Ship of the Week: The Death Star

[Sionnach Glic]

Keep in mind that the 17 year construction rate for the first one probably included testing, prototype work, etc. When you factor into account that the second one was two thirds constructed in just six months, and was far larger, that number looks very dubious.

As for both of them being destroyed, I wouldn't say that the criticism levelled against them is all that fair.
The first one was, to all intents, invulnerable to attack. Remember that it was only Luke's use of the Force that allowed him to actualy hit the reactor. Before he tried, another fighter (Red Leader, IIRC) also got a shot off at the vent, but his targetting computer wasn't able to hit it, as the Rebel commanders had predicted. Though I agree they should have at least put a bit of freaking grating over it.
The second one was only destroyed because fighters flew inside its still incomplete structure, which gave them a direct path to the reactor. Had the DS2 been fully completed, that wouldn't have been possible.

[Graham Kennedy]

Keep in mind that the 17 year construction rate for the first one probably included testing, prototype work, etc.

I would say that it probably didn't, actually. What we saw at the end of the third prequel was pretty obviously meant to be the Death Star, and a good deal of work had already been done on it. If anything all the prototyping and testing and whatever would have been done before that.

When you factor into account that the second one was two thirds constructed in just six months, and was far larger, that number looks very dubious.

Well I go by the movies myself, so I can't really argue that.

As for both of them being destroyed, I wouldn't say that the criticism levelled against them is all that fair.
The first one was, to all intents, invulnerable to attack.

Um, I'm sorry but no it wasn't. Being destroyed in an attack is the very definition of being vulnerable to attack.

Remember that it was only Luke's use of the Force that allowed him to actualy hit the reactor. Before he tried, another fighter (Red Leader, IIRC) also got a shot off at the vent, but his targetting computer wasn't able to hit it, as the Rebel commanders had predicted. Though I agree they should have at least put a bit of freaking grating over it.

Lukes use of the force may have allowed him perfect targeting, but that does not mean the same feat could not have been done otherwise. All the force did was tell him exactly when to release the torpedoes. You could equally do the same thing through luck or great skill. The only way to claim that "only the force could make that shot" is to imply that Luke did something like actually shoving the torpedoes down the hole in a way that their normal flight characteristics would make a physical impossibility.

But this is absurd. Nobody at any point objected that torpedoes simply could not perform the maneuver required to hit that target. The only objections were with regards to accuracy, and accuracy in this case is simply a matter of firing at the right height/speed/distance from target.

The second one was only destroyed because fighters flew inside its still incomplete structure, which gave them a direct path to the reactor. Had the DS2 been fully completed, that wouldn't have been possible.

How do you know that?

[Captain Seafort]

Keep in mind that the 17 year construction rate for the first one probably included testing, prototype work, etc. When you factor into account that the second one was two thirds constructed in just six months, and was far larger, that number looks very dubious.

Indeed - the actual construction time of the first DS was less than two years.

As for the purpose, the Death Star wasn't a weapon of conquest but of terror - its superlaser was the only weapon that could reliably defeat planetry shields. With that capability, and the psychological effect of having planets blown up left right and centre, the objective was to terrify the galaxy into submission, as there would be no means available of holding off an Imperial attack.

[Graham Kennedy]

As for the purpose, the Death Star wasn't a weapon of conquest but of terror - its superlaser was the only weapon that could reliably defeat planetry shields. With that capability, and the psychological effect of having planets blown up left right and centre, the objective was to terrify the galaxy into submission, as there would be no means available of holding off an Imperial attack.

The death star wouldn't scare me one tiny little bit if I had been an Imperial citizen. Millions of planets, one Death Star. Assume it could destroy a planet a day... then even in a hundred years it couldn't destroy more than a fraction of a percent of the Imperial worlds. As a terror weapon, it sucked balls.

As for defeating shields, what could the superlaser do that half a million or so Star Destroyers couldn't do?

[Captain Seafort]

I would say that it probably didn't, actually. What we saw at the end of the third prequel was pretty obviously meant to be the Death Star, and a good deal of work had already been done on it. If anything all the prototyping and testing and whatever would have been done before that.

That wasn't the first Death Star - the shape and proportions were different, as shown here.

The second one was only destroyed because fighters flew inside its still incomplete structure, which gave them a direct path to the reactor. Had the DS2 been fully completed, that wouldn't have been possible.

How do you know that?

The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels spcifically states that the completed DSII would have been invulnerable to attack, owning to the one flaw in the design of the first model (the exhaust port) being replaced by thousands of millimetre-wide ducts. What exactly the hole the Falcon entered through was is uncertain, but it wouldn't have remained a hole once the station was completed.

[Captain Seafort]

The death star wouldn't scare me one tiny little bit if I had been an Imperial citizen. Millions of planets, one Death Star. Assume it could destroy a planet a day... then even in a hundred years it couldn't destroy more than a fraction of a percent of the Imperial worlds. As a terror weapon, it sucked balls.

Most of those planets wouldn't need a Death Star, as they wouldn't have planetary shields - you'd just need to send a Star Destroyer or three and BDZ the place. Against the core

As for defeating shields, what could the superlaser do that half a million or so Star Destroyers couldn't do?

Beat them. Alderaan's shield even held off the Death Star's blast for a fraction of a second - you'd need hundreds of millions of Star Destroyers to match that sort of firepower. That's the absolute minimum, assuming the ships spent a full day charging up for the shot, and they could release all the energy simultaneously.

[Graham Kennedy]

I would say that it probably didn't, actually. What we saw at the end of the third prequel was pretty obviously meant to be the Death Star, and a good deal of work had already been done on it. If anything all the prototyping and testing and whatever would have been done before that.

