Talk:Daedalus class battlecruiser/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Similar Design to a Battlestar? 2 same picture, 2 ships 3 Rail Guns 4 Gateworld an acceptable source? 5 O'Neill class 6 speculation on apollo 7 Apollo Continued 8 Possible Solution 9 Crusade pt1 Issues 10 Rings 11 Korolev or Odessey absorbing fire 12 Nuclear Warheads 13 Shield color debate 14 The systems of the ships DO run at 25% without a ZPM! 15 Asgard Hyperdrive 16 Beaming Technology

Similar Design to a Battlestar?

Has anyone noticed that the general design of the ship is similar to that of a Battlestar from Battlestar Galactica? I mean it has flight pods either side of the ship and as a large command module at the front. It also makes use of projectile weaponry and nukes much like the new series of BSG. In my opinion the producers should have stuck with the Prometheus design and just added to it. The Daedalus just feels like a rip-off quite frankly.

The only similarity is in the hangar bays on either side of the ship. The rest of Deadelus' shape is fairly different from that of Galactica's (it's also alot smaller). As the majority here also point out, Deadelus' primary defence is not her fighters and unlike the Galactica, is completley capable of destroying ships many times her size without using her fighters. So the ships and their combat abilities are actually quite different, and you are looking for debate. No Way Back 15:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

same picture, 2 ships

why is the same picture used twice but is called the daedalus in one and the odyssey in the other? -Xornok 23:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I am opposed to having that pic, I asked MatthewFenton, who canged it, but the reason I got is that it's a "better" pic, but they are actually from 2 different episodes. I'll change it back and see what happens.

Faris b 23:44, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I took that picture of the Daedalus in ep. 8 (SGA) when Daedalus was over Earth and about to leave for Atlantis, fariusb insists overwise. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 07:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Rail Guns

Currently the weapons section links to the Rail Gun article, which makes sense, but there's also a Railguns in science fiction article that includes a section specifically on Stargate. Should we switch the link to the article, or leave it to the generic Rail Gun page? JBK405 19:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Deha Vu, :-P thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:40, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Gateworld an acceptable source?

On the main Daedalus page the Gateworld web-site is listed as a source for the classifying the Odyssey as a "PB3865 Deep Space Carrier", but is Gateworld a "legal" source? How official is its information? I'm not contradicting its info, but simply curious as to whether another source needs to be found. JBK405 23:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not an ideal source, but it will do. If you can find a more official one, then please replace it, but until then, it's better than nothing. --Tango 12:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The only other references to that number and designation are from the mission patches and the like that are seen in the background of various Odyssey centric episodes. - 59.167.42.43 04:51, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

O'Neill class

That is and isn't an O'Neill class. Its the same model, but its size is horribly mixed up. When the Prometheus encountered an O'Neill, it was dwarfed. In this episode, the O'Neill was the same size as the Daedalus class ships. Alyeska 23:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

How can you tell relative sizes without any way to tell distance? The battle was in space, there were no landmarks. Anyway, when did the Prometheus meet an O'Neill Class? --Tango 11:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I take that last bit back, it appears the ship in "Prometheus" was O'Neill class, I had my timings confused. --Tango 11:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

You can tell bassed on its relative position to other ships and orientation of weapons fire. If the O'Neill was farther off (it would have to be a great deal farther out to appear the size it did with the Oddessey), then when the O'Neill fired, its weapons should have angled towards they camera as they approach the Ori ships. Instead the Asgard weapon shot traveled in a straight path right on the Ori ships. Similar results appear when the Ori fire on the O'Neill. Basicaly they messed up the scaling completely. The O'Neill is noticably larger then a Hattak and the Daedalus is noticably smaller then a Hattak. In the episode, all ships were relative in size. Alyeska

Yes, the producers admitted the SFX studio had made a mistake with their scaling in Camelot, it is an O'neill class. - 59.167.42.43 04:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a reference for that? A link to an interview, or something? It would be useful information to include in the article. --Tango 22:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

It was on gateworld a while ago, troll through their news, you should run into it eventually. Something to do with interviews regarding CAmelot and Flesh & Blood. - 59.167.26.44 08:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

speculation on apollo

why is the apollo listed as a 304? there is no evidence suggesting that it too will be a 304. until more information is released, i think we should take it off the list... -Xornok 22:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm tempted to agree - the only information we have is a short spoiler about an episode that won't be aired (or even filmed) for months. It's not very reliable. --Tango 22:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The only information on Apollo is that it's a new battleship, we dont know that means a 304, for all we know, it could be a 303 or a 305 specifically outfitted to kick the Asuran's asses. It should not be on the 304 page. - 59.167.26.44 08:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

