A T-65 X-Wing (Star Wars) could defeat the USS Enterprise NCC 1701-D (Star Trek)
Debate Rounds (5)
I'll accept that debate and thank Pro for the opportunity to discuss this important subject. I expect to be able to demonstrate that Pro is unable to prove with any kind of confidence that a standard issue Rebel T-65 star fighter should generally or regularly be expected to overcome by force in a weightless vacuum a Federation Constitution-class heavy cruiser from the mid-to-late 23rd Century. I look forward to Pro's argument.
Thank you for accepting the debate. I look forward to it
To began my argument, I will list the basic specifications for both vehicles. A Constitution-class heavy cruiser had a standard armament of eighteen phaser emitters and two photon torpedo banks.  They were equipped with deflector shields for defense.  The T-65 X-Wing was equipped with four Taim & Bak laser cannons and two proton torpedo launchers, each launcher holding three torpedos.  They were also equipped with a shield generator for defensive purposes. 
The Photon torpedo was a relatively powerful weapon, with most estimates placing its power at 25 isotons. (Roughly 50 Megatons.)  However, the torpedo was relatively unmanuverable. It would have little chance of hitting a small craft such as the X-Wing, which flew at speeds faster then one thousand kilometers per hour. 
Next are the phaser emitters. Throughout Star Trek: The Original Series, these appear to be the Enterprise's main ship-to-ship weapon. They are mainly useful in combat against large, somewhat stationary objects and would again be useless against the small and nimble X-Wing.
The strength of a Constitution-class's shields are never specifically stated. However, a Galaxy-class's shields were taken down by four hundred gigawatts of energy.  As the Constitution-class was significantly less advanced, it can be assumed that it's shield strength is significantly less. It is also worth noting that the deflector shields were most useful in dissipating energy. A Jem'hadar starship tore through the USS Odyssey's shields in a suicide ramming. 
Now, returing our focus to the X-Wing, we can look at the Proton torpedo. While we have no real numbers on their energy amounts, they are physical torpedoes that are designed to direct a large amount of energy directly towards its target. There is a high probability that the physical impact alone would tear through a Constitution-class's shields.
Based on the above information, it becomes abundantly clear the advantage a X-Wing has over a Constitution-class. It's firepower could easily rip through the deflector shields, and destroy the ship soon after. The Constitution-class, lacking any anti-starfighter weapons, would have no counterattack, and would be defeated within minutes of the initial contact.
  http://en.memory-alpha.org...
  http://starwars.wikia.com...
 Star Trek: The Next Generation technical manual.
There are several different species of reasons I'll use to argue that Pro won't prove the tactical superiority of the T-65 over a Constitution class heavy cruiser such as the USS Enterprise.
As is often the case, the most compelling arguments are the least entertaining and may to some extent despoil the levity with which Pro has no doubt submitted his resolutions. Therefore, I shall drop these unhappy bores first at the doorstep in the expectation that they shall secure Con's victory and need not further hinder our geekfest.
I. Star Wars and Star Trek are both works of Science Fiction.
A. The physical properties of either the X-wing or the NCC-1701 are both ill-defined and mostly at the mercy of the storyteller's necessity. As both franchises have been elaborated upon for decades by generations of storytellers, contradictions and uncertainties develop for which there can be no satisfactory real-world testing.
If we wished to contrast the relative qualities of the English longbow vs. the Mongol Composite bow, for example, we could research historical and archaeological findings, construct authentic replicas and measure those qualities in the physical world. Star Wars vs. Star Trek offers no such avenue for resolution.
B. We can be reasonably confident, however, that were any such conflict written into the canon of either franchise the Enterprise would necessarily be the victor.
Why is that? Fan politics, if nothing else.
Consider that X-wings only describe a make of mass-produced star fighter with multiple models. Any given X-wing need not be piloted by any character from the franchise and the loss of a single X-wing in some intergalactic battle would not necessarily impact the fortunes of any beloved protagonist. The Enterprise, on the hand, is a specific ship populated by a large number of popular characters. The history of that ship and her crew is well-documented in fiction, detailing her commission from her construction at the San Francisco shipyards to her destruction over the Planet Genesis 40 years later.
Sure, one might imagine greedy executives from Paramount and Disney conspiring to construct such a cross-over battle, but even greedy executives would know better than to kill the gold-laying goose by inserting some bewildering tale of alternative destruction for the Enterprise and her crew. No fan base, no matter how loyal or rabid, would long endure such corporate meddling.
