I ran it 5 times, and it isn't even a contest. The Raynor kills the Solaris with between 65 and 85% health remaining. With no beams whatsoever, it's a bit closer, but still a clear victory for the Raynor, being left with 30 - 60% health. Pulse Cannons are definitely better than Gattler turrets. The two ships were arranged side by side, and on the last 2 rounds, the Solaris was rolled 90 degrees. Beam-wise, the Raynor only had one TerSlashBlue and one SBlue firing.
I'll add that not a single Eos managed to hit. Those point defense guns are quite effective.
The results are similar if you replace the Raynor with a Titan. Bit closer, though.
The Titan actually does better than the Raynor if there's no jamming at all, provided it's actually in a position to use its frontal beams. They'll often kill each other, with the Solaris' last volley killing the Titan from beyond the grave. The Titan will typically survive if the Solaris' first missile barrage fails to knock out a BBlue.
I'm probably saying things the rest of you already know, but hopefully I'm contributing something.
Mars: oh, I know. A test in a vacuum like this is already pretty flawed, because it doesn't take into account fighter screens and other variables. Who wants a fair fight?
MatththeGeek: Perhaps the Diomedes is more expensive. Wouldn't surprise me, since it's a pretty high-tech ship. My point is that it's a much better anti-ship, er, ship, despite being 2/3 the size, and still has a fighter bay. Whether the UEF military is more efficient with the resources it has is up for debate, but the former doesn't preclude the latter. The UEF could be more efficient with its capital ship designs, but GTVA ones are generally superior, performance-wise.
-Norbert-: I agree. I doubt Calder was really worried about a couple TerSlashes. My point was that the Solaris can have its torpedoes jammed, and when that happens, it's a sitting duck for anything with some decent firepower. Who's to say the GTVA won't do it in the future?