Talk: Death Star II/Legends/Archive1

Back to page |
< Talk:Death Star II/Legends
Wiki-shrinkable

This is the talk page for the article "Death Star II/Legends/Archive1."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for discussing the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit Wookieepedia Discussions. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

This page is an archive of the discussion of an article. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's current talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.

A 200 km wide Death Star II

The ROTJ novelization says that the second Death Star is nearly twice as big as the first one. The 900 km figure is disputed by stills from the movie itself. The movie was inconsistent in its portrayal of the second battle station's size. The 900 km figure comes from Curtis Saxton, a Star Wars fan who has made no mystery in favoring the highest possible figures. His taste for greater than necessary/correct figures is all over the place. And yes, the SW databank is notorious for being one of the poorest sources of information. It is best used as a quick introduction to data. It has, for example, entertained the wrong sizes for the Executor and AT-AT for years. Note, again, that the Executor's latest size, 19 km, instead of 17.6 km, has been heavily influenced by C. Saxton as well. To get back to the DSII's size, considering that at a given time, the official size of the first Death Star was 120 km wide, the second one could have only been, at best, less than 240 km wide, and that was if you used big as a reference to width, instead of volume like it's generally done. Now, with the other measure being 160 km, the second battle station could only be less than 320 km wide. But if you used the volume, since the first Death Star had a volume of 2.1447 e6 m³, therefore the second Death Star's volume would be less than twice that of the first one, ergo less than 4.2894 e6 m³. Which corresponds to a width of 201.588 kilometers. So the second Death Star would actually be around 200 km wide, which is not too far to the former size estimation for the battle station, made by people other than C. Saxton. Editors are seriously invited to reconsider this question.--77.202.16.72 03:10, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

This is about what's been figured out from looking at movie stills. The only way it could possibly be 900km was if the moon of Endor was absolutely enormous. --TheLairOfRockwhales 05:45, June 22, 2012 (UTC)

Death Star II plans: Tay Vanis and Polyhedron

Someone needs to add the information from Marvel about the Tay Vanis' acquisition of Death Star II plans. In addition, if it can be made to fit, there's an additional story about DS II plans in Polyhedron #86.72.68.228.25 20:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Mike Wong

Somebody keeps reverting the external link from Mike Wong's site. A commentary on Death Star I firepower, has nothing to do with Death Star II. Other than that, Jack Something could just be another Darth Wong fanboy. 66.189.171.19 23:06, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)

  • Actually, wrong. Just because they have different numbers doesn't mean that the link only talks about the first Death Star's firepower. Considering they're both superlasers, they have a relatively same amount of firepower. So, the link is important to the article. I'm not a "Darth Wong" fanboy. I just make sure everything is the right way here. And at least I have a name. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:10, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  • Actually, if you go to StarDestroyer.net, and go to the forums, Mike Wong's forum name, is Darth Wong. That's who I was talking about. No, they're not the same. DSII is larger, which (only usually) means more powerful. And as I can see you have been snooping around, reverting many of my articles. I would not like to have a stalker. As for the reason I haven't named myself, I've only seriously been on Star Wars Wiki for about a month. And I can keep editing the article as long as I want. Got it? 66.189.171.19 23:13, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, a superlaser is a superlaser. They can destroy planets and captial ships. That link is informative and relevant. You can edit it all you'd like, but I'll always put it back to the way it should be. And I'm not a stalker, just an article fixer. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:15, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  • Nah, don't worry. I'll be editing it as much as I can. 66.189.171.19 23:16, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  • You do know that you could get easily banned or I could get an administrator to lock this page up, don't you? All of us Wookieepedians know that, as I have had a few pages locked up by my request before. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:18, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  • I can go the other way, (not about locking the page). I could get you banned for snooping around and editing my corrections. 66.189.171.19 23:23, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, I just fix these articles. So, I'm basically correcting your corrections. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:24, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
    • Plus, Nebula here has a pretty solid rep, where as you are an annonymous user. Who do you think the admins will side with? Make sure you can back up your claims before you make them -- SFH 23:30, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
      • And you would be? Let me guess, the Star Wars version of a Trekkie. 66.189.171.19 23:33, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  • After all this "Heck," fine, I'll give in. 66.189.171.19 23:39, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  • And you would be? Let me guess, the Star Wars version of a Trekkie. - says the contributor to the Star Wars Wikipedia...Kuralyov 00:11, 25 Sep 2005 (UTC)
      • The only confirmed difference between the DSI and DSII superlasers is the fact that the DSII uses more feeder beams than the DSI, I see no reason to just randomly delete a link that is helpful because you personaly don't like it Elementalos 10:38 PST, Jan 15 2007

