Starfleet vs UNSC Ground Troops

[The Original Sixth]

The problem I'm having with the reasoning in this thread is that the pro-UNSC side is mostly bent on claiming ST won't use abilities it's demonstrated to have, because they "didn't use it these other times." The issue there is that if they've ever used it once, they have demonstrated they have that ability and we can't say why they may have chosen not to use it this other time.

By the logic being thrown around here, the US used nukes once on Japan but didn't use any nuclear weapons in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan, therefore clearly the US doesn't have any nuclear doctrine or nuclear weapons.

This can all be really frustrating.

It's not even an issue of Starfleet not living up to its full creative potential. I've literally had to post evidence that Starfleet can and does deploy people with high tech such as backpacks and pockets. Or belts.

The largest points of contention here are things that have been proven true.

Starfleet doesn't have grenades!

I post evidence of Starfleet using grenades, evidence of Starfleet having grenades in stock on ships, and Starfleet having grenades stockpiled for the purpose of a war with a peer power.

Response: Well, they don't use it enough, so it doesn't count!

Starfleet doesn't have a lot of good pilots!

I post evidence that Starfleet requires an abundant number of skilled pilots to keep their ships running, point to a major battle that involved fighters as a key strategy, point out that a peer power uses fighters, point out Starfleet Academy trains fighters, and they would logically have a large pool of talent to draw upon, given the nature of travel in Star Trek.

That doesn't mean they have a lot of good pilots!

Phasers aren't very powerful!

I post evidence that they are powerful--capable of vaporizing titanium without even hitting the max setting. I point to evidence from the TM.

Yeah, but they don't use them enough for my taste!

The goalposts keep moving. First it's we never see Star Trek use these things, then it's we don't see them use it enough. Then it's weak excuses of why they can't have these things, despite having them. What this really comes down to is Battlegrinder needing to throw up roadblocks, because while the UNSC is obviously more battle hardened, they don't really have an answer to phasers, photon grenades, and transporters. Tanks are basically useless, troop armor is now mostly a burden, and logistics become an everlasting nightmare against a highly mobile enemy that can pick and choose most of its fights.

The only argument that can be offered where the UNSC has a chance of winning is where Starfleet is grossly incompetent, beaming down with nothing more than phaser rifles and wandering right into UNSC forces so they can be slaughtered. I mean, we're not even talking about creative uses for transporters, like beaming bombs down or beaming the enemy army into space. I am being forced to argue that yes--Starfleet is smart enough to send reinforcements with its transporters and yes, they'll probably do their best to put them in the best tactical position as possible. Yet according to Battlegrinder, this small jump in logic is too much for Starfleet.

It's all about roadblocks.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Star trek isn't one of those "realistic" settings where they care about possibly puncturing something important during a boarding action, they regularly run around having gun battles in the hallways, I doubt grenades would make it any worse.

See, the problem is that all your arguments revolve around the same thing, you guess, maybe, grenades wouldn't make it any worse. Then you extrapolate all kinds of limitations based on your guess. It's becoming increasingly apparent as you keep moving the goalposts that everything comes down to your guess and your assumptions because there's never enough evidence for your guess.

And it is notable that in these battles in the corridors, you don't see many vaporizations going on, almost as if they're using lower power settings to avoid blowing up the ship.

The only time I recall there being any discussion of internal damage during a firefight was First Contact, and that was in engineering specifically and also clearly just a plot device, as in normal circumstances I'm pretty sure "and this is where we'll install the fragile glass tubes full of fleshing melting acid, make sure nothing ever happens to them or everyone in the room will die horribly" is the sort of design feature that wouldn't fly.

You assume... but you'd assume the same thing about exploding consoles, wouldn't you?

As I mentioned before, in AR-558, the defiant was there on a resupply run, a resupply run they completed. If hand grenades were starfleet issue equipment, AR-558 should have had some, and if the garrison got shorted, they would have complained about it, since they complained loudly about every other aspect of thier situation.

The Defiant came under fire from Jem'Hadar forces while unloading and retreated. You assume they had time to unload everything and you assume people would specifically complain about grenades onscreen but that's just your assumption, as with most of the arguments here.

As for other away teams, "soldiers going in to combat" or not. Many of those away missions have been explicit combat missions where the crew breaks out the phaser rifles, if they had other weapons they should have used them then.

You assume.

See, this exactly the "they had this thing once 80 years ago, surely they still do" mindset that keeps popping up in these debates. Enterprise was more than a century before TNG. This akin to arguing modern US marines have an advantage in hand to hand combat, because 19th century triangular bayonet wounds are hard to to sitich up, and the marines had those sorts of bayonets in the 19th century and surely still do.

This goes double for stuff like the enterprise era stun grenades, which were non-lethal weapons that could easily be used inside a ship (and indeed that's exactly where they were used in ENT several times) and would have been extremely useful throughout the rest of the series.

That is a great example of why your assumptions are so specious. We see 19th century US marines with bayonets, and modern marines are issued knives. But according to the same reasoning you've used here, because we mostly see marines shooting people today, you assume they must not possess knives nor have a doctrine about when to use knives. We can see a few cases of marines stabbing a bitch, but even then you assume marines don't use knives because it's so rare compared to marines shooting a bitch and there just aren't enough instances of stabbing to get past your assumptions.

A moment's thought reveals the obvious fallacies there. It's exactly the same for the Federation.

I'll note that's not a a federation grenade, it's bajorian, but sure, it's at least possible the feds might have a few.

It was thrown by this guy:

Do you have any quote or proof it was Bajoran beyond "I assume it to be so because it would ruin my argument otherwise?"

 

[The Whispering Monk]

I think the biggest problem with this debate is that we're assuming the UNSC tech is so far LESS than Star Trek despite them having a GENERATION almost of constant WAR.

I have no doubt that UNSC space fighters are quite capable of downing Federation Fighters and Shuttles. They do so regularly to Covenant force fighters, and the Covenant faction is at least on par with the UFP.

 

[Battlegrinder]

There's no reason to assume that if Starfleet is willing to send people down to escalate a situation to save a hostage, they won't for a strategic or tactical advantage during wartime. In fact, given that they're willing to beam people into dangerous areas, evidence suggests that they will do so.

