Prev: Re: [GZG] some size debates Next: [GZG] Re: (SFSFW) Bifrost 2005 Photos

Re: [GZG] some size debates

From: Charles Taylor <nerik@m...>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:03:26 +0100
Subject: Re: [GZG] some size debates

In message <>
	  jason standlea <> wrote:

> Trying to drag the list back from bad sheep jokes, convention
> announcements, etc etc....
> Last time I checked, the general opinion was that a Star Wars Imperial
> SD was a 1600 meter ship.  Personally, I tried making them very large
> dreadnoughts when I converted them to FT (which a lot of people didnt
> agree with *chuckle* ), but I that was because I simply didnt want a
> 'super ship' that I'd have to design and laborously hack together a
> SSD for.  What's you guys general opinion on how much FT mass that
> translates into?

Well, depends what role you're using them for, if they're the 
equivalent of big capitals (i.e. the largest non-super-ship in play), 
then 250-500 MASS.
> Also, does anyone have a length in meters for B5's Omega 'destroyer'?
Well, I know it can be definitely shown that it is _not_ about 1717m, 
I think the best value (based on comparisons with B5, the size of 
which _is_ known) is between 1200 and 1320m.

Oh, and there is _no_Way_ that White Stars are 465m long, 465' OTOH...

Almost all B5 ship sizes quoted on the Web are wrong, probably 
including these :-)

You may have guessed this is a long-standing gripe for me :-)

Gzg-l mailing list

Prev: Re: [GZG] some size debates Next: [GZG] Re: (SFSFW) Bifrost 2005 Photos