Scimitar vs. Sovereign

[Sionnach Glic]

If you think a mod's made a mistake or something, feel free to bring it up.
Accusing a mod of abusing his power, on the other hand, is quite a different matter.

Of course, you should probably do a bit of research before you try accusing a mod of something serious like that. The fact that in the entire history of the forum there hasn't been a single complaint about the mods' actions is proof enough that we're capable of seperating personal grieviences from our administrative decisions.

Actualy, I tell a lie. There was one incident in which Seafort was accused of abusing his power by one member of the forum.
You can read his complaint and his subsequent banning due to his illegal manufacture of ice cream here.

[m52nickerson]

Aye, those scans are pretty useless.

Not exactly since mine was to come up with an explanation that fits everything, something you are not interested in.

Which is exactly what you've been attempting to do all through this thread. So, again, its remains worthless.

Your right.

What were the others doing?

Their jobs. Worf's job is Tactical Officer. He's the one responsible for keeping the captain up to date on the capabilities of an enemy vessel, not anyone else.

Which he did by giving the report, that does not mean the other would not have been looking at the scan results. It would be important for anyone that might have to take over the tactical station to know were key system of the Scimtar were located, including the weapons systems. So the fact that no one correct Worf, or he never corrected himself make him simplle making a mistake highly unlikely.

We have seen other time data give tactical evaluations from OPS. So based on that we can safely bet Data also looked at the scan.

So because Data has occasionaly spoken up with info on enemy ships, we must assume he was looking over details of the ship's armament? Not only is that a leap in logic, but it makes no sense. Unless Worf wasn't trusted to do his job competantly, Data would have no reason to be looking at those scans.

See above.

. Do you have any reason why no one else would look at the scan?

Because that's not their job.Their jobs would be to be as informed as possible to better give the Captain options and carry out his orders.

I understand that you are making that rationalization only because it fits your theory. As I'm making rationalizations that don't require Worf's statements to be incorrect.

Correct, yours just requires massive assumptions and the retardation of thousands.In your opinion, not reality.

In both cases were we see a ship cloaked and firing it did not have shields. Yes your explanations could be correct, but require a greater advancement in tech then having to limit power to other systems to make it work.

Or perhaps it just requires a more powerful power source. Hell, that could be the very reason that the ship was powered by the thelaron generator instead of more conventional power sources.

How do you know it was powered by that generator and that was not just part of the Thelaron weapon?

Care to point out were I lied.

You want me to reference all the times you said we've failed to adress something, despite us having done so?

Example?

There would be engineers that made sure all the systems could work together.

Correct. They would not, however, know all the necessary info on how the devices work and on what principles they work. Their job is completely unrelated, and is thus a red herring.

That is wrong on many levels. One, even if they did not understand the inner working of each system, they would know how much power those systems would require. So if the Cloak, Shields, were seen as greater priorities then the weapons the weapons would have to be designed around the power available. Two, not knowing how all the systems worked would mean the possibility of major design flaws, and sytem not being compatible.

Except for the fact that if they did fire all the weapons at once that the enterprise was not crippled they would have had a long time to take fire while waiting for the weapons to come back. Plus if all the weapons could not be charges at the same time, going back to limits on power drain, it would be even longer.

It would take all of a dozen or so seconds to recharge the guns from what we've seen. Hardly a crippling disadvantage, particularly when you're in an invisible ship that can take a hell of a beating without losing shields.

Unless those were not the exact same weapons firing, then the recharge rates could be much longer.

So offical sources are not cannon, it would seem pretty dumb of Paramount not to include there own site as cannon. Can you post the link to were Paramount declared on the shows and films cannon, becasue on their sit it state TV, Movies, and Star Trek Facts files.

Emphasis mine. You'll note the lack of "oh, and this website is also absolute canon" in that list.
And FYI, official =/= canon. They're two seperate things.

You can lose, you just will not except it.

If you'd been here longer, you'd be well aware that I've conceded debates plenty of times.

Just not this one.