You're doing that thing again where you take a general premise of "will go down to the surface at all" and take it as being evidence of your very specific claim, which it does not support.

So you have no idea how deep it went into the hull, but you assume it'll penetrate?

Yes, because UNSC uses missiles for air defense, missiles that can be used as anti-tank weapons in a pinch. An anti-tabk missile, even a sub par one, is a more effective and more destructive anti armor weapon than 50 BMG.

That was also a shuttlepod with no SIF and no deflector shields. A roundabout, fighter, and a shuttle craft will be shielded and carry an SIF field to match.

Which actually supports my point. If you'll recall, the point of this tangent was to not to bring up how phasers are 20 MW because some display screen that popped up for half a second said so or whatever, the point was the overall soundness and strength of Federation shuttle hulls.

A modern federation shuttle has, as you say, shields, defectors, SIF fields, etc, it doesn't need to rely entirely on the physical strength of it's hull. A shuttlepod without those those features does, and even a shuttlepod built entirely to depend on its hull for protection is vulnerable to machine gun fire.

Which we know to be false. Many skilled pilots go on to helm starships. This is supported by what they said in regards to the pilot who helmed the Defiant during the Dominion War, as well as the fact that Dax, LaForge, and Paris are all skilled pilots--and all helm starships. It would imply that they in fact, have tens of thousands of skilled pilots.

You're doing that leap in logic again. Presuming shuttle pilots normally go on to pilot starships is reasonable based on the evidence, assuming that therefore there must be loads of great shuttle pilots just waiting for the chance to hop into a starfighter is not. Many starship pilots were shuttle pilots, yes. What you are missing is what happened during that career track. Maybe the best shuttle pilots regularly get poached for starship duty, and most pilots are merely adequate. Maybe there are other factors, and it's during training for piloting a starship that a lot of people really sharpen there skills, because piloting starships is so much more important than shuttles.

There are a lot of other possibilities you're disregarding in order to try prove every shuttle pilot must be awesome.

the fact that fighters play a predominate role in fleet warfare

Two battles is not a predominate role.

Which might be a persuasive argument if this were a bus...or even a public shuttle. The fact is it isn't. These are Starfleet shuttle flown by Starfleet personnel. Nor am I arguing that everyone of them is an ace fighter pilot or even qualified to pilot a starfighter. What I am saying is that it is not as easy as you wish to make it out.

Ok, so what if it's an army bus, are army bus drivers are automatically qualified to be tankers now?

We see these attack fighters used in 11 episodes Battlegrinder, in TNG, DS9, and VOY. Two of those involved Operation Return and the Second Battle of Chin'toka. And I could probably find more, given that we know DS9 reused footage from Sacrifice of Angels for other battle scenes of the war.

Looking at the episodes listed in memory alpha, half of those episodes are maquis ships, not the actual federation fighter, another chunk are them just popping up on a display screen. They've actually shown up in combat twice as far as I can tell. Operation Return (which accounts for three of your episodes despite being one single battle) and What you leave behind.

The Defiant is over twice as large as the Dominion Strike Fighter.

Ok, and?

I post evidence of Starfleet using grenades, evidence of Starfleet having grenades in stock on ships, and Starfleet having grenades stockpiled

Actually, you posted evidence of them being on hand or stockpiled, and call that them being used, despite that not being what the word "use" means.

UNSC is obviously more battle hardened, they don't really have an answer to phasers, photon grenades, and transporters.

Their answers are guns, frag grenades, and then basic ecm for transporters. I realize in hindsight I was far too generous in not being more hostile and bring up how finicky transporters are in anything but the most permissive of environments, and that changes now.

Tanks are basically useless

You haven't come in close to proving this absurd "phasers one-shot tanks" claim.

troop armor is now mostly a burden

Not really, even if can't block direct shots, it's still useful as a means to carry equipment, including the UNSC's various vision devices and motion tracker than given them a major edge when it comes to an actual firefight, and the armor is light enough it won't significantly impede mobility.

and logistics become an everlasting nightmare against a highly mobile enemy that can pick and choose most of its fights.

It doesn't matter how well you pick your fightsxwhen your troops aren't equipped to actually win them, and in the "real" star trek, as opposed to this fictions one you've concocted where everyone is running around with tank busting handguns, the federation is at a major disadvantage.

 

[Bear Ribs]

You haven't come in close to proving this absurd "phasers one-shot tanks" claim.

TNG Q-Who, Riker gouges a crater that looks to be half as deep as Worf's knee and also about half his height wide out of solid stone. Note, that's a type 1, the smallest and weakest phaser of all.

In TNG Chain Of Command we see a type 2, the phaser pistol which is slightly larger, vaporize a large tunnel through solid rock. In the dialogue, Worf states that this is phaser setting 16, and the tunnel he's digging will go through 75 meters of rock to a lava tube.

DS9 Rapture, Sisko goes to town on a wall again, this time on wide beam.

Again, all three of those were massive damage inflicted with just hand phasers. And while we're at it...

DS9 Way of the Warrior, Sisko and Kira use widebeam sweeps to clear an entire room in seconds.

VOY Cathexis, Tuvok takes out a whole room in one widebeam shot.

 

[Sailor.X]

Considering the UNSC has been facing fighter forces that will, likely, have been peer competitors of star fleet, I don't think the Air Domination is as one-sided as you think.


...Spartans

The Covenant are many things Peer competitors to the Federation is not one of them. When Starfleet gets serious they can field Starships that would crack High Charity in half. And I mean exactly that. Crack that Behemoth in half.

Edit: Also



Orbital Phaser Stun. Game over and this time it is over.

 

[The Original Sixth]

You're doing that thing again where you take a general premise of "will go down to the surface at all" and take it as being evidence of your very specific claim, which it does not support.

That Starfleet has the two brain cells to rub together to beam troops in to support ground forces?

Yes, because UNSC uses missiles for air defense, missiles that can be used as anti-tank weapons in a pinch. An anti-tabk missile, even a sub par one, is a more effective and more destructive anti armor weapon than 50 BMG.

