Could the Federation destroy a planet?

SWvST: the subject of the main site.

Moderator: Vympel

User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Captain Seafort »

Connor MacLeod wrote:TOs had whatever mechanism blew off the atmosphere (purportedly at least. Assuming it isn't hyperbole).
The mechanism was brute force. Whether or it literally blew off half the atmosphere is unknown, but something certain hit the E-nil hard enough to shake her around a lot, and the remastered episode shows a very impressive-looking dent in the planet:

Image
User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Captain Seafort »

And in case that one doesn't work, try this:

Image
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Darth Tedious »

Captain Seafort wrote:
Connor MacLeod wrote:TOs had whatever mechanism blew off the atmosphere (purportedly at least. Assuming it isn't hyperbole).
The mechanism was brute force. Whether or it literally blew off half the atmosphere is unknown, but something certain hit the E-nil hard enough to shake her around a lot, and the remastered episode shows a very impressive-looking dent in the planet:

Image
The picture didn't seem to work. The second picture didn't seem to work either. But I find 'a very impressive-looking dent' to be nicely descriptive anyway. Would this mechanism be able to punch through plantetary shields?

And are there any good examples of planet-wide artificial climates in the GFFA? I seriously think that losing one's sun could have a pretty drastic effect on climate conditions. Even for a civilisation with the level of tech we're talking about there'd be some considerable effort required to keep the planet habitable...

EDIT: Second pic just started working- that is an impressive-looking dent!
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Captain Seafort »

Would this mechanism be able to punch through plantetary shields?
Depends on the shield, but I doubt it. The damage was caused by a one-ounce antimatter charge that Kirk and the redshirt-of-the-week beamed down with. Even if they used it as a torpedo warhead it's nowhere near powerful enough to punch through a shield, given how well Alderaan's held up.
And are there any good examples of planet-wide artificial climates in the GFFA? I seriously think that losing one's sun could have a pretty drastic effect on climate conditions. Even for a civilisation with the level of tech we're talking about there'd be some considerable effort required to keep the planet habitable...
Coruscant, for starters. Sure, it isn't entirely sealed off, but I expect it's 90% or more indoors anyway, the streets see no natural light, and as has been commented on already, preventing the place from cooking is probably a bigger problem than heating it.
User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 10361
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: CIC, Battlestar Temeraire

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Eternal_Freedom »

The Yuuzhan Vong have their Worldships, which are IIRC basically self contained biospheres. Not many quantifications on how big they are though, so they don't count as "planet-sized," but they are pretty damn big. The one destroyed in "Edge of Victory 2: Rebirth" was described as being Death Star sized as a seed, and when full grown as capable of swallowing death stars whole. It also (through a chain of dovin basals) pulled substantial quantities of matter from Sernpidal's primary as fuel.

In "The Crystal Star" (gah, feel unclean, terrible book) Hethrir is driving around in a "Worldship" as well.
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Darth Tedious »

Captain Seafort wrote:Coruscant, for starters. Sure, it isn't entirely sealed off, but I expect it's 90% or more indoors anyway, the streets see no natural light, and as has been commented on already, preventing the place from cooking is probably a bigger problem than heating it.
Agreed, but that is with a sun. The claim has been made that there would be little increase in power demands if the sun were no longer there. The sun heats the atmosphere, which would provide at least some warmth at street level (by providing warmth, I mean "keep it from being colder than Hoth").
I do agree that pollution levels (and artificial heating at street level) would contribute to this, but the loss of sun also means greenhouse effect would have no external heat to feed it. With no external heat to trap, the temperature of the atmosphere would need to be maintained artificially.
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
User avatar
Napoleon the Clown
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2007-05-05 02:54pm
Location: Minneso'a

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Napoleon the Clown »

Batman wrote:Actually, the federation has, however reluctantly, made use of cloaking devices in the past. Kirk used one back in 'The Enterprise Incident', and so did the Sisko aboard 'Defiant'.
Genesis is pretty much a no go because there's no way you're gonna get the device onplanet until considerably after you've been conquered already, but a cloaked ship (assuming the cloak-conventional, phasing, or otherwise) actually works against Wars sensors launching a Trilithium torpedo at Coruscant's primary would at the very least not inconsiderably inconvenience them, though I very much suspect the shields would be up to the task.
Poor word choice on my part. What I meant was that I am unaware of any instances where the built a ship with a cloaking device that actually went into service. The closest I can think of in that realm is with the Pegasus, and it was an experimental craft.

