Where was the Enterprise during the Dominion war ?

[Gil Hamilton]

Gil, don't read to much into that example. FC and Nemesis show far different capabilities.

What? In FC, it showed up after the cube was already a wreck with it's power grid failing and in Nemesis it went against a ship that's shields went from 70 some percent to naught after the Enterprise sloooowly rammed it. And regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that the Son'a ships, as weak as they were, were smacking the Enterprise around like it was the E-Nil.

[Alyeska]

Gil, don't read to much into that example. FC and Nemesis show far different capabilities.

What? In FC, it showed up after the cube was already a wreck with it's power grid failing and in Nemesis it went against a ship that's shields went from 70 some percent to naught after the Enterprise sloooowly rammed it. And regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that the Son'a ships, as weak as they were, were smacking the Enterprise around like it was the E-Nil.

Nice red herring Gil. FC shows combat capabilities to the Enterprise as does Nemesis. Insurrection is not a standard example. Furthermore you do not know the firepower of the weapons in question. Last of all you failed to take into account that these gasses that you call so weak did not fully opperate by known principles. Since when does gas in space collect so densely in such small pockets? There is more going on then you fully comprehend.

[Darth Wong]

Speaking of the Sovereigns weapons. I read at Daystrom that the phasers of a Sovie were as powerful as the phasers of a starbase. Knowing GK's unreliableness, is that true?

Ya know his stuff is clearly marked. How can you consider someone unrealible if they clearly mark what is canon and what is not canon and simply a fanfic like addition?

He isn't the problem the problem is those that don't read his damn FAQ.

Oh, you mean like the part about how it's supposedly canon fact that lasers "of any power level" are useless against Federation shields?

[Gil Hamilton]

Nice red herring Gil. FC shows combat capabilities to the Enterprise as does Nemesis. Insurrection is not a standard example.

How is it not a standard example? There is a space battle once per movie, and the one in Insurrection is most certainly one of them. None of the movies show the Enterprise fairing particularly well in an engagement.

Furthermore you do not know the firepower of the weapons in question. Last of all you failed to take into account that these gasses that you call so weak did not fully opperate by known principles. Since when does gas in space collect so densely in such small pockets? There is more going on then you fully comprehend.

We know it was a chemical reaction, which puts a serious capper on how powerful an explosion it can possibly be. Secondly, they scooped up the stuff in a ram scoop and sprayed in on the Son'a ships, so it collected so densely because it just shot out the back of the Enterprise.

[Darth Wong]

Nice red herring Gil. FC shows combat capabilities to the Enterprise as does Nemesis.

Both of them show combat capabilities, but nothing remarkable. The E-D was easily hurling as much weaponry in "Survivors" as the E-E did in either case incident. It comes down to assumptions about the newer weapons being vastly more powerful than the older ones, and that's a questionable assumption.

Insurrection is not a standard example. Furthermore you do not know the firepower of the weapons in question. Last of all you failed to take into account that these gasses that you call so weak did not fully opperate by known principles. Since when does gas in space collect so densely in such small pockets? There is more going on then you fully comprehend.

So? Appealing to uncertainty now? In cases of an uncertainty, the onus is on you to show what it means, rather than simply claiming that it's incomprehensible and assuming that therefore, it supports your position.

By the way, gases do occasionally condense in space of their own accord, if they are being drawn together by gravity. That is, after all, how celestial bodies form.

[Alyeska]

How is it not a standard example? There is a space battle once per movie, and the one in Insurrection is most certainly one of them. None of the movies show the Enterprise fairing particularly well in an engagement.

Try reading further along before making such statements.

And not fairing particularly well? Well gee, I guess sustaining several shots from the Borg is meaningless. And I guess sustaining more then two dozen torpedo strikes from the Scimitar as well as firing more then 40 torpedos in return (that we visual see or deduct) is pretty pathetic as well.

We know it was a chemical reaction, which puts a serious capper on how powerful an explosion it can possibly be. Secondly, they scooped up the stuff in a ram scoop and sprayed in on the Son'a ships, so it collected so densely because it just shot out the back of the Enterprise.

Yet you ignore the fact that release of such gasses should have had the gas rapidly dispersing due to change in pressure. This strangely didn't happen. That means these gasses have some other affect that you don't fully understand and hence any calculations derived from them are spotty at best.

