Defiant Class- Ablative Armor composition

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-06-27 12:51am

Has there ever been any indication or even speculation anywhere as to what the Defiant's ablative armor is composed of? Even the tech manual doesn't say (except that the hull beneath the armor is composed of the standard Duranium and Tritanium)

The Nomad · Post by **The Nomad** » 2004-06-27 06:13am

I'd been told that the DS9TM says it has neutronium compounds

... apparently someone lied to me

.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-06-27 08:52pm

The Nomad wrote:I'd been told that the DS9TM says it has neutronium compounds ... apparently someone lied to me .

The TM doesn't mention neutronium, but several websites mention a substance call neutromium (note the "m"), as being part af the hull structure. Neutromium is described as a "rare and exotic alloy", and the reference for this substance apparently comes from Star Trek: the Magazine. Since it is called neutromium by so many sources, it is clearly not a typo, and since it is referred to as an alloy, it is obviously not neutronium, as in degenerate matter. Some other sites claim that this neutromium is so difficult to manufacture, that only the Defiant herself used it in it's hull structure, while the other vessels of the class used standard Duranium/Tritanium instead.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2004-06-27 11:22pm

Neutromium with an "m", eh?

Sounds like the bullshit's getting mighty thick.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-06-28 03:57am

Well, it can't be neutronium. It'd block the transporters.

Lancer · Post by **Lancer** » 2004-06-28 08:47am

Patrick Degan wrote:Neutromium with an "m", eh?

Sounds like the bullshit's getting mighty thick.

wait, so we've got neutronium, carbon neutronium, and now neutromium?

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-06-28 09:53am

peanut butter

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2004-06-28 11:36am

Rogue 9 wrote:Well, it can't be neutronium. It'd block the transporters.

Eh? Funny how in Think Tank they were perfectly able to beam through a hull comprised partialy of Neutronium....

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-06-28 11:39am

? Stupid Voyager and its stupid lack of continuity... >_<

Crazedwraith · Post by **Crazedwraith** » 2004-06-28 12:11pm

Rogue 9 wrote:? Stupid Voyager and its stupid lack of continuity... >_<

Well no.
1) TOS 'Porter would be less advanced. In the years between VGR and TOS they may have discovred how to beam through neutronium.
2) I beleive the planet killer had a pure neutronium hull, the Think Tank was on partial neutronium.

The Nomad · Post by **The Nomad** » 2004-06-28 12:12pm

Rogue 9 wrote:? Stupid Voyager and its stupid lack of continuity... >_<

Not only Voyager, but DS9 ( "To the Death" ) and TOS ( "The Doomsday Machine" I think... )

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-06-28 02:06pm

Crazedwraith wrote:
Rogue 9 wrote:? Stupid Voyager and its stupid lack of continuity... >_<
1) TOS 'Porter would be less advanced. In the years between VGR and TOS they may have discovred how to beam through neutronium.

Or they may not have.

2) I beleive the planet killer had a pure neutronium hull, the Think Tank was on partial neutronium.

And they never beamed into or onto the Planetkiller, so what's the point of mentioning it?

Crazedwraith · Post by **Crazedwraith** » 2004-06-28 05:30pm

Stofsk wrote:
2) I beleive the planet killer had a pure neutronium hull, the Think Tank was on partial neutronium.
And they never beamed into or onto the Planetkiller, so what's the point of mentioning it?

Well the point is the couldn't in TOS and they could in VGR which Rogue 9 was saying was piss-poor continuality I was pointing out this wasn't nessacirly so. Or have I completly misunderstood this thread?

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-06-28 05:48pm

Crazedwraith wrote:Well the point is the couldn't in TOS and they could in VGR which Rogue 9 was saying was piss-poor continuality I was pointing out this wasn't nessacirly so. Or have I completwly misunderstood this thread?

Probably. Rogue 9's point was that the Defiant's armour can't be made out of neutronium, as that would block their transporters. A perfectly valid point to make. Chris O'Farrell rebutted by saying in Voyager they could do it, although it was a different scenario altogether (I don't know the episode in question, but Chris O'Farrell points out himself the ship was made partially out of neutronium, not fully - which could mean anything, it could mean parts of the hull don't have any neutronium in it, while other parts do. And the Defiant's armour would have to encase it completely to provide protection from all angles of attack).

As for mentioning the PK in TOS, I thought the point was that you can't beam through it, and because they never tried to do so in that episode it might be seen as testimony of that fact. Not that they might have any place to beam to, but anyway...

Besides, Voyager sucks.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-06-29 02:29am

Maybe "neutromium" is just some sort of brand name or nickname given to some exceptionally strong material.

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2004-06-29 05:13am

Stofsk wrote:
Crazedwraith wrote:Well the point is the couldn't in TOS and they could in VGR which Rogue 9 was saying was piss-poor continuality I was pointing out this wasn't nessacirly so. Or have I completwly misunderstood this thread?
Probably. Rogue 9's point was that the Defiant's armour can't be made out of neutronium, as that would block their transporters. A perfectly valid point to make. Chris O'Farrell rebutted by saying in Voyager they could do it, although it was a different scenario altogether (I don't know the episode in question, but Chris O'Farrell points out himself the ship was made partially out of neutronium, not fully - which could mean anything,

It was covered in Neutronium armour, the entire SHIP wasn't neutronium and they were able to beam through it without a problem. I dont' recall any TNG+ instance.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-06-29 01:56pm

Well, actually I was referring to hearsay about Voyager not being able to do it. Apparently I have just discovered why hearsay is inadmissible evidence in court.