Interesting, what sort of anti-air missiles?

Which actually supports my point. If you'll recall, the point of this tangent was to not to bring up how phasers are 20 MW because some display screen that popped up for half a second said so or whatever, the point was the overall soundness and strength of Federation shuttle hulls.

Ah, so here we go that display screens aren't good enough. I'm actually not even referring to The Wounded. Point of fact, I'm actually referring to the TNG TM and comparing the smaller phasers on a GCS to that of a Galor. Although yes, The Wounded does support similar firepower capabilities among the Galor.

A modern federation shuttle has, as you say, shields, defectors, SIF fields, etc, it doesn't need to rely entirely on the physical strength of it's hull. A shuttlepod without those those features does, and even a shuttlepod built entirely to depend on its hull for protection is vulnerable to machine gun fire.

Do you have proof that the modern UFP shuttlepods are any weaker? And shields are actually really useful here. Any impact upon the shields by an AA missile or anti-tank weapon is going to detonate the warhead at least a couple of meters away from the hull. Your chances of actually damaging the shuttle is going to be pretty low.

You're doing that leap in logic again. Presuming shuttle pilots normally go on to pilot starships is reasonable based on the evidence, assuming that therefore there must be loads of great shuttle pilots just waiting for the chance to hop into a starfighter is not. Many starship pilots were shuttle pilots, yes. What you are missing is what happened during that career track. Maybe the best shuttle pilots regularly get poached for starship duty, and most pilots are merely adequate. Maybe there are other factors, and it's during training for piloting a starship that a lot of people really sharpen there skills, because piloting starships is so much more important than shuttles.

And maybe they're all executed by Section 31 as part of some sick joke. Or maybe they all get the shits when someone mentions war. Or maybe they all get married and settle down. Or maybe...or maybe...or maybe...you have a lot of maybe's. There's no way we can know either way, but there's no reason to assume that Starfleet puts incompetent boobs in charge of fighters, simply because it's convenient for your argument Battlegrinder.

There are a lot of other possibilities you're disregarding in order to try prove every shuttle pilot must be awesome.

We don't need every shuttle pod pilot to be awesome. We simply need the to be competent. Which all evidence suggests that they are.

Two battles is not a predominate role.

It's two more than you have.

Ok, so what if it's an army bus, are army bus drivers are automatically qualified to be tankers now?

No, and no one said that would be the case. Yet you can train a military driver (bus or jeep or otherwise) more easily than you can train someone who has no skill at all. And when you have lots and lots of said drivers to pick from, your chances of having good drivers is much higher than if you had a relatively narrow pool.

Looking at the episodes listed in memory alpha, half of those episodes are maquis ships, not the actual federation fighter, another chunk are them just popping up on a display screen. They've actually shown up in combat twice as far as I can tell. Operation Return (which accounts for three of your episodes despite being one single battle) and What you leave behind.

Yes, and? We know the Maquis worked with acquired Starfleet equipment.

Ok, and?

And so is my response to you. So what if the Dominion fighter is about twice as large as the UFP one? It's a fighter. It's stated to be a fighter repeatedly. The TM designates it as a strike fighter.

Actually, you posted evidence of them being on hand or stockpiled, and call that them being used, despite that not being what the word "use" means.

Arena had a grenade launcher. We saw it used.

Their answers are guns, frag grenades, and then basic ecm for transporters. I realize in hindsight I was far too generous in not being more hostile and bring up how finicky transporters are in anything but the most permissive of environments, and that changes now.

Battlegrinder, your arguments on transporters have never been all that successful.

You haven't come in close to proving this absurd "phasers one-shot tanks" claim.

I have, actually. The SEM alone is enough to slice through the tank. The NDF will eat chunks out of it.

Not really, even if can't block direct shots, it's still useful as a means to carry equipment, including the UNSC's various vision devices and motion tracker than given them a major edge when it comes to an actual firefight, and the armor is light enough it won't significantly impede mobility.

It's also a large target.

It doesn't matter how well you pick your fightsxwhen your troops aren't equipped to actually win them, and in the "real" star trek, as opposed to this fictions one you've concocted where everyone is running around with tank busting handguns, the federation is at a major disadvantage.

Tank busting handguns? We've seen what their phasers do.

We've seen them burn their way through material more resistant than titanium. We know that those same phasers can damage duranium, which is able to tank 12,000 C with no visible damage. We've even seen hand units vaporize a truck.

A futuristic phaser, to be sure. However, there is no evidence as far as I'm aware, that this unit is significantly stronger than what we see from the other hand units. This is right in line with what we might expect from a 24th century hand unit at a very high setting. And this is supported by the TM with its SEM:NDF ratio. The work done is split between the SEM and NDF at higher settings is considerable. On maximum setting, the ratio is 1:50. That's roughly the equal to 77.5 MJ. Against hardened materials, the phaser will penetrate 24.5 meters. Even if we wanted to pretend that the phaser won't spread out as it normally does, the penetration is clear. It will slice through those tanks like a hot knife through butter.

 

[Battlegrinder]

See, the problem is that all your arguments revolve around the same thing, you guess, maybe, grenades wouldn't make it any worse. Then you extrapolate all kinds of limitations based on your guess. It's becoming increasingly apparent as you keep moving the goalposts that everything comes down to your guess and your assumptions because there's never enough evidence for your guess.

And it is notable that in these battles in the corridors, you don't see many vaporizations going on, almost as if they're using lower power settings to avoid blowing up the ship.

First off, the stun grenade that you yourself pointed out do zero damage to the ship and would be totally usable, as would anything else designed to be lethal or debilitating that won't break through the metal equipment covers lining (which are fairly thick, I think at least a quarter inch).

Secondly, and I'll have to get out my copy of the TM and look for a cutaway to confirm, but I don't think and can't find a reference to there being anything particular dangerous in the walls, I know there's some computer wring in there and voyager has some gel packs in there sometimes, but all the vital stuff is deeper inside, in the Jeffries tubes.

You assume... but you'd assume the same thing about exploding consoles, wouldn't you?

The exploding bridge consoles are also mostly a cheap tool for drama, yes.