Now lets say a Ship A has 52 disruptors, and Ship B has 6 disruptors. The total straight of the each ships weapons are equal. If Ship A has the 52 disruptors arranged in 6 or so groups it becomes equivalent to ship B. If Ship A had the disruptors spread across the ship, it is harder for that ship to concentrate fire, and may be more difficult for the tactical officer to operate each weapon, it also adds to the complexity of the design since power and other needed components must be tied to a greater number of points on the ship.

Right, it's official: you know precisely jack s**t about military matters.
Kendall; Seafort; I'll leave this one to you two. You're both far more knowledgable about such things than I am.

So you concede that point, thanks. I can't wait for someone to tell me that the way a WW battle ship works is comparability to a Star ship. I got one, how about the fact that on battle ships the main guns are normally in groups of three or more.

[m52nickerson]

Yeah, useless picture.

And curious, but how is my theory complex? It takes into account all evidence, both spoken and visual.

As for Worf detecting them... it is quite easy for a weapon to be in place but not connected or active. There have been several times in Trek that sensors have detected none operational weapons.

Your theory is not more complex. In fact it helps explain why the Enterprise had to wait so long before the the Scimitar appeared, they were completing as much of it as possible. Remember the initial plan was not to fight the Enterprise but just to capture Picard and then complete the needed procedure. After that there would be time to complete the ship.

[Aaron]

So you concede that point, thanks. I can't wait for someone to tell me that the way a WW battle ship works is comparability to a Star ship. I got one, how about the fact that on battle ships the main guns are normally in groups of three or more.

Yeah, in individual armoured mountings. The fancy sloped turret you see isn't the actual armour but the gunhouse. When an accident knocked out Iowa's center gun in the number 2 turret in 1989, it didn't render the whole turret useless. What bloody armour does a ST ship have save the Defiant.

[Sionnach Glic]

Which he did by giving the report, that does not mean the other would not have been looking at the scan results. It would be important for anyone that might have to take over the tactical station to know were key system of the Scimtar were located, including the weapons systems. So the fact that no one correct Worf, or he never corrected himself make him simplle making a mistake highly unlikely.

If Worf was, for whatever reason, incapacitated then they'd simply have one of the other officers take over at his station until a replacement tac officer could get to the bridge. All relevant info would be at Worf's station, and thus it would still be a waste of time to have everyone else on the bridge looking at such info when they all have jobs of their own to do.

Their jobs would be to be as informed as possible to better give the Captain options and carry out his orders.

Yes, give him info that is relevant to their department. Tactical's job is to advise the captain on matters pertaining to combat.

In your opinion, not reality.

Actualy, you're quite wrong. The only way that ship would ever have been built with 52 guns clustered around 6 locations within a few metres of each other is if every member of the design and construction team was suffering from chronic retardation.

How do you know it was powered by that generator and that was not just part of the Thelaron weapon?

I don't. But the fact that it was reffered to a a thelaron generator and the entire ship detonated violantly when the generator was destroyed would seem to suggest it.

Example?

All the times you've claimed we're ignoring Worf's quote. Do you want me to find specific quotes from you on that?

That is wrong on many levels. One, even if they did not understand the inner working of each system, they would know how much power those systems would require. So if the Cloak, Shields, were seen as greater priorities then the weapons the weapons would have to be designed around the power available. Two, not knowing how all the systems worked would mean the possibility of major design flaws, and sytem not being compatible.

Right, so in addition to military design we can also add ignorance of basic design and engineering methods.
For Christ's sake, even I know this stuff.

Unless those were not the exact same weapons firing, then the recharge rates could be much longer.

Prove the recharge rates for guns of the same type are different.

Just not this one.

I tend not to concede debates where I'm correct.

So you concede that point, thanks.

Whatever.

I can't wait for someone to tell me that the way a WW battle ship works is comparability to a Star ship. I got one, how about the fact that on battle ships the main guns are normally in groups of three or more

Don't be alarmed; that bang you heard was just Seafort's head exploding after he read that statement.

[Captain Seafort]

Which he did by giving the report, that does not mean the other would not have been looking at the scan results. It would be important for anyone that might have to take over the tactical station to know were key system of the Scimtar were located, including the weapons systems. So the fact that no one correct Worf, or he never corrected himself make him simplle making a mistake highly unlikely.