[Alyeska]

Both of them show combat capabilities, but nothing remarkable. The E-D was easily hurling as much weaponry in "Survivors" as the E-E did in either case incident. It comes down to assumptions about the newer weapons being vastly more powerful than the older ones, and that's a questionable assumption.

The Quantum Torpedoes are fairly easily pegged as singificantly more powerful. The launchers on the E-E also show far greater capacity and refire over the E-Ds single launcher. Nemesis was by far the most impressive capabilities of a single ship ever shown for Starfleet.

So? Appealing to uncertainty now? In cases of an uncertainty, the onus is on you to show what it means, rather than simply claiming that it's incomprehensible and assuming that therefore, it supports your position.

By the way, gases do occasionally condense in space of their own accord, if they are being drawn together by gravity. That is, after all, how celestial bodies form.

We are already uncertain to an extent on how these gases act. How can you be sure they are fully like normal gas? They did not look nor act like gas as we know it in space. There was something else affecting them. Hell, the fact that such small amounts were collecting in pockets everywhere indicates something else was going on. Given the vulnerability ST ships have with subspace and how easily the explossion ripped through the one ship, that might even have an aspect.

Think of it this way Mike. Is it fair to assume standard properties on the gas in one respect when they don't demonstrate standard properties with known examples? If you ignore the gas element in this movie, there are countless examples in Trek with much greater firepower being needed to destroy Trek ships. Put that rating into the torpedoes the E-E carries and remember it pegged one Sona ship. So either you assume earlier Trek firepower figures were quite off base, or something unknown is going on in Insurrection.

[Darth Wong]

Yet you ignore the fact that release of such gasses should have had the gas rapidly dispersing due to change in pressure. This strangely didn't happen. That means these gasses have some other affect that you don't fully understand and hence any calculations derived from them are spotty at best.

What are you talking about? They detonated a cloud of gas; it burned, and two ships were blown up. The burning cloud did rapidly expand.

If you're trying to say that it was not a chemical reaction, then you may feel free to show what it was. Otherwise, you're just appealing to uncertainty and hoping for a win by default.

[Howedar]

Both of them show combat capabilities, but nothing remarkable. The E-D was easily hurling as much weaponry in "Survivors" as the E-E did in either case incident. It comes down to assumptions about the newer weapons being vastly more powerful than the older ones, and that's a questionable assumption.

Now I'll admit that I havent' seen Survivors in a long time, but all I remember is a torpedo spread or two (perhaps a dozen torpedos total) and several phaser shots.

The E-E in Nemesis shelled out a hell of a lot more than that, over a shorter time.

[Darth Wong]

The Quantum Torpedoes are fairly easily pegged as singificantly more powerful. The launchers on the E-E also show far greater capacity and refire over the E-Ds single launcher. Nemesis was by far the most impressive capabilities of a single ship ever shown for Starfleet.

Did its rate of fire exceed that of the E-D in "Survivors"?

We are already uncertain to an extent on how these gases act. How can you be sure they are fully like normal gas?

Prove that they aren't. Star Trek has all sorts of weird space-time distortions; their behaviour can be chalked up to one of these without having to invoke new and mysterious types of gases which undergo spontaneous reactions of a completely unknown new type.

They did not look nor act like gas as we know it in space. There was something else affecting them. Hell, the fact that such small amounts were collecting in pockets everywhere indicates something else was going on. Given the vulnerability ST ships have with subspace and how easily the explossion ripped through the one ship, that might even have an aspect.

So? Let's suppose the space-time was all fucked up in that region of space (wouldn't be the first time), thus causing the gases to condense to an unnatural extent. That still wouldn't change the fact that we are talking about a gas explosion, not nuclear or matter/antimatter. And if you're going to pretend that these were super-gases which can generate fantastic yields with insignificant mass and spontaneous chain reactions, you'd better come up with a helluva lot better reasoning than "they were kind of weird".

Think of it this way Mike. Is it fair to assume standard properties on the gas in one respect when they don't demonstrate standard properties with known examples?

In what way did they not demonstrate standard properties? It makes far more sense to blame the unusual density on the region of space than on the gas; we already KNOW about fucked-up space-time patches in Star Trek, so that hypothesis does not invent new phenomena. If it's something about the gas itself, and it's got some horrifyingly powerful characteristic based on your mystery mechanism, then why aren't they using it as a weapon?