The Defiant came under fire from Jem'Hadar forces while unloading and retreated. You assume they had time to unload everything and you assume people would specifically complain about grenades onscreen but that's just your assumption, as with most of the arguments here.

The latter is an assumption, but a reasonable one in light of how the ground troops were written otherwise.

The former is not an assumption, it's what they said in the episode:

QUARK: Nog, shouldn't you be helping Doctor Bashir unload the supplies?
NOG: We're pretty much finished.

Now, "pretty much finished" is not "finished", but there were several more scenes before the defiant had to bail, and transporters are very, very fast, Voyager once beamed up the entire crew of a Klingon ship, a crew of hundreds of people, in seconds. With, being generous here and assuming no more than a few minutes between this point and the defiant leaving, it's not plausible that they still had stuff left unloaded.

is a great example of why your assumptions are so specious. We see 19th century US marines with bayonets, and modern marines are issued knives. But according to the same reasoning you've used here, because we mostly see marines shooting people today, you assume they must not possess knives nor have a doctrine about when to use knives. We can see a few cases of marines stabbing a bitch, but even then you assume marines don't use knives because it's so rare compared to marines shooting a bitch and there just aren't enough instances of stabbing to get past your assumptions.

A moment's thought reveals the obvious fallacies there. It's exactly the same for the Federation.

I think you're being a bit uncharitable here and misreading my argument. I did not say "you're just assuming marines still have bayonets, we don't see them using them very much so they must not". I'm fully aware the marines still have knives and those knives can be used as bayonets (I'm fuzzy on if they still actually do bayonets drill, I think someone stopped doing it lately but I don't recall who).

What I said was "a hundred plus years ago, they used to have this one particular kind of bayonet:

It is now a hundred years later, we've never seen one them with one of those, it's not reasonable to assume that just because they had this one specific weapon at some point they must still have it on hand now."

Do you have any quote or proof it was Bajoran beyond "I assume it to be so because it would ruin my argument otherwise?"

Actually I did have a quote, but I misread the transcript and thought it was thrown at the federation officers and not by them. My bad.

TNG Q-Who, Riker gouges a crater that looks to be half as deep as Worf's knee and also about half his height wide out of solid stone. Note, that's a type 1, the smallest and weakest phaser of all.

The issue is, these are phasers, being directed against rock. Phasers are notoriously material dependent, because they're not just simple thermal weapons, they do weird stuff (like the famous disintegration effect, which is not possible via normal thermal effects).

I say this because phasers behave very differently when it comes to metal, they don't vaporize big chunks of it, they cut through it:

This is seen not just in Too Short a Season, but in "Aquiel" and "Who mourns for Morn" where quark jumps into a metal crate and a beam og some kind punchs right through one side and out the other (and Morn is the only time we see this happen fast, otherwise it's about as fast as a cutting toarch)

This is relevant to the anti-tank issue because, as I said before, you cannot kill a tank by just slowly poking a few holes in it, modern anti tank weapons have secondary effects related to how they make those holes that will destroy the interiorcof the tank or kill the crew. Phasers do not, a Scorpion tank with a hole in it is still just as deadly, and cutting that hole is a slow process as the federation trooper cuts through inch after inch of armor while highlighting his position with a bright orange beam. Bad idea.

Disabling a scorpion in this manner is still possible, but it will be very hard, because even if the federation soldier knows where to aim (which isn't hard to figure out, tricorders and so on), Scorpions are built to be resilient and redundant so any attempt to disable one will require multiple hits (engine, ammo/gun, coax ammo/gun, and two crewman), which the Scorpion can easily disrupt by, say, movingly slightly.

In TNG Chain Of Command we see a type 2, the phaser pistol which is slightly larger, vaporize a large tunnel through solid rock. In the dialogue, Worf states that this is phaser setting 16, and the tunnel he's digging will go through 75 meters of rock to a lava tube.

That's a common misunderstanding of that scene, look at the actual dislogue a bit closer:

PICARD: There's a lava tube beyond here that runs for seventy five metres, then it connects with another chamber. We need to get through here. This tube opens up beyond this crack. We could widen the opening, then we should be able to crawl through. Mister Worf.

There's already a 75 meter long tunnel in the rock, they only have to destroy a thin layer of rock blocking it in order to to get through to it (it's worth noting when the Delta Flyer once got buried underground to a similar depth, Voyager had to beam down special phaser drills in order to dig it out, handheld phasers were not up to the task).

DS9 Way of the Warrior, Sisko and Kira use widebeam sweeps to clear an entire room in seconds.

I'm aware widebeam mode exists. It's seemingly incapable of operating even on the "kill" function, let alone the "melt battle tank" mode.

 

[Battlegrinder]

That Starfleet has the two brain cells to rub together to beam troops in to support ground forces?

Beam troops in through a jamming field.....how exactly?

Interesting, what sort of anti-air missiles?

Argent V.

Do you have proof that the modern UFP shuttlepods are any weaker? And shields are actually really useful here. Any impact upon the shields by an AA missile or anti-tank weapon is going to detonate the warhead at least a couple of meters away from the hull. Your chances of actually damaging the shuttle is going to be pretty low.

Modern shuttlecraft have no reason to be built even as strongly, but to be conservative we can assume they're as durable as the 22nd century model that's threatened by 50 cal.

There's no way we can know either way, but there's no reason to assume that Starfleet puts incompetent boobs in charge of fighters, simply because it's convenient for your argument Battlegrinder.

Again, the question isn't "starfleet fighter pilot are inept" the question is "are starfleet fighter pilots so common they're part of a troop transports standard complement?".

We don't need every shuttle pod pilot to be awesome. We simply need the to be competent. Which all evidence suggests that they are.

Sure, complement shuttle pilots. But flying a delivery bus and flying a fighter are totally different things and being good at one doesn't mean you're good at the other.

Yes, and? We know the Maquis worked with acquired Starfleet equipment.

Which in this case they didn't, memory alpha goofed. The ships the maquis used were not federation fighters, they were modified courtier ships.

And so is my response to you. So what if the Dominion fighter is about twice as large as the UFP one? It's a fighter. It's stated to be a fighter repeatedly. The TM designates it as a strike fighter.

