Talk:Aurora class battleship
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Stargate, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Stargate on Wikipedia. |
 |
Contents |
[edit] Merge from other articles
I will refer you to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stargate#Articles to be merged. Why? Because I'm a lazy bum. Lockesdonkey 21:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] spelling?
The ship that Sheppard named the Orion. This article spells it Hypopheralcus, garnering only 4 google hits. GateWorld spells it Hippaforalkus, garnering 26 google hits. Not a phenominal difference, but significant enough? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 03:45, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Orion Destroyed?
Ok, what the heck is wrong with the writers? Can ANY Ancient ship survive longer than a few episodes? I at least hope the Daedalus beamed off the remaining drones before it was destroyed. Because from what I interpreted there was double the amount they used to destroy the first hive onboard. What a loss. They should have just have had the Daedalus take the drones and have Zelenka make some computer interface to launch them instead of using the Orion since they knew the shape it was in since the drones don't have a chair that someone has to sit in to launch them. Faris b 07:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why no energy weapons?
I know that the drones are superior to energy weapons but why don't they have them as a backup in the event the drones run out? I think it's because the writers don't want Earth or anyone from it to capture a ship that has working energy weapons. I'm tired of this, that is the same reason the Daedalus and Prometheus class ships never had energy weapons, because the writers are afraid to make Earth ships too powerful.
Take the captured hive ship, that is the only time Earth has used energy weapons for real but they couldn't even do it until they really had to, that had that hive for a few days, couldn't they have at least taken some scans of them with the Daedalus and replicated them back on Earth and added them on? That would be a million times better than missiles. No, I'm not forgetting about the times SG-1 had a chance to have a Ha'tak but they never actually did anything productive with it's weapon systems.
Faris b 06:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, I couldn't tell if the weapons being released on Asuras in Progeny were drones or energy weapons. -- SFH 06:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, there is a discussion about that over at the Gateworld forum, in the hi detail photos, you can see that they were firing blue energy pulses with smoke trails at the Asuran remains but it appears yellow onscreen because of the broadcast quality.
Faris b 22:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- Did it look like the energy shots being fired out of that weapon seen in Trinity? -- SFH 23:55, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
It did except for the fact that a smoke trail followed the bolt (like the hive ship weapons). Faris b 04:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] speculation on tria
they never said it was an aurora class, they said it might be... -Xornok 23:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
But during the scene where it whizzed by the Daedalus, you can make out that it's an Aurora Class ship.
Also, Where was it stated that it used a ZPM to power itself? Aside from speculation from McKay, it was never confirmed, the origin of the ZPM that Atlantis was given by the Ancients was never stated, they could have made a new one, although the assumptions are likely correct, I'm just throwing the possibilities out there. Plus, how much energy would be in it if it was used non stop for 12 years for sublight travel?
Faris b 15:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I think it's safe to assume that a ZPM was used, or at least McKay's speculations should be mentioned here. Rodney is mosly right in this kind of situations... Maartentje 13:19, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
it was too blurry to make out as an aurora class... -Xornok 19:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, maybe not as 100% but I think that anyone could tell that it was, besides, what are the odds that the Ancients had 2 separate classes of ships that looked so simmilar?
Faris b 20:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
the deady and the promy look alike except for the tower part, and since the ancient ship was blurry, you cant tell 100% that it was an aurora. in progeny, they only way to tell that there were different ships was cause of the back of the ships, where the engines were at... -Xornok 21:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
You could say that but if you look at it, there are many differences between Prometheus and Daedalus, sleeker, bigger, larger fighter bays, more engines, the aft tower missing, the neck is fatter... It probably was Aurora class.
Faris b 16:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The ships in "Progeny"
I don't believe that they were a different class just because the engines looked different, I mean, they're glowing red instead of yellow is the only difference I can spot.
Orion: http://www.stargatecaps.com/sga/s3/301/html/nml0330.html
Ships from "Progeny": http://www.stargatecaps.com/sga/s3/305/html/progeny469.html
They all look the same, they have the same compartments, rear, the fins.
Maybe red engine glow is like an interplanetary hover mode since those ships are too large to stay in the air going at the speed they were, the engines were yellow when they were about to enter hyperspace so I don't think we can take that seriously as evidence of different classes, while there probably are different classes of ships, I don't think that is the proof.
Faris b 16:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
well, the second picture doesnt actually show the back of any ships clearly and i have no idea where you say that they are glowing red... http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n63/140189/4f3ae8f1.jpg -Xornok 17:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I never noticed that or really saw that in the episode. Thanks. I said the engines looked to be glowing red in "Progeny" instead of yellow, that's what I meant. Also, I see what you mean now but I don't think it's a different class of ship just because of that, maybe it's an improvement to the Aurora design or something like that, the body looks almost exactly the same.
Faris b 18:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I also don't believe that they are different from the Aurora class. I have watched the episode numerous times and they all appear to be Aurora class, but from different angles. ProBono Dave 20:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
have you even looked at the links above? the stern is quite different. Maartentje 20:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
hey guys, maybe there were two classes of ships present at that attack: one aurora, one the one with the unkown engine/stern. I say this because some of the picture have an identical front end to the aurora, and only red engines to suggest a different class.
[edit] Why do people keeping changing "Tria" to "Triva"?
Are they just thinking someone misspelled "trivia" and are trying to correct it or what? This is very annoying and it has happened before.
Faris b 01:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Other ships?
I do not understand why we have a section called "Other ships", which the article is specifically about the Aurora. This is a similar problem to what we had over on the Daedalus article with people trying to add the Apollo without knowing what kind of ship it was (and even saying that we had no idea in the article). My opinion is that this should be relocated to the main Ancients article or other appropriate place...it certainly doesn't need to be here for the same reason Apollo didn't need to be on the Daedalus page until some confirmation was available. -- Huntster T • @ • C 17:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- I do agree with you, seems unneeded and irrelevant in this article. At best it's extraneous. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
the page on the F-302 has a section about the X-301 as well, and they're not the same class of ships either Maartentje 18:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please, Maartenje, no argumentum ad ignorantiams. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, that was a comparison. (and technically, the plural of argumentum ad ignorantiam is argumenta ad ignorantiam) And plz don't use my name if you can't spell it correctly. About the other ships section, information regarding Auroras in the background certainly does belong on this article. Maartentje 12:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well I've learnt a new thing today :-) - and sorry about the name thing, I thought I'd got it 100%. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 12:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- While I personally consider it not-so-good to include them when they were, to my eyes, little more than blurry background shapes, I'm much more pleased to see Adaras removed. -- Huntster T • @ • C 19:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Not only are they off-topic, they are full of speculation - Heard, but not seen; it is possible; Unknown ship; at this time unknown though it is possible; But unlikely (itself bad grammar); Most likley (bad spelling). CovenantD 06:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- A quick look at the talk page of the contributor confirms my impression; this IP address, 199.185.87.66, is registered to Edmonton Public School Board. CovenantD 06:25, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
