Guest SlasherX Posted February 12, 2001 Share Posted February 12, 2001 I was watching the Special Edition Star Wars : A New Hope just very recently and was wondering... The Death Star moved itself as if it is a starship by moving from Alderaan to the Rebel Base moon, but it's a space station (I thought of non movement)? And how did it move by that huge mass of size? There were any visible huge thrusters to move that thing? Any answers and points to add on here? [This message has been edited by SlasherX (edited February 22, 2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Expert Rookie Posted February 12, 2001 Share Posted February 12, 2001 There's a site that discusses how it moves. It has like 50 non-hyperspace engines and only 1 hyperdrive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nova_wolf Posted February 14, 2001 Share Posted February 14, 2001 May be they used tugs ? In space, weight doesn't exist, so may be it would be possible to use tugs... Long shot, but you never know ! ------------------ Nova Squadron, the Elite B-Wing flight group stationed aboard the Nebulon B Frigate 'Oracle', home of the tech library. 'No capitol too large, no corvette too armed. NOVA squadron, for ALL your extermination needs. Our special at the moment - SSDs (See our work with the Iron Fist !) !' Commander Jon 'DFMD' Adamson - leader of Nova Squadron (B-Wing ID = 'The White Witch') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Kinnison Posted February 14, 2001 Share Posted February 14, 2001 there is no wieght but everything still has mass. If there was no mass while in space, we would have no probly sendin space craft into space with Seltser bottles for propulsion to get them to Pluto. buit becasue they have mass, we need BIG rockers to push them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremiahMatthew Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 How do you know the Death Star has millions of tink engines? One or two million TIE fighter engines would probably work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Kinnison Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 i know how it moves in sublight! all the storm troopers spit spitbalsl out the back windows. I think the DS does most of its "Manuvering" as rotation or Gravity effect by nearby planets/moons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 well according to the Esstential guide to Vechiles and starships. The death star had its drive system in the equatorial trench, and that these drive sytems took up a huge amount of the station. We never see them because it is behind to superlaser. so they wouldn't be visible. ------------------ "Dulce bellum inexpertis." (Sweet is war to those who have never experinced it.) Roman Proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SlasherX Posted February 17, 2001 Share Posted February 17, 2001 There has to be some sort of mass within space...and by that size of the Death Star, it must held a lot of mass even within space. It wasn't theoritically impossible to move something in that size. Another question, why was the Death Star so defenseless? I mean, they just possibly just sented out only about 20-40 TIE Fighters and they still lost? Why weren't there any backup fleets or escorts? Were the Imperials so cocky?! Damn Admiral Moff Tarkin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Kinnison Posted February 17, 2001 Share Posted February 17, 2001 2 words: Imperial Arrogance Taarkin said: "EVACUATE?!?! In our momment of truiuph? I think you over estimate the Rebels chances" this has been discussed over at TFN. THere were no escorts becasue Taarkin had to have 100% confidance in his battle station. If he brought even ONE other ship along, he would never get the power he desired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SlasherX Posted February 18, 2001 Share Posted February 18, 2001 But, what about the fighter superioty. I didn't see much at all. They're weren't much TIE fighters. There would be at least 100 to 1000 fighters that the Death Star could hold. It just doesn't make sense. Also, I would usually expect Imperials would be cowards more and a lot of them switch sides for personal reasons and money later in the war. There was such an huge difference between the 1st Death Star and the 2nd. I believe the 2nd one couldn't move at all, but just orbited the Endor Moon. It was supported with many starfighters and Star Destroyers once the Rebellion arrives. Another thing, is that the mission of the Battle of Endor for XWA wasn't realistic at all, didn't have the exact number of ships or starfighters to really re-enact like the movie. I wonder why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Kinnison Posted February 18, 2001 Share Posted February 18, 2001 Originally posted by SlasherX: But, what about the fighter superioty. I didn't see much at all. They're weren't much TIE fighters. There would be at least 100 to 1000 fighters that the Death Star could hold. And they only sent 4 TIE fighters after the falcon. Again Imperial Arrogance, similar to todays navy the captains dont want to be in command of fighters, they want to command Big ships, that is where the glory, and status is. Yes the DS had lots of fighter, but The Imperials couldn't belive that a single X-wing, with 2 torpedoes could destroy the station, therefore didn't thing off them as threat I would usually expect Imperials would be cowards more and a lot of them switch sides for personal reasons and money later in the war.Where did you get that idea? Imperials are very loyal, and are stict enforcers of loyalty (Vader is a Good example) There was such an huge difference between the 1st Death Star and the 2nd. I believe the 2nd one couldn't move at all, but just orbited the Endor Moon. It was supported with many starfighters and Star Destroyers once the Rebellion arrives. Actaulyl it could move.. but only rotate. if it moved it would lose the protection of the Shields. Another thing, is that the mission of the Battle of Endor for XWA wasn't realistic at all, didn't have the exact number of ships or starfighters to really re-enact like the movie. I wonder why? The game does not allow you to have 30 + captial ships on a side, and thousands of fighters flying around. it jsut cant handle it. so they had to shorten it to allow for playablitiy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SlasherX Posted February 18, 2001 Share Posted February 18, 2001 Geez, the Empire could of really won the war if they're more responsible to take their actions more seriously. Where did you get that idea? Imperials are very loyal, and are stict enforcers of loyalty (Vader is a Good example) Err...play the game TIE fighter, General Havoc and Admiral Thrawn switched sides for money. Actaulyl it could move.. but only rotate. if it moved it would lose the protection of the Shields. Of course I know that, all things rotate in space based on gravatational pulls from nearby planets or asteroids. But, I meant that it couldn't really get off orbit around the Endor Moon. But, I wasn't sure it could really get off orbit based on it's status of still being under construction. The game does not allow you to have 30 + captial ships on a side, and thousands of fighters flying around. it jsut cant handle it. so they had to shorten it to allow for playablitiy Yeah, but you got to agreed with me, the mission could of been done much better and realistic to the movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted February 18, 2001 Share Posted February 18, 2001 well to refresh Admiral Thrawn was the essence of Loyalty. Otherwise he wouldn't have become a Grand Admiral and then try and rebuild the Empire. Also there isn't much money in the Rebellion, those that defected did for other reasons. The second Death Star had the protection of the shield generator so why move when you have protection and the drive systems probably weren't working. And remember that it was the site of the Imperial ambush they didn't want the death star to movie or else there goes the ambush. And the Empire was responsible but they still would have a hard time to win: 1. The rebels would run when they could not get a space superiority, when they did they would destroy a couple of targets and leave before the empirer shows up. 2. The empire has to protect certain locations and can't leave them unprotected. The rebelion didn't have any thing that they had to protect, they could move with freedom. Indicitors came later on so...... 3. The cell structure of the Alliance, prevents the empire from finding out where the alliance HQ was at. 4. The rebels had nothing to lose and everything to gain so they fought harder, the empire had everything to lose and little to gain and took soldiers off planets they conquered so those men wouldn't care as much about the empire as those that joined volentarily. It was the same way in Vietnam. ------------------ "Dulce bellum inexpertis." (Sweet is war to those who have never experinced it.) Roman Proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K_Kinnison Posted February 18, 2001 Share Posted February 18, 2001 Dont use SW games to prove your point about Empire loyalty. SW games should never be a source for how the SW universe really is. besides, the empoer was holding the Empire together with his Sith powers of influnace. that is why the Empire lost the battle. once the Empoer was distracted, the Imperials paniced. If you want to try and make the Edor missions correct to the movies, then you are in a big job of editing. There had to be some sacrifices. I never complained about there not being enuf fighters during the First DS missions in the First X-wing game. I knew that the game engine couldn't handle it, and applauded the designers for creating a mission that was fun to play. Dont epext SW games to fully immerse you in the way the moives were. It jsut cant happen. at least not yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sharkolomew Posted February 19, 2001 Share Posted February 19, 2001 About Tie FIghter: It was Admiral Harkov, not Havoc. It was Admiral Zarrin, not Thrawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SlasherX Posted February 19, 2001 Share Posted February 19, 2001 Ok, so sue me even though I got the Imperial officer's names wrong. I mean I haven't played that old game in about 2 years. But, my points were clear and argued. Where did you get that idea? Imperials are very loyal, and are stict enforcers of loyalty (Vader is a Good example) Not till to the end of Return of the Jedi. Throws the emperor off the platform killing him. The ultimate disloyalty to the Imperial Empire! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted February 22, 2001 Share Posted February 22, 2001 I'm not going to mention Imperial Empirer, but still Vader was very loyal to the empire and only turned when his son was being killed. Also the Emperor weeded out most of the members loyal to the old republic in his fleets, so that they would be loyal to him. ------------------ "Dulce bellum inexpertis." (Sweet is war to those who have never experinced it.) Roman Proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.