If you ignore the gas element in this movie, there are countless examples in Trek with much greater firepower being needed to destroy Trek ships. Put that rating into the torpedoes the E-E carries and remember it pegged one Sona ship. So either you assume earlier Trek firepower figures were quite off base, or something unknown is going on in Insurrection.

Your hypothesis: there is a fantastic gas which produces incredible nuclear yields in a low-density chain reaction. This amazing super-gas can destroy starships because of its incredible power.

My hypothesis: there is a fucked-up region of spacetime in which gravity is enhanced, so the gases collect more densely than they normally would (note that such problems are already known to exist in Trek). They burn up, and some of the gas is actually inside the warp engines (see the "manifolds" of the E-E), so the result is a chemical explosion which passes right through the shields and detonates something inside the delicate warp engines, destroying the entire ship.

Note how my hypothesis relies entirely upon phenomena already known to exist in Trek.

[Gil Hamilton]

Try reading further along before making such statements.

And not fairing particularly well? Well gee, I guess sustaining several shots from the Borg is meaningless. And I guess sustaining more then two dozen torpedo strikes from the Scimitar as well as firing more then 40 torpedos in return (that we visual see or deduct) is pretty pathetic as well.

Pretty much, given it's supposed states on paper. Besides, the Borg's silly tractor ray hit the Defiant barehulled and couldn't destroy it, and you think it's impressive that the Enterprise, which had just showed up could survive several hits from it? Or the Scimitar, which idea of firing "all port side" weapons is one or two shots?

Yet you ignore the fact that release of such gasses should have had the gas rapidly dispersing due to change in pressure. This strangely didn't happen. That means these gasses have some other affect that you don't fully understand and hence any calculations derived from them are spotty at best.

Not at all. It takes time for gas to disperse, even in space and it only had a few second to happen anyway. Secondly, it doesn't matter if we can't get an exact number, we know it can't be all that tremendous compared to, say, a nuclear weapon, yet it destroyed one ship and crippled another.

[Darth Wong]

Now I'll admit that I havent' seen Survivors in a long time, but all I remember is a torpedo spread or two (perhaps a dozen torpedos total) and several phaser shots.

Right, but that burst of fire only took a few seconds.

The E-E in Nemesis shelled out a hell of a lot more than that, over a shorter time.

That's what I'm asking for confirmation of. Does anyone have that episode on DVD?

[Howedar]

I don't.

I know that burst took a short time, but even the instananeous rate of fire of the E-E was a lot higher. If memory serves, of course.

[Ender]

DW: Metrion Gas was described as having a subspace component to it in Voyager (and I believe ithad something to do witht he destruction of Neelix's world), so it is not a normal gas.

[Uraniun235]

Now I'll admit that I havent' seen Survivors in a long time, but all I remember is a torpedo spread or two (perhaps a dozen torpedos total) and several phaser shots.

Right, but that burst of fire only took a few seconds.

The E-E in Nemesis shelled out a hell of a lot more than that, over a shorter time.

That's what I'm asking for confirmation of. Does anyone have that episode on DVD?

I have Survivors on my computer. It is arguably the most impressive show of force ever seen from a GCS.

The initial volley is something like six torpedos in ~1 and 1/3 seconds (I think), and the second volley has six torpedos more spread out (slightly over two seconds I think). However, the slower rate of fire may have indicated that Worf was spacing the torpedos out so that he could maintain "rapid-fire with all weapons on full" as Riker had ordered.

The first volley of phaser fire is three extended phaser shots that last for about three seconds total. The second volley consisted of four slightly shorter phaser bursts that added up to the same amount of time. The phaser blasts, from the perspective of the bridge viewscreen, seemed to all come from different origin points.

There is a pause at the end of the second volley, and while they may have been about to launch a third volley, the Husnock ship takes advantage of this brief pause to return fire, disabling the Enterprise defense systems.

Every shot in these barrages hit their target.

[Darth Wong]

DW: Metrion Gas was described as having a subspace component to it in Voyager (and I believe ithad something to do witht he destruction of Neelix's world), so it is not a normal gas.

Everything has a subspace component to it in Star Trek (I'm serious; they use subspace sensors to pick up everything).

[Laird]

I don't remeber the line about needing retrofitting.

I do know the admiral says in the intial communications to the enterprise that "The enterprise is not retrofitted properly for the briar patch".