And if the USAF is following naval standards (quite possible given the previous ships have been called Battlecruisers or Carriers), the new ship could also be the 307 (304 is Daedalus, 305 is Oddessey, and 306 being the Korelov). When you get down to it, the Apollo is unknown. However, there is a solution. We can create a new page called Tauri ships. This page can go into some detail about each SG ship. That would let us prune this page of some information (it doesn't have to go into detail about every ship of the class). Tauri ships would spend more time talking about the history of the ship then the technical specifications. Alyeska 17:41, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Alyeska, where did you get that the 304 is Daedalus, 305 is Odyssey, and so forth? If i remember Flesh and Blood, Landry tells Woolsey that the Ori ships cut through two 304s (meaning the Odyssey and Korolev). You're confusing hull codes and hull numbers. Jordan.Kreiger 21:29, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, I am using traditional US Navy naming conventions. The class of ship is designated by both the first ship of the class and its hull number. An example of the 688 Los Angeles class submarines. They are known as both LA and 688. The Los Angeles was hull number 688, and yet the entire series of boats is often called 688 even when the newer ships are actualy higher in number. The Sea Wolf class wasn't 689, it was a much higher number because it followed the previous 688 boats. If the Tauri ships are following a traditional naming and designation, the Apollo is going to be 307 since we already have 304-306. Alyeska 21:48, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

What makes you think its American? I mean come on if it stands a cat in hells chance of taking on Asurans its likely British :) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I've checked out both references and they provide exactly two pieces of information, the ship's name and the commander's name, so IMO there's no basis for putting anything here about it. Since it's likely to be a Daedalus it may warrant a mention in the article, but we should make sure to fully qualify its ambiguous status and we should definitely not be making up hull numbers or other such details. I've removed it from the table and added mention that we don't know it's a Daedalus class to its section. Bryan 22:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Faris, it could be an Apollo class for all we know. Alyeska 23:28, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, while I don't agree with you on that, it would probably be prudent to wait. I mean, the way I see it, there were 2 phases of Earth ships,
The Prometheus phase - Which was making a ship under trial and error/jerryrigging

and
The Daedalus phase - Which was making a ship exactly the way they wanted it

While I'd love to see a 305 have Asgard generators in order to run at 100% (The Daedalus runs Asgard systems at 25% evidenced by the ZPM giving them a huge boost; long story) and the Naqahdah generators giving a lower power output, actual energy weapons and such, but I don't see it happening. While the big wigs in DC (The Ties that Bind, I believe) said that they wanted to build more 304's, they said the same about the 303's but this time I think they mean it.

Faris b 01:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Its definately prudent to wait. The theories behind the Daedalus proved to be largely wrong. Everyone thought that was going to be a BC303 Prometheus class, it most definately was not. Alyeska 02:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The ships follow the USAF standard, not the Navy, the Air Force are building these things. They classify their craft types by number. They're a class of 304, just like a fighter class is F/A-18 or F-14. If they were navy, then each ship commissioned would have a different number - 59.167.46.179 05:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, but I have another concern, the Apollo isn't going to be destroyed early on is it? Or the Daedalus for that matter. It seems the shows have a 1 ship limit, does this mean that either ship will end up destroyed when they decide to face the Asurans? I hope not, the show has evolved enough to the point where 2 ships woudln't mean too powerful, esp. when fighting Ancients. It mentions that Abe Ellis is possibly a recurring character for S4 so hopefully that will mean the Apollo is going to stay, but lets hope the same stays true for the Daedalus.

Faris b 12:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with all the other editors who have stated that any information about the Apollo being Daedalus-class is speculation and shouldn't appear on this page. CovenantD 21:28, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I've stated it multiple times, Apollo should not be mentioned anywhere in this article. It is complete speculation that it will be a 304, and until the ship is shown on screen it shouldn't even be mentioned at all. Now, I am about 90% sure it will be a 304, but until that is shown on screen we need to wait. Konman72 21:39, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

And just where should the Apollo be listed? Do you see many of us actualy saying the Apollo is a 304? No, you don't. We don't know what class of ship the Apollo is and there is too little information to warrant a new page. And yet, the information exists and should go somewhere. Given the possibility that the Apollo is going to be a 304 makes mentioning it in this article sufficent until more information exists. Saying we can't mention it because its not a 304 is a BS excuse. Should we remove all mentions of the Prometheus as well? Alyeska 22:20, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I will repeat. There is no other place that the Apollo might be listed. There is no Stargate ships article. There are only the two main class articles and where else is the Apollo going to be listed? Whats more, precedence allows the Apollo to be listed. Before we know what class the Daedalus was, it was listed in the Prometheus article. Why? Because there was no other location for the article. A stub for a 3 line article would get deleted so fast, or what do you know, it would get merged into another article. Instead of just deleting the information outright, why not actualy try considering the options? The Apollo is NOT being listed as a 304 and is specificaly stating what is and isn't known. Alyeska 22:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

