Millennium Falcon or Starship Enterprise? What would you pick?

hawkwing43 · November 2015

This is a DUH question on here I am sure. If you do pick the Enterprise, which version would you choose?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMH1vDDd1xc

starswordc · November 2015

Depends on the scenario. Space race? Falcon, it's smaller and much faster. Stand-up fight? Enterprise, because no matter how much Han soups her up the Falcon is ultimately still just a light freighter with guns grafted on, not a purpose-built combatant starship.

rambowdoubledash · November 2015

Hyperspace travel in Star Wars is exceedingly dangerous. You need precise calculations and data on where you're starting, where you're going, and what's on the way there, or else you could end up colliding with the mass shadow of a star or planet, bouncing off a solar flare, or any number of other things. Travel is possible in Star Wars at all only thanks to literally tens of thousands of years of exploration of the Galaxy Far Far Away, mapping things out, planting hyperspace beacons, and so on.

Thus while the Millennium Falcon is faster than the Enterprise while in the Galaxy Far Far Away, it is not faster anywhere else - because it's frankly just too dangerous to risk long-scale interstellar travel of even a handful of light years.

Meanwhile, the Enterprise - any of them - just turns on its deflector dish and its FTL sensors. You can now push through or fly around anything that might harm your ship, without problem.

So the one area where Falcon might have had an advantage, its speed, it has just lost when in the Milky Way, unless the Falcon comes along with millions of hyperspace beacons scattered throughout the Milky Way. As it doesn't, I pick Enterprise.

Enterprise-C, specifically, if that's in the cards.

Unknown · November 2015

This content has been removed.

mightyspence · November 2015

This is an unfair comparison, and I think that it should not be an "either or" question.

Here is an analogy: think of the Millennium Falcon as a LearJet, and think of the U.S.S. Enterprise as a Boeing 747; each aircraft can fly from New York to California in approximately five-to-six hours, but the LJ is designed to carry several people, and the 747 is designed to carry hundreds of people. The LJ has almost exhausted its fuel-supply after the coast-to-coast trip, and the 747 can continue to fly for many more hours. The LJ is agile and quick to reach its top-speed, and the 747 is ponderous and slow to reach its top-speed.

As starsword mentioned above, my choice would depend on what I would need to do in a given situation.

artan42 · November 2015

Enterprise J.

dareau · November 2015

I'd say Falcon for only one reason:

Give me an Astromech droid and a wookie co-pilot, and I can go anywhere. Even the "Original" Connie-class Enterprise or the *gasp* NX-iprize needs a crew in the dozens to hundreds, at least...

mustrumridcully0 · November 2015

Enterprise D. If the real world sucks,I can still lose myself in her holodecks.

Unknown · November 2015

This content has been removed.

jonsills · November 2015

And as Tyson observes, in a fight the Enterprise - any Enterprise - would wipe its butt with the Falcon. None of the weapons on the freighter could even scratch Starfleet shields, and Han showed at the Death Star that he can't break free of a tractor beam. As for weapons aim, the Enterprise uses a computer to lock in its targeting systems, while the Falcon relies on a live gunner at each station to aim. There's a reason why we used to call B-52 tailgunners "suicide jockeys" - in the event of an actual war, there'd be one guy with a quad-.50 mount trying to shoot down supersonic interceptors by eye, while they use computer-locked infrared-targeting missiles to start shooting from the other side of the horizon.

sovereign47 · November 2015

Enteprise E - Sovereign class of course! Several phaser blast from arrays would be pretty much enough to turn Millenium Falcon into a pile of burning space debris. Not to mention it would be obliterated by single quantum torpedo. And MF really can't even scratch a hull paint of Sovereign class

cmdrscarlet · December 2015

Falcon. I love Star Trek, seriously. Especially the Ent-B. But the Falcon because

.

theraven2378 · December 2015

Falcon or the Enterprise, tough call but I'll say Enterprise, the NX-01 to be precise

mjarbar · December 2015

Neither - Imp Star Duce for me!

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_II-class_Star_Destroyer

adamkafei · December 2015

Hmm, If I can have the Ent-B with a Lakota refit done on it then it'd be that, otherwise the Ent-E wins. In terms of comfort, anything Trek wipes the floor with anything SW, likewise in combat, I'd love to see SW fighters try to evade phaser volleys, SW has shown all too frequently all one needs to do to destroy any fighter is to scratch the paint but that's fine because everyone in that universe is incompetent when aiming is concerned. Then there's the small matter of being able to go places, Besides, even the NX was better looking than the MF.

revanindustries · December 2015

Millenium Falcon because I don't need a crew of several hundred to man it. Think of the salaries I'd save. Plus Star Wars is always superior.

