enigma 521 Posted May 15, 2010 Enigma, on the ICS cutout I saw, the ISD had three 8-cannon emplacements per side on it's dorsal side (before the tower when looking at the ISD from the front), plus 1 8-cannon Ion cannon emplacement per side. I never saw a diagram of the ISD II. Where did you see it? It was mentioned in Wookieepedia and they cited ESB. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 16, 2010 While I do agree it has nothing to do with the Firepower, I'm using them to show that the EU shoots holes in many accepted claims for SW, such as large forces, and also the accepted values on Firepower... ST is just as inconsistent with the added bonus its all the same level of canon. All it proves is Thrawn didnt have access to many ships How, disabled as "cannot turn the shields on" or as "all power generators on the planet have been shut down"? Pretty important information... The generators were still there, even if they were not able to send their power to the shields. A car still has fuel even if the engine cannot use it because its engine has been sabotaged an cannot start... Unknown the books only say sabotaged, don't elaborate on how. Yes, because modern day Earth uses antigrav on buildings and vehicules, planetary shields for protection, Turbolaser and Ion canon emplacements... No mention is ever made of turbolasers or ion cannons on Caamas, who are described in other books as being pacifistic. Nor have you shown how an unknown number of power generators is going to contibute significantly to an extinction level event Actually, you first stated that the Caamas destruction was completed in 24 hours while the description gives no support to your assessment. So then, you first have to provide proof that what you say is true. simple enough NJO sourcebook p.45 Caamas is now a dead world. Devastated shortly after the Clone Wars by an orbital bombardment ordered by the Emperor, Caamas's vegatation and animal life - including most of the Caamasi people- died in the space of a day. The book only states that the Bombardment lasted for 24 hours. It did say that Caamas was destroyed and devoid of life immediately after the last shot was fired, which is what you argue for, so you need to provide proof of what you argue for. Since you haven't yet, and I've linked to an article describing the destruction in question, I've done far more then you did... Nope all I'm arguing is the bombardment lasted no more than a day, and everything died Oh, and here's where modern scientists disagree with you: http://en.wikipedia....bal_nuclear_war A war using the total arsenal at our disposal would be catastrophic for the human race. And that arsenal is only 5000 Mtons, fas less then what those 3 ISDs would be raining down on Caamas... Again, since the description doesn't state, at all, that the destruction of all life on the planet is complete immediately after the bombardment, then Occam can sleep well tonight... Now, show where the hippy scientist's paper says where its going to kill everything on the planet. Its pretty irrelevant otherwise, SINCE LIFE ON THIS PLANET SURVIVED THE IMPACