TCW Season 1, Episode 7

[Khas 12,158]

This is the episode in which we see that the Separatist fleet uses asteroids to hide from a Republic fleet. The asteroids range in size from about 100 meters to a kilometer wide. Using common rock density, that would place these asteroids' mass between 1.5 million and 1.5 billion tons (given the odd shapes of some of the asteroids, we might assume even less). The Republic knew that the Separatists were coming, but because of the asteroids, any shots would just be blocked. So, of course, this leads to them using AT-TEs placed on asteroids to wreak havoc on the Munificents. (Given that the ICS states that ground vehicles have KT to MT weapons, we already get some contradictions in here.) Anyway, for the asteroids, assuming that they're made of a quartz-basalt mix (two common substances in the universe), we'd get a specific heat of 775 joules per kilogram/K, meaning, to raise the asteroids' temperature by 1 Kelvin, it would take 775 joules. Going by the masses of the asteroid, that would mean that it would take between 1.16 terawatts to 1.6 petawatts to heat them up by 1 Kelvin. Going by rock's boiling point - 2573 K - to vaporize those asteroids would require between 3 petawatts (.75 megatons) and 3 exawatts (.75 gigatons)

 

(Info on vaporizing asteroids also came from this government pdf file detailing plans to protect Earth against asteroids.)

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/509521-LUpxHI/webviewable/509521.pdf

 

So, what do we have here? TCW being impossible to reconcile with the ICS? My my my...

[scvn2812 504]

You keep posting this. I think this is probably the third time now. The answers are the same:

 

The inability to use LIGHT guns to break up the asteroids is contradicted by Empire Strikes Back. Yes these are bigger asteroids but it's not as if they actually need to vaporize them when fragmenting them with continuous bombardment with Hoth level firepower will do the job if not as fast as with the smaller asteroids.

 

Grievous' ship gets smacked by an asteroid with no apparent damage.

 

The AT TEs are firing into the unshielded and unarmored portions of the ships after Grievous specifically ordered full shields to the front. Given the circumstances, there is no reason to believe that AT TEs couldn't inflict some damage, not having to worry about shields or armor from that angle. After all, fighters are vastly smaller than capital ships by a factor of millions but as seen at Yavin and Endor, they can hurt unshielded, unarmored targets on ships.

 

The Munis are more vulnerable than most because they have virtually no armor beyond the big front plates.

 

All of these excuses are possible reconciliations with the scene but once more, Hoth conclusively shows that ships have the firepower to pulverize asteroids if they want.

 

I think I'm just going to find my responses to this scene and save them. I don't see the point in typing an original response to the same argument a fourth time when you inevitably repost this in two or three months.

 

I suppose I could turn this around. Yes it does mean ICS is wrong. It radically understates the firepower of walkers that can legitimately menace capital ships. Capital ships having the firepower to destroy small asteroids in one shot using guns we can't even see. By your own reasoning if walkers can threaten capital ships and you're assuming for no rational reason that capital ships are equally well protected across their entire surface and have zero exposed systems fighters or walkers could target, then it stands to reason that walkers have capital ship firepower.

 

Or we remember that at Yavin and Endor fighters millions of times smaller than Star Destroyers could attack poorly defended targets of opportunity on major warships without actually causing major structural damage. And that small asteroids die in moments to the guns of ISDs and Slave I, big ones would just need more shots.

[Khas 12,158]

You keep posting this. I think this is probably the third time now. The answers are the same:

 

The inability to use LIGHT guns to break up the asteroids is contradicted by Empire Strikes Back. Yes these are bigger asteroids but it's not as if they actually need to vaporize them when fragmenting them with continuous bombardment with Hoth level firepower will do the job if not as fast as with the smaller asteroids.

 

Grievous' ship gets smacked by an asteroid with no apparent damage.

 

The AT TEs are firing into the unshielded and unarmored portions of the ships after Grievous specifically ordered full shields to the front. Given the circumstances, there is no reason to believe that AT TEs couldn't inflict some damage, not having to worry about shields or armor from that angle. After all, fighters are vastly smaller than capital ships by a factor of millions but as seen at Yavin and Endor, they can hurt unshielded, unarmored targets on ships.

 

The Munis are more vulnerable than most because they have virtually no armor beyond the big front plates.

 

All of these excuses are possible reconciliations with the scene but once more, Hoth conclusively shows that ships have the firepower to pulverize asteroids if they want.

 

I think I'm just going to find my responses to this scene and save them. I don't see the point in typing an original response to the same argument a fourth time when you inevitably repost this in two or three months.