khan5000 · December 2015

jonsills wrote: »

And as Tyson observes, in a fight the Enterprise - any Enterprise - would wipe its butt with the Falcon. None of the weapons on the freighter could even scratch Starfleet shields, and Han showed at the Death Star that he can't break free of a tractor beam. As for weapons aim, the Enterprise uses a computer to lock in its targeting systems, while the Falcon relies on a live gunner at each station to aim. There's a reason why we used to call B-52 tailgunners "suicide jockeys" - in the event of an actual war, there'd be one guy with a quad-.50 mount trying to shoot down supersonic interceptors by eye, while they use computer-locked infrared-targeting missiles to start shooting from the other side of the horizon.

to be fair he was trying to break free of a tractor beam from the Death Star. Even the Enterprise had trouble with tractor beams from bigger ships...see Corbormite Manuver an Star Trek The Motion Picture

jonsills · December 2015

adamkafei wrote: »

Besides, even the NX was better looking than the MF.

She may not look like much, kid, but she's got it where it counts. The NX is the one Enterprise the Falcon could defeat. (No shields, just polarized hull plating. Falcon's shields may have been pretty primitive, but they were at least shields...)

daviesdavies · December 2015

I would pick enterprise because I am a fan, but there are not logics behide it.. if you try to explain it , it is just complete non-sense.. just like that "dude" from the video.. I mean come on... everything he said pretty much BS...
1) "the only ship that is desigined to explore and not from one place to another?
WTF I guess people forgot about Captain Nemo....what a tool
There are really other old stories about "exploring ship"...
2) Enterprise is way more fake than millinium falcon in terms of storytelling
you rarely see anything break down on the Enterprise and pretty much everything works.
Falcon is much more real, it breaks down pretty much every time
and then you send hairy monkey ( or a droide ) to fix it..
basicly it is how everyone perceive an engineer -> Clumpsy monkey or droids who saying stuffs they dont understand.
arrr ohh beep beep beep that is how you perceive things you dont understand, that is realism. Not some fancy science buzzwords "I just look up and made up poopoo matrix and more power to the broomsticks"
...
repeat: fan picks ship because emotional bonds.. not some reasoning aboutstupid pop-science shitt, those are fake fake fake stuffs you made up as you talk/type lol

Pretty much choose between GIant Douche and TUrdsandwich... olololol

rambowdoubledash · December 2015

you rarely see anything break down on the Enterprise and pretty much everything works.

walligig · December 2015

I'd pick the Ebon Hawk over both.

mustrumridcully0 · December 2015

reyan01 wrote: »

revanindustries wrote: »

Millenium Falcon because I don't need a crew of several hundred to man it. Think of the salaries I'd save. Plus Star Wars is always superior.

Not anymore. Not since all that EU TRIBBLE was rendered non-canon.

I don't cry for the EU TRIBBLE, but I might cry* for the Zahn novels. It was never a realistic idea, but I would have loved to see Thrawn and Pelleaon on the big screen.

*Figuratively speaking. I don't cry that easy.

lilchibiclari · December 2015

No Eagle Five? She's a Winnebego with secret hyperjets and a fuel tank full of Liquid Schwartz!

starswordc · December 2015

reyan01 wrote: »

revanindustries wrote: »

Millenium Falcon because I don't need a crew of several hundred to man it. Think of the salaries I'd save. Plus Star Wars is always superior.

Not anymore. Not since all that EU TRIBBLE was rendered non-canon.

You don't need the EU to simply observe from watching the movies that this is a setting where people talk casually about traveling to the other side of the galaxy, a trip that would have taken Voyager 75 years at maximum possible speed. Nor do you need the EU to infer the technological and logistical capabilities of major polities; the mere existence of the Death Stars handles that. The destruction of Alderaan required a minimum of 1 x 10^38 Joules of energy (calculated purely based on what you'd need to overcome the gravitational binding energy of a planet the mass of Earth, which we know Alderaan to be roughly in the range of based on the epilogue of Revenge of the Sith, and then make it double in diameter in a fraction of a second), roughly the amount of energy the Sun produces in 8,000 years. And thanks to the aforementioned noncanonicity of the pre-Disney EU, the only source stating there was anything other than a pure directed-energy weapon involved (Steve Perry's otherwise quite good novel Death Star) no longer counts. And they built the moon-sized monster that was the Death Star II in the two years or so that passed between A New Hope and Return of the Jedi, which speaks volumes about the Empire's industrial capacity and its ability to move cargo.

Oh, and by the way? It's only pre-Disney material that's non-canon. Not only is the new EU canon, it's canon at the same level as the movies and its authors are free to re-canonize prior writing as they see fit, subject to approval from the Lucasfilm Story Group (James Luceno has already done that with IIRC his Darth Plagueis backstory). So we might get Thrawn et al. back after all.

jorantomalak · December 2015

lilchibiclari wrote: »

No Eagle Five? She's a Winnebego with secret hyperjets and a fuel tank full of Liquid Schwartz!

Pfft I choose Spaceball one it can go to ludicous speed and plaid at the same time

markhawkman · December 2015

revanindustries wrote: »

Millenium Falcon because I don't need a crew of several hundred to man it. Think of the salaries I'd save. Plus Star Wars is always superior.

Yeah, I can't imagine how much I would have to spend for maintenance on a Galaxy class ship. O_O'

jonsills · December 2015

There's no evidence Death Star II: Electric Boogaloo was built only after Death Star I: Original Flavor was destroyed. In fact, the plans existed as far back as the prequels, meaning it took twenty years to finish DSI:OF; it seems unlikely they'd only build the one superweapon when they have the plans and it takes that long to complete. (It seems unlikely to me that only two were built, for that matter - someone could always discover where the Emperor's secret third Death Star is hidden, abandoned but nearly complete...)

gulberat · December 2015

Well...if you're going to ask me to live on one of the ships, I'd say the Enterprise-E is good on creature comforts and also pretty sleek and maneuverable for its size, and well able to defend itself.

legendarylycan · December 2015

jonsills wrote: »

There's no evidence Death Star II: Electric Boogaloo was built only after Death Star I: Original Flavor was destroyed. In fact, the plans existed as far back as the prequels, meaning it took twenty years to finish DSI:OF; it seems unlikely they'd only build the one superweapon when they have the plans and it takes that long to complete. (It seems unlikely to me that only two were built, for that matter - someone could always discover where the Emperor's secret third Death Star is hidden, abandoned but nearly complete...)

that is certainly a far better explanation than asking someone to actually believe that it took over 21 years (because remember that it was originally a CIS superweapon before the empire got hold of it) to build a 120 kilometer station, yet the 900-kilometer version took only 4

rambowdoubledash · December 2015

markhawkman wrote: »

revanindustries wrote: »

Millenium Falcon because I don't need a crew of several hundred to man it. Think of the salaries I'd save. Plus Star Wars is always superior.

Yeah, I can't imagine how much I would have to spend for maintenance on a Galaxy class ship. O_O'

Thanks to replicators, less then you'd imagine, I'd wager. You can replicate any damaged parts. Although the very first thing you should replicate is a new replicator and an independent power source, and the plans to build more. Replicators are the lathes of the future.

jonsills wrote: »

There's no evidence Death Star II: Electric Boogaloo was built only after Death Star I: Original Flavor was destroyed. In fact, the plans existed as far back as the prequels, meaning it took twenty years to finish DSI:OF; it seems unlikely they'd only build the one superweapon when they have the plans and it takes that long to complete. (It seems unlikely to me that only two were built, for that matter - someone could always discover where the Emperor's secret third Death Star is hidden, abandoned but nearly complete...)

That actually happened, like, nine times in the old EU before the New Jedi Order arc put a deliberate stop to that (i.e., "we're not gonna write stories about that anymore"), as it was getting silly.

For the interested, the original concept for Episode VI had it taking place on Coruscant at the end rather than Endor, and we would actually see five Death Stars in various states of construction over the planet. Also the Emperor's throne room was surrounded by lava.

starswordc wrote: »

re-Disney material that's non-canon. Not only is the new EU canon, it's canon at the same level as the movies and its authors are free to re-canonize prior writing as they see fit, subject to approval from the Lucasfilm Story Group (James Luceno has already done that with IIRC his Darth Plagueis backstory). So we might get Thrawn et al. back after all.

Again, I feel the need to point out that FTL travel in Star Wars requires precise knowledge of the Galaxy Far Far Away (as evidenced by Han himself in IV stating as much), which we don't have of our own Galaxy, hamstringing the Falcon's effective speed due to how unsafe hyperspace travel would be.

Also I feel the need to point out that using on-screen evidence for anything in Star Wars should be taken with a grain of salt. For example, someone once crunched the numbers on an Imp-II's ability to blow apart asteroids effortlessly as seen in V, based on the average composition of asteroids. The resulting power suggested by the blast was...impressive, impressive enough to potentially obliterate any Trek vessel in a single hit.

But then that would mean that the Tantive IV must be the toughest ship in the universe, as it took a direct blast from an Imp-II with its deflectors down in the opening of IV, but wasn't blasted apart into space dust.

(Mind, the same grain of salt should be taken with Trek.)

artan42 · December 2015

They were trying to capture the Tantive not destroy it.

Millennium Falcon or Starship Enterprise? What would you pick?

Comments