Star Wars vs. Star Trek

[smileyeagle1021]

Did you ever notice though, until one season in DS9 that you never saw fighters in any Star Trek?
.

If you think about it though, in a space battle, fighters wouldn't be that useful. They lack firepower (relative to larger battleships) and lack shielding, all they have going for them is maneuverability, which in the vacuum of space, you don't necessarily need to be small, defenseless, and without major firepower to achieve that.

[Pagan]

If you think about it though, in a space battle, fighters wouldn't be that useful. They lack firepower (relative to larger battleships) and lack shielding, all they have going for them is maneuverability, which in the vacuum of space, you don't necessarily need to be small, defenseless, and without major firepower to achieve that.

Which just makes it all the more curious that they're used so much....

[jackfaire]

The original Star Wars wasn't science fiction it was fantasy. It was once defined, no I have no reference just memory, that science fiction can explain the technology they use with science even if made up for that universe. The original Star Wars didn't seem to care about Science.

For example never slipping into any sort of environmental suits when landing in an asteroid that they had no idea if it contained breathable air.

[Plaidman]

Batman could beat both of them up. Blindfolded.

[lordlundar]

Which just makes it all the more curious that they're used so much....

A lot of people underestimate fighters, particularly in Star Trek where there's a total reliance on shields for defense in almost every ship and no point defense system. The shields aren't a kinetic barrier, but instead are energy dispersion systems. Once a fighter get's inside the shields, they'll find the hull is simply there for atmospheric integrity, and could have a field day in there. Ship phasers can't score a hit because they're not designed to work in close quarters like that and you can't use torpedoes because they have to leave the shield to start tracking, and your shield then becomes the fighters.

Don't forget the navy forces in the world have replaced all their large scale battleships with carriers (the largest gun suited ships currently are frigates) because the fighter planes are more effective in more roles than a salvo from a battleship. And those fighters are going up against point defense systems (AA guns, flak, SAMs, etc)

[smileyeagle1021]

A lot of people underestimate fighters, particularly in Star Trek where there's a total reliance on shields for defense in almost every ship and no point defense system. The shields aren't a kinetic barrier, but instead are energy dispersion systems. Once a fighter get's inside the shields, they'll find the hull is simply there for atmospheric integrity,

Not entirely true, the shield do also act as a kinetic barrier (hence them having to lower shields to allow a shuttle to land). Also the phasers can be used up close as a point defense system. There have been multiple episodes where the phasers have been used against targets even attached the the hull. The hull itself has defenses too. The plating can be energized and polarized to dissipate energy weapons and it has been established that while the hull cannot take too many direct hits, it can take at least some hits before a breach occurs, which is long enough to maneuver the ship out of harms way or do a counter attack (which if you have a skilled gun crew, it's been established in the star wars universe that typically it takes only one shot to destroy a fighter) that will neutralize the immediate threat.

[Nyoibo]

One thing to keep in mind, fighters are smaller thus have less mass so they are a hell of a lot more manuverable than a large ship, they can pull off turn that a larger ship simply wouldn't be capable of.

[Fryk]

Except that Star Trek capital ships seem to handle as well as slower Star Wars fighters.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

I wouldn't say that Star Wars disregarded science, merely neglected to explain it. Just looking at the way things work there's a logical rhyme and reason to it (with some artistic license here and there, as scifi generally does) whereas Star Trek spends a lot of time explaining ludicrous technology with more or less nothing but inane techno-babble that doesn't actually mean anything.