 

I suppose I could turn this around. Yes it does mean ICS is wrong. It radically understates the firepower of walkers that can legitimately menace capital ships. Capital ships having the firepower to destroy small asteroids in one shot using guns we can't even see. By your own reasoning if walkers can threaten capital ships and you're assuming for no rational reason that capital ships are equally well protected across their entire surface and have zero exposed systems fighters or walkers could target, then it stands to reason that walkers have capital ship firepower.

 

Or we remember that at Yavin and Endor fighters millions of times smaller than Star Destroyers could attack poorly defended targets of opportunity on major warships without actually causing major structural damage. And that small asteroids die in moments to the guns of ISDs and Slave I, big ones would just need more shots.

 

You are aware that the script for ANH states that the turbolasers use turbines to generate power, right?

INT. DEATH STAR

 

Smoke belches from the giant laser guns as they wind up their

turbine generators to create sufficient power. The crew rushes

about preparing for another blast. Even the troopers head

gear is not adequate to protect them from the overwhelming

noise of the monstrous weapon. One troopers bangs his helmet

with his hand in an attempt to stop the ringing.

http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Star-Wars-A-New-Hope.html

 

And I re-watched AoTC, and you know what? Slave I didn't vaporize a single asteroid. Blaster bolts seem to explode without hitting the target. Hell, re-watch the Battle of Coruscant in ROTS, and you see turbolaser blasts exploding long before they hit anything.

 

And the proton cannon that walloped the Venators in TCW? The ball it fired was only about a meter wide, and was travelling at only a few km/s. Given that we know that kinetic energy can pulverize ships in SW, this shouldn't be too surprising. I mean, just look at the damage the asteroids did to the ISDs in ESB. Or how about in RoTJ, when an out-of-control A-Wing sent the Executor ass-over-tit and caused it to crash into the Death Star?

 

Or maybe you're forgetting the fact that we NEVER SEE GUNS ON ACCLAMATORS IN EITHER THE MOVIES OR THE SHOW.

 

If they had guns, they'd be firing them. Even in planetary atmospheres. But do we see a single gun being fired? No. Not one.

 

Also, explain to me this. If the Republic cruisers could destroy the asteroids, WHY WEREN'T THEY FIRING ON THEM? They knew the Separatists were coming, and that they were using the asteroids as shields. Given that the energy required to destroy those asteroids is much less than what the ICS says, they could have just blasted them apart like they were nothing. But instead, they come up with a convoluted tactic to attack the Munis.

 

Jesus, it's like you think that nothing contradicts the ICS, and that it should be taken as Holy Scripture, when in reality, even people at Lucasfilm have decried it.

[Khas 12,158]

As for the turbolaser blasts exploding before they hit anything, remember this scene from TPM?

 

They hit nothing solid, and guess what? We still see explosions.

[Vince 520]

Nothin you said matters. We still saw guns to small to see vaporize asteroids and smack the Falcon around [low megatons in the films]. And we still see the Death Star in the films blow up a planet a million times over, and we still see ships with all that lofty thousands G acceleration in the films [and EU] requiring petatons of power output a second for an ISD.

 

The ATAT lasers hit something at over 17Km with out any arching, massless beams. The shots you showed from the tanks, they arched, so were not massless but in fact projectiles.

 

There isn't much you can do really. We see tens of kiltons to several megatons from invisible point defense, we see kilotons from fighters which can't scratch main armour on a battleship. Why don'y you accept this and try to reconcile other sources? Theres no point in arguing for the sake of arguing. Lets try to be constructive.

[Vince 520]

You are aware that the script for ANH states that the turbolasers use turbines to generate power, right?

INT. DEATH STAR

 

Smoke belches from the giant laser guns as they wind up their

turbine generators to create sufficient power. The crew rushes

about preparing for another blast. Even the troopers head

gear is not adequate to protect them from the overwhelming

noise of the monstrous weapon. One troopers bangs his helmet

with his hand in an attempt to stop the ringing.

And it don't matter HOW they do it, because they DO, do it. Guns to small to see firing massless beams shaking the Falcon around = several megatons per shot, consistent with the highest figures ICS gave for point defense. Cheer for consistency!

 

EDIT; thus because it is lubricious that turbolasers that require petawatts of power are powered by turbines, I would reconcile or throw out this quote in favour of ones which make more sense, like the weapons being powered by the main hypermatter reactor with the turbines being a catylist or some such . Obviously it is clear this quote intends them to be turbine powered, but it is completely implausible to have petawatt or (zetawatt in the case of heavy tl) level weaponry powered by such things when it should be impossible, especially when your main reactor is generating power in the same magnitude of our sun!