanna gas makes a lasrer a plasma weapon, it does not, tibanna gas is uses to increase the power and efficiency of a blaster, it does not turn the beam into a plasma beam nor does it travel with the beam because the use of the gas also destroys the gas at the same time.

[@thefirstprimariscatosicari6870]

Anonymous Idiot Even worst, in the first episode of Star Trek Enterprise we see them using plasma, then all the other episode (except the one during WW2) we don't see plasma weapon anymore.

[@optimuscprime]

I agree with you on most of your thoughts on the two ships compared. how ever any vessel in space has maneuvering thrusters the artist renderings are for entertainment purposes and shocker Hollywood artist and the props department are not really engineers. I will mane the argument because of the vessels design they are less noticeable. thinkin of the mercury space craft vs the space shuttle they both have rcs units but they are hard to see on the older craft Same for the tv Enterprise refit Enterprise. It most likely has them. they just are not visible to out sight

[@Idazmi7]

The RCS thrusters on the Enterprise actually _are_ visible. They are the yellow-orange bits on the edges of the saucer.

[@missbish1000]

Hehe I can already see the star wars fanboys raging over this one and I've only read a few of the comments below. let them rage, it still isn't going to change canon facts. Nice presentation too.

[@Idazmi7]

Thank you very much. I recently made another video which evaluates the firepower as seen in the shows themselves. Essentially the same conclusion, of course. :)

[@missbish1000]

Your very welcome, and of course, I'm looking forwards to seeing it and getting a good laugh at the star wars fanboys that want to dispute canon fact. (subscribed)

[@c0ldyloxproductions324]

First off the "lasers" used by star wars are not energy based like the ones used by some ships in star trek. Star wars laser are plasma based, making them much more powerful than u state they are

[@c0ldyloxproductions324]

Yes being plasma based does make a difference, especially since they would be firing at star treks energy based shielding, plasma is a much more power full form of weapon than the standard focused energy that make up phasers, What phaser are is a highly focused beam of energy directed at a point on the enemy ship or planet. the "lasers" star wars uses is made up of plasma energy, this bolts of plasma are much more effective at disabling shields, then melting its way through even the toughest hulls. there is a reason they used plasma as their basis for weapons and shielding.

[@c0ldyloxproductions324]

ya but the the star trek plasma weapons don't have the power output the star wars ones do, and to prove it heres a figure, the turbo lasers used by most imperial star destroyers puts out 215,000 TW of plasma energy, thats just at the low end. i wish i could find something about star trek plasma weapons but i am finding it very difficult, so i tell u the best estimate of the energy output of most star trek shields, a full-strength shield could handle 3 TW for 12 hours and a full-strength shield could handle 12 TW for 3 hours.

[@c0ldyloxproductions324]

if u want i can give you the link to the site, math doesn't lie;)

[@c0ldyloxproductions324]

those supposed fragments are a lot larger than they appear, those star destroyers are the larger versions of the one in ur diagram, remember the one ur comparing is only the smallest one

[@c0ldyloxproductions324]

im not saying that what in the movie was one of the bigger ships, but if u watch the super star destroyer all see that it was obliterating a asteroids that were much larger, plus there is also the matter of the eclipse super star destroyer as well, and if u know anything about star wars ull know what I'm talking about

[@ShonaSoF]

The speed is wrong. .65 is not how close to lightspeed the Star Destroyer can go. The smaller the number, the faster the speed. The Millennium Falcon is .5. Star Wars ships are capable of traversing the galaxy in months where Voyager would have taken almost 70 years to get home unassisted. ..... And now I will end this nerdrant that's likely already in here somewhere and go watch some Star Trek

[@ShonaSoF]

***** Han Solo (In Movie) - She'll make .5 past light speed. She may not look like much but she's got it where it counts. No need for insults.