While I have no doubt the Federation has the materials and know-how to build a cloaking device they could use on one of their ships, I'm not so sure that in a scenario like described in the OP they'd have access to the resources.
Sig images are for people who aren't fucking lazy.
User avatar
Batman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 16329
Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Batman »

Darth Tedious wrote:
Captain Seafort wrote:Coruscant, for starters. Sure, it isn't entirely sealed off, but I expect it's 90% or more indoors anyway, the streets see no natural light, and as has been commented on already, preventing the place from cooking is probably a bigger problem than heating it.
Agreed, but that is with a sun. The claim has been made that there would be little increase in power demands if the sun were no longer there.
By whom?
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
User avatar
Batman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 16329
Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Batman »

Napoleon the Clown wrote: Poor word choice on my part. What I meant was that I am unaware of any instances where the built a ship with a cloaking device that actually went into service. The closest I can think of in that realm is with the Pegasus, and it was an experimental craft.
While I have no doubt the Federation has the materials and know-how to build a cloaking device they could use on one of their ships, I'm not so sure that in a scenario like described in the OP they'd have access to the resources.
Err-they had the resources to do so during DS9, what with the second Defiant having a cloaking device?
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Darth Tedious »

Batman wrote:
Darth Tedious wrote:
Captain Seafort wrote:Coruscant, for starters. Sure, it isn't entirely sealed off, but I expect it's 90% or more indoors anyway, the streets see no natural light, and as has been commented on already, preventing the place from cooking is probably a bigger problem than heating it.
Agreed, but that is with a sun. The claim has been made that there would be little increase in power demands if the sun were no longer there.
By whom?
By Baffalo.
Baffalo wrote:I'm currently in a lab where we work with machinery and power networks. From what I've found out, some generators are ideal for steady loads and some are more suited for peak times. Nuclear power costs about the same whether the station is producing power or not, so nuclear power plants produce power around the clock, while coal power plants are usually run during the day to handle the peak power requirements of the grid. So with that in mind, that has me thinking back to one of the EU books.

In the book Han is nearly hit by a giant machine that uses heat to drill through the polar ice of Coruscant. The primary reason for this is to provide drinking water to the people of Coruscant, but in water is the key to fusion power: Deuterium. If the water being harvested was processed to extract the deuterium, it would provide a nearly constant amount of fuel to feed the power grid of Coruscant. And unlike our own real world reactors, Coruscant would remain about the same, load wise, as the planet rotates instead of having continents that draw power during the day and then drop the load at night. If there was a need for more, solar plants could come online.

The reason I say all this is that if Coruscant does lose its star, it might not be drastically hit, power wise, except when the shield come online. That might cause brownouts, but whatever. I would imagine that would be the least of the average citizen's concerns in that case.
Bolded the important bit.

I really believe that the results of complete loss of external heat to the planet would require a lot of energy expenditure to overcome.

Here's a link to a site that has some fun, funky equations for calculating a planet's 'theoretical temperature', based on the amount of energy from sunlight it receives. It doesn't account for Greenhouse Effect (and so the theoretical temperature for Earth would be -19°C), but should give an idea of the problem you'll run into with no sun- the temperature of the planet cannot be maintained without application of heat.

I'm not saying that it's outside of the capabilities of GFFA society to produce heat in that amount (their power production is pretty insane), but it would certainly require a lot more to replace the sun than simply turning the thermostat up a bit.
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
User avatar
Baffalo
Jedi Knight
Posts: 805
Joined: 2009-04-18 10:53pm
Location: NWA
Contact:

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Baffalo »

Darth Tedious wrote:Bolded the important bit.

I really believe that the results of complete loss of external heat to the planet would require a lot of energy expenditure to overcome.