Logically then, the X-wing would be the only possible loser in any fictional conflict between these two spacecraft.
II. Star Wars and Star Trek are too distant in space-time
A. Only slightly less compelling and therefore marginally less dull is the idea that if both spaceships were not fiction, then they would be too far separated by space-time to ever believably find reason to fight one another.
1. The Enterprise's location in space-time is pretty well documented: Milky Way Galaxy: 2245-85 AD 
2. We have far less information about the T-65's location. We mostly only know that those stories take place in the rather relative "long time ago in a galaxy far, far away." We do know that the Galaxy is a spiral galaxy with multiple, small, satellite galaxies. The closest spiral galaxy, Andromeda, fits that description and is very close to the Milky Way on a universal scale- only 2.4 million light years from us.  Although Andromeda is really too close to qualify as "a galaxy far, far away" we might use it to get a sense of the distance such a battle would need to breach.
B. We'll take a deeper look into spaceship speeds later, but just for purposes of proving this point let's get a decent estimate of hyperspeed vs. warp speed.
1. Star Trek data is again more consistent but nevertheless contains a number of contradictions between shows and even between episodes of the same show. If we go by the writer's guide for The Original Series, where warp factors are expressions of multiples of of c with a cubic function, then v = w3c (velocity equals warp factor cubed multiplied by the speed of light).
Or we can go by the more elaborate Okuda scale which makes Warp 10 an unachievable infinite. 
On the Original Series scale, the time it would take the Enterprise to travel to Andromeda at Warp 6 (216c, standard cruising speed) would be roughly 11,100 years. The Okuda scale cuts that time in half to 5,096 years. Either way, they'd be boldly going where no one has gone before for far longer than the lives of any protagonists (violating I.B. above).
2. Hyperspeed, on the other hand, is notoriously difficult to define. None of the stories seem interested in maintaining a consistent scale. Some ships travel between the outer rim of the galaxy and the inner core in less than a day, implying speeds up to 100,000 times the speed of light, while comic books define journeys between relatively nearby planets of the inner core as sometimes taking weeks. After much pondering, I've decided to use one scale that employs more reasoning than most and offers ranges of speed so volatile that at least the illusion of science is maintained.  This site estimates that a spaceship with a hyperdrive rating of 1.0 (such as the T-65) travels at roughly 8,300c which reduces the travel time between Andromeda and the Milky way to a paltry 289 years. Unfortunately for the X-wing pilot, his ship can only sustain life support for up to 5 days. 
C. We can see by using even the most liberal estimates from either multiverse that any conflict between these two forces would require that some reason for conflict be ignited across centuries if not millennia of vacuum, necessitating that the will to battle be sustained from one generation of fighters to the next or else that the original combatants be preserved for centuries. Neither ship seems to be particularly well equipped for cryostasis although the Enterprise is obviously familiar with the technology and ought to be able to construct some kind of sustainable system given time and materials. Imagining how a some plausible causus belli might arise between cultures so spectacularly separated by time and space must strip any remaining credibility from the notion of combat.
III. Other Hyperdrive vs. Warp Drive Considerations
A. In fact, the extreme strategic limitations of hyperdrive when compared to warp drive ought to advise any Admiral of even Ackbar's achievement to advocate for a more diplomatic solution.
Hyperdrive is much faster than warp, but is inferior in combat to warp, which allows ships to travel in proximity to stars, planets, and even inside nebulae and wormholes. Ships with hyperdrive must always pause to calculate the straightest path that precludes the gravity wells of celestial objects as small as asteroids.
The gravitational threat to ships in the Star Wars multiverse was so substantial in fact, that after one million years of space flight, travel was still overwhelmingly clustered around a few well-worn spacelanes and accurate astrogation maps were valuable commodities.  Whole galactic regions such as the western quarter and the inner core were considered too gravitationally dense to transit.
B. T-65s were unable to initiate hyperdrive inside any gravitational pull. In any region of space likely to be inhabited or support resources worth protecting a hyperdrive has no superluminal options while a warp drive is fully operational.
C. Ships in hyperdrive have no ability to sense or influence regular space, while a Constitution class ship can manoeuvre and fire faster-than-light weapons, all the while sensing and targeting FTL targets.
We'll start looking at armaments, armor, speed, sensors, and tactics in Round 3.
Thank you Con, for a fascinating, yet unexpected counterargument.