How exactly does "another star trek power, that is not the federation, deploys a ship that is bigger than a federation fighter, operates in a different role than a federation fighter, and has different capabilities than a federation fighter, but is still called a fighter" support your claim at all.

Arena had a grenade launcher. We saw it used.

A pity arena was a century before the era in question.

Battlegrinder, your arguments on transporters have never been all that successful.

Transporters get knocked out by all manner of interference, exotic and otherwise, including, as you're surely aware from souring other parts of it so much, a transformer substation in "Legacy". UNSC ECM gear can meaningfully hamper forerunner technology, and the forerunners make the federation look like children playing with tinker toys. There's zero chance the feds are able to reliable transport anything.

I have, actually. The SEM alone is enough to slice through the tank. The NDF will eat chunks out of it.

I swear we're going in circles on this. By all means, present an image of phasers eating chunks out of armor plating.

We've seen them burn their way through material more resistant than titanium. We know that those same phasers can damage duranium, which is able to tank 12,000 C with no visible damage.

As I said before, if you "burn through" the armor of a UNSC tank, all you have is a fully operational tank that knows where you are and has a hole in it. Bad times.

We also just got through "just because the halo writers call it titanium doesn't mean they bothered having it limited by the actually abilities of titanium", a debate that ended up showing that UNSC ships and craft are by all evidence far stronger than federation ones (which makes sense, as they're also not threatened by an M2 browning).

And if I recall correctly, that 12,000 figure is from Arsenal of Freedom and, even if I unquestionably accepted single lines of dialogue as definitive and not just the writers having characters shout numbers at each other, that was a figure for the entire enterprise, which I suspect is probably much tougher than a shuttlecraft.

A futuristic phaser, to be sure. However, there is no evidence as far as I'm aware, that this unit is significantly stronger than what we see from the other hand units.

That's transparently dishonest. The 29th century tech starling got his hands on was portrayed as being leaps and bounds above what voyager had. His sensors were better, his computers were better, the votager crew was baffled by the fact a mobile holographic emitter was even physically possible, etc.

The episode itself even showed this, when one of voyager's shuttles attacked a semi and merely managed to blow up the cab, while starlings 29th century phaser can vaporize an entire truck.

 

[The Original Sixth]

I say this because phasers behave very differently when it comes to metal, they don't vaporize big chunks of it, they cut through it:

This is seen not just in Too Short a Season, but in "Aquiel" and "Who mourns for Morn" where quark jumps into a metal crate and a beam og some kind punchs right through one side and out the other (and Morn is the only time we see this happen fast, otherwise it's about as fast as a cutting toarch)

And exactly what setting is it on?

Just eyeballing it, this looks as about 15cm thick. That roughly translates to setting 6. More interestingly, I noticed something about those older Phaser IIs...

There's only eight settings on that phaser readout. Ten at best. It in fact, matches the smaller holdout phaser we see characters carrying.

Compare this to later Phaser IIs

That matches well with the diagram we see in the TNG TM.

Oh, and in regards to phasers just penetrating metals, let's look at what happens when ship grade phasers hit metals.

The phaser did over-penetrate the ship, much like it did that crate, but it didn't just keep going. It caused the material around the penetration point to begin to vaporize, which is consistent with how phasers act. In fact, it is how phasers act in almost every situation.

This is consistent behavior. There is no reason to assume that phasers are going to act differently between these different power levels, apart from the energy that goes into it. A couple of examples of phasers on setting 6 isn't really going to cut it Battlegrinder.

A tiny prinpick hole won't always take out a tank. But a hole big enough you could squeeze your head through? Yeah, that's probably going to mission kill the tank, especially because the phaser beam is going to put that hole straight through the tank.

 

[The Original Sixth]

Beam troops in through a jamming field.....how exactly?

We aren't talking about a jamming field Battlegrinder. We're talking about Starfleet transporter operations. Are you seriously suggesting that despite the fact that Starfleet has displayed the ability to choose tactical positions to beam in and despite them willing to send in raiding parties to rescue hostages, that they won't be able to beam troops into a ground battle, where those troops might be in an advantageous position?

Argent V.

And how does it achieve target acquisition?

Modern shuttlecraft have no reason to be built even as strongly, but to be conservative we can assume they're as durable as the 22nd century model that's threatened by 50 cal.

The shuttlepod wasn't threatened by 50 cal Battlegrinder. One or two fighters unloaded into them and the shuttle escaped. They pulled three bullets that had lodged themselves in the hull. It didn't even penetrate the hull. It wasn't even indicated to have done significant damage to the shuttlepod.

Again, the question isn't "starfleet fighter pilot are inept" the question is "are starfleet fighter pilots so common they're part of a troop transports standard complement?".

Why would they send inept pilots into a situation they can't handle? If you assign someone to use a hopper, then chances are...they know how to land the hopper and use it in a warzone.

Sure, complement shuttle pilots. But flying a delivery bus and flying a fighter are totally different things and being good at one doesn't mean you're good at the other.

Granted, which is why you have people who specialize. Some of them go on to be normal shuttle pilots, others become fighter pilots, yet others work the helms of ships, and yet others go in for ground operations. There's no reason to believe that Starfleet doesn't train for using shuttles and hoppers as support, when that's exactly what they do in a warzone. Especially when things like transporter jammers are so easy for them to use in war.

Which in this case they didn't, memory alpha goofed. The ships the maquis used were not federation fighters, they were modified courtier ships.

And they look almost exactly the same as the actual fighters. Which probably means that the Maquis obtained modified federation fighters or courier designs that were the backbone of the Peregrine class.

How exactly does "another star trek power, that is not the federation, deploys a ship that is bigger than a federation fighter, operates in a different role than a federation fighter, and has different capabilities than a federation fighter, but is still called a fighter" support your claim at all.

Because Starfleet operates in that environment and is shown in at least two major battles to have field starfighters.

A pity arena was a century before the era in question.

A pity that doesn't matter when we see that the Klingons still use artillery a century later. And of course, when it's the only contender for photon grenade in the Federation's arsenal.

