Rogue One: A Star Wars Story : Star Destroyer withing atmosphere?

Should that even be possible? Would they be able to keep that much mass hovering within a planet's atmosphere?

Great point!

Because NOW is obviously the time to finally address the plausibility of space-science in a goddamned Star Wars movie, lol.

But, srsly. It did appear that they were WITHIN the upper atmosphere of Scarif. Failing that, there's always the excuse of the invisible shields protecting loading docks in space for the Star Wars universe, as established in numerous earlier films within the franchise..

No biggie!

OP was referring to the Destroyer hovering in the atmosphere over Jedha, not the ones that crash into the shield portal over Scarif.

The scale of the vessel against the foreground of the citadel clearly shows that the SD is within the atmosphere of Jedha. One can only assume, without knowing any specifics about the propulsion/repulsorlift technology employed by the Empire for its Star Destroyers, that the craft has enough power to keep itself aloft in any thinner atmosphere.

I'm not sure why you would think anyone was confused about that point in the OP or even just MY post replying to it.

Obviously, we're talking about the scene of Vader standing there as the Tantive IV takes off from the command ship of Raddus.

But, yeah.

Sci-Fi tech.

/thread

---

I'm not sure why you would think anyone was confused about that point in the OP or even just MY post replying to it.

---

Well, mainly because you addressed a different scene entirely than the one to which the OP was referring. If that's not confusion then I'm unsure what would qualify as such.

---

Obviously, we're talking about the scene of Vader standing there as the Tantive IV takes off from the command ship of Raddus.

---

This isn't obvious at all, not sure why you'd say that. In fact, OP made no mention of Vader or Scarif. The only scene in R1 featuring a SD hovering within a planet's atmosphere occurs on Jedha, not Scarif.

It is most definitely Sci-Fi tech.

Okay, fair enoughit's w/e.

I guess I'd just assumed it was a repeat of the frequent question about Vader and a squad of Storm Troopers standing there in the airlock without being sucked out into the vacuum of open space.

I guess they could have been referring to Jedha, sure.

Either way our points stand so it's still a WIN/WIN, I'd say.

:)

---

Either way our points stand so it's still a WIN/WIN, I'd say.

---

Huzzah! :-)

---

One can only assume, without knowing any specifics about the propulsion/repulsorlift technology employed by the Empire for its Star Destroyers

---

Repulsorlift technology was also used by the Republic, as it seems to have been standard in all vehicles, as seen by the lines of airborne traffic on Coruscant. Heck, even Podracers used them!

Why are you here if you haven't seen the movie yet?

To clarify, I did mean the scene on Jedha.

Yeah, yeah, yeahI get it, my bad.

>___>

In AOTC and ROTS, the proto-Star Destroyers of the Republic were within planet atmospheres too.

I just didn't like the Star Destroyer above Jedha hanging completely still. It looked a bit weird for such a massive ship.

The Shroud of the Disney has fallen. Begun the Jar Jar Abrahams Wars have.

If Luke can have a floating car; then the Empire can have a floating ship.

The main reactor for a Star Destroyer (the round bump on the underside) is basically a small sun, so it's definitely got the power to just park like that.


"I can't read peoples' minds, I'm not a Jedi!" Lucifer Morningstar

I agree, dobraye_utra.

In the original trilogy, the biggest ship we see takeoff and land from planetary atmosphere is a Nebulon-B rebel transport ship (Empire Strikes Back, when the rebel base on Hoth is being evacuated).

Those transports are not very big ships.

I look at Star Destroyers and other capital ships being introduced into the atmosphere as lazy canon breaking.

If Star Destroyers could enter atmosphere the Empire probably would have used this ability to great effect a few times during the original trilogy blockades are a lot more effective if you can park your ships RIGHT over the space port.

Just because the SD could enter the atmosphere is no indication that it could land on the surface. I can swim, but that doesn't make me a dolphin.

Parking ships in orbit is a lot simpler than having them in atmo. For one thing, it's easier to manoeuvre a ship that big when you don't have to work against gravity, weather and such. Plus, how many ships can you fit above a single base?

In ESB, the rebels had that planetary shield in place, so if they'd taken their blockade closer, they might have hit the shield itself. The fleet knew that a ship can't hyperjump inside a planet's atmosphere, so the ships would have to come to them before jumping; i.e., they were trapped. Plus, if you know your enemy is going to shoot at you, do you want to get closer or further away? That ion cannon took out a destroyer in orbit. Imagine if there'd been a bunch of destroyers floating like in Rogue 1? Ducks in a barrel. And after crashing I'd bet they'd never fly again, unlike the one shot in Empire.