My opponent states that the X-Wing is "only...a make". This is simply not true. The X-Wing is extremely loved by the Star Wars fan base. It is synonymous with Star Wars itself. Ever since its debut, it has been loved as the starfighter of the rebel alliance. To call it "only...a make" simply does not do justice to it's influence. Just as the Star Trek fans would be angered over the defeat of the Enterprise, Star Wars fans would be rightfully outraged if the X-Wing lost.
Next, my opponent claims that fan politics would allow the Enterprise to emerge victorious. Again, I strongly disagree. The Star Wars franchise is far more valuable then Star Trek. In 2007, it had brought in more then $20 billion.  When sold, it was purchased for slightly over $4 billion.  In comparison, the Star Trek franchise has grossed somewhat higher then $2 billion.  While certainly impressive, it is nowhere near Star Wars' level of success. In addition to that, Star Wars is much more popular among fans. In a poll conducted on IGN, 77% of the 65,000 polled selected Star Wars as the better franchise.  As such, any crossover would inevitably end in a Star Wars victory. They simply could not risk angering that large and lucrative of a fan base.
While I find these points about hyperdrive largely irrelevant, I will refute them nevertheless. In Star Wars: A New Hope, the Millenium Falcon travels from Tantooine to Alderaan, a distance of 30,000 lightyears, in roughly 8 hours.  That multiplies out to 90,000 lightyears per day. However, the Millennium Falcon had a hyperdrive rating of .5. An X-Wing has twice that, with a rating of 1.0. Thus, the X-Wing could travel 180,000 lightyears per day, or 1, 260, 000 per week. The X-Wing had enough consumables to last 1 week. However, that could be extended with the addition of storage pods.  While not an easy task, the X-Wing could travel a distance such as that.
My opponent's final points would have little impact on a battle between the craft. Once the X-Wing had located the Enterprise, it could overwhelm its shields and destroy it long before the Enterprise to flee in Warp. With the obvious technical advantage, and it's advantage in "fan politics" it remains obvious that the X-Wing would be the victor.
Just as the Star Trek fans would be angered over the defeat of the Enterprise, Star Wars fans would be rightfully outraged if the X-Wing lost. Star Wars is much more popular among fans. As such, any crossover would inevitably end in a Star Wars victory. They simply could not risk angering that large and lucrative of a fan base.
Pro misses the point. Yes, X-wings are popular but in that fictional world they are mass-produced. Many X-wings were destroyed in Star Wars IV and VI, but because those X-wings did not contain main characters, the loss was minimal. Put another way, there were multiple makes and models of Firefly-class transports in Josh Whedon's series and the Firefly itself was popular with audiences. If any Firefly except Serenity were destroyed on-screen, I doubt there would be much audience concern. If Serenity and all her passengers were destroyed in battle, however, the story would be over and audiences disappointed.
An X-wing populated with Luke Skywalker would represent the interests of the franchise, but any old X-wing populated by any old pilot would not. The relative popularity of one franchise beyond another is not relevant as both are extremely lucrative. Destroying the Enterprise in some cheesy non-canonical fight with a X-wing would obviously disappoint one lucrative franchise and harm its value, hardly worth the risk.
However, the Millennium Falcon had a hyperdrive rating of .5. An X-Wing has twice that, with a rating of 1.0.
Uh-oh. Better check your fan club card, I think it may have expired.
The lower a hyperdrive rating, the faster the ship. Imperial Star Destroyers were class 2 and X-wings class 1, making X-wings twice as fast as Destroyers. And if you don't keep in mind that the Millennium Falcon with a hyperdrive rating of .5 was indeed the "fastest hunk of junk in the galaxy," I doubt your fan club card will ever be renewed. 
Once the X-Wing had located the Enterprise, it could overwhelm its shields and destroy it long before the Enterprise to flee in Warp.
Easier said than done, my friend. Let's look at the relative battle worthiness of both these ships.
1. The X-wing's primary weapons were generally 4 KX9 laser cannons. We can't speak much to the relative power of the "bolts" from these cannons, but we can be confident that they were slower than light because we can see the beginning and end of each bolt in transit. Since the human eye is incapable of detecting light in transit (when you flip a light switch, the room becomes instantly bright rather than filling with light, for example), these bolts were not made of light. This is one of two reasons an X-wing's laser cannon could never be fired when moving faster than light.