Here's a link to a site that has some fun, funky equations for calculating a planet's 'theoretical temperature', based on the amount of energy from sunlight it receives. It doesn't account for Greenhouse Effect (and so the theoretical temperature for Earth would be -19°C), but should give an idea of the problem you'll run into with no sun- the temperature of the planet cannot be maintained without application of heat.

I'm not saying that it's outside of the capabilities of GFFA society to produce heat in that amount (their power production is pretty insane), but it would certainly require a lot more to replace the sun than simply turning the thermostat up a bit.
Right, I didn't factor that in. The average temperature would indeed drop, and it would be quite bad, but there's a few things that would make the situation marginally better.

1) Coruscant is supposed to be slightly cooler than most humanoid planets, meaning that many would no doubt keep heaters in their rooms for when the room gets cool.

2) The height of some buildings would make them colder, since the temperature drops as height is increased. Being over a kilometer straight up would cause the temperature to drop several degrees.

3) Several areas of Coruscant are heavily industrialized, meaning they pump tons of hot material into the atmosphere. While it might not be enough to offset a severe temperature drop, it would help.

4) Tantans.
"I subsist on 3 things: Sugar, Caffeine, and Hatred." -Baffalo late at night and hungry

"Why are you worried about the water pressure? You're near the ocean, you've got plenty of water!" -Architect to our team
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Darth Tedious »

Are you suggesting tauntauns as transport, or to be used as sleeping bags? Either way, I love your style! :D

Another consideration in this situation (and I'm not sure what effects exactly this would have) would be the fact that the planet is now drifting through space, and quite possibly doing so at a fair speed, assuming it copped some acceleration from the level 12 shockwave that washed over it.
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
User avatar
Baffalo
Jedi Knight
Posts: 805
Joined: 2009-04-18 10:53pm
Location: NWA
Contact:

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Baffalo »

Darth Tedious wrote:Are you suggesting tauntauns as transport, or to be used as sleeping bags? Either way, I love your style! :D

Another consideration in this situation (and I'm not sure what effects exactly this would have) would be the fact that the planet is now drifting through space, and quite possibly doing so at a fair speed, assuming it copped some acceleration from the level 12 shockwave that washed over it.
There are several immediate issues that the loss of a star would present. We've already covered heating and power, but also that, should Coruscant survive, it would essentially be a rogue planetoid, hurtling through space. This will make finding the planet extremely difficult, because every navcomputer in the galaxy is programmed to calculate Coruscant's location in relation to where it's star is, what position it is in it's orbit, all of it very complicated. With the loss of it's host star, Coruscant will no longer maintain its orbit and will either fly in a tangent to it's orbit or will have the shockwave alter its vector between 0 and 90 degrees of its original tangent, depending on the actual force transmitted into the planet.

Not every vessel will be immediately effected, but any captain who makes his living travelling to and from Coruscant is going to be in for a shock. Everyone heading to Coruscant for official business will be shocked. Until word reaches other systems, many will believe that Coruscant is gone, and it will only be after updating the navcomputer that everyone will be able to travel to Coruscant, assuming they don't choose to evacuate. And given that we've already established that Coruscant is insanely overpopulated, I'd be willing to bet that it might be easier to only evacuate a certain portion of the population (the wealthy, the higher ranking Imperial personnel, etc) and leave everyone else there.

If only the top level people left Coruscant, then the result would be pure anarchy. The extent of this wouldn't be seen right away, but it would possibly result in gang wars over dwindling resources, people paying exorbitant prices to get off planet, and an eventual collapse of Coruscant's infrastructure. Yes, it would royally suck, but how do you handle over a trillion refugees? Even if you spread them evenly across every planet in the Empire, which was about 1000 planets, you'd still need to send a billion people to each planet. The Empire would probably be better off cutting their losses and letting the majority die.
"I subsist on 3 things: Sugar, Caffeine, and Hatred." -Baffalo late at night and hungry

"Why are you worried about the water pressure? You're near the ocean, you've got plenty of water!" -Architect to our team
User avatar
Darth Hoth
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2319
Joined: 2008-02-15 09:36am

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Darth Hoth »