Transporters get knocked out by all manner of interference, exotic and otherwise, including, as you're surely aware from souring other parts of it so much, a transformer substation in "Legacy". UNSC ECM gear can meaningfully hamper forerunner technology, and the forerunners make the federation look like children playing with tinker toys. There's zero chance the feds are able to reliable transport anything.

Lol, do you really expect that after the bullshit you put me through to prove that Starfleet has pockets and backpacks, that I'm going to let you get away with some vague bullshit like that? Provide examples of the UNSC having any technology that can meaningfully block transporters. And sorry, but 'Forerunner tech!' does not count. If you forgot, the defenses on the planet are non-functional.

I swear we're going in circles on this. By all means, present an image of phasers eating chunks out of armor plating.

As I said before, if you "burn through" the armor of a UNSC tank, all you have is a fully operational tank that knows where you are and has a hole in it. Bad times.

Yeah, it's not like Starfleet could just scan the tanks and realize where the guy piloting it is. Or where the ammunition belt is. Or where the engine is. And the discharge time for setting 16 is 0.28 seconds. And it'll punch through 24.5 meters of armor (probably more against titanium...). A Scorpion tank is about 10 meters in length, right? There's enough penetration power there to punch through two tanks and hit a warthog behind them.

Thus far, your burn through argument is limited to setting 6,which is only disruption effects. You don't get disruptive/explosive effects until setting 11. And by the way? Your argument of phasers not being able to be kept on continuous beam setting just got fucked.

We also just got through "just because the halo writers call it titanium doesn't mean they bothered having it limited by the actually abilities of titanium", a debate that ended up showing that UNSC ships and craft are by all evidence far stronger than federation ones (which makes sense, as they're also not threatened by an M2 browning).

Then put up. Because it seems more or less as durable as normal titanium to me.

And if I recall correctly, that 12,000 figure is from Arsenal of Freedom and, even if I unquestionably accepted single lines of dialogue as definitive and not just the writers having characters shout numbers at each other, that was a figure for the entire enterprise, which I suspect is probably much tougher than a shuttlecraft.

It's actually from Descent. The hull in Arsenal of Freedom was only raised to 3,300 C.

That's transparently dishonest. The 29th century tech starling got his hands on was portrayed as being leaps and bounds above what voyager had. His sensors were better, his computers were better, the votager crew was baffled by the fact a mobile holographic emitter was even physically possible, etc.

The episode itself even showed this, when one of voyager's shuttles attacked a semi and merely managed to blow up the cab, while starlings 29th century phaser can vaporize an entire truck.

We actually have no proof that it was more powerful. More sophisticated? Sure. But more powerful? Not really. The goon using it really had no idea what he was playing with and was probably overdoing it. And just because Sterling had managed to use better computers and holoemitters, doesn't mean that he had built a better phaser. I mean, it's not like he effortlessly outran Voyager. It's just as easy to accept that phaser technology more or less peaked around the 24th century.

I mean, I could go on for hours and hours how that 29th century phaser is more or less as powerful as the 24th.

 

[Bear Ribs]

First off, the stun grenade that you yourself pointed out do zero damage to the ship and would be totally usable, as would anything else designed to be lethal or debilitating that won't break through the metal equipment covers lining (which are fairly thick, I think at least a quarter inch).

Secondly, and I'll have to get out my copy of the TM and look for a cutaway to confirm, but I don't think and can't find a reference to there being anything particular dangerous in the walls, I know there's some computer wring in there and voyager has some gel packs in there sometimes, but all the vital stuff is deeper inside, in the Jeffries tubes.

The exploding bridge consoles are also mostly a cheap tool for drama, yes.

The latter is an assumption, but a reasonable one in light of how the ground troops were written otherwise.

The former is not an assumption, it's what they said in the episode:

Now, "pretty much finished" is not "finished", but there were several more scenes before the defiant had to bail, and transporters are very, very fast, Voyager once beamed up the entire crew of a Klingon ship, a crew of hundreds of people, in seconds. With, being generous here and assuming no more than a few minutes between this point and the defiant leaving, it's not plausible that they still had stuff left unloaded.

Again, you assume that a vague "almost finished" is the same as finished unloading everything, and that the Defiant, a dedicated space-combat superiority ship, has the same bulk transport as Voyager, a long-range science vessel.

I think you're being a bit uncharitable here and misreading my argument. I did not say "you're just assuming marines still have bayonets, we don't see them using them very much so they must not". I'm fully aware the marines still have knives and those knives can be used as bayonets (I'm fuzzy on if they still actually do bayonets drill, I think someone stopped doing it lately but I don't recall who).

What I said was "a hundred plus years ago, they used to have this one particular kind of bayonet:

It is now a hundred years later, we've never seen one them with one of those, it's not reasonable to assume that just because they had this one specific weapon at some point they must still have it on hand now."

No, I'm not being uncharitable or misreading your argument. Nobody claims that the specific stun grenade used by MACOs is still in use, we're mentioning how grenades exist at all, thus a comparison to your "If no bayonets, then knives must not exist" is quite apt for your claims.

The issue is, these are phasers, being directed against rock. Phasers are notoriously material dependent, because they're not just simple thermal weapons, they do weird stuff (like the famous disintegration effect, which is not possible via normal thermal effects).

I say this because phasers behave very differently when it comes to metal, they don't vaporize big chunks of it, they cut through it:

This is seen not just in Too Short a Season, but in "Aquiel" and "Who mourns for Morn" where quark jumps into a metal crate and a beam og some kind punchs right through one side and out the other (and Morn is the only time we see this happen fast, otherwise it's about as fast as a cutting toarch)

This is relevant to the anti-tank issue because, as I said before, you cannot kill a tank by just slowly poking a few holes in it, modern anti tank weapons have secondary effects related to how they make those holes that will destroy the interiorcof the tank or kill the crew. Phasers do not, a Scorpion tank with a hole in it is still just as deadly, and cutting that hole is a slow process as the federation trooper cuts through inch after inch of armor while highlighting his position with a bright orange beam. Bad idea.