That wasn't the first Death Star - the shape and proportions were different, as shown here.

It wasn't the finished Death Star, to be sure. I don't believe it wasn't meant to be the first Death Star.

The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels spcifically states that the completed DSII would have been invulnerable to attack, owning to the one flaw in the design of the first model (the exhaust port) being replaced by thousands of millimetre-wide ducts. What exactly the hole the Falcon entered through was is uncertain, but it wouldn't have remained a hole once the station was completed.

Nothing can be invulnerable to attack. Simply sneak on board (not hard) and go shoot the reactor by hand.

[Graham Kennedy]

The death star wouldn't scare me one tiny little bit if I had been an Imperial citizen. Millions of planets, one Death Star. Assume it could destroy a planet a day... then even in a hundred years it couldn't destroy more than a fraction of a percent of the Imperial worlds. As a terror weapon, it sucked balls.

Most of those planets wouldn't need a Death Star, as they wouldn't have planetary shields - you'd just need to send a Star Destroyer or three and BDZ the place. Against the core

Which is just another way of saying that the Death Star was largely irrelevant. It's a white elephant.

Beat them. Alderaan's shield even held off the Death Star's blast for a fraction of a second - you'd need hundreds of millions of Star Destroyers to match that sort of firepower. That's the absolute minimum, assuming the ships spent a full day charging up for the shot, and they could release all the energy simultaneously.

Didn't the Death Star have the firepower of half the fleet?

[Captain Seafort]

It wasn't the finished Death Star, to be sure. I don't believe it wasn't meant to be the first Death Star.

Regardless of what Lucas intended it to be, it wasn't. It's the wrong shape and the superlaser's too small.

Nothing can be invulnerable to attack. Simply sneak on board (not hard) and go shoot the reactor by hand.

With what? This isn't a GCS - you can't blow it up with a pistol. The first went down to a chain reaction, and the second required Wedge to take out a power regulator before the Falcon's missiles could trigger another chain reaction. All done with megaton-range weapons.

Most of those planets wouldn't need a Death Star, as they wouldn't have planetary shields - you'd just need to send a Star Destroyer or three and BDZ the place. Against the core

Which is just another way of saying that the Death Star was largely irrelevant. It's a white elephant.

My apologies - that second sentence should read "against the core worlds, that wouldn't work - they're too well shielded".

Didn't the Death Star have the firepower of half the fleet?

More than. Unless you want to leave half the galaxy undefended while you concentrate your ships against one planet, how else do you propose to concentrate such firepower. Besides which, the Death Star's mass-to-power ratio is considerably greater than an ISD's - it's 40 million times the size, but hundreds of millions of times more powerful

[shran]

EU sources even mention a third one being built.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Death_St ... h Star III

[Mikey]

I'd have to agree with Seafort in that the point of the main armament wasn't to be useful in a tactical sense, but as an implement of fear. Sure, GK makes a good point about it not necessarily being able to complete an anti-planet campaing quickly, but if I'm Joe Imperial citizen, I don't want to take the gamble that my planet is next. Besides, it's obviously sent to hotbeds of unrest - which makes me think twice about harboring any rebellious sentiments.

As to the design flaw of the DSII - complete or not, the Falcon with an escort abreast were able to fly through the superstructure, even in the completed sections. Having the thing built so that a ship loaded with concussion missiles a/o torpedoes can muck about inside is definitely a design flaw.

[Captain Seafort]

As to the design flaw of the DSII - complete or not, the Falcon with an escort abreast were able to fly through the superstructure, even in the completed sections. Having the thing built so that a ship loaded with concussion missiles a/o torpedoes can muck about inside is definitely a design flaw.

What completed sections? The only completed section the Falacon entered was the final cruciform passage into the reactor chamber (possibly a power conduit of some kind) - the entry to the station, and the rest of the run, was made through the uncompleted superstructure.

[Sionnach Glic]

The canon status of that one is extremely dubious.

Regarding the one we saw at the end of ROTS, that is probably the Death Star prototype that was mentioned in a few of the novels.

Nothing can be invulnerable to attack. Simply sneak on board (not hard) and go shoot the reactor by hand.

How? The reactor isn't placed out in the open. As we saw in ROTJ, it's inside an armoured core. It'd be impossible to get in, and the sheer amount of energy it gives off would probably kill you anyway.

Which is just another way of saying that the Death Star was largely irrelevant. It's a white elephant.

Not really. Against important or wealthy planets it would be the only possible weapon of any effect, since such planets would have planetary shields capable of resisting attack from starships (even the Rebels were able to get such a theatre shield for their base on Hoth). The only other option would be to lay siege to the planet for several months or years, and hope to starve out the populace. The DS could simply frag the planet.

Didn't the Death Star have the firepower of half the fleet?

The first one did, no idea how the second one compares. Though it's probably around the same. I can't imagine you'd need to boost the power when it can already bust planets.

[Mikey]

As to the design flaw of the DSII - complete or not, the Falcon with an escort abreast were able to fly through the superstructure, even in the completed sections. Having the thing built so that a ship loaded with concussion missiles a/o torpedoes can muck about inside is definitely a design flaw.

What completed sections? The only completed section the Falacon entered was the final cruciform passage into the reactor chamber (possibly a power conduit of some kind) - the entry to the station, and the rest of the run, was made through the uncompleted superstructure.

That final passage is the example of which I was thinking. Not only did the Falcon have room to fly straight through to the reactor, there was room for the fighters to maneuver.

[Sionnach Glic]

Why is that a problem? Presumably there'd need to be room for maintanence drones to get around, and given that it's burried beneath 450KM of steel and decks, I don't see how it's a problem.