Missing For The Klingons

posted on December 16th, 2005, 7:23 am

I don't understand why they abandoned the phase cloak, that owns, then you cloak, even in battle, stuff goes right through the ship...

posted on December 16th, 2005, 8:01 am

i think the energy from beam weapons, plasma torps, anti-matter based trops can cause "partical displacement", which is just as bad as being hit by weapons with the added effect of going through the ship in a line, instead of just impacting the hull. (i think, once again i'm not sure, so plz don't ground me into paste)

posted on December 16th, 2005, 6:06 pm

Yeah ,like on the defant class you can click a button and it fires phasers in all directions and if it passes through a cloaked ship then you can see the cloaked ship ,but not be able to fire at it, only see it.
And the way to get phasers is by the avatar .
Hence - it gives more popularity and use to the avatar and defant.
but save this idea 4 a l8er version

posted on December 16th, 2005, 8:00 pm

A problem i have noticed-wen you cloak your ships its hard 2 tell. they dont go all seethrough

posted on December 16th, 2005, 11:02 pm

Not to call you an IDIOT.
But if you look at those links the Vorcha is:
2.2 million mass
The Excelsior is
2.125 million mass
The Nebula is
3.3 million mass
And the Akira is
3.01 million mass.

Since mass is the amount of matter in an object, those ships are SIGNINIFICANTLY larger then the Vorcha class, length means nothing about size, as VOLUMNE which is size, is the length multiplied by the height and width, the Vorchas a light weight compared to the Nebula and Akira. You goat.

posted on December 17th, 2005, 12:06 am

so what u saying a vorcha under the command of me wouldnt **** up a nebula or akira?

posted on December 17th, 2005, 12:15 am

size doeasnt matter. look at defiant

posted on December 17th, 2005, 3:42 am

Defiant was designed for war only.
As to a degree is the akira (or more themed towards).
But this is just a comparison of Cruisers, those multipurpose badboys.

posted on December 17th, 2005, 1:55 pm

Not to call you an IDIOT.
But if you look at those links the Vorcha is:
2.2 million mass
The Excelsior is
2.125 million mass
The Nebula is
3.3 million mass
And the Akira is
3.01 million mass.

Since mass is the amount of matter in an object, those ships are SIGNINIFICANTLY larger then the Vorcha class, length means nothing about size, as VOLUMNE which is size, is the length multiplied by the height and width, the Vorchas a light weight compared to the Nebula and Akira. You goat.

you talking to me?
you forget to take into account what actually occupies that mass. in the fed ships a fair portion will be the luxuries of 24th century life (holodecks, individual crew quaters etc, etc...). this can be proven by the size of the crew, Nebula = 750, Akira = 500, Vorcha = 1900. That is why they are classed the same. Next time try to read between the lines *unsheafs his pool cue & smacks Rhaz upside his head for trying to be a smart@ss*

PS. You are a coward to call people names from behind a computer screen

posted on December 17th, 2005, 10:40 pm

The Vorcha only has a high crew because of the SPARTAN Crew Quarters, and a large crew means no difference, how many times have 150 000 drones saved a borg cube from destruction? Jem'hadar ships have much higher crews as well. But I am right, you gouf, as my original point was in the same MASS category, the Vorcha is the king, so don't try to argue with me. A freighter can weigh less than an Akira and have a million people on board =P. So trust me, when you have a ship 2/3rds the mass of the next ship, putting them in the same category, function or not is wrong. And the Akira class was designed for war, did you see its diplomatic abilities? The Akira class is NOT an explorer type vessel like the Nebula or Galaxy, the Vorcha serves all purposes within the Klingon Empire, from diplomacy (note TNG Klingon Civil War) to Transport (Kmpecs ship). Akira classes have no purpose other than to patrol and engage enemy targets. They have larger more luxurious crew quarters so their crews can maintain LONGER voyages, and their ships require less crew as federation ships are much more automated than Klingon warships. You simply can't compare them, the Vorcha is an aging war cruiser, still the King of its 2.5 million and under mass class, that now performs all functions, and the Akira is a warship of much greater mass, thats meant for deep space voyages and engaging enemy targets, yet still cannot defeat the Vorcha in some areas, the Nebula however, can and is a much larger starship, with the same multiple purpose. So please, don't include points which I never mentioned which have nothing to do with the case to which you are arguing. And please, I beg of you, show up at my address and argue with me face to face about it, I beckon you.

posted on December 18th, 2005, 1:57 am

how do they weigh a ships mass in space? in space you can't weigh mass unless you have gravity. i mean on the moon you mass is a 6th from what is on earth so in space you have nothing

posted on December 18th, 2005, 2:36 am

I learned thid from science- your thinking of gravity not mass. mass is just a bsic unit to measure SIZE, or is that volume?

[LordsofKobol]

posted on December 18th, 2005, 5:57 am

Last edited by LordsofKobol on December 18th, 2005, 5:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

Adama is correct, "Weight" is mass x gravity. Mass by definition is how "Massive" something is, or how much matter it contains.

Also, the theory of universal gravitation shows that we would have "weight" everywhere, because everything has gravity

edit: i spelt gravity wrong mg:

posted on December 18th, 2005, 9:40 am

then i would like you to see you weight a brick on a skale without gravity. you will got no weight. it does have mass. bout you can't say howmuch it weighs so you can say it has a mass but not how much because that can't be measured due to you can't put it on a scale or balance or like that

[LordsofKobol]

posted on December 18th, 2005, 10:43 am

Last edited by LordsofKobol on December 18th, 2005, 11:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

Technically we can tell the weight of something in space, but you have to have the base on which you wish to test it's weight, so in your case the scale, then you would find the mass of the scale, and divide the weight of it when they are put atop each other Technically of course, we have yet to test this in space, and i'm sure there is some kind of insanely long calculus equation for measuring weight in space by using the relative gravity of the scale and the brick

Point is, I told you how it's done, mass is how dense something is, or how much matter it contains, weight is mass x gravity, end of file.