Disabling a scorpion in this manner is still possible, but it will be very hard, because even if the federation soldier knows where to aim (which isn't hard to figure out, tricorders and so on), Scorpions are built to be resilient and redundant so any attempt to disable one will require multiple hits (engine, ammo/gun, coax ammo/gun, and two crewman), which the Scorpion can easily disrupt by, say, movingly slightly.

Perhaps around a tenth of a second of phaser power punches through metal that looks to be at least an inch thick, vaporizing a hole that looks to be over a foot wide through it, and destroying critical conduits behind it. This is also a decent answer to "There's nothing critical inside starship bulkheads" and "No collateral damage" BS.

That's a common misunderstanding of that scene, look at the actual dislogue a bit closer:

Fair enough, I retract the statement.

There's already a 75 meter long tunnel in the rock, they only have to destroy a thin layer of rock blocking it in order to to get through to it (it's worth noting when the Delta Flyer once got buried underground to a similar depth, Voyager had to beam down special phaser drills in order to dig it out, handheld phasers were not up to the task).

Yes, the Delta Flyer fell, from orbit, unpowered, and hit the planet hard enough to dig itself three kilometers deep into the mantle, which had unknown properties as it was made of bemonite. So we've got that amazingly hull durability here (Seriously do these Halo tanks have the durability to hit anything hard enough to drive themselves three kilometers into it and survive mostly intact?).

And... they didn't need phaser drills to bore through eighty meters but more like several kilometers. You're making a really weird self-serving assumption again. Check the transcript.

They literally start going down with Phaser drills in the first half of the episode, and are down to 80 meters, which they're drilling very carefully to avoid collapse and because the caverns are full of flourine gas, in the last part of the episode. They didn't just declare "Oh, 80 meters, need a phaser drill."

I'm aware widebeam mode exists. It's seemingly incapable of operating even on the "kill" function, let alone the "melt battle tank" mode.

Exact Dialogue: "This phaser is on wide-beam dispersal and set to kill."

Now, how about you do your homework too? Instead of just insisting that everybody else show everything, post some pics and feats for the UNSC. I honestly don't know, maybe they have these kinds of showings. But so far the Star Trek side is doing all the proving and you're not doing anything but assuming things. Show the tank that punches three kilometers deep into a planetary crust and keeps its crew alive in the process, the rifle that can bore through meters of rock in one shot and has widebeam spread, the jammers that can block transport (without being on the scene, apparently, since there's no reason the Federation won't beam down immediately while the UNSC is still flying down the long way from orbit), and the craters left by weapons that don't manage to kill a scorpion tank. Prove some of your stuff for a change instead of insisting everybody else prove everything up to and including the existence of backpacks while you sit back.

 

[Battlegrinder]

Again, you assume that a vague "almost finished" is the same as finished unloading everything, and that the Defiant, a dedicated space-combat superiority ship, has the same bulk transport as Voyager, a long-range science vessel.

The Defiant also has far smaller cargo bays than Voyager, even if it transports down slower, it also has far less stuff available to beam down.

The episode says they're nearly done, and givens them a fair bit of time to finish, arguing they must still not be done is a much bigger assumption then the reverse.

No, I'm not being uncharitable or misreading your argument. Nobody claims that the specific stun grenade used by MACOs is still in use, we're mentioning how grenades exist at all, thus a comparison to your "If no bayonets, then knives must not exist" is quite apt for your claims.

Ok, where are they?

Perhaps around a tenth of a second of phaser power punches through metal that looks to be at least an inch thick, vaporizing a hole that looks to be over a foot wide through it, and destroying critical conduits behind it. This is also a decent answer to "There's nothing critical inside starship bulkheads" and "No collateral damage" BS.

"There's something vital inside one conduit, therefore there must be something vital behind every single wall on the ship" is a bit of a leap.

As is the corresponding but unstated argument therefore if a phaser can do it, a peice of shrapnel from a grenade can also punch through an inch of metal.....that's really dubious. On a quick Google, many tanks have had thinner armor in places, but were still impervious to hand grenades.

Yes, the Delta Flyer fell, from orbit, unpowered, and hit the planet hard enough to dig itself three kilometers deep into the mantle, which had unknown properties as it was made of bemonite. So we've got that amazingly hull durability here (Seriously do these Halo tanks have the durability to hit anything hard enough to drive themselves three kilometers into it and survive mostly intact?).

The episode does not establish the ship actually rammed its way through 3 km of solid rock, and it doesn't appear to have done so either, looking at the crash site, it appears to have made its way into a natural cavern, the same cave system voyager spends most of the episode scanning and exploring.

Also, bemonite has unknown properties, but we can make a guess about some of them:

PARIS: Bemonite. I want to land this shuttle, not bury it.

Paris expected the shuttle to easily bury itself if it the planet's crush is full of bemonite, which suggests that bemonite is very weak (extremely weak, if we observe that most shuttles, which crash into ordinary soil, remain above ground).

And... they didn't need phaser drills to bore through eighty meters but more like several kilometers. You're making a really weird self-serving assumption again. Check the transcript.

They literally start going down with Phaser drills in the first half of the episode, and are down to 80 meters, which they're drilling very carefully to avoid collapse and because the caverns are full of flourine gas, in the last part of the episode. They didn't just declare "Oh, 80 meters, need a phaser drill."

That is not what happens, you've misread the transcript:

SEVEN: Commander, I'm reading duranium alloys. I believe it is the shuttle. Approximately eighty metres beneath this rubble.
CHAKOTAY: Lifesigns?
SEVEN: None. Commander, without lifesigns to lock onto we cannot beam the crew out.
CHAKOTAY: Maybe we can transport the entire ship to the shuttle bay.
SEVEN: Through fifty kilotons of bemonite?
CHAKOTAY: Chakotay to Voyager.
JANEWAY [OC]: Janeway here.
CHAKOTAY: We think we've found the shuttle, but we need to dig it out.

They don't find the shuttle for most of the episode, and it's only buried 80 meters down when they do locate it.

Exact Dialogue: "This phaser is on wide-beam dispersal and set to kill."