So we present false information because there is no place to present correct information? THAT is BS reasoning. And I see 4 people who definitively say that the Apollo should not be presented in this article, whether they phrase it as "304 page" or "this article." CovenantD 23:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

You seem to be under the false impression that incorrect information is being presented. The Apollo is specificaly stated as to be of an unknown class. Alyeska 23:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

And I quote Very little other information on the Apollo is availible so far, including whether it is or is not indeed a Daedalus class ship or a new class of ship. Well what do you know, there is no false information since that sentence clearly states the facts. Alyeska 23:22, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Am I right in saying that the only information we have about this ship is what is in a single spoiler? Spoilers have been known to be wrong, or plots change prior to airing - we shouldn't be writing multiple paragraphs about a ship that may not even exist. A single sentence mentioning the ship is plenty - "A spoiler has been released describing a new ship called the Apollo, commanded by [whoever it is]. No other details of the ship are known at this time, including its class." (Ok, so that's two sentences, nevermind). --Tango 23:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

As new information is released, we can update or alter as necessary. Alyeska 23:48, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

You seem to think that we must include the information just because it is out there. That is wrong. There should be no mentioning of Apollo for the many reasons stated. Until it is seen on screen anything about it is subject to change (including its very existance). Just wait the few months it takes for the episode to air and then slap it wherever you want to. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. If the information is not a present thing then it is not to be included. If we include the fact that a new ship is coming then we will need to also mention that at any time, in any episode, a new ship could be revealed. This is why there is a policy against crystal balling. This isn't about false or true information, it is about what should or should not be included in an encyclopedia entry. And speculative information based on spoilers that have shown their fallibility should not be included. Konman72 03:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Apollo Continued

Funny, I made much the same argument nearly a year ago over the issue of the Oddessy or Korelov being destroyed, and ultimately I was threatened with being blocked from Wiki for wanting to keep spoilers out of the page. Alyeska 04:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

If you argued against speculation before then why argue for it now? I would have whole-heartedly supported you back then had I had the opportunity. It is speculation about something that not only might not be a 304, but also might not even exist! I am reverting it again because as I stated there are more people against its inclusion than for it. The people that want it must give reasons for its inclusion. So far you have given none, while those against have given many reasons including the fact that we have a policy against crystal balling. I ask that you refrain from readding the information until you can provide proper reasons why we should go against policy, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Konman72 (talk • contribs) 01:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Note: I assumed you were replying to Alyeska and not me, so I moved your line to the correct location. -Huntster

There has been absolutely no speculation on Apollo. All that has been said is the cold hard facts. How many times do I have to make this clear? There is no speculation, merely a statement of what we know and what that could mean. Either the Apollo is or is not a 304. Thats not speculation, thats fact. Speculation would be saying "The Apollo is a BC304B FlightII designed for the sole purpose of killing Replicators". However, such things haven't been said. If you want to make a point, it would help if you actualy bothered to understand the situation. Alyeska 09:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

There are some major differences between the Oddessey/Korolev destruction issue and the Apollo class issue. First and foremost, Oddessey and Korolev are known to be Daedalus class ships and were already the subject of this article. If anyone can find references saying that Apollo will be a Daedalus too, then we might include it. Until then there's no evidence to indicate that Apollo is encompassed in the topic of this article at all. The issue of whether it's a "spoiler" or not is completely irrelevant. Bryan 07:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've tried reading the material above, and I still do not understand why some people want to keep Apollo on this page, when there is no proof of any kind that it will be a 304. I mean, this page *is* for Daedalus-class starships, is it not? Create a stub article for Apollo in the interum (simply Apollo (Stargate)), and place a link under a "See also" heading on the Prometheus and Daedalus pages.... If it turns out to be a 304, do a redirect back to this page. For the time being, though, I am of the belief that including Apollo here falls under WP:NOR. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 06:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a reading comprehension problem or something? I've stated half a dozen times now that we don't know what class of ship the Apollo is. I quoted the last sentence in the Apollo section and bolded it. I will do it again for your benefit. Very little other information on the Apollo is availible so far, including whether it is or is not indeed a Daedalus class ship or a new class of ship. See? How the hell is that calling it a 304? The statement clearly says WE DON'T KNOW. Creating a stub for something unknown is likely going to get it deleted or merged right back in here. In the mean time PRECEDENT already sides with me. The Daedalus was put on the Prometheus page. Alyeska 09:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Alyeska, please calm down, this is *not* a big deal. Just because Daedalus was included on Prometheus' page doesn't make it right, and in my opinion, should probably have not been done. And no, I somewhat doubt that an Apollo stub would be redirected here or elsewhere, if a simple case was made to keep it until such a time as it can be properly classified elsewhere (which cannot be done currently). Cheers! -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 09:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