They couldn't go faster then 1/10th impulse or something with out the retrofit.

[Chris OFarrell]

DW: Metrion Gas was described as having a subspace component to it in Voyager (and I believe ithad something to do witht he destruction of Neelix's world), so it is not a normal gas.

Everything has a subspace component to it in Star Trek (I'm serious; they use subspace sensors to pick up everything).

I think he ment that there was something that involved it interacting with subspace in a way that would defy a more basic element as we know it. The Metrion Cascade unleashed against his world was some kind of super funky subspace chain reaction that killed everyone on his world. Or something.

I also remember in taht 'The sound of her Voice' DS9 episode there was a planet which was enclosed in a Metrion cloud or something and when active subspace sensors were used on it, it blew their warp core and other subspace related systems. So they had to use a shuttlepod without any active subspace emmisions or core to penetrate it.

I think its same to say whatever this Metrion stuff is, its hardly something that plays by any laws of physics *I* know about.

[Darth Wong]

I don't remeber the line about needing retrofitting.

I do know the admiral says in the intial communications to the enterprise that "The enterprise is not retrofitted properly for the briar patch".

They couldn't go faster then 1/10th impulse or something with out the retrofit.

Obviously, since we could see the interaction of the gas with the manifolds, so the drag force was going to be a serious problem for the ship.

[Darth Wong]

I think he ment that there was something that involved it interacting with subspace in a way that would defy a more basic element as we know it. The Metrion Cascade unleashed against his world was some kind of super funky subspace chain reaction that killed everyone on his world. Or something.

We've seen that the same kind of "chain reaction" is possible in Trek with ordinary atmosphere.

I also remember in taht 'The sound of her Voice' DS9 episode there was a planet which was enclosed in a Metrion cloud or something and when active subspace sensors were used on it, it blew their warp core and other subspace related systems. So they had to use a shuttlepod without any active subspace emmisions or core to penetrate it.

None of this proves that the gas produced fantastic energy yields when detonated.

I think its same to say whatever this Metrion stuff is, its hardly something that plays by any laws of physics *I* know about.

Nothing in Star Trek plays strictly by the laws of physics that you know about. This doesn't mean you have carte blanche to assume that anything you want to be true is true. The burden of proof still falls upon you, and I have already produced an explanation which does not rely on any magical super-energy yields in order to destroy those So'na ships.

[Chris OFarrell]

We've seen that the same kind of "chain reaction" is possible in Trek with ordinary atmosphere.

Same kind? Exactly what episode are you talking about? The only chain reaction in an atmosphere that I remember was in A Matter Of TIme when they somehow converted the particals in the planets atmosphere into plasma which they they somehow sucked out and blew into space. It wasn't realy an ordinary atmosphere there, it was filled with all manner of junk which they had to specificaly do something to before they could start a chain reaction. With phasers, which are a chain reaction weapon IIRC.

Nothing in Star Trek plays strictly by the laws of physics that you know about. This doesn't mean you have carte blanche to assume that anything you want to be true is true. The burden of proof still falls upon you, and I have already produced an explanation which does not rely on any magical super-energy yields in order to destroy those So'na ships.

I'm not caliming some super energy yields or what not. I'm simply showing that this 'Metrion' crap has an established histroy IN Trek of doing certian things. Logicaly if we're looking at an event in ST that uses this stuff we should take into account all the past evidence OF this stuff before claiming a sound theory of what happened.

Fact. We know there was a Metrion Cascade weapon that when used on the moon orbiting Nelix's homeworld killed preaty much everyone through some sort of chain reaction.
Fact. In DS9 'Sound Of Her Voice' we see that a Metrion barrier around the planet (which was explictly said to be a subspace thing) would cause extreme damage including destruction of warp cores to anyhing that was stupid enough to stimulate it.

As such, hypothesising that the events in ST9 should be consistent with this is hardly unfair. Hypothesising that the gas caused damage to the two Sona ships through things such as warp cores cooking off in response to active subspace scans or torpedoes streaking through it with active subspace fields or what not isn't unreasnoable, given that its an established thing that happens with this crap.

[Sarevok]

What are you talking about? They detonated a cloud of gas; it burned, and two ships were blown up. The burning cloud did rapidly expand.

