Star Wars vs. Star Trek: it's a debate which has remained unsolved for years, due to the hugely loyal fan-bases possessed by both shows. However, renowned astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson was recently pitched the question, definitively stating that Star Trek's Enterprise would easily destroy Star Wars's Millennium Falcon.
Tyson is pretty big on using his scientific knowledge to deconstruct popular culture, but is he right? The Falcon and the Enterprise are two of the most iconic spacecraft in cinematic and television history, so if they were ever to throw-down, who would come out on top?
Millennium Falcon vs. The Enterprise
When debating the issue, Falcon fans generally note its speed, maneuverability and the fact that it's Han Solo at the helm, whereas Enterprise supporters note its superior size and technology.
Well, a few points have to be considered, especially as the iconic ships exist in entirely different universes, each with their own pseudo-science and history. But here's a quick rundown of my thoughts on the discussion.
Let's discuss an easy one to start with: size. The Enterprise is a huge vessel, with an enormous crew, as well as families, whereas the Falcon is a small ship which only needs between 2-6 crew-members. This one goes to the U.S.S. Enterprise.
Where my initial thought was that Star Trek would win hands down in terms of firepower, I've since given it a second thought. One source: 'Star Wars vs Star Trek in five minutes' claims that ships in Star Wars are, in fact, much more powerful than Star Trek. Assuming for a moment that this is true, the Enterprise still has a vast array of weaponry, including photon torpedoes, up against the Falcon's laser turrets.
We can't forget that one episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation where they confronted a less-advanced race in possession of laser weapons and Warf laughed. However, we can't assume that this tech was on par with Star Wars weaponry.
Still, I can't see the Enterprise being brought down by laser turrets.
Okay, so the Falcon is an incredibly maneuverable ship, in addition to being small and very fast, giving it a huge advantage over the Enterprise. However, the Enterprise has well-calibrated auto-lock weapons with sensors that pretty much guarantee a hit. So does this remove the Falcon's maneuverability as a factor?
I'll get right to it: according to 'StarWars.Wikia' the galaxy in which Star Wars exists is 100,000 - 120,000 light years across, around 37,000 parsecs. This makes the Star Wars galaxy slightly larger than the Milky Way, which is approximately 100,000 light years across.
The Millennium Falcon and other vessels from the Star Wars franchise have proven that they can cross the galaxy in weeks or months through use of their hyperdrive, whereas such feats would take a Federation vessel hundreds of years. Simply put, the Falcon's hyperdrive makes it significantly faster than the Enterprise's warp drive.
Sorry Star Trek fans, but Star Wars wins every time when it comes to speed!
There's a lot to consider here. It's worth noting that Star Wars and Star Trek have varying technological advantages and disadvantages. Star Trek technology seems more advanced and honed, whereas Star Wars has powerful battle-hardened technology which has existed for thousands of years.
However, the Enterprise is a powerful ship with a vast array of weaponry; the Falcon simply isn't up to the challenge. The outcome could be entirely different if a the Enterprise were to face off against a Star Wars Capital ship. Now that would be a fight!