(to Alyeska) I know you aren't saying it is a 304, however all of your additions do. Even if you say in the article that we don't know what class it will be this is the 304 article. We are giving a whole section to a ship that you even admit might not be a 304...on the 304 article. Would you expect a regular encyclopedia to include a section on World War III in the World War II article? No. And you can quit citing precedent since precedent means nothing (even in your specific example, I would have opposed it just as much as this), it has never been nor will it ever be a sufficient reason for anything on Wikipedia. What does matter though is policy, and I have cited multiple policies that are being violated with this addition crystal balling and no original research to name a few. I am even opposed to creating a stub at the moment (but would not do anything if it was actually done). Why do you all feel it absolutely necessary to include this bit of information before it is shown on screen? Do you think somebody will be researching future Stargate ships and be disappointed? There is no reason to include this ship because we don't know anything about it yet. All that we do "know" is subject to change in an instant and is not suitable for Wikipedia since it does not come from a reliable source. Now, I don't want this edit war to continue any further so I won't revert at the moment, but I hope that you all can look beyond your evident desire to include this information and see the multitude of reasons why it should not be included. BTW, I think that a straw poll should be taken to make a final decision on this matter. Anyone else agree? Konman72 09:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Apollo should definately NOT have it's own article, it's completely non-notable and well get deleted straight away. (I'll put it up for AfD myself if it gets created.) There is no speculation or original research involved in mentioning Apollo, as long as it's mentioned in the form of "A spoiler says...". An entire section on Apollo isn't appropriate because we don't know if Apollo even exists. We do, however, know that the spoiler exists, so we can mention the spoiler, which is all the mention Apollo needs. --Tango 11:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

this is funny, everyone is talking about what wikipedia is and isnt. it isnt a crystal ball, blah blah blah, but we still make articles about episodes that havent aired and whose content comes from the same source as the apollo information. i agree with alyeska that the apollo should be mentioned for the time being, as it has no other place to be and because creating a page for "Tau'ri space crafts" would serve no other use except to rehash everything thats been said on the promy and deddy-class pages and just adding the apollo information... -Xornok 16:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Other than for major episodes like finales, I don't think we should have more than a mention on the episodes list for unaired eps. Finales, the 200th ep, etc. often have enough info about them to be notable before airing, but others aren't. --Tango 23:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

One thing I'm not understanding in this current kerfuffle is why there's such an all-consuming rush to have some sort of information about Apollo in either this article or a stand-alone one on Apollo itself. Wikipedia can survive without it for a few months until information about the ship's class comes out. Or why not create First Strike (Atlantis) already and put the information there? There is certainly precedent for having articles on individual episodes and that's the one all the information's from currently. Bryan 17:36, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

My point exactly Bryan Derksen. Look, I can understand the desire to include information, but it should be done properly, and having Apollo on here is not proper. You can cite all the precedent you want, it won't change anything because chances are I disagree with the instant you are citing (like Daedalus being on the Prometheus page). Just let this little tiny piece of information go, no one is looking for it since it isn't even known beyond the hardcore fanbase that read spoilers (and if people don't read those then they probably don't want to know anyway). If the information is trimmed down to a mentioning, as opposed to a whole section, then I will not revert it. I will still argue against it and think that it is wrong, but it isn't anything to get into an edit war over. I also think that creating First Strike (Atlantis) would be a fantastic idea since it is notable enough (as all episodes are) and can be changed to a redirect if the title changes. Konman72 03:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

There are plenty of ways to get in a mention of Apollo without the assumption that it is a 304. Until such time as a citation can be provided that states it is Daedalus class, it is speculation to include in an article that is entitled "Daedalus class battlecruiser." Until such time as a citation can be provided, such speculation is subject to removal under Wikipedia:Verifiability. CovenantD 03:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Still using tired arguments already proven wrong I see. We aren't assuming it is a 304 and the actual wording of the entry explicitly states this. Try reading up on your english comprehension skills a little. Alyeska 03:50, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

So you're saying that the article isn't about Daedalus class battlecruisers? CovenantD 04:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

You know very well what I did and didn't say. Alyeska 05:49, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

And you know very well what he said. This article is entitled "Daedalus class battlecruiser" not Ships in Stargate. All entries in here (when not just a simple reference, such as Prometheus) are only to be about Daedalus class battlecruisers. You can say all you want that the Apollo may not be a 304 but if you slap it in the article about the 304 then the assumption is being made, or at least the subject of the article is being expanded/broken beyond its constraints. Konman72 08:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Apollo's a 304, this discussion can be archived now. - 59.167.10.58 01:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible Solution

There, I've created First Strike (Atlantis) with a copy of the "Apollo" section from here. If it does turn out to be a Daedalus class ship the information can be easily copied back here when confirmation shows up, and until then it can be edited and expanded freely over there. Solution for everyone, hopefully? Bryan 05:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