Locked

  • This page has been locked due to an edit war. Once this issue has been resolved, see a moderator to get it unlocked. QuentinGeorge 00:31, 25 Sep 2005 (UTC)
    • Thank you. Quentin, I'm glad that whole issue on the Jedi Purge was solved. You seem to be a very good ally now. Anyways, O anonymous user, we here at Star Wars Wikipedia make sure that everything it is the way it is supposed to be. When edit wars break out, the page is requested to be locked so no one can edit it until this is resolved. And, if you are to start this up again after it's unlocked, it will just get locked again. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 01:30, 25 Sep 2005 (UTC)
      • If he starts it up again after it gets unlocked, he'll be lucky if we don't just ban him and leave the page open. But let's hope it doesn't come to that. – Aidje talk 06:02, 5 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Can this get unlocked now? Kuralyov 06:44, 20 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Death Star I VS Death Star II

If the second one is more powerful than the first, how come D.S. 1 blew up a planet (Alderaan) on contact, when it took D.S. 2 a second to blow up a Mon Calamari Star Cruiser? Double D 19:24, 3 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • Well, there could be a few ideas, but perhaps since the battle station was still incomplete, the weapon might not be as powerful as the first Death Star's yet. What it says about that the Death Star II's superlaser was more powerful might refer to it when the station was fully complete. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 20:50, 3 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Maybe it was just on a lower setting, given that they knew they were firing on something much smaller than a planet. Also, Alderaan was not destroyed on contact. If you watch closely you can see the entire planetary shield light up before the explosion. File:Destruction of Alderaan-1.jpg shows the shield beginning to light up. – Aidje talk 21:58, 3 Oct 2005 (UTC)
    • Hmm, there's something else I found out. I never knew that Alderaan had a planetary shield. Anyhow, it could have been set down on a lower setting. That's another possiblity. Who knows what Palpatine wanted done. Cmdr. J. Nebulax 23:18, 3 Oct 2005 (UTC)

When you say planetary shield, do you mean an energy shield or the planet's atmospere? Double D 19:15, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • An energy shield surrounding a planet, like a "deflector shield atmosphere". Cmdr. J. Nebulax 22:30, 4 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • The second Death Star supported more weapons and the superlaser, however at the same power, was more efficient, and could be fired more often (around once every 5 minutes as opposed to the 24 hour recharge time of the original weapon). Also, the design flaw of the older Death Star was corrected by the exhaust ports no longer leading directly to the main reactor. The only flaws in the second Death Star were the IG-88 problem below, and the Emperors' desire to launch his weapon before the fortified hull was completed.

As for the top of this subject, maybe it was because the folks at ILM got better at pyro-compositing(you know, making the the effect "read" as real, or having a time delay for dramatic effect) and has nothing to do with the story. Zeelog11/27/2008

Two Years?

Latest update says "this Death Star took much less time (around two years) to construct." Anyone able to tell me what the sources were for this...? Thanks! --McEwok 04:48, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Eh, it was my best estimate. I don't really think we have a source, but the ROTJ opening crawl says that the Empire has been constructing one, yet it doesn't give an exact period of time. Since I doubt they would have just thrown one together in a few months, considering the long period of time it took for the first one, around 15 years in between the end of Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope. General Kenobi 05:52, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • According to Galaxy Guide 5: Return of the Jedi (from West End Games), Bevel Lemelisk went into hiding after the destruction of the first DS, fearing for his life, since the DS was brought down by a simple design-flaw. When he was tracked down on Hefi, the Emperor simply wanted him to design another battlestation, this time without the exhaust-flaw. So that makes it 2-3 years to reach the DS II's state in ROTJ. VT-16 15:09, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • It is still very strange that the battle station could be completed by the Battle of Endor. Admiral J. Nebulax 19:42, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • It wasn't complete, about 60% or so. They just rushed the superlaser-section as fast as they could, leaving most of the other facilities to be done at a later time. Then there's also the two "twin mini-DS" stations being made in orbit around Coruscant ("The Illustrated SW universe"), which were also never completed. But they might have begun construction prior to the completion of the DS I, for all we know. VT-16 20:45, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • I didn't mean that it was completely completed. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:04, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
          • Oh, sorry. VT-16 23:42, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
            • Don't worry about it. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:27, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
              • 69.123.198.128, are you User:Adamwankenobi? Because if you aren't, don't edit what he wrote. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 15:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
  • The second Death Star probably took less time, because it wasn't of Geonosian design and due to improved construction capabilities. However if it only took two years, wouldn't there be noticible differences throughout Return of the Jedi especially around the Emperor's Throne Spire where there are evident holes, if they had the steadfast ability to build, they would not want the Emperor to see their "lack of progress". The Empire probably began construction on the second Death Star before the first Death Star's construction finished, It would make sense since it takes a long time to build a moon-sized craft as well as the Emperor's desire to have more than one of these battlestations to keep control of the Galaxy.