Captain Seafort wrote:
Connor MacLeod wrote:TOs had whatever mechanism blew off the atmosphere (purportedly at least. Assuming it isn't hyperbole).
The mechanism was brute force. Whether or it literally blew off half the atmosphere is unknown, but something certain hit the E-nil hard enough to shake her around a lot, and the remastered episode shows a very impressive-looking dent in the planet:
Attributing it to brute force is kind of problematic, however. Or at least, unless I am misremembering things, since I seem to recall it being caused by a bomb carrying (according to the dialogue) less than a kilogram of antimatter. :)
Captain Seafort wrote:And in case that one doesn't work, try this:
Hm. That one was new to me.

I may be mistaken, but supposing a multi-teraton/petaton detonation (which from what I understand can suffice as a conservative benchmark for what would be needed to blow large amounts of atmosphere off an Earth-like planet) had indeed occurred not much earlier, should the crater not be deeper than it appears to be in that image? With a lot of still-glowing lava, and so on?
"But there's no story past Episode VI, there's just no story. It's a certain story about Anakin Skywalker and once Anakin Skywalker dies, that's kind of the end of the story. There is no story about Luke Skywalker, I mean apart from the books."

-George "Evil" Lucas
User avatar
Azron_Stoma
Padawan Learner
Posts: 353
Joined: 2008-10-18 08:37am
Location: HIMS Korthox III, Assertor Class Star Dreadnought

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Azron_Stoma »

Baffalo wrote:Even if you spread them evenly across every planet in the Empire, which was about 1000 planets, you'd still need to send a billion people to each planet.
The Republic was thousands of systems, as per dialogue in RotS, we don't know if that was tens or hundreds or just 2,000-9,999. The Empire 20 years later was millions, as per the ANH Novelization, so I'm guessing it was hundreds.

In any case you'd still need to send a million people to each planet on average, which if you stripped out all the troops and vehicles from an Acclamator, would prolly take about 23 acclamators for each planet, granted that would also mean about 23 million acclamators overall, give or take, with quite a few more fully laden with troops for crowd controll.
User avatar
TOSDOC
Padawan Learner
Posts: 419
Joined: 2010-09-30 02:52pm
Location: Rotating between Redshirt Hospital and the Stormtrooper School of Marksmanship.

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by TOSDOC »

Batman wrote:Actually, the federation has, however reluctantly, made use of cloaking devices in the past. Kirk used one back in 'The Enterprise Incident', and so did the Sisko aboard 'Defiant'.
Genesis is pretty much a no go because there's no way you're gonna get the device onplanet until considerably after you've been conquered already, but a cloaked ship (assuming the cloak-conventional, phasing, or otherwise) actually works against Wars sensors launching a Trilithium torpedo at Coruscant's primary would at the very least not inconsiderably inconvenience them, though I very much suspect the shields would be up to the task.
If you're using a cloaking device, the Genesis Torpedo can be beamed down into an empty office building from orbit with a timer--it doesn't have to be launched at the planet. Star Trek II depicted the torpedo going off just fine sitting on a transporter pad.
"In the long run, however, there can be no excuse for any individual not knowing what it is possible for him to know. Why shouldn't he?" --Elliot Grosvenor, Voyage of the Space Beagle
User avatar
Batman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 16329
Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Batman »

...except transporters don't work so hot through shields :wink:
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kid with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'
User avatar
TOSDOC
Padawan Learner
Posts: 419
Joined: 2010-09-30 02:52pm
Location: Rotating between Redshirt Hospital and the Stormtrooper School of Marksmanship.

