www.ditl.org

stitch626 wrote: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.

m52nickerson wrote:I agree that it is not that best idea, still better than the Scimitar had only 6 disruptors.

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"

Rochey wrote:Jesus H Christ, why the f**k is this thing still going on.

All that's important is the film itself.

Seafort wrote:Both the grouped weapons theory and the single weapon theory are consistent will the evidence. The simngle weapon theory is simpler. Therefore it is superior.

Captain Seafort wrote:

m52nickerson wrote:I agree that it is not that best idea, still better than the Scimitar had only 6 disruptors.

Once again, prove it. Both the grouped weapons theory and the single weapon theory are consistent will the evidence. The simngle weapon theory is simpler. Therefore it is superior.

Rochey wrote:Jesus H Christ, why the f**k is this thing still going on.
I'm on my lunch break now, so I'll only say this one thing for now:

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"

Let me make this very clear for you:
As much as I like EAS, they are not canon. They are no more canon than DITL, MA, or some random webpage that I could put up. What Bernd (sp?) wants to list as canon is utterly irrelevant. Why?
Because his words do not carry more weight than official statements from Paramount.

So unless Paramount explicitly states "yeah, by the way, EAS is now canon", what that site lists is utterly irrelevant. As is what any other site lists. All that's important is the film itself.

Only simpler until you have to explain the sensor readings. Yes, if you just go by the visuals I would say 6 is a pretty good number. Personaly with just the visuals I would say the Scimitar had:
6 foreword disruptors,
2 foreword torpedo tubes, these are based on the battle and the images of the the ship.

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.

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.

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.

....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.

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

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.

Rochey wrote:Unless the site is specificaly stated to be canon, it is not canon. It's that simple.

So is the Paramount site cannon?

Only simpler until you have to explain the sensor readings. Yes, if you just go by the visuals I would say 6 is a pretty good number. Personaly with just the visuals I would say the Scimitar had:
6 foreword disruptors,
2 foreword torpedo tubes, these are based on the battle and the images of the the ship.

Where are you getting 6 forward disruptors from? Direct observation shows two forward disruptors, with a dorsal turret that can fire forward. Logic suggests that there's a similar turret placed on the ventral hull. That's 4, not 6.

There are six small ports of some type located on the front of the ship. They are right in the area were we see disruptor bolts firing. With there close proximity and the distance we see the shots come from it is impossible to tell which one of these, if any the shots come from. This does tie in at least one more element and is not earth shattering.

We never see the dorsal aft weapon fire forward. When the Romulan ship is disabled the shot cuts away before the ship flies completely over the Scimitar. Plus those hits were all white in color and hit that ship at about 90 degree angles. I think the Scimitar started to pound away with torpedoes once the ship had passed it.

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.

We've no idea what way the scan was presented in. Worf could have simply brought up a list of the ship's armament, or he could have brought up visuals of the exterior and identified weapons by visual inspection, or the computer could have done that for him, or he could have scanned for power sources near the surface that might have indicated weapons* or it could have been done in some other method. As we have no idea what format the scan was displayed in, it is illogical to suggest that it was too simple for Worf to have misread.

*I just thought of this possibility a moment ago, but I quite like it. As we know, weapons in Trek come in all shapes and sizes, to the point where some aren't even recognisable as actual weapons (type 2 phasers, anyone?). As such, perhaps Worf could have scanned for things that might indicate the existance of weapons. Things like power cores, batteries or any type of energy-emitting system on or just beneath the surface for the disruptors, and anti-matter for the torpedo launchers.

If this is the method in which it is done, it's quite easy to see why there might be such a large difference between what Worf's conclusion says and what the actual battle shows. The power sources Worf picked up could have been, in addition to the actual weapons, things like tractor beam emitters, vents, heat sinks, shield projectors, the thelaron emitters and any number of other systems. This would explain why Worf was wrong, without having to introduce trickery on behalf of the Scimitar or a mistake on behalf of Worf. In addition, the idea of scans being conducted in such a manner is not unreasonable. Naturaly it would cause quite a bit of a margin of error when determining an unknown ship's capabilities (as we saw), but it would litteraly be the only way to determine the armament of an unknown vessel while providing an upper limit for the Fed captain as to the enemy ship's strength.

Personaly, I like this explaination best. It explains everything nicely without introducing any other elements or requiring stupidity to occur. As such, this is going to be my new pet theory.

That is not bad at all. While I doubt that scanner or Worf would mistake torpedoes, tractor beams and such, the cloaking system could have had components spread across the ship whose components were similar to that of disruptors. Since this was a new type of cloak and the Enterprise computer had not seen things like this before it falsely identified them as weapons. This also helps explain how only part of the cloak could be dropped. Any other members of the crew that looked that scans would have seen the same thing.

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.

And who would that other be? The helmsman, who is busy flying the ship? The captain, who is busy directing the ship? The XO, making sure everyone has their s**t in order? The chief engineer, who's busy keeping the ship in one piece? The ops officer, who's busy keeping the ship running smoothly?

The Enterprise was stop and had been there for two day, at least. The XO, the engineer, and the opts offier would all have a vested invested interest in seeing that scan.

Everyone on the bridge is there for a specific reason. To have them stop what they're doing and verify a report from a fellow, supposedly competant, officer is foolish. And moreover, it would indicate that the captain and other senior officers didn't think much about how competant his tac officer was, which could lead to morale problems. That also raises the question of just what reports are checked. Does Worf check over Geordi's report on how the warp core is functioning? Does Geordi make sure Data's report doesn't have any errors in it? Is every report checked? What if they're in a situation that requires all crew to be ready to go to full alert at a moment's notice?
Sorry, but the idea of having other officers take time out to verify an officer's statements and reports seems highly unlikely.

If they were in an emergency situation I would be with you. At the time of the scan the appearance of the scimitar was the only thing the crew was focused on.

Moral problems, it would be a bigger moral problem if an office made a serious mistake that cost lives. So having multiple eyes on an important scan would not be a bad thing.

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.

Rationalising =/= ignoring.
Tell me, if we've been ignoring Worf's statements, then would we have spent several pages arguing over whether Worf was mistaken, or being fooled in some way? No, we wouldn't. We've adressed his statements. That we don't consider them to be correct does not mean we're ignoring it. Understand?

Yes you are addressing them. When you formed your theory you ignored, or did not take the statement into consideration because you found it to be in error. If you had not done this, right or wrong, you would not have come to the conclusion you did.

....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.

The Scimitar was a warship. Ergo, weapons would have been up there on the list of priorities.

Would they have been above the Shields and the Cloak, or life support?

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

Prove they were different weapons. Saying "well, if we assume it to be true then it fits with my theory" is not proof. All that shows is that it's a workable idea. What you now need to do is look at the film and see can you find evidence of the various weapons being of different powers.

What? The argument was regarding weapons having long recharge time and each being in a different state of charge. If they were only fired when at full power they would inflict close to the same damage. It is a workable idea, just as your idea that the Scimitar is a workable idea. You can't prove beyond a shadow of doubt that it only has 6 disruptors.

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.

24th century starship =/= WW2 era battleships.

So it the Paramount site cannon?

There are six small ports of some type located on the front of the ship. They are right in the area were we see disruptor bolts firing. With there close proximity and the distance we see the shots come from it is impossible to tell which one of these, if any the shots come from. This does tie in at least one more element and is not earth shattering.

We never see the dorsal aft weapon fire forward. When the Romulan ship is disabled the shot cuts away before the ship flies completely over the Scimitar. Plus those hits were all white in color and hit that ship at about 90 degree angles. I think the Scimitar started to pound away with torpedoes once the ship had passed it.

While I doubt that scanner or Worf would mistake torpedoes, tractor beams and such,

the cloaking system could have had components spread across the ship whose components were similar to that of disruptors, capacitors and such. Since this was a new type of cloak and the Enterprise computer had not seen things like this before it falsely identified them as weapons. This also helps explain how only part of the cloak could be dropped. Any other members of the crew that looked that scans would have seen the same thing.

The Enterprise was stop and had been there for two day, at least. The XO, the engineer, and the opts offier would all have a vested invested interest in seeing that scan.

If they were in an emergency situation I would be with you. At the time of the scan the appearance of the scimitar was the only thing the crew was focused on.

Moral problems, it would be a bigger moral problem if an office made a serious mistake that cost lives. So having multiple eyes on an important scan would not be a bad thing.

Yes you are addressing them. When you formed your theory you ignored, or did not take the statement into consideration because you found it to be in error. If you had not done this, right or wrong, you would not have come to the conclusion you did.

Would they have been above the Shields and the Cloak, or life support?

What? The argument was regarding weapons having long recharge time and each being in a different state of charge. If they were only fired when at full power they would inflict close to the same damage. It is a workable idea, just as your idea that the Scimitar is a workable idea. You can't prove beyond a shadow of doubt that it only has 6 disruptors.