That takes it out of the realm of speculation, which is what policy and common sense dictate. CovenantD 07:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Very nice. Works for me! (Personal note: Sorry if I came off harsh or like an ass, the internet does not carry tone of voice very well. I was not angry or upset in any way, and if I upset anyone then I am sorry) Konman72 08:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Funny how its a solution only when one side openly agreed with it. Alyeska 16:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

how come none of you are fighting over the Tria in the aurora class ship article? -Xornok 15:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

You're making the assumption that we were aware of it. With over 1.4 million articles on Wikipedia it's impossible to know about all of them. CovenantD 17:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. I've got this particular article watchlisted because it's historically attracted a lot of speculative edits and original research, I don't have the Aurora class article watchlisted. I do now, and I agree that the Tria may have the same problem over there too (though not as much as Apollo, Tria was "said by Dr. McKay to possibly be Aurora class" so at least there's some evidence to work with). But far be it for me to spread a lame edit war to other articles, so I think I'll wait until this situation is resolved before taking that one up myself. If my attempt at resolving it by putting the information in the "First Strike" article hasn't worked, all I can think of doing next is starting an RfC to see if anyone else has ideas. And also requesting protection if the edit-warring continues in the meantime. Could someone explain what's wrong with the "First Strike" article solution? Bryan 18:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Just throwing this out there, but there is ALREADY a page for First Strike (Atlantis) as First Strike (Stargate Atlantis) and seeing as how the latter is more detailed, I think that the former should be deleted/become a redirect.

Faris b 19:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Good catch. I changed First Strike (Atlantis) to a redirect since all others are (Stargate Atlantis). Alyeska, if this doesn't satisfy you then please explain why. We have shown multiple times how this information violates Wikipedia policy and all you have come up with is "precedent" which has never been sufficient reason to do anything on Wikipedia. So, please explain why this is not satisfactory and we can discuss further. Konman72 20:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

You should notice that I have had ample time to make a comment or make changes to the main article and have done neither. That is your answer. Alyeska 23:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, the whole "Funny how its a solution only when one side openly agreed with it" comment threw me off. Glad we could reach this compromise. Konman72 06:42, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I was a tad irritated how people were dismissing my comments by using incorrect statements as to what I was doing. I was also not pleased that people declared a solution reached when no one from the opposition had yet to say anything. I neither like or dislike the solution. It just is and it works, and that is sufficent in my opinion. Alyeska 16:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

From watching the SGA epp "First Strike" online, the Apollo is a 304. --Heruur 20:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Crusade pt1 Issues

After looking over my copy of Crusades again, I've spotted something that seems to contradict areas of this article, and I wanted to discuss it before starting an edit war :)

There are a few sentences in this article that indicate the Korolev was unfinished when it went to battle in the season nine finale, now I'd assume that came from this scene in pt1:

   LANDRY
   Colonel Chekov's had his eye on (a 304) for a while. The latest was about to roll out.

   DANIEL
   I thought the next Daedalus class ship wasn't due out of the pipeline for over a year?

   LANDRY
   It was a huge concession, but we didn't have much choice.

It seems to me that the Korolev was complete at the time of Camelot, and Daniel was talking about the next 304 after that, as in there were two under construction; the Korolev (which was more or less complete) and another 304 (possibly Apollo, since it will arrive nearly a year since that episode). Daniel was talking about Apollo being over a year away because he recognised the problems with the Russians and US having equal ability to project power in the Milky Way.

Landry's two lines seem to back up my claims, i.e, 'The latest one was about to roll out' (why would he say that if it was unfinished?) and 'It was a huge concession' (Why would he say that if it was a partially constructed ship? Surley a partially finished ship means fewer resources spent on it before handing it over to the Russians?).

I may be halucinating, but thats how it reads to me No Way Back 23:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that means that, I'm assuming it means only 1 ship was nearly ready.

While it does seem confusing if you overthink it, I doubt it means there were 2.

"Latest was about to Roll out" and "the next one due in a year" could be interpreded as there being 2 I doubt that is the case.

Faris b 01:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

They say in Camelot that Korolev was rushed into service, that means it wasn't finished and shaken down at the time. I doubt that this means they had one finished and another ready to go. It just means the US had to give the next one they built (Korolev) to the Russians before they built another one of their own. If the Ori invasion hadn't occured, the Korolev probably would have been properly finished and given to the Russians on completion - 59.167.46.179 05:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Rings

Ok, probably a stupid question but does the Daedalus have rings or just the Odyssey/Korolev, the reason I ask is because why would rings be useful for a ship that's going to where they don't exist? It seems the Ancients supplemented the rings in exchange for the booth transporters so I doubt there'll be any in Pegasus, also rings used to be in Atlantis, at least in theory, back when they left Earth as Earth's Ancient outpost had them but Atlantis does not, they were probably removed after a bit.