Everyone else was busy doing their jobs. There may have been a backup tactical officer, but he'd have been less experienced than Worf, and so as likely, if not moreso to make the same mistake, if a mistake was made. As has been pointed out repeatedly, a mistake is not the only possibility.

Their jobs would be to be as informed as possible to better give the Captain options and carry out his orders.

In their area of expertise. Worf's area of expertise was tactical, therefore he gave the weapons report.

How do you know it was powered by that generator and that was not just part of the Thelaron weapon?

Which part of "maybe" do you not understand. Not to mention that this entire debate is revoling around the fact that you don't understand the burnen of proof. You are making a positive claim - that the Scimitar has dozens of weapons despite visual evidence to the contrary. It is your job to prove that claim, not ours to disprove it.

Example?

Every fucking time you've claimed that we've ignored Worf's statement.

That is wrong on many levels. One, even if they did not understand the inner working of each system, they would know how much power those systems would require. So if the Cloak, Shields, were seen as greater priorities then the weapons the weapons would have to be designed around the power available. Two, not knowing how all the systems worked would mean the possibility of major design flaws, and sytem not being compatible.

Only two systems need to be universally compatable - the power distribution grid and the computer network. Nothing else. As for the issue of power requirements, those designing the overall ship would know how much power each system required, and how much power the main reactor could generate. They would then know how many disruptors (for example) the ship would be able to carry.

Unless those were not the exact same weapons firing, then the recharge rates could be much longer.

True. Now prove that those were different weapon, despite the fact that they were all firing from the same half dozen points on the hull.

I can't wait for someone to tell me that the way a WW battle ship works is comparability to a Star ship.

They are both designed for the same fundamental role - to inflict maxium damage on the enemy. To do this they need to balance firepower, mobility, and protection. This has not changed since the days of chariots, and will not change as long as warfare continues.

I got one, how about the fact that on battle ships the main guns are normally in groups of three or more.

Wrong. The vast majority of warships use twin turrets, and spread their weapons as far apart as possible without compromising protection. Moreover each gun is protected individually, rather than depending solely on the ship's main belt armour. Since starship protection is universal, rather than concentrated in armoured belts, the effectiveness of their shields is affected by the overall size of the ship far more than the distribution of their weapons.

[Sonic Glitch]

Here, my little contribution Canon, from the other great Trek site.

[Aaron]

Here, my little contribution Canon, from the other great Trek site.

Quoth the raven, 404.

[Sonic Glitch]

Let's try this again. Canon

[m52nickerson]

Which he did by giving the report, that does not mean the other would not have been looking at the scan results. It would be important for anyone that might have to take over the tactical station to know were key system of the Scimtar were located, including the weapons systems. So the fact that no one correct Worf, or he never corrected himself make him simplle making a mistake highly unlikely.

If Worf was, for whatever reason, incapacitated then they'd simply have one of the other officers take over at his station until a replacement tac officer could get to the bridge. All relevant info would be at Worf's station, and thus it would still be a waste of time to have everyone else on the bridge looking at such info when they all have jobs of their own to do.

What other jobs would they have to do after waiting two days other than to look at the data regarding the ship that just decloaked in front of them? You say that the tactical data would be easy and quick to read since an other officer could quickly look and understand that info, lets go with that.

Their jobs would be to be as informed as possible to better give the Captain options and carry out his orders.

Yes, give him info that is relevant to their department. Tactical's job is to advise the captain on matters pertaining to combat.

What would Riker and Data be looking at?

In your opinion, not reality.

Actualy, you're quite wrong. The only way that ship would ever have been built with 52 guns clustered around 6 locations within a few metres of each other is if every member of the design and construction team was suffering from chronic retardation.

This is what I'm talking about. I have explained why it is not retarded and you responded with "I will let someone else deal with that". Please explain to me how my example which showed that grouping would no be a detriment the ship is flawed.

How do you know it was powered by that generator and that was not just part of the Thelaron weapon?

I don't. But the fact that it was reffered to a a thelaron generator and the entire ship detonated violantly when the generator was destroyed would seem to suggest it.

Yes, as in generating thelaron radiation, or a thelaron generator. That does not indicate it was providing power to the ship. Nor does the fact that shooting it at close range will cause a massive explosion that will destroy the ship.