[@ShonaSoF]

***** Waaaaay too slow. It would be about four and a half hours just to get out of the Earth's solar system at 1.5c. 2-3 years just to get to the nearest star. it's a shame Star Wars never really gives a canon explanation to exactly what they mean by x number 'past' lightspeed. But as a multiple, it would make no sense. Even Star Trek's speeds in Kirk era movies and shows is inconsistant. But Warp 1 seems to always be equal to c. At one point in the Original Series they mention exceeding warp 13 where in Next Gen and on. Well you know, of course. In any case, what I'd love to see is a properly scaled image of these ships next to each other. Especially after seeing the cross section of the ISD you have in this video. I'd never seen it before. When I was a kid I thought the Blockade Runner was comparible to the Enterprise, but once you see the actual dimentions it's much easier to get a mental image of how big the ISD is. Thanks for the video!

[@reverendbrotherlove633]

What months?. The Millennium Falcon can cross the entire galaxy in about 1 hour! In ANH (1977), Han Solo's ship travelled from Tatoine to Alderaan which is the half distance of SW galaxy.

[@Roninkaits]

And all you can prove is that you can listen to what the tv show tells you, if you look at the actual science then these numbers mean nothing lol fact is the shows don't show actual science, its just what you want to hear. Poor little trekkie, try doing some real science for once ^^

[@sci-figuy9711]

www.st-v-sw.net/STSWhi2.html There's real science, now read it.

[@Roninkaits]

I see no real science. I see numbers pulled from peoples ass but not based on anything. They get close by mentioning the effects of weapons against semi known targets (like ice and rock) but they never go into depth or give any of the math they supposedly use. And also the words of a character (IE "There is enough firepower to blast a continent" or something like "We have several *enter space techy sounding name* of power" is not evidence for actual ability, words from fictional characters do not count. You have more people just flailing around again with nothing solid to back it up. Even your evidence page at best has both sides tied (though I question some of those choices, like a bunch of explorers/diplomats being better military strategists than the empire or rebellion, you know people actually fighting wars instead of 'boldly going where nobody else has gone') This is all pathetic and I'm tired of making the same points over and over again. Between the two of you, you guys don't have 2 brain cells to rub together and all you can do is jerk each other off with facts that you both have proven on your own merit to be false or just an outright lie. I know you are going to try to say you win without having to give any sort of real proof, that's what loosers like you always do when you get backed into a corner. I honestly expected more from trekies, like real facts and science and real debate abilities. Instead all I find is a bunch of intellectual dishonesty. You can't make any sort of legitimate claims so you give the most paper thin arguments you have while you flinging ad homenim attacks to attempt to distract from the fact that you really have nothing. You are the worst kind of debaters, the kind who talks out of their ass and is so desperate to win that you will straight out ignore whatever you don't like and lie to make your point hinging on the fact that I wont look it up. Piece of advice, the first side to say so and so is a liar (like when you attacked stardestroyer.net) is usually the side that is really being dishonest. I'll never get you clowns to admit your horrible little show could ever be wrong, to you it will always be the most perfect thing ever created, but my job here is done. Weather or not you admit to it or even realize it you both have been made to look like complete idiots, mostly because of what you yourselves have said. Your facts are a joke, your ability to present any sort of challenge in a debate is laughable, and your blind faith to your lord and savior cpt Kirk is...well kind of scary to be honest. Anyways you guys can keep up this charade as long as you want, as for me I'll have fun laughing at whatever pathetic attempt you make to rebut this with a girl in my lap, cuz you know I have a life beyond this hobby. Have fun ^^

[@sci-figuy9711]

Roninkaits You must be real butthurt then.

[@whitemanstand72]

Sci-Fi Guy He is trust me He goes and uses fiction as fact to prove that star trek is better than star wars and goes on a mad hatters crusade I mean WHO CARES !!!!!! LOL They are both fiction . How sad is this individual and you know how butt hurt this guy is ? he goes around KZbin and harressess you

[@whitemanstand72]

Now he's lying what an inept idiot of a human being

[@Alex-pm4tq]

Finally the truth. This is perfect. Now everyone will know! So Star trek wins. Finally there is peace in my mind about which technology is better. Also people very easily forget when talking about ST universe vs SW universe Star Trek wins no matter what. Q. Enough said.

