AT-ATs - shielded?

[Captain Seafort 17]

So, I was watching ESB recently, and something caught my eye:

 

 

The screencap is taken from here at approximately 2:27, as Luke clears the second walker after strafing it.

 

Is it just me, or does that look remarkably like a shield flash?

[Khas 12,158]

There's no mention of them being shielded, and we don't see that when the Snowspeeders blow up the crashed one.  It's possible it was a 'flak burst', like the ones we usually see in large space battles in SW.

[Captain Seafort 17]

There's no mention of them being shielded

 

There's no mention of TIEs being shielded either, but we accept that they are,

we don't see that when the Snowspeeders blow up the crashed one.

 

 

Probably because it crashed - faceplanting from 100ft up can't be good for it.

 

It's possible it was a 'flak burst', like the ones we usually see in large space battles in SW.

 

The only "flak bursts" I'm aware of are the shield flashes.

[Vince 520]

 

The only "flak bursts" I'm aware of are the shield flashes.

 

To be fair I think the case for flak-bursting laser bolts in sw (as stupid and retarded and unexplainable as it is) is pretty compelling I think. The Falcon chase sequence in the asteroid belt for example. Shots which stray far from the Falcon appear to burst in the blackness of space. 

[Captain Seafort 17]

To be fair I think the case for flak-bursting laser bolts in sw (as stupid and retarded and unexplainable as it is) is pretty compelling I think. The Falcon chase sequence in the asteroid belt for example. Shots which stray far from the Falcon appear to burst in the blackness of space. 

 

I've always interpreted that as the Avenger continuing to target asteroids rather than the bolts bursting - they're small and dark enough to be invisible against the background. 

[Khas 12,158]

There's also the fact that the Empire wouldn't really need to shield the AT-ATs.  In the Battle of Hoth, one of the pilots (I think it was Wedge), mentioned that the AT-ATs' armor was too thick for the snowspeeders' blasters to penetrate.  If they had been shielded, I'm pretty sure it would have been noted by one of the pilots, since deflector shields get mentioned, oh, only a ton of times in battles in SW.

[Captain Seafort 17]

There's also the fact that the Empire wouldn't really need to shield the AT-ATs.  In the Battle of Hoth, one of the pilots (I think it was Wedge), mentioned that the AT-ATs' armor was too thick for the snowspeeders' blasters to penetrate.

 

They probably wouldn't be necessary against snowspeeders, but it would be idiotic for them to be designed with such light opponents in mind - as a rule of thmb they should be protected against their own firepower.

 

If they had been shielded, I'm pretty sure it would have been noted by one of the pilots, since deflector shields get mentioned, oh, only a ton of times in battles in SW.

 

Not particularly - the TIE's shields are never mentioned, and neither, AFAIK are any capship shields

[Khas 12,158]

In ANH, we hear that X-Wings have shields, when one pilot says "switch main power to front deflector screen".  We also hear Han say that the Millennium Falcon is losing its deflector shields when the ISDs are attacking.

 

In ROTJ, when the Executor gets hit and loses one of its domes, we hear an Imperial officer say "Sir, we lost our bridge deflector shield".

 

In TPM, the Naboo pilots mention that the Droid Control Ship's shields are too strong for their weapons to get through.

 

There are probably more examples, these are just the ones I remember off the top of my head.

[Captain Seafort 17]

In ANH, we hear that X-Wings have shields, when one pilot says "switch main power to front deflector screen".  We also hear Han say that the Millennium Falcon is losing its deflector shields when the ISDs are attacking.

 

There was also the order to stablise rear deflectors when Vader's flight attacked.

 

In ROTJ, when the Executor gets hit and loses one of its domes, we hear an Imperial officer say "Sir, we lost our bridge deflector shield".

 

In TPM, the Naboo pilots mention that the Droid Control Ship's shields are too strong for their weapons to get through.

 

Good point - so we have had capship shields discussed.

 

My point was never that shields are never discussed, merely that the absence of such a mention is irrelevent to whether or not they're present.

[Jason 27]

I say way Luke took down AT-AT is evidence on own right rule out shields. This does not even go into the fact able us happon and tow cable to take down AT-ATs. Both of those thing expect shield stop. Armor kind dealt with the enegry weapons and nothing prevent project weapon. Fact artilery hit to also back the claim AT-At armor. Also rebal sensor able to pick shield unless they jammed hard enough more evidnece Rebel evidence rebel sensor entire depend on infred. 

[Tyralak 12,068]

To be fair I think the case for flak-bursting laser bolts in sw (as stupid and retarded and unexplainable as it is) is pretty compelling I think. The Falcon chase sequence in the asteroid belt for example. Shots which stray far from the Falcon appear to burst in the blackness of space. 

 

They aren't unexplainable at all, actually. My personal theory is that blasters/lasers/turbolasers in SW are closer to Hellbores than actual lasers as we know them. A highly charged bolt of plasma temporarily contained within a magnetic field. They have a certain range before the field decays, and loses containment.  

[Tyralak 12,068]

They probably wouldn't be necessary against snowspeeders, but it would be idiotic for them to be designed with such light opponents in mind - as a rule of thmb they should be protected against their own firepower.

 

 

Why should they be? Naval ships and tanks can't handle a volley of their own firepower. In fact, other than bunkers, I have a hard time thinking of any instance where a vehicle's defensive systems are stronger than its offensive capability.

[Captain Seafort 17]

Modern naval ships can't, but historically capital ships were expected to have a decent sized zone of immunity against their own weapons.  As for tanks, the frontal armour of a modern MBT certainly can resist its own firepower.

[Vince 520]

They aren't unexplainable at all, actually. My personal theory is that blasters/lasers/turbolasers in SW are closer to Hellbores than actual lasers as we know them. A highly charged bolt of plasma temporarily contained within a magnetic field. They have a certain range before the field decays, and loses containment.  

Sorry, I never saw this till now. That single property would be explainable, yes, but when you take all blaster characteristics into account they become unexplainable. But yes, in principle, I agree. They must be some kind of containment, otherwise how would they pass through atmosphere and water without any interaction. But I'm reluctant to start calling them plasma, or laser, etc.