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by TOSDOC »

Batman wrote:...except transporters don't work so hot through shields :wink:
:D I haven't forgotten--tell it to the mere ounce of anti-matter over there. LOL
"In the long run, however, there can be no excuse for any individual not knowing what it is possible for him to know. Why shouldn't he?" --Elliot Grosvenor, Voyage of the Space Beagle
User avatar
Alferd Packer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3699
Joined: 2002-07-19 09:22pm
Location: Slumgullion Pass
Contact:

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Alferd Packer »

Or, if we're not limited to conventional options, why not just ship the Genesis Device to Coruscant using an established shipping company? While one has to assume the that the security and screening measures undertaken by Coruscant's equivalent to a Port Authority and the various private shipping firms serving Coruscant have to be excellent, they cannot be perfect. It seems to me that that would have a better chance of success than any kind of military action.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--that principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spencer

"Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." - Schiller, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, III vi.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
Location: Blighty

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Captain Seafort »

Darth Hoth wrote:Attributing it to brute force is kind of problematic, however. Or at least, unless I am misremembering things, since I seem to recall it being caused by a bomb carrying (according to the dialogue) less than a kilogram of antimatter. :)
Yep - an ounce. How they got a few orders of magnitude more than the theoretical maximum out of it I don't know, but it destroyed the cloud creature, threw enough of the atmosphere at the Enterprise to shake her about hard despite being in high orbit, and left that dent in the planet.
I may be mistaken, but supposing a multi-teraton/petaton detonation (which from what I understand can suffice as a conservative benchmark for what would be needed to blow large amounts of atmosphere off an Earth-like planet) had indeed occurred not much earlier, should the crater not be deeper than it appears to be in that image? With a lot of still-glowing lava, and so on?
*Shrugs* I presume so. I'm just presenting the evidence - I'll leave the detailed analysis to those who know what they're talking about.
User avatar
Napoleon the Clown
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2007-05-05 02:54pm
Location: Minneso'a

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Napoleon the Clown »

Batman wrote:
Napoleon the Clown wrote: Poor word choice on my part. What I meant was that I am unaware of any instances where the built a ship with a cloaking device that actually went into service. The closest I can think of in that realm is with the Pegasus, and it was an experimental craft.
While I have no doubt the Federation has the materials and know-how to build a cloaking device they could use on one of their ships, I'm not so sure that in a scenario like described in the OP they'd have access to the resources.
Err-they had the resources to do so during DS9, what with the second Defiant having a cloaking device?
Well, seeing as how I have never seen DS9 and I did state I wasn't aware of any cases...
Sig images are for people who aren't fucking lazy.
User avatar
Baffalo
Jedi Knight
Posts: 805
Joined: 2009-04-18 10:53pm
Location: NWA
Contact:

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Baffalo »

Azron_Stoma wrote:
Baffalo wrote:Even if you spread them evenly across every planet in the Empire, which was about 1000 planets, you'd still need to send a billion people to each planet.
The Republic was thousands of systems, as per dialogue in RotS, we don't know if that was tens or hundreds or just 2,000-9,999. The Empire 20 years later was millions, as per the ANH Novelization, so I'm guessing it was hundreds.

In any case you'd still need to send a million people to each planet on average, which if you stripped out all the troops and vehicles from an Acclamator, would prolly take about 23 acclamators for each planet, granted that would also mean about 23 million acclamators overall, give or take, with quite a few more fully laden with troops for crowd controll.
Even at the height of the Clone Wars, I doubt there were that many Acclamators running around. In fact, I don't think that even if every Star Destroyer was pulled from service just to transport the refugees that there would be close to 23 million ships. Especially given that only a third of the fleet is available at any given time. So the biggest issue is definitely going to be time to transport that many people across the galaxy. And even then, I don't think the refugees will necessarily receive a warm welcome.

The sudden influx of refugees is going to put a strain on every planet that takes them in, regardless of population already present on the planet, but some worlds will feel the strain harder than others. Start-up colonies, which I assume are some of the newly acquired planets amassed by the Empire, are probably not going to be able to take on that many people right away. Even if they could, the sudden influx of people would overwhelm the population already present, and tensions would mount as people who have probably spent their entire lives in an urban setting look down on the local colonists, and vice versa. Plus, there's the matter of law enforcement as you already mentioned. Refugees usually mean an influx of poverty stricken people who are going to be desperate, and given that large portions of Coruscant are basically huge ghettos, the amount of crime that comes with them is going to be outrageous.