IG-88

Hey, I'm new to Wookieepedia (and Wikis in general), but I noticed on the Death Star II page, there was no mention of IG-88 uploading himself into the great weapon. I don't know if this was done on purpose, or just simply overlooked.

Anyway, I copied and pasted a few lines from the IG-88 article, and edited them around a bit to fit the Death Star II article better. If that shouldn't be there, then I apologize!

Impeal 07:43, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • Impeal, it's perfectly okay. That bit of information was overlooked and thank you for adding it. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:53, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Hmm, I thought I had saw a bit on that in the article before... Admiral J. Nebulax 12:43, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Death Star size

Hey there. I'm new to wookieepedia, so I hope you don't mind me asking this question. I know the second Death Star is 900km in diameter - I'm not dispuing that - but the thing that makes me wonder is why is the second one so much larger than the first(which only had a diameter of around 160km). I saw a comparison of the two once, and the first DS wouldn't even cover the second one's superlaser dish. You would think that they could just build 10 DS1s instead. Anyway, I would be very grateful for any responses made. Thanks in advance for your time. User 81.132.81.203

  • Well, at least you're not vandalizing the page like another anon (or anons) did, and I thank you for that. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) Imperial Emblem 11:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Um... no it was not my intent to vandalise the page. I was just wondering why the second DS is so much larger. If I'm being a pain and this has been already answered elsewhere then I apologise. User 81.132.81.203

  • No, not at all. Just as long as you don't change something in the article without a source. Anyway, you don't have to worry about it. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) Imperial Emblem 21:54, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

At risk of getting us back to topic... User 81.132.81.203

I honestly can't remember where - it was one of the forums on the web, but it had the Executor(barely a pinprick) the DS1 (120km) and the Death Star 2(900 km) side-by-side. If I can find it I'll put it up. It just struck me as weird that the second one must have had 100 times the volume of the first. 81.132.81.203

Sorry, just realised the back-on-topic thing might have sounded a bit rude. It wasn't meant to be - I just was a bit thrown by how we got from the original question to vandalism. User 81.132.81.203

No need. Finally found it. User 81.132.81.203 http://www.sfdebris.com/deathstars.jpg

  • Thank you very much. It's wierd, because in the movies, you can't really tell that the Death Star II is that much larger than the Death Star I. Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 19:19, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. That's why I was asking about the relative diameters and why the second one was so much bigger. The 120/160km figures may be wrong, but they do seem to be a much more plausible upscaling, rather than a DS2 at 5 times the diameter and probably 200 times the volume. On a side note, the same site I found that in has a shot of the DS2 compared to Texas. Scarily large, innit? User 81.132.81.203

  • Well, the figures we have are canon, so they can't be wrong. And as for the second Death Star compared to Texas, yes, that's "scarily large", as you put it. However, that comparison seems reasonable. Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:22, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying it isn't canon, I'm just wondering why the second one was so much bigger. Was it a psychological warfare thing("you blew up one, so we built another one five times the size") or did it have to do with the new, improved power systems? User 81.132.81.203

Fair enough. Also possibly Palpatine's ego at work - building such a huge battlestation could be the ultimate affirmation that the Empire was unbeatable. If it was so much larger, yet built in a much shorter time, it gives a good account of their near limitless resources. User 81.132.81.203

Hmm. Think I just answered my own question. In any case Cmdr Nebulax, thanks for your time and patience. As an aside, do you think it's possible to work the size comparison shot into one of the Death Star articles? User 81.132.81.203

Sorry, I meant Admiral Nebulax. User 81.132.81.203

  • Don't worry about the title thing. I was once a commander anyway. ;) As for the size comparison chart, I suppose it could be added in, but first we'll need to get permission from the site you retrieved it from. Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 20:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. Again, thanks for your time. User 81.132.81.203( OR smegatron as I decided to create an account as)

