Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Can someone add the source for this radiation weakness? -- Cid Highwind 16:26, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- Added. I had to do a little google searching and MA referencing. It appears that the weakness was mentioned in the DS9 episode named "Valiant", since a script I found through google mentioned the lines for delta radiation being the weakness. But it is not exactly confirmed if this is true or not. Someene may have to watch the episode to find out. Since I cannot be certain if what I found is true, I am leaving the pna in place for now. --MKSuleth 18:03, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was going to say, off the top of my head -- "Valiant," since it was the only episode that talked about the ship. "Consistancy of wet pasta" or whatever Farris said... --Alan del Beccio 18:05, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
- I should also note that since the ship the Valiant attacked survived their attempt to turn those braces into "wet pasta", it is very highly probable that the cruiser was either not a battleship or had been redesigned to correct the flaw. Which makes part of the article mentioning the ship the Valiant fought as inaccurate should the class not be the same. This is something which could be discussed. For the moment however, it is fine with me if it remains as-is. --MKSuleth 18:51, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
I understand where the length of ~1300 meters is coming from, but I have to disagree. The only line from "Valiant" regarding the size is:
- "Someone told me that ship out there is twice the size of a Galaxy-class starship and three times as strong."
Here i my problem, it does not say what "twice the size" means. The ~1300 meters is assuming that the it means length, in which case it is right, since the Galaxy-class is 641 meters in length. Problem is, Jake does not say he is talking about length, only size. What if he is talking about volume? If that is the case, then 1300 meters would have no basis. I am therefore removing the number, since we have no way of knowing if it is remotely accurate. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I wonder what are the actual measurements for jem hedar battleship?
Where does it say that it was active from 2374 and onward? who knows, they could have been used way before that year. I think someone should remove that portion of the article. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk).
- The very first episode with it, which said that it was a new ship newly in operation and stuff. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)