Not only that, but disease outbreaks are going to be rampant as well. Stuffing thousands of people aboard a ship and then sending them somewhere is a paradise for communicable diseases, which might have been somewhat negated when people were living back on Coruscant. On Coruscant, they could at least somewhat quarantine themselves in their homes. Not so aboard a starship. Even if there were aid stations set up to treat the sick and establish quarantines, being exposed to the sick while waiting in line means that many people won't start showing signs of the disease until after they're packed like sardines. And once they arrive, they're going to be thrown into makeshift barracks, probably packed close together, meaning that if one person is sick, the close confines would make sure everyone gets sick. At least on the planet they're taking refuge on, they can better quarantine the sick.

Any evacuation of Coruscant is going to be a giant clusterfuck no matter how you slice it. And the fleet can't exactly rush in every ship available, since if the Federation got away with blowing up one star already, they might do it again. Every ship will be on full alert, ready to mobilize, and I highly doubt any sane Admiral will willingly part with his ships if he catches even the slightest whiff of Starfleet. Coruscant might have gotten away with its massive planetary shield, but what would happen to another target? Like say, Kuat? Or Corellia? Or even Alderaan? What would happen if the Federation used its superweapons against them? They don't have shield generators around every single square kilometer of the planet, so they're in danger of being hit by almost anything.

And what if the Federation chose one of those secondary targets first? Or hit them together? No warning, just suddenly BAM! A sudden strike against several highly industrialized worlds. Kuat might get the trilithium torpedo, but Corellia and Alderaan are vulnerable to the Genesis device. And Corellia has five planets, so by the time they realize what's going on, a starship could have launched more genesis torpedoes. One thing I know for sure is that sometimes the threat of violence is enough to terrify, because every single planet in the galaxy will be demanding protection so that they don't become the next target. It would be a huge blow, and no doubt everyone would be panicking.
"I subsist on 3 things: Sugar, Caffeine, and Hatred." -Baffalo late at night and hungry

"Why are you worried about the water pressure? You're near the ocean, you've got plenty of water!" -Architect to our team
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Darth Tedious »

Alferd Packer wrote:Or, if we're not limited to conventional options, why not just ship the Genesis Device to Coruscant using an established shipping company? While one has to assume the that the security and screening measures undertaken by Coruscant's equivalent to a Port Authority and the various private shipping firms serving Coruscant have to be excellent, they cannot be perfect. It seems to me that that would have a better chance of success than any kind of military action.
That plan is perfect- even if the Coruscant Port Authority's security is perfect, if it is on-world (as opposed to in orbit) you only have to set the Genesis Device off while it's on it's way into/sitting in customs. It doesn't actually have to get though security. Simply being under the planetary shield would suffice. Given that it worked in a nebula, it should only need to be within the atmosphere, and not even on the surface of the planet.
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by The Romulan Republic »

Baffalo wrote:
Darth Tedious wrote:Are you suggesting tauntauns as transport, or to be used as sleeping bags? Either way, I love your style! :D

Another consideration in this situation (and I'm not sure what effects exactly this would have) would be the fact that the planet is now drifting through space, and quite possibly doing so at a fair speed, assuming it copped some acceleration from the level 12 shockwave that washed over it.
There are several immediate issues that the loss of a star would present. We've already covered heating and power, but also that, should Coruscant survive, it would essentially be a rogue planetoid, hurtling through space. This will make finding the planet extremely difficult, because every navcomputer in the galaxy is programmed to calculate Coruscant's location in relation to where it's star is, what position it is in it's orbit, all of it very complicated. With the loss of it's host star, Coruscant will no longer maintain its orbit and will either fly in a tangent to it's orbit or will have the shockwave alter its vector between 0 and 90 degrees of its original tangent, depending on the actual force transmitted into the planet.

Not every vessel will be immediately effected, but any captain who makes his living travelling to and from Coruscant is going to be in for a shock. Everyone heading to Coruscant for official business will be shocked. Until word reaches other systems, many will believe that Coruscant is gone, and it will only be after updating the navcomputer that everyone will be able to travel to Coruscant, assuming they don't choose to evacuate. And given that we've already established that Coruscant is insanely overpopulated, I'd be willing to bet that it might be easier to only evacuate a certain portion of the population (the wealthy, the higher ranking Imperial personnel, etc) and leave everyone else there.