The Databank at starwars.com lists the size of the second death star as being 160km in diameter. Come on, doesn't the Databank's information supersede pretty much everything else? In any case, it's impossible to build a 900km diameter battlestation in such a short time (even only 60% of it) when the previous 120km battlestation took 15+ years. The second death star cannot be 900km in diameter, it's gotta be 160km. User:Unatco

  • No, the Databank has been wrong before, and in this case, it is. The diameter is 900km. And nothing's really impossible. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 11:56, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  • The Databank is a quick introduction to each subject and not in any way superior to film material and sources revolving around the films (novelizations, scripts, visual dictionaries, cross-sections and inside the worlds guidebooks). And yes, it has contained both errors and incomplete information before and now. VT-16 12:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

guys, lets think about it. anyone could've pasted those pictures together, making them any size they want, any size they beleive it really is. And lets face it, does it make any sense that the first death star took 19 years to build but after 3 years of construction the second death star is almost finished. the core is intact, and the superlaser is operational. now could it really be that much bigger? i have a picture of my own that i'd like to show, but i need a little help. how do i get it on here? obviously copying and pasteing didn't work Carbonox-infernox 02:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be another discrepancy regarding the size of the second Death Star. It's commonly accepted that the second Death Star is about 900 km wide. Endor's moon has a diameter of about 4,800 km, making it a bit more than five times as wide as the second Death Star. However, in the pictures, Endor's moon looks far, far larger. --Ixfd64 12:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Survivors?

They make a point of showing people running to and fro as alarms blare during the scene where Luke is leading Vader to the shuttle. It seems reasonable to assume that these guys are in the process of evacuating. So, how many of them actually managed to get off the Death Star before it blew up?

And on the same line of thinking, if they were in fact evacuating, what kept Jerjerrod from jumping ship as well? If the lowliest of his subordinates had enough sense to get out of Dodge while the getting was good, why didn't he? - Kooshmeister

  • Yeah, the fact that they were running away in chaos indicates that some made it out. As for Jerjerrod, I guess he wanted to go down with the ship. Than again, it's been a while since I've read the RotJ novel.-LtNOWIS 20:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't want to rip off Clerks here, but I guess I don't have a choice. What about the workers the Empire contracted to construct the second Death Star. When the US government builds weapons, they don't do it themselves: they contract it out to Lockheed or some other company. What I'm trying to say is that I seriously doubt the Emperor evacuated all the civilian workers from Sienar or Kuat Drive Yards prior to the battle with the rebels; it would have been too suspicious. And once the attack began and the core of the Death Star was hit, there would not be much time before the station exploded. So what happened to all the contracted civilian workers and slave labor being used to build the second Death Star? They only feasible answer is that most of them died when the station exploded; millions of slaves like Wookiees and other aliens, and the contracted human workers died. Due to the actions of the Rebel Alliance. So what makes these guys better than the Empire? User:Unatco

  • You might as well ask why bother to cheer for the Allies in WWII since they terrorbombed German cities. Why cheer for the Norwegian resistance when they blew up a passenger ferry to stop a shipment of heavy water from reaching Germany. Bad stuff involving civilians can and do happen in a war, even with the overall "good guys" doing it. That doesn't mean they should be looked at as equal to their opposition, unless this pracise becomes common-place. VT-16 12:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Plus the people building the 2nd Death Star aren't innocent because they know that it will be used to blow up planets and stuff, just like the archetechs that built Auzwitch(sp) aren't innocent.-Gimodon

Executor crash caused serious damage near the hangar bays

As mentioned in the survivors section of the discussion page, when the Executor plunges into the Death Star, it must have caused serious damage since you see panic amongst Imperial officers running about in the hangar. Also, none of the officers seem to notice or care that Darth Vader is being carried away to a shuttle. Probably they thought he was one of the injured from the explosion. With this said, the explosion of the Executor must have been near the hangar bays as the hangar bays are being evacuated.

  • Not really. They were evacuating because the Rebels had hit the power generator already. They were running because the station was about to explode, not because Executor crashed into it. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 13:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I do not believe that's correct. the Death Star's reactor core is destroyed right after Vader dies in the hangar bay, placing it after we see the officers running about. You may be right in a way, the Imperials, realizing the Rebels had gone deep within the Death Star probably realized that something was up and it was time to bail out.
      • That's what I'm thinking. I may have been off on the time when the reactor core was destroyed, but I think they were fleeing because the Rebel craft were in the Death Star II's structure. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 11:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Lego descriptions?

hi i recently bought a Death star 2 lego set online and it came with a plaque with some pretty huge numbers here is the llink to a picture. check 360 views and it will be at the bottem

[1]

Assassin droid?