Example?

All the times you've claimed we're ignoring Worf's quote. Do you want me to find specific quotes from you on that?

Please, your whole argument is that Worf was wrong for one reason or another, and thus when forming your theory his statements are ignored.

That is wrong on many levels. One, even if they did not understand the inner working of each system, they would know how much power those systems would require. So if the Cloak, Shields, were seen as greater priorities then the weapons the weapons would have to be designed around the power available. Two, not knowing how all the systems worked would mean the possibility of major design flaws, and sytem not being compatible.

Right, so in addition to military design we can also add ignorance of basic design and engineering methods.
For Christ's sake, even I know this stuff.

So the design engineers would not have to know how much power each system would use? They would not have to prioritize system because the amount of power the ship can generate does have a limit?

Real world example, using what I do. Lets look at a Drinking water plant. We start with the wells, lets say there are two of them. These well need to be able to supply the plant enough water to meet its need. So the engineer must know what the maximum daily demand is and size the well pumps accordingly. Best option is to size each pump so that 1 well can meet demand. Plus you need to know how deep the well is and it's diameter so you can calculate head loss and size the pump correctly. The engineer may not know exactly how the pump works, but he has to know it's capacities. All that just for the well pumps, then you have to start looking at treatment, storage, service pumps, the electrical to run it all.

Unless of course you think that a drinking water plant is harder to design then a Starship.

Unless those were not the exact same weapons firing, then the recharge rates could be much longer.

Prove the recharge rates for guns of the same type are different.

No other type as I stated that they would have been designed for the Scimitar to work with its cloak.

Just not this one.

I tend not to concede debates where I'm correct.

Have not proved it yet.

So you concede that point, thanks.

Whatever.

I can't wait for someone to tell me that the way a WW battle ship works is comparability to a Star ship. I got one, how about the fact that on battle ships the main guns are normally in groups of three or more

Don't be alarmed; that bang you heard was just Seafort's head exploding after he read that statement.

[m52nickerson]

Which he did by giving the report, that does not mean the other would not have been looking at the scan results. It would be important for anyone that might have to take over the tactical station to know were key system of the Scimtar were located, including the weapons systems. So the fact that no one correct Worf, or he never corrected himself make him simplle making a mistake highly unlikely.

Everyone else was busy doing their jobs. There may have been a backup tactical officer, but he'd have been less experienced than Worf, and so as likely, if not moreso to make the same mistake, if a mistake was made. As has been pointed out repeatedly, a mistake is not the only possibility.

Do you think the tactical scans would be hard to read, as in Worf having to identify disruptors or do you think the computer would give him a summery? If they were complicated all the more to have others look at the data so if they have to take the tactical station they would have the information. If the it was just a summery, then it is hard to believe that Worf and anyone else that looked at the data could misread a 6 for 52.

Yes, a mistake is not the only possibility, there is the possibility that some sort of trick was used to fool the sensors. That does have some problems attached to it, but I'm more likely to believe that then the other.

Their jobs would be to be as informed as possible to better give the Captain options and carry out his orders.

In their area of expertise. Worf's area of expertise was tactical, therefore he gave the weapons report.

Just because he gives the report does not mean he is the only one that looked at it. What would happen if a tactical officer made a major mistake like not identifying charged weapons? It only makes sense that there would be other to make sure a major mistake is made.

How do you know it was powered by that generator and that was not just part of the Thelaron weapon?

Which part of "maybe" do you not understand. Not to mention that this entire debate is revoling around the fact that you don't understand the burnen of proof. You are making a positive claim - that the Scimitar has dozens of weapons despite visual evidence to the contrary. It is your job to prove that claim, not ours to disprove it.

How do you not understand that your claim that the Scimitar had only six weapons hinges on incomplete visuals and contradicts a very clear statement that was made. You have to prove that the statement was incorrect by proving that the reason we only see what looks like a few weapons is because there were only a few weapons. It was submitted that the extra weapons may not have fired because the Scimitar was not complete, you have yet to address this. The other theories are also possibilities, and not more complex when you look at why it is unlikely that Worf made a mistake, and on on else caught it, or the sensors were fooled. Both of those require more explaination and become increasingly complex.