2. The secondary weapon was the MG7-A proton torpedo carried in 2 magazines of three each. By interstellar battle standards, the range of these torpedoes was extremely limited- 500 meters or just under a third of a mile.  Considering that a Federation photon torpedo's range was 300,000 km (600,000 times greater), the X-wing would be at a profound disadvantage. The Enterprise could target an object half the distance to the moon while most hot air balloons would be out range for an X-wing torpedo.
1. Federation Heavy Cruisers, on the other hand, were equipped with 9 dual-emitter phaser banks. Phasers were phased particle weapons that had obsoleted laser weapons in the 23rd century. A phaser was a highly adjustable weapon which with a single could be used to stun multiple city blocks or wipe out whole cities with a single pulse  Unlike laser cannons, Phasers were much faster than light and could be deployed at virtually any warp speed.
2. As we see in IV.A.2 above, a federation photon torpedo had far superior range than a proton torpedo, but was superior in every other respect as well. Photon torpedo were anti-matter warheads that could carry up to a 200 isoton yield in a class-6 torpedo (50 isotons being enough to destroy small planets, like Death Stars for example).  The photon torpedo case was essentially a tiny warp nacelle, allowing photon torpedoes to travel at high warp speeds.
3. The Enterprise was also equipped with a deflector array, generally used to pulse small asteroids out of the ship's path, but the deflector beam was also highly adaptable and used to emit a wide variety of energy emissions.
4. Constitution-class ships were also equipped with powerful tractor beams fore and aft designed for the purpose of towing heavier ships and asteroids. Even shielded, most smaller ships could be easily crushed by a tractor beam although this tactic only seemed to work at sub-light speeds. 
5. Lastly, at distances under 10,000 km, a Federation ship might employ teleporters as weapons, beaming combatants or bombs into enemy cockpits or beaming pilots out into the brig or into space as might seem necessary. Since the X-wing's galaxy was unfamiliar with this technology, it is doubtful that their shields could be equipped to repulse such an attack. Again, transporter attacks were only used at sub-light speeds.
C. We might also note that both of the X-wing's weapons were only deployable in a straight line extending forward from the pilot's 12 o'clock position, necessitating that the X-wing align the craft behind or in front of the target before firing. This is another serious disadvantage in the 3-dimensional battlefield of space. That's why the Enterprise could deploy phasers, torpedoes, tractor and transporter beams on any access. The only position from which an X-wing could threaten a Constitution-class cruiser was from directly behind and from very close range. As we shall see, shields and speed would nevertheless deflect any such threat after the first second or two.
1. X-wings were made from Titanium, the same material the US uses to make most modern missiles and spacecraft.
2. X-wings were also equipped with a small deflector shield. Unlike larger Imperial ships or any Federation ship, the X-wing's shield was a ray-shield, designed to absorb and deflect energy attacks such as lasers. The X-wing might offer some protection from a phaser beam, but probably not from a tractor or transport or graviton beam and definitely no protection at all from an incoming photon torpedo.
1. The hull of a Consititution-class starship was composed of tritanium, once described by Dr. Spock as "21.4 times harder than diamond." At those hardness levels, a small titanium ship like an X-wing would shatter on high impact with a tritanium hull.
2. Unlike an X-wings shields, the Enterprise's deflector shields prevented any matter as well as energy from penetrating. The X-wing's proton torpedoes would be useless. As Picard once noted in battle with the "outrageous Okana," laser weapon technology was useless against even the lighter weight navigational shields of his Enterprise. Once the Enterprise had her shields up, any X-wing would be harmless.
I think we're starting to get a sense here of how badly outclassed an X-wing would be against most Federation ships. Next round we'll look at the astonishing sub-light differences and hopefully get a chance to discuss tactics.
TheReguritator forfeited this round.
I appreciate the concession as such conduct has to be preferred over forfeit without cause. Still, I regret we couldn't continue the geekfest.
In truth, I had no idea that X-wings specifications were as limited as the fan pages seem to say. Top Speed 1050km/hr and a missile range of 500m? An F-18 has a top speed of 1915 km/hr and a missile range of 2500m, meaning that if one had to choose between a squandron of X-wing fighters and a squandron of US Air Force fighters to take out the Death Star, the Air Force would be more likely to get the job done.
Well, thanks for the opportunity to do some fun research.
Please VOTE CON
TheReguritator forfeited this round.
Pro has conceded this debate.
Please VOTE CON
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: FF
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.