Why is Death Star 2 is in Assassin droids cathegory?--Darth Sauron.:Talk about the Dark Side you want?:.Revanchist Sith 20:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

DS2 size - Star Wars Chronicles & Databank

I'm wondering why the Wookieepedia goes with the 900 km size when the Databank puts it at 160 km?

Also, I splurged on Star Wars Chronicles...it also puts it at 160, as do many other licenced books.

'Inside the Worlds...' puts it at 900 km, but that book is fraught with typos. (Wompa Rats, anybody?)

  • I'd assume the most recently published book is more likely to reflect what's currently considered canon. Inside the Worlds is a 2004 book, while Star Wars Chronicles is a 1997 book which was reprinted in 2005 without updating. The Databank entry may be a few years old by now, and not updated to reflect the rescaling. —Silly Dan (talk) 13:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
    • So, to sum it up, it's 900 km. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 14:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
      • But the retcon/correction (I think of it as a retcon of an ambiguous figure, some of you are probably muttering that 160 km was wrong to begin with) hasn't propagated through to every official source still in print or online. Anyone know which source was the first with 900 km? Maybe the BtS could clarify the situation a bit. —Silly Dan (talk) 14:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
        • What worries me is that a new source might say "160 km". What do we do then? Keep on changing the figure? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 14:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
          • If it's an official re-retcon, yes. If we ask Leland Chee or some other Lucasfilm authority figure, and they say "someone goofed", then no: it goes in BtS as a continuity error. (Neither situation is likely: I'm sure the number's in a file somewhere now.) —Silly Dan (talk) 14:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

But what about the superlaser size? The amount of space the superlaser takes up on the Death Star I isn't very different from the amount of space it takes up on the Death Star II. SO either the Death Star II isn't 900km, or they drastically sized up the the superlaser on the Death Star II.

And who defines what's canon? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax? Great.

Just curious about the calculations for the DS2 size...

Noticing that the majority of the calculations come from shadow sizes & pixel sizes, I'm wondering about another type of calculation... I haven't timed the Battle of Endor, but I'm guessing *somebody* has! So...based on the maximum speed of the Falcon during the 'shaft run', is it even possible for it to travel 450+ km in the time between taking out the reactor and exiting the fireball? I don't really think that the ships were travelling more than 200 km/h, based on how quickly they receed when the camera stops relative to the ship. Has anybody done the calculations for this?

  • If you're suggesting that the 900 meter figure is incorrect, it isn't, because the most recent canon sources say so. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 20:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • This site does not rely on the calculations made by fans to determine the size, its mainly the sources closest to the movie production. VT-16 12:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I personally believe what starwars.com says. (120 for the first and 160 for the second) because if the scaling you're talking about is true, than the DS2's superlaser is bigger than the entrie first one. Also, you can see the equatorial trench from a distnce, and that is only maybe 2 km high if you look at the 'emporor's shuttle landing' scene. Plus, check out the page for the millenium falcon, with its top speeds it would take twenty minutes to get out of the death star. User: Prattman13 11:15, 6 April 2007

It's 160. The most recent canon source says so. What can be more recent than a regularly updateable website such as starwars.com? Which is, by the way, run by Lucasfilm, which makes it more reliable than any book by a third party publisher such as Dorling Kindersley ("Star Wars" Complete Locations). Actually, there are wrong "facts" in their "Marvel Comics Encyclopedia", too. -- 160. Deal with it. —Unsigned comment by 80.171.89.232 (talk • contribs)

  • The StarWars.com Databank is not the most recent source, nor is it as updated as you'd like to think. -- I need a name (Complain here) 18:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Star Wars: Complete Locations had to go through Lucasfilm before being published. I say again, 160km for the first Death Star and 900km for the second Death Star. That is canon. You deal with it, anon. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

How can it be canon, when there are contradicting information from sources on still unevaluated (!) canon level? Thus, it's nothing more than your personal(!) opinion and therefore these contradictions should at least be mentioned in the article.

Yes, it's the Great Dictator J. Nebulax' canon. So say we all!