If only the top level people left Coruscant, then the result would be pure anarchy. The extent of this wouldn't be seen right away, but it would possibly result in gang wars over dwindling resources, people paying exorbitant prices to get off planet, and an eventual collapse of Coruscant's infrastructure. Yes, it would royally suck, but how do you handle over a trillion refugees? Even if you spread them evenly across every planet in the Empire, which was about 1000 planets, you'd still need to send a billion people to each planet. The Empire would probably be better off cutting their losses and letting the majority die.
I thought the Empire had about fifty million worlds.

You may be confusing worlds and sectors.
User avatar
Baffalo
Jedi Knight
Posts: 805
Joined: 2009-04-18 10:53pm
Location: NWA
Contact:

Re: Could the Federation destroy a planet?

Post by Baffalo »

The Romulan Republic wrote:
Baffalo wrote:There are several immediate issues that the loss of a star would present. We've already covered heating and power, but also that, should Coruscant survive, it would essentially be a rogue planetoid, hurtling through space. This will make finding the planet extremely difficult, because every navcomputer in the galaxy is programmed to calculate Coruscant's location in relation to where it's star is, what position it is in it's orbit, all of it very complicated. With the loss of it's host star, Coruscant will no longer maintain its orbit and will either fly in a tangent to it's orbit or will have the shockwave alter its vector between 0 and 90 degrees of its original tangent, depending on the actual force transmitted into the planet.

Not every vessel will be immediately effected, but any captain who makes his living travelling to and from Coruscant is going to be in for a shock. Everyone heading to Coruscant for official business will be shocked. Until word reaches other systems, many will believe that Coruscant is gone, and it will only be after updating the navcomputer that everyone will be able to travel to Coruscant, assuming they don't choose to evacuate. And given that we've already established that Coruscant is insanely overpopulated, I'd be willing to bet that it might be easier to only evacuate a certain portion of the population (the wealthy, the higher ranking Imperial personnel, etc) and leave everyone else there.

If only the top level people left Coruscant, then the result would be pure anarchy. The extent of this wouldn't be seen right away, but it would possibly result in gang wars over dwindling resources, people paying exorbitant prices to get off planet, and an eventual collapse of Coruscant's infrastructure. Yes, it would royally suck, but how do you handle over a trillion refugees? Even if you spread them evenly across every planet in the Empire, which was about 1000 planets, you'd still need to send a billion people to each planet. The Empire would probably be better off cutting their losses and letting the majority die.
I thought the Empire had about fifty million worlds.

You may be confusing worlds and sectors.
I went looking and found this in Wookiepedia:
Wookiepedia wrote:The Galactic Empire's territory at its peak consisted of some one and a half million member and conquered worlds, as well as sixty-nine million colonies, protectorates and puppet states spread throughout the entire galaxy, stretching from the borders of the Deep Core to at least Wild Space.[15] Emperor Palpatine sent Grand Admiral Thrawn on a mission to bring the rule of the Empire to the Unknown Regions. The Grand Admiral set up a command post at a fortress on Nirauan and from there brought the rule of the Empire to the uncharted regions of the galaxy, creating the Empire of the Hand.
So I was wrong to assume only a thousand worlds, as pointed out by Darth Tedious. The colonies they mention are probably so small that they don't really contribute to the empire except in terms of raw materials or are simply places where people are starting out. Either way, that's 1.5 million worlds trying to take up almost 700,000 people each. And even then, the smartest move would be to ship people to nearby Core worlds, so the majority of refugees will be sent to places like Corellia, Alderaan, Kuat, any world nearby, relatively speaking. Assuming the Federation doesn't use the Genesis device once it gets under the shield network. Then everyone's just plain fucked. What I want to know is would a shield generator protect from the effects of the Genesis probe if it were set off on another portion of the planet? Like say, would Coronet City be safe if it activated its shield generators and then the genesis device went off?
"I subsist on 3 things: Sugar, Caffeine, and Hatred." -Baffalo late at night and hungry

"Why are you worried about the water pressure? You're near the ocean, you've got plenty of water!" -Architect to our team
Post Reply