If you're trying to say that it was not a chemical reaction, then you may feel free to show what it was. Otherwise, you're just appealing to uncertainty and hoping for a win by default.

There is no oxygen in space so there was no way the gas could burn. Whatever reaction caused the destruction of the Sona Battleships must have been highly unusual. I am not saying it was anywhere near nuclear yield but it may that Star Trek shields do not work against Metreon gas. The manifolds statement seem to support this theory.

Also in VOY : "Flashback" a similar thing is seen. The Excelsior is cornered in a dense nebula by a Klingon Battlecruiser and uses an anti-proton beam to ignite the nebula. The resulting explosion was powerful enough to toss around the Klingon Battlecruiser like it was made of paper but as the bridge crew reported that the explosion did not even scratch it. I forgot the name of the nebula but it was dense like the Insurrection one.

This would indicate Federation shields are quite capable of handling large chemical explosions. Metreon gas is an exception as shields can not stop it from touching the hull so the shields would not protect a ship from an exploding Metreon gas cloud.

[Darth Wong]

We've seen that the same kind of "chain reaction" is possible in Trek with ordinary atmosphere.

Same kind? Exactly what episode are you talking about? The only chain reaction in an atmosphere that I remember was in A Matter Of TIme when they somehow converted the particals in the planets atmosphere into plasma which they they somehow sucked out and blew into space. It wasn't realy an ordinary atmosphere there, it was filled with all manner of junk which they had to specificaly do something to before they could start a chain reaction. With phasers, which are a chain reaction weapon IIRC.

Precisely. In "A Matter of Time", they were able to start a chain reaction in an inhabited planet's atmosphere. Saying that it "wasn't really an ordinary atmosphere" does not change the fact that it could not have been that strange or people wouldn't be able to breathe it.

I'm not caliming some super energy yields or what not. I'm simply showing that this 'Metrion' crap has an established histroy IN Trek of doing certian things. Logicaly if we're looking at an event in ST that uses this stuff we should take into account all the past evidence OF this stuff before claiming a sound theory of what happened.

And what is your theory, then?

Fact. We know there was a Metrion Cascade weapon that when used on the moon orbiting Nelix's homeworld killed preaty much everyone through some sort of chain reaction.

More magic Trek chain reactions; they're a dime a dozen, and don't require anything that exotic.

Fact. In DS9 'Sound Of Her Voice' we see that a Metrion barrier around the planet (which was explictly said to be a subspace thing) would cause extreme damage including destruction of warp cores to anyhing that was stupid enough to stimulate it.

And exactly why would it cause this kind of damage? I have presented a theory, while you have not.

As such, hypothesising that the events in ST9 should be consistent with this is hardly unfair. Hypothesising that the gas caused damage to the two Sona ships through things such as warp cores cooking off in response to active subspace scans or torpedoes streaking through it with active subspace fields or what not isn't unreasnoable, given that its an established thing that happens with this crap.

So the metrion gas used 'active subspace scans" or "torpedoes streaking through it with active subspace fields" to kill the So'na ships now? Are you on drugs? They detonated a gas cloud, and the explosion killed the two ships. I have already presented a perfectly reasonable explanation as to how this happened, and all you've done is basically mumble that we can't be certain of it because Trek is weird.

[Darth Wong]

There is no oxygen in space so there was no way the gas could burn.

This is not hard vacuum; it is a dense cloud of material. It is entirely possible for the gas cloud to contain reactants.

Whatever reaction caused the destruction of the Sona Battleships must have been highly unusual. I am not saying it was anywhere near nuclear yield but it may that Star Trek shields do not work against Metreon gas. The manifolds statement seem to support this theory.

Also in VOY : "Flashback" a similar thing is seen. The Excelsior is cornered in a dense nebula by a Klingon Battlecruiser and uses an anti-proton beam to ignite the nebula. The resulting explosion was powerful enough to toss around the Klingon Battlecruiser like it was made of paper but as the bridge crew reported that the explosion did not even scratch it. I forgot the name of the nebula but it was dense like the Insurrection one.

This would indicate Federation shields are quite capable of handling large chemical explosions. Metreon gas is an exception as shields can not stop it from touching the hull so the shields would not protect a ship from an exploding Metreon gas cloud.

Which is precisely what I've been saying. What is your point?

[Uraniun235]

I'm still irritated that the navigational deflector conveniently doesn't work in the Briar Patch.