  • Anon, knock it off. Canon doesn't change just because you don't like it. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 11:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • ILM intended for it to be 5 times larger than the one they made for ANH. Scaling done on the finished film, showed that they largely succeeded in their goal. Ergo, changing the dimensions in text to reflect the film better, was done and is now noted. VT-16 18:36, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Why would Empire waste credits, meterials, and time to make it 900km. 160 is a better estimate, pluss at 900 it could have caused climate changes on Endor with its mass.--Grand Moff Wilhuff Tarkin 03:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
      • The evidence for DS2 to be 900km in diameter is shaky at best, largely derived from size comparisons in certain shots in RotJ between the station and Endor and ignoring other shots which clearly show Endor to be much, much bigger. Those size comparisons also ignore the multiple shots of the DS2's equatorial trench, which show it to be comparable in size to the DS1's, most notably the final shot of Luke's shuttle exiting the station which pretty much ends the debate. The only thing which opens it up again is the suggestion by one of the original designers that the station was intended to be much bigger. Given the size of the equatorial trench and the scale of the DS2 in comparison to most shots of Endor, they failed in this intention. The only remaining issue is the 'Complete Locations' book, which as a lone source contrasted to multiple other sources citing the smaller size could be safely ignored if it wasn't for Lucasfilm's canon-level system suggesting it should be taken seriously, in defiance of other sources, common sense, logic and internal consistency. If DS2 is five times bigger than DS1, it should have taken substantially longer to build, and thus its construction should predate that of the DS1. Yet there is no evidence for this to be the case.--Werthead 21:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

If Death Star II is complete

According to the opening crawl of Return of the Jedi, if Death Star II is completed, in terms of structure, the Alliance to Restore the Republic will certainly be doomed, thus having no chance against the Galactic Empire. Tedius Zanarukando 04:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Video Board Game

  • Elements from the Video Board Game have been shown to be canonical, for instance in The Dark Forces Saga here. I don't know what to do about other board games, but this one definitely seems to fit the bill of a legitimate appearance. jSarek 00:44, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Was the planet specified to have been destroyed? Is the Imperial end in the game, the "true" one? If so, what is the source? VT-16 21:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Discrepancy with the movie?

In the article, it is stated that the Death Star II was moved to Endor by Vader, and along the way it destroyed D'rinba IV with its superlaser. The Rebels tried to stop the Death Star before it destroyed the planet. Thus, they would be well aware that the Death Star II's superlaser was operational and capable of destroying a planet. However, in Return of the Jedi, they are attacking the Death Star II at Endor under the assumption that the superlaser is inoperable and the station vulnerable to attack. Did they just forget that a planet was destroyed not too long ago by it? --Danik Kreldin 18:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm pretty sure those Rebels were wiped out. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 20:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Read D'rinba IV. It states Kyle Katarn was involved in the operation. He didn't die. --74.68.17.86 07:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Not to mention, the whole D'rinba IV being destroyed comes from [[Star Wars: The Interactive Video Board Game. Not sure how canonical that is. It clearly contradicts the movies - the superlaser was not ready until shortly before the Battle of Endor, Palpatine sent Vader to rush its completion. It could not have destroyed a planet with its superlaser anytime before it arrived at Endor. Moreover, the knowledge of a second Death Star being constructed did not come to light until Bothan spies retrieved the information and passed it along. --Danik Kreldin 07:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
      • It sounds like The Interactive Video Board Game should be moved farther down the canon scale. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 15:02, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Should we put a non-canon tag on the Interactive Video Board Game article, and remove D'rinba IV's mention from this article and the actual D'rinba IV article? --74.68.17.86 17:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
          • I'd say yes for the first thing, but for the D'rinba IV mention, we'll just make it a separate paragraph and encase it in non-canon tags. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 00:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
            • Done. --Danik Kreldin 04:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
              • And removed, as the Interactive Board Game has both been stated to be canon, and referenced elsewhere. Word simply hadn't travelled to the Rebel Fleet by the time they attacked. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 10:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

The time between the Interactive Video Board Game and the Battle of Endor has to be long enough for word of a planet being destroyed to reach Alliance High Command. You don't think Kyle Katarn or anyone would report the destruction of a planet at the hands of the Death Star II, something that could very well destroy the entire Alliance? Information travels quite fast in the SW universe, mind you. Not to mention, the Interactive Video Board Game operates under the assumption that the superlaser is already complete well before the Battle of Endor, when, clearly, it is only completed just a short time beforehand when rushed by Vader, who had to arrive personally. Moreover, the Interactive Video Board Game shows Vader already on the Death Star II well before Return of the Jedi. Your argument is that the time period between the Video Board Game and the movie is almost nothing (hence why the Alliance High Command wouldn't be aware of the operational status of the Death Star). However, if this were the case, why would Vader be arriving on the Death Star at the beginning of RotJ at Endor? The time it took to go from D'rinba IV to Endor, and for Vader to leave from Endor and to go wherever else, and then return, would have been LONG enough for word to reach the Alliance that the Death Star II just destroyed a planet. But the Death Star II didn't destroy a planet because its superlaser was not finished until after Vader arrived on the Death Star in RotJ. The Video Board Game contradicts the movies and cannot be considered canon. The Alliance did not learn of the Death Star II until Palpatine leaked its information to Bothan spies, who transferred it over to the Alliance. This is clearly evidenced in both Shadows of the Empire and Return of the Jedi. FURTHERMORE, Shadows of the Empire details how Palpatine hires Xizor to supply materials to Endor for construction on the Death Star. The Death Star II is already undergoing construction at Endor during Shadows of the Empire. Now are we to say that a board game has superiority over books and the movies themselves?