Also, can rings and the booth transporters exchange matter streams or are they not compatible? And are the booths a security threat to Atlantis? I mean, what if the Asurans or someone else with an Ancient warship (assuming they have booths as well) managed to booth into Atlantis via one?

Anyone have any thoughts?

Faris b 20:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think any of those questions have been answered in the show. The Daedalus has Asgard transporters, so might not have rings... It's possible the booths could be used as a point of access, but I expect the shield blocks them. I've always wondered why the Gou'ld don't guard their ring rooms, or at least have alarms... --Tango 21:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

The Daedalus most certainly has rings. Why assume one ship has them when others don't? If we did that we can assume that Oddessey doesn't carry the same number of weapon systems or fighters. Alyeska 23:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Possible but I think the real story behind the rings is that the ships weren't meant to have them until it was convenient to the story to have them in "Flesh and Blood", plus, as far as we know, the SGC can't make rings so they probably have to extract them from some old Goa'uld planet and maybe they didn't have any ready to take for the Daedalus, either way, I doubt we'll see rings in Atlantis.

Faris b 03:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

SGC Rings are visibly different from Goa'uld rings. And they have other differences as well such as lockouts to prevent foreign access of the rings. They are home built. Notice that Carter even stated the Prometheus was built using purely native Earth construction. They built their own rings. We have seen rings on the Korelov and have no reason to think they aren't on other ships until proven otherwise. It was a standard feature on the Prometheus and they have proven useful in enviroments hostile to Asgard transporters. Alyeska 04:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Then why are they using the Goa'uld style keypad instead of an SGC style one? The Ancient keypad is also different, having 8 keys instead of 6.

And another thing, why is Hermoid pronounced HERMIAD?

Faris b 21:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Is the pronounciation not just how Americans say "o"? --Tango 16:34, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

What? I don't think so, I never heard of "o" being pronounced "a".

Faris b 23:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Faris, I want to remind you that this talk page is the place to discuss changes to the article, and not a forum to discuss the Stargate shows. CovenantD 00:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't know if it was just a typo, but to clarify, it's "Hermiod," not "Hermoid". And GateWorld proves this (you'll need to search for Hermiod in the list on the right side of the screen). The Duke of Copyeditting, Bow before me! ^{You can't control me!} _{I'm a P. I.!} 01:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Korolev or Odessey absorbing fire

Could people stop changing the blurb on this picture to the Odessey absords fire? It's not. Check the episode, when the Korolev drops out of hyperspace (from the POV of looking AT the supergate) the Korolev takes up position to the right of Odessey. Thus, in that screen cap we have displayed, it's the Korolev, NOT the Odessey in the foregroud. 15:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I watched the episode and took that cap, Odyssey is to the left, Korolev to the right, and as you can see.. the Korolev is to the right. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 15:31, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/the_timmsv2/korolevtotheleft.jpg

In your description, your changing your reference point of view, so we'll use the position this cap is taken from. As I've pointed out, Korolev is off to the camera's left and the super gate is behind us. When your cap was taken, the gate is off to the right of the screen so the camera has basically traveled 90 degrees left of where it was in the cap I have above. So in your cap, it's the Korolev in the fore, because that is the one closest to the left. No Way Back 15:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Tangos edit seems to be a good solution. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:05, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Nuclear Warheads

In the article, you wrote that the MarK VIII warheads were "tactical". But, tactical warheads are small warheads, not as powerful as the strategical warheads. We mesures their explosive energy in Kilotons.

In Stargate Atlantis, Mark VIII warheads are supposed to have a destructive power of several gigatons, maybe more, because they are Naquadah warheads. So, I think that you should maybe delete the word "tactical" in the article, for Mark VIII.

Caldwell called them tactial nukes. Deus (talk) 12:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Shield color debate

Ok, here is why [I think] that shield color is evidence of shield strength:

It's kind of like the way that different colors of fire equals greater heat if you know what I mean.

Red: Weakest but prevent slow moving objects from entering (Seen in "Deadman Switch" and "Window of Opportunity") Orange: Weak but do not prevent against slow moving objects (Ha'tak mothership shields) Yellow: Strong but not the strongest (Seen on the Prometheus in multiple episodes) Blue/Green: Very strong (Atlantis's shield but it is powered by a ZPM so it can go on forever) Blue: Very, very strong (Asgard ship shields and Daedalus class ship shields, demonstrated by the fact that the Prothemeus couldn't take one Ori beam hit but Daedalus class ships could) White: Almost perfect (The Ori shields)

Does this make sense now? I may have talked about this before and it may be in the archives for this page.