Rochey wrote:A few of the first shots we see coming from the Scimitar come from this front section of the ship. The torpedo launchers could be the larger openings we see.

It is all about tying as much as possible in together.

It look to me that those shots came from the front of the ship.

I think you misunderstood me here. You state that system with power sources, could have been mistaken for disruptors, then listed torpedoes as one of them.

We have seen Data and other give tactical information from other stations before.

Even if Worf was the only one to look at the scan, why did he not correct that later on? I'm sure he and others, including that Captain reviewed that scan as they were preparing for the battle.

If the ship was not crippled in the first burst that there could be problems. Also it has seemed that multiple hits on a shield do more then one large impact equal to all those hits. Look that the Prometheus. Instead of trying to out load a ship with every larger and more powerful weapons the Prometheus was designed to put more point of impact on an enemies shield.

A few of the first shots we see coming from the Scimitar come from this front section of the ship. The torpedo launchers could be the larger openings we see. It is all about tying as much as possible in together.

It look to me that those shots came from the front of the ship.

I think you misunderstood me here. You state that system with power sources, could have been mistaken for disruptors, then listed torpedoes as one of them.

I agree that we could easily get to that number, if you look at the section of the ship were the Cloak was drop it was not very large, and might have had a few cloak emitters in that section alone. The only thing I would dis agree with is the scan misreading tractor beams, since those are seen all the time. Even without them it still makes sense.

We have seen Data and other give tactical information from other stations before.

Even more reason for everyone to look at the weapons and what state they are in.

Even if Worf was the only one to look at the scan, why did he not correct that later on? I'm sure he and others, including that Captain reviewed that scan as they were preparing for the battle.

Ignore - To refuse to pay attention to; disregard. (From the American Heritage Dictionary)

Really you think it would be above the Cloak? The ship was powerful enough to destroy two new Romulan ships and the Flag ship of the federation. I would say what ever price was worth it.

If the ship was not crippled in the first burst that there could be problems.

Also it has seemed that multiple hits on a shield do more then one large impact equal to all those hits. Look that the Prometheus. Instead of trying to out load a ship with every larger and more powerful weapons the Prometheus was designed to put more point of impact on an enemies shield.

m52nickerson wrote:A few of the first shots we see coming from the Scimitar come from this front section of the ship. The torpedo launchers could be the larger openings we see.

Or the larger openings could be the shuttle/fighter bays which we know from the ramming scene to be in the bow.

It is all about tying as much as possible in together.

It's about producing the simplest explanation consistent with all the facts.

It look to me that those shots came from the front of the ship.

Upper centre from what I could tell, where we already know there's an emplacement - the one that took out the second Valdore.

I think you misunderstood me here. You state that system with power sources, could have been mistaken for disruptors, then listed torpedoes as one of them.

Torpedoes wouldn't produce a significant power signature while stored, but the launcher certainly would.

We have seen Data and other give tactical information from other stations before.

Usually, as I recall, in the middle of a battle, when the tactical officer was busy firing weapons. At the time we're talking about the Scimitar had just decloaked, so the ship would have been in the middle of shifting from normal operating conditions to yellow or red alert. Such a shift, involving reallocation of power and sensor resources from non critical systems to tactical systems, waking sleep-shift crew members, and getting everyone to their assigned duty station, would have required the coordination of the Ops Manager - Data. Geordi would similarly have been busy supervising the boosting of the warp core from ticking over to a much higher output in case of possible combat

Even if Worf was the only one to look at the scan, why did he not correct that later on? I'm sure he and others, including that Captain reviewed that scan as they were preparing for the battle.

Maybe he did. Remember that sequence of the ship preparing for action, including reviewing scans of the Scimitar? It's possible that it was then that It was discovered that the initial estimates had been too high. Or it wasn't realised until the battle, at which time everyone was somewhat preocupied with surviving.

If the ship was not crippled in the first burst that there could be problems. Also it has seemed that multiple hits on a shield do more then one large impact equal to all those hits. Look that the Prometheus. Instead of trying to out load a ship with every larger and more powerful weapons the Prometheus was designed to put more point of impact on an enemies shield.

1) If the first salvo isn't fatal, so what? The Scimitar's aledgedly got the best cloak ever deployed - a competent commander would simply wheel away and stay out of weapons range until his weapons had rechaged.

2) Trying to use the piece of shite that is the Prometheus as an example of a good design is an exceptionally bad idea.