Construction began at Endor, remained at Endor. At no time did the Death Star II travel across the galaxy blowing up planets. The Alliance did not learn of the Death Star II until Palpatine leaked the information during Shadows of the Empire. The Alliance attacked the Death Star II in RotJ and destroyed it. End of story. Your argument of the Alliance not learning of the superlaser destroying D'rinba IV is wrong because the time period is far too long for it to not go unnoticed. I'm sorry, but it is not canon. --Danik Kreldin 22:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I agree. The Interactive Video Board Game contradicts canon. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 00:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, let's see what Jaymach or anyone else has to say before changing it back. --Danik Kreldin 02:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Agreed. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 12:00, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
        • I actually agree with part of what you said...the whole purpose in the Interactive Boardgame is to stop the Death Star II from being able to fire its superlaser at D'rinba, and to stop it being destroyed...now as we've seen with...well...every game that's been given a canon ending so far...the light side ending wins out...therefore, in the Boardgame...the heroes win...the Death Star II isn't able to fire at the planet, and so it's not destroyed...the Death Star was still partially constructed at D'rinba IV, and it's entirely possible that the superlaser was indeed complete at that point...but I do not believe that it would have blown up the planet, as in the light side ending for the game it would not have. So it's entirely possible that Katarn and his group had no idea that the superlaser was active at the time of the Battle of Endor, which would neatly tie up why the Rebels had no idea it was active. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 01:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Wreckage/Debris?

I think it's important that this article include what happened to the debris of the Death Star after it exploded, especially in reference to the supposed Endor Holocaust, as well as the wormhole thing that is mentioned in The Glove of Darth Vader (clothing) article. Specifically, it has this to say:

During the Battle of Endor, Luke Skywalker severed Darth Vader's hand with his lightsaber, and the cybernetic appendage was cast aside. Soon after, the Death Star battle-station was destroyed and Vader's glove was presumably lost. The glove survived however, ensnared within a piece of wreckage that landed on the watery world of Dac after being pulled through a wormhole created by the explosion of the hypermatter in the Death Star's core.

Was the entire wreckage pulled through the wormhole? Or the just bits and pieces? Did it all go to the same place? I don't know the answer to these questions, but I'm hoping someone who has read the source material does, and can fill in the holes here. Thanks. MaclimesZero 17:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

  • That's a pretty good question. When the wormhole was created, the wreckage of the Death Star could have been scattered across the Galaxy. It would appear the majority fell to Endor; however, objects near the reactor when it detonated (like Vader's glove) would have been immediately sucked into the wormhole if the reactor's explosion did not destroy them. Seeing as the whole fireball burned out quickly, the wormhole probably didn't last long; therefore, not so much debris would have entered it. While the Endor holocaust itself may or may not be canon, it seems that the majority would have fell to the forest moon and small debris would have burned up in the atmosphere, while larger pieces would have crashed to the moon. However, I could imagine that some wreakage managed to end up on the other side of the Galaxy. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 22:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    • So most of the info that we "have" is primarily conjecture? That's sad. Well, I seem to recall that Kyp found some wreckage on the surface of Endor as well (although it may have been the wreckage of a Star Destroyer, my memory is fuzzy). I think this is important information, however, and should be added to the article. MaclimesZero 16:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Capacitor image

Someone keeps deleting the capacitor image I put on this page a while ago. Whoever keeps doing that can they please stop. I'm going to put the image back on now.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 15:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[[File:Capacitor1.jpg|200px]]

Construction

In the article it says that it was constructed at Endor but in the article The Maw, it says it was built there. Here is the section of the article that says that: Other superweapons designed and built there include the World Devastators, the Tarkin, the Ion Ring, the Galaxy Gun, the second Death Star, and the Subspace Holotransceiver.Drol revan 20:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Then shouldn't we delete the part that says the second Death Star was built there?Drol revan 23:24, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Deleted.Drol revan 15:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Number of tributary beams