Faris b 07:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

That is some great analysis and evidence. Sadly though it is original research by its very definition, so it can't be in the article. Konman72 07:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

While it makes sense as far as energy levels and visual spectrum go, it also looks uncomfortably like original research to me. We shouldn't be trying to "figure things out" here on Wikipedia, just reporting on what other sources have said about them. Bryan 07:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to say it again but it is flawed speculation. (No Man's Land) Matthew Fenton (talk) 08:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It's original research in it's purest form. It's not even reliable - we have no idea how those shields are meant to work, so we can't even begin to speculate about a relationship between their colours and strengths. --Tango 12:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. Yes, I know it's OR but I'm just explaining what that other person probably was thinking as well. And here is my analysis if the Orion's shields. Basically, even if you're using a weak shield with a very good power source, it could probably last much longer as seen with Atlantis's blue/green shield being powered by a ZPM. The Ancients probably used something a whole lot better than Naqahdah for power unlike the Goa'uld do.

Faris b 19:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Faris, again, this is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. Unless your comments are about editing the article, please take your discussions to a more appropriate venue. CovenantD 19:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The systems of the ships DO run at 25% without a ZPM!

How is this OR? The figures are given in the episodes. The trip takes 4 days with a ZPM and 18 without one, that's 4.2x longer therefore, even with multiple Naqahdah generators, they can only achieve 25% of the total potential power since the Asgard use Neutrino Ion generators which must have a simmilar power output to a ZPM. Why else do the shields last such a short time without a ZPM and the hyperdrive so slow? It was even stated in "Misbegotten" of Atlantis by Weir that with an Asgard ship, they could get to Atlantis 2 weeks earlier? 18 days minus 14 days = 4 days!

Does it have to SPECIFICALLY be stated in the ep "Our systems are at 25% of possible power without the ZPM!" for it to be not considered OR? If so, this is really stupid because we're omitting some pretty juicy info here.

Thanks,

Faris b 04:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

All we can really say from this is that "the trip between Milky Way and Pegasus takes 4.2 times longer without a ZPM". You're trying to generalize that to other systems and situations, that's where the original research comes in. If I've got a car that gets twice the mileage when running on ethanol rather than gasoline, does that mean that the headlights will be twice as bright too? It doesn't necessarily follow. Bryan 05:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

We know the hyperdrive is about 25% as fast, and we know the "shield strength [is] severely diminished" (I looked up that quote). We don't have a quantitative assessment of the shield strength, and we don't have any assessment of any other systems. --Tango 11:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. I guess systems like life support and transporters don't use much power but the shields and hyperdrive function far less efficiently.

Here is a screenshot from "The Siege, pt. 3" http://www.stargatecaps.com/sga/s2/201/linz/html/stargate12925.html

Make of it what you like but to me, it looks like the shield strength is at 75% without the ZPM but it's also possible that the screens were updated to include the non-ZPM'ed shield strength.

Faris b 17:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

There's no way to know what a full bar means. It could mean maximum possible strength for those shields, or if could mean maximum strength possible with the current power source. It may be 75% because they've lost the ZPM, or it could be 75% because they've taken a few hits. All we can know is from what Kovak said about the shields being "severely diminished" - we have no way to know what "severely" means. --Tango 21:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

What it actually means is that the Daedalus systems run 4 times more efficiently when the ZPM is tied in, not that the loss of a ZPM cuts their already operating rate. Daedalus was NOT designed to run with a ZPM, they only installed it later on so the 400% increase in efficiency was just a bonus, not a design implementation. Saying they run at 25% is saying that the ship was built to use a ZPM for operating at full capacity which is not true. - 121.44.251.28 01:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Asgard Hyperdrive

How is than with an asgard hiperdrive powered by a ZPM the Daedalus arrived to Atlantis in 4 days but the asgard ships can go from the ida galaxy to earth in minutes? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JDeus01 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

Maybe Pegasus is exceedingly far in the Stargate Universe? Who knows.. ;-) (Retcon?) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

It's probably because the hyperdrive of the Daedalus is Asgard-designed, not specifically an exact copy of Asgard hyperdrives. There could be size related issues to why the Daedalus-class hyperdrive isn't the same (as the O'Neill is a fair degree larger than Earth ships). I doubt it's a galactic distance issue, cause the Ida galaxy is said to be someodd 4 million light years away, when the Pegasus is only about 3 million.

Please keep in mind this Talk page is for discussion of the article, not the ship itself. Check out Gateworld Forums if you'd like to continue this discussion. Jordan.Kreiger 18:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Where does that 4 million figure come from? Most speculation I've read has Ida being very close to the Milky Way (possibly one of the Magellanic clouds). --Tango 20:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The exact episode reference escapes me. But it is the episode where they destroy the sun, in an attempt to destroy one of the Goa'uld fleets. The SGC and their Ha'tak, along with the fleet flagship, end up in another galaxy, that Jacob tells is 4 million light years from the Milky Way. They later fight the Replicators in that galaxy. Circumstantial evidence for sure, but I think that suggests they are in the Ida Galaxy.Jordan.Kreiger 23:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I doubt it, I think the Ida galaxy is about a few hundred thousand LY away. Remember, using an Asgard ship in "Misbegotten" of Atlantis, Weir mentions that it would shave 2 weeks off of travel time (18-14=4) 4 being 4 days! Meaning that even with an Asgard vessel it still takes 4 days, this evidence supports the fact that the Ida is a few hundred thousand LY from the Milky Way, not 4 mil. Also, who's to say the replicators didn't exist in other galaxies as well?