[@TheDarkendstar]

So I get the fact that the Federation would completely outclass the empire so just to see how completely outclassed they are I wonder how easily species 8472 would annihilate them

[@TheDarkendstar]

how fast they would star wars of course how many ships do you think it would take them 5 maybe :P

[@TheDarkendstar]

Well the borg were able to destroy one by crashing a cube into it how that blast not manage to destroy voyager is beyond me other than plot armor

[@TheDarkendstar]

While that maybe be true you cant ignore the fact it is considered canon though at the same time.

[@TheDarkendstar]

***** Indeed I mean I liked voyagers story but it had more plot armor than doctor who flying over the universe of star wars :P

[@missbish1000]

There's also the planet killers, not even the massive laser of the death star and death star 2 could penetrate a solid neutronium hull and would be utterly outclassed by the planet killers massive antiproton beam. Even the largest of star wars fleets would be useless against one of them.

[@yep9557]

Ashley Yu

[@SuperGamefreak18]

dude looks like you won lol...nice job...now where are those millions are hates coming from the illogical star wars fans

[@SuperGamefreak18]

***** yep just u also got the resonable SW fans to come as well...now on to the next challenge...Ive seen a small divide in trekkie fans...you know the Roddenberry fans vs the JJ fans think u can work on that lol

[@SuperGamefreak18]

***** thats not what im talking about...I meant the ships lol because I enjoy the newer movies for what they are...even if they aren't anything Rodenberry would ever allow. The biggest thing is the fact that no one can figure out the sizes of said ships compared to canon ships since there is no blueprints for them...though Im just glad to see prime spock alive after what happened to him in the prime universe that is mentioned in STO

[@SuperGamefreak18]

I know it was more of a joke...and what about that dreadnaught ship

[@SuperGamefreak18]

***** Dude just wanted to mess with you and honestly I already have a huge ship I love thats the flagship in STO and the Oblisek carrier ship in the same game

[@SuperGamefreak18]

***** yep there's really no badly designed ship ingame

[@homelessend8557]

You won the debate completely. It's over. If any SW fan still denies it, they should just go dig a hole for themselves and hide until their shame is over. R.I.P. stardestroyer.net,(For Micheal Wong)

[@homelessend8557]

***** But I'm sure if Micheal Wong and his goons saw this video, they'd shit their pants

[@homelessend8557]

All Micheal did was a lie, some SW fans just can't stand up to the facts.

[@homelessend8557]

I just read it, and it kind of looks like legogeek94's logic. Quite illogical indeed.

[@homelessend8557]

I see.

[@Bleachsoul13]

Mario tehtroll SD.net actually *has* seen Idazmi7's videos, and dismiss them. Granted, they're also dismissing Disney's announcement so they're not to be taken seriously anyways.

[@capitaohectorbarbossa9172]

That is not canonical in legends neither in the current disney canon, nice try for a series that keep piling decks as the story needs.

[@Idazmi7]

I cited my references.

[@aurorathearcticwolf4243]

well star wars wins in 2 things: size and FTF speeds u clearly left out that part it takes a star destroyer less than a SECOND To go from earth to pluto while the enterprise would take a few mins so uhhh yeah

[@homelessend8557]

It's not really an advantage at all. The federation has also built large structures so that really means nothing. As for speed, you need to map out hyperspace routes while in star trek, warp speed can get you anywhere while making movements and firing weapons

[@jozefkozon4520]

You are just comparing the clipper to the Ohio class battleship and you prove that the clipper is more controllable because he has sails and no armor, and therefore is better. Właśnie porównujesz kliper do pancernika klasy Ohio i udowadniasz, że kliper jest bardziej sterowny bo ma żagle i nie ma pancerza i tym samym, jest lepszy.

[@mikemac2888]

Next video you do, lay off coffee or Redbull, for fiuck sake.

[@Idazmi7]

Neither of those things were involved in the creation of this video.

[@emileblais]

Aaah, Trekkies

[@Idazmi7]

That comment has no substance.

[@emileblais]

You did not even use official blueprints for the Imperial Star Destroyer

[@Idazmi7]

+TheMaster FR Ah, so the blueprints by Colin Cantwell and Joe Johnston, the guys who _designed the Star Destroyer,_ are "unofficial". Good to know that Star Wars fanboys have neither credibility nor sense. I suppose my Star Trek blueprints were "unofficial" as well, despite being hand signed by Star Trek's creator.