The article claims the number of tributary beams of the second death star to be nine. But the picture of the fireing laser dish shows only eight beams including the central one. The picture is from the movie, so the number of nine is wrong. --Sundace 13:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

  • The central tributary beam (not present in the first Death Star) combines with the eigth others to form the superlaser. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 14:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

But there are only seven beams on the fringe, not eight --Sundace 15:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Wow, I never realized that. Thanks for pointing it out. Feel free to change it - I'm busy with another article at the moment. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 15:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Other images say nine and there is a posibility that beam number nine was eclipsed by another, or it could have been reconed to nine later.--Grand Moff Wilhuff Tarkin 03:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Another size confirmation

Not sure if it's significant at this point, but the latest issue of Star Wars Insider backs up the 900km diameter size. In an article about the "secrets of Return of the Jedi," the Death Star II has a slight mention, where they describe it as 900 kilometers in diameter. Just another confirmation to the 900km size, as a lot of people still seem to argue the point. --Danik Kreldin 22:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

  • That's issue 105, right? Cool. :) VT-16 22:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
  • What the hell? 900 kilometers in width? Pfft. If the first was 160 and it took them about 18 or 19 years, and then they made a 900 kilometer-wide one in four years? I doubt it. MastahCheef117 19:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
    • Evidence trumps doubt, plus there is peripheral evidence that DSII work may have been started prior to the destruction of the first (Hammertong). Dangerdan97 20:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Better Image of Death Star II

We know that the slightly purple image used as the main image and for the Wookieepedia logo is not used in other sources. Neither is the green one. (You can compare it with the hangar pictures, which is grey). I found a much better and high res picture. Please upload this one as the main pic, and if you really want, the logo too. It really doesn't make sense that we have a pic where in the m,ovie it appears grey. Link:http://www.desktopextreme.com/photos/Star_Wars_Death_Star_38200545907PM743.jpg --Governor Jerjerrod 04:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

  • Never mind. I think this one is just a black and white version of the pruple one. That would be inaccurate, so forget it.--Governor Jerjerrod 02:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Better image of DS2

I have uploaded a pic whoich is colour-accurate. Why have you reverted it?--Governor Jerjerrod 03:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't the DS2 opposed by someone?

Wasn't someone who was involved with ESB opposed to having another Death Star in RotJ? I recall reading this a while ago, but I'm not sure who it was that had opposed it (nor where I read it >.<). If this is true, I believe it would be good behind-the-scenes info to add to this article. RobertM525 01:13, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

  • It would make a good BTS note. If you can find the official source to reference too, go ahead and add it. - JMAS Hey, it's me! 01:16, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

Death Star II????

As the DS1 has been moved to DS-1 Orbital Battle Station, shouldn't this be moved to DS-2 Orbital Battle Station?? I'm not in agreement with this little known name change, but both should have the same kind of title don't you think?? Anomaly Master 98 19:37, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

  • Only if "DS-2 Orbital Battle Station" is used as an official name somewhere. —Silly Dan (talk) 20:03, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Death Star Blows up Home One

Does anyone see that the picture we have of the Death Star II blowing up a Mon Calamari Cruiser, that the ship looks like Home One??!?!? Is it just me? Or does anyone else see a resemblance to Home One? TheFizz 03:23, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

  • I Believe its the same class of ship as Home One, but it can't be since Admiral Ackbar was on Home One, and he survived the battle, and he used this ship as his flagship for many battles after this. VadersFist666 03:28, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

DS2 size relative to Endor

Curtis Saxton's figures give the Forest Moon of Endor as being 11.2 x the diameter of the Death Star. People have disputed that based on the screenshots- but leave that out for the moment.

What's more important, is that the most recent canonical diameter for the Forest Moon (given in The Essential Atlas) is much smaller than the 900 km DS2 diameter would dictate.

Specifically, 4900 km (The Essential Atlas, page 58.)

Now- does that not suggest that something is wrong with the 900 km figure? --Hamish 86.140.42.176 17:24, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

Star Wars Galaxies Appearance

I was riding a swoop bike throughthe mountains in the northern part of Endor on SWG earlier and I noticed that the incomplete Death Star II was clearly visible in the sky. I took a screen shot of it, should I add the screenshot to Wookieepedia and update the appearances? Aquarion Nieja 17:14, September 30, 2011 (UTC)