Faris b 06:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

This is not a forum for general discussion about Daedalus class ships. If your comment is NOT about editing the article, find a forum for your discussion. CovenantD 12:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Why does someone always get really mad when this happens? Look, I'm just trying to clear this up so it will end, not drag it on. Call this page what you want, but sooner or later, people WILL use it as a forum.

Faris b 16:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The fact is we are supposed to be a community.. we all watch this page.. it actually does more good then harm to have light conversations.. I see no actual problem with having discussions here as long as they don't turn into flame wars.. or detract from the article subject.. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

It is outside the bounds of what Wikipedia talk pages are for; see WP:TPG. I would be within the guidelines to just remove such conversations rather than just try to keep people on track. Talk pages are not for general conversation. Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal. When fictional events are being discussed as real world situations with no reference to the article in question, that crosses into fan discussion and not editing the encyclopedia. CovenantD 20:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok people, i kwon than this is not a forum buy so what, what we talk here could be included in the article, after all some of the information on they is from our own conclusions, for example who say than the drones can past through any shield? yes we listen Her'ak saying Our shields are of no use!, but so what, ori's main weapon and tollan's ion cannons can past too. Have anybody considered than the drones are just advance enough for passing through the weakest shield in the series. JDeus01 02:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

If it's an idea we've come up with from scratch here on talk it's not allowed in the article per our policy of Wikipedia:No original research. And I also have to echo CovenantD's comment that talk pages are not for general forum discussion, either. This has been coming up increasingly often on some of the pages I frequent, I think from now on I'm going to start actively deleting any new discussion threads that are founded solely in general speculation about the show. Please bear in mind that this place is a part of Wikipedia, not an independant Stargate wiki, so Wikipedia's policies and customs come first. Bryan 03:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad for ask that, it wont happen again. JDeus01 03:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The Daedalus uses Earth power systems to run it when it's not using a ZPM (most likely nuclear based), so the drive can only take the power that the reactors can give it. The reason asgard ships go so fast is because their own power systems provide massive amounts of energy compared to a nuclear reactor (See SG-1: Small Victories). When the Daedalus made it to the Pegasus galaxy in 4 days doesn't mean the drives are restricted, it just means thats how fast the drive could draw energy from the ZPM without overloading the ship's power conduits. You cant run 10,000 volts through a standard copper wire so it stands to reason that the daedalus on technical design restraints keep the asgard drive from ever running at full capacity. - 121.44.251.28 01:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Beaming Technology

All the Daedalus-class vessels use Asgard beaming technology, and the Daedalus herself can use it offensively because of Hermiod. The Korolev attempted to transfer nuclear warheads using their Ring Transports, but not via Asgard beams. The Odyssey has used Asgard beams to destroy a Wraith hive ship (in Pegasus Project), with no mention of an Asgard engineer. I think this means the Asgard have modified the ships (Odyssey at least, with possibility of the Daedalus) to use the beaming technology offensive without the safeguards. Would it be possible to add this to the article? I.e. is it something that isn't original research? Jordan.Kreiger 16:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Once the safeguards had been deactivated once, they can probably just repeat whatever Hermiod did - it's their ship, so I doubt Hermiod can keep much secret from them. However, that is OR. We don't even know for sure that the Odyssey doesn't have an Asgard onboard. --Tango 20:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The Odyssey doesn't have one, they have shown the engineering room where Hermoid would be on the Daedalus and it was always empty except in "Flesh and Blood".

Faris b 01:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

But the engineering room is not shown in Pegasus Project, or at least I don't recall they did. And in any case, there is never any specific dialog that there are only humans aboard at that time. So what can we do with this information? Jordan.Kreiger 02:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Nothing can be done with this information. It is OR to assume that the Odyssey does not have an Asgard engineer; because it has not been explicitly stated that it does or does not. His station could be located elsewhere, or possibly just not aboard the ship that that moment, or any other reason. You cannot pick and choose when OR will be applied...if it isn't stated, it probably should not be used without a *very* good reason. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 09:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the Asgard was attending to a call of nature. Never dismiss the simple solutions. --Tango 12:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Possibly but I don't see any orrifices on them other than the ears, nose and mouth. We do know they eat though.

Faris b 17:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I think this is why the Asgard complain so much you know.. :-\ thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 17:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)