Example?

Every f***ing time you've claimed that we've ignored Worf's statement.

Since you are basing your theory that Worf's statement is incorrect you do ignore it. In forming theories one doesn't take into account false data.

That is wrong on many levels. One, even if they did not understand the inner working of each system, they would know how much power those systems would require. So if the Cloak, Shields, were seen as greater priorities then the weapons the weapons would have to be designed around the power available. Two, not knowing how all the systems worked would mean the possibility of major design flaws, and sytem not being compatible.

Only two systems need to be universally compatable - the power distribution grid and the computer network. Nothing else. As for the issue of power requirements, those designing the overall ship would know how much power each system required, and how much power the main reactor could generate. They would then know how many disruptors (for example) the ship would be able to carry.

....and if the power that the weapon system would have after all higher priority system are accounted for was low, it would make sense to design a weapon system that could use little power and still generate a pretty steady stream of fire.

Unless those were not the exact same weapons firing, then the recharge rates could be much longer.

True. Now prove that those were different weapon, despite the fact that they were all firing from the same half dozen points on the hull.

This is inline with Worf''s statements, and explained by the weapons set close together.

I can't wait for someone to tell me that the way a WW battle ship works is comparability to a Star ship.

They are both designed for the same fundamental role - to inflict maxium damage on the enemy. To do this they need to balance firepower, mobility, and protection. This has not changed since the days of chariots, and will not change as long as warfare continues.

Was the Scimitar designed to use those disruptors and other weapons to inflict damage, or was it primarily designed to sneak close to a planet and use the Thelaron weapon? How do grouped weapons take away from inflicting damage to an enemy?

I got one, how about the fact that on battle ships the main guns are normally in groups of three or more.

Wrong. The vast majority of warships use twin turrets, and spread their weapons as far apart as possible without compromising protection. Moreover each gun is protected individually, rather than depending solely on the ship's main belt armour. Since starship protection is universal, rather than concentrated in armoured belts, the effectiveness of their shields is affected by the overall size of the ship far more than the distribution of their weapons.

Really because every photo I can find I see three. Care to post links.

While each gun is protected individually if that emplacement is hit and no longer can rotate it becomes pretty hard to aim properly. That and as you have stated before the close proximity of those 2 or three guns means that a hit on one of them could damage or disable the other. So why do the ships have the guns in emplacements. It would take to much room and energy to place each gun on its own turret. It also allows those guns be aimed at the same target with better accuracy.

[m52nickerson]

Let's try this again. Canon

I like it - from that page "Ex Astris Scientia No, I'm not suffering from megalomania. The reason why I'm listing EAS as a candidate for a canon source is that some fans refer to my website as canon. But actually EAS does not create any canon content. It can only convey canon data and, in debatable cases, suggest reasonable solutions with a minimum of speculation."

Then from Ex entry on the Scimitar - "The Scimitar is a huge vessel built by the Reman rebels on a secret base. Apparently superior to any ship of either the Federation or the Romulans with 52 disruptors and 27 torpedo banks, the Scimitar is capable of firing while cloaked. It is also equipped with a thalaron emitter, a weapon that destroys any organic tissue. The thalaron emitter is activated by unfolding the wings of the vessel. There is at least one large shuttlebay with dozens of Scorpion-class fighters"

[Aaron]

Edit: You know what, nevermind. I think this was actually the reason I took a break: idiotic fanboyism.

[stitch626]

I still like my theory better.

As for the current argument...
I thought I missed these kind of debates after Blackstar had "left". I guess I was wrong. Its too hard to keep up. Too many really long posts.

And now for my contribution: per the 52 in 6 groups... it is unreasonable that they would pack that many disrupters so close together. One accurate torpedo and you lose a sixth of your weapons. While turrets of 2 or 3 are ok, large amounts are not a good idea.

[Tsukiyumi]

Edit: You know what, nevermind. I think this was actually the reason I took a break: idiotic fanboyism.

Yeah, it is a bit tiresome. One side believes one thing, the other side, something else, and neither will quit. Hooray for going in circles!