And that simply cannot be true, because such a capability would have been used on numerous occasions and never was. For example, AR-588, where the plot literally would not function if it was possible for phasers to lay down a continuous barrage of lethal fire into an extremely narrow (a few meters at most) chokepoint, even if it required constant fire from multiple phasers to do it it would have still been a better plan than just firing off single shots and letting it degenerate into a melee.

the jammers that can block transport (without being on the scene, apparently, since there's no reason the Federation won't beam down immediately while the UNSC is still flying down the long way from orbit)

The UNSC doesn't need to jam transporters everywhere, thry just need to jam them in the vicinity of thier own forces to prevent ambush or starfleet reinforcements.

But so far the Star Trek side is doing all the proving and you're not doing anything but assuming things.

I don't think you've really been paying attention to what I've been posting if that's your impression of what I've done. Off the top of my head, I've cited:

UNSC lifeboats crash landing at speeds fast enough to kill the occupants, but remaining physically intact, demonstrating the sturdiness of UNSC materials (and the advantages of federation inertial dampeners).

The UNSC Pillar of Autumn repeating the same trick on a larger scale and even remaining partially functional after impact, while the Enterprise D's saucer and Voyager were totalled by similar crashes, despite the saucer being designed with this sort of crash landing in mind and voyager being designed with the ability to land and presumably the possibility of a crash landing, while the Autumn was never intended to enter atmo at all (no matter what Reach says)

UNSC SAMs are powerful enough to threaten federation shuttles (granted, more because shuttles are, per Sixth's own evidence, not sturdy enough to withstand fire from an M2 browning and not because UNSC missiles are awesome)

 

[The Original Sixth]

Now, how about you do your homework too? Instead of just insisting that everybody else show everything, post some pics and feats for the UNSC. I honestly don't know, maybe they have these kinds of showings. But so far the Star Trek side is doing all the proving and you're not doing anything but assuming things. Show the tank that punches three kilometers deep into a planetary crust and keeps its crew alive in the process, the rifle that can bore through meters of rock in one shot and has widebeam spread, the jammers that can block transport (without being on the scene, apparently, since there's no reason the Federation won't beam down immediately while the UNSC is still flying down the long way from orbit), and the craters left by weapons that don't manage to kill a scorpion tank. Prove some of your stuff for a change instead of insisting everybody else prove everything up to and including the existence of backpacks while you sit back.

To be fair, we haven't really challenged him on much. So let's change that. The Scorpion tank has a 90mm cannon. Assuming a roughly 12 kilo shell and a speed of 810 m/s, we're looking at 3.936 MJ or 4 MJ to round it out. Since they use shells, they clearly aren't rail cannons. And while we know that a scorpion tank can't one-shot another scorpion, we do know that they do considerable damage. So UNSC "titanium" armor seems to top out at around 4 MJ. Less, since the rounds themselves deal damage.

As for Pelicans...



They're reasonably tough, but they're crashing at much lower altitudes (albeit, most of them are shot down) and the crash typically ruins the frame. Obviously a lot of these are players just goofing around and are non-canon, but #23, where they ram the Scarab? The pelican wasn't even really moving all that fast. Even if we assume that the pilot had gunned it to 903 kp/h, that's not anywhere close to what a UFP shuttle can take.

I don't think we should expect Halo armor to provide all that much of an advantage to the UNSC at all here.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

These are assumption that have nothing to base them on. So you're argument has no basis.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

Assuming a roughly 12 kilo shell and a speed of 810 m/s, we're looking at 3.936 MJ or 4 MJ to round it out.

These assumptions are based on nothing more than modern tech....which UNSC is decidedly NOT.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

By the logic being thrown around here, the US used nukes once on Japan but didn't use any nuclear weapons in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan, therefore clearly the US doesn't have any nuclear doctrine or nuclear weapons.

No, the logic being "thrown around" here would correctly deduce that the U.S. nuclear doctrine is not to use them.

 

[The Original Sixth]

The UNSC doesn't need to jam transporters everywhere, thry just need to jam them in the vicinity of thier own forces to prevent ambush or starfleet reinforcements.

Hey, let's see some evidence of the UNSC carrying mobile transporter jammers. Or any jammers. Or is the USNC just going to hide under a transformer the whole war?

UNSC lifeboats crash landing at speeds fast enough to kill the occupants, but remaining physically intact, demonstrating the sturdiness of UNSC materials (and the advantages of federation inertial dampeners).

Well, until they use those lifeboats as tanks, that isn't going to do them much good. We know that UNSC tanks can be damaged by fellow tanks. That tops them off at around 4 MJs. Less, because the rounds are dangerous.

UNSC SAMs are powerful enough to threaten federation shuttles (granted, more because shuttles are, per Sixth's own evidence, not sturdy enough to withstand fire from an M2 browning and not because UNSC missiles are awesome)

Are you smoking pot right now? It did stand up to M2 Browning fire.

What damaged the shuttlepod wasn't the P-51s, it was the anti-aircraft fire.

When the shuttlepod was hit, it took damage and it was enough to force the shuttlepod to return to Enterprise. I repeat, it was enough to make the shuttlepod, flee to space. Coincidentally? WWII anti-air consisted mostly of 90mm cannons.

90 mm gun M1/M2/M3 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

An unshielded, outdated shuttlepod from the 22nd century is about as durable as a UNSC tank, from what I can see.

 

[The Original Sixth]

These assumptions are based on nothing more than modern tech....which UNSC is decidedly NOT.

Yes, but the UNSC also uses modern NATO rounds too. Neither is there anything wrong with this. The UNSC needs to move these ground assets through space. A smaller gun allows for a lighter tank, smaller rounds, and therefore more of each. Unless you have proof that they're somehow using far superior rounds, despite using what is obviously a traditional shell round...well, you're fucked.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Maybe we should do a Force Sub, replace the Federation Ground Forces in AR-558's final battle with an equal number of UNSC forces. Or the same with the final skirmish in Rocks and Shoals or Star Trek: Insurrection.

And maybe do the same with the Federation. I don't know of any Halo ground battles but we can do one with the normal calcs we've seen and then one with the Galor-cannon proof shuttlecraft, tank busting, multiple target acquiring, widebeam hand phasers and nuclear photon grenades.

Should get the full gamut of capabilities and interpretations then.