"I can't read peoples' minds, I'm not a Jedi!" Lucifer Morningstar

---

In ESB, the rebels had that planetary shield in place, so if they'd taken their blockade closer, they might have hit the shield itself. The fleet knew that a ship can't hyperjump inside a planet's atmosphere

---

While we're on this Rogue One pooped all over that 'no hyperjumping near a gravity source' piece of canon, too.

---

The fleet knew that a ship can't hyperjump inside a planet's atmosphere

---

Source?

Why are you here if you haven't seen the movie yet?

Just watching the movie for starters. The rebels on the ground knew the fleet was waiting in orbit, so if they could jump before even leaving the atmosphere, they would have. Heck, in ANH, Han basically tells Luke that if they enter hyperspace and cross through an object in real space, they'll be destroyed. They had to face the fleet to know which way to jump to.

"I can't read peoples' minds, I'm not a Jedi!" Lucifer Morningstar

I think the EU had established that they were built in space and could not fly/hover in atmosphere, but the prequels already undid that at the end of Attack of the Clones.

Perpetual outrage is the most popular religion today.

That does seem more likely / makes more sense.

STAR TREK 09 made a similar blunder with the Enterprise.

"I love the Galaxy!"

J.J.'s Star Trek was hardly the first ST movie to make that "blunder."

Canon is flexible and the further things get from the core TV/MOVIE basis of the franchise the less relevant they are to the core concept.

You can't really expect multimillion dollar filmmakers banking on making billions to paint themselves into corners over something written by an underpaid staff writer or w/e over a busy weekend almost half-a-century beforehand, lol.

It was actually a GR-75 medium transport, not a Nebulon B frigate that was at Hoth.

I'm disappointed none of you nerds corrected me on that.

Massive starships being built in space is a pretty basic idea, sorry if it's too highbrow of a concept for you, lol.

Star Trek: The Next Generation did the same thing: in one shot (hard to see) there is clearly a Galaxy-Class Starship being built on the ground at Utopia Planitia on Mars, the same design as the USS Enterprise.

Why are you here if you haven't seen the movie yet?

Luckily it was an 'alternate reality' and not considered real. Real trek ships are built in space;
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/startrek/images/8/8d/Yards.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130411203319

edit: found this

---

Although barely visible, Rick Sternbach and Mike Okuda's original intentions was for this to be a Galaxy-class ship under construction. Later however, they concluded it wouldn't be very logical to be built on the surface, as it would require more energy to take the parts into orbit than necessary. One response to this they suggested is that it was for officer training.

---

"He's dusted, busted and disgusted, but he's ok"

Star Wars is more of a fantasy than a hard scifi. If it wants a star destroyer floating in atmosphere instead of being too heavy and crashing, Its allowed.

"Not all change is progress, as not all movement is forward."

---

Would they be able to keep that much mass hovering within a planet's atmosphere?

---

Hermes: "Ten atmospheres of pressure!"
Fry: "How much pressure can the ship take, Professor?"
Professor: "It's a spaceship, so any where from zero to one!"

"He's dusted, busted and disgusted, but he's ok"

This is nothing new. It happened all the time in the prequels. Give 'em a closer look. You will see sizable spacecraft taking off, landing, and hovering all the time in the atmosphere of Coruscant. All without any aerodynamic shape or means of aerial power (such as helicoptering, turbine-jet, etc). The inference has always been that these ships use some type of anti-gravity technology. Theoretically such technologies would allow you unlimited control over the ships weightlessness and mass. So it wouldn't matter how big, heavy or aerodynamically flawed the ship was you could move the ship about as you so pleased in the atmosphere.


"Silly TFA apologists!" =

We saw it with out own eyes, so yes it was possible.

They had an entire city defying gravity, floating in the clouds in Empire Strikes Back, a space ship doesn't seem that greater a stretch of the imagination to me.

Wow this thread is very long. One and only correct answer:

Star Wars is fantasy not Sci-fi.

The fact is there's plenty precedent for it already within the fantasy world of SW. So it's not out of place, even by fantasy SW standards.


"Silly TFA apologists!" =

More believable than the Enterprise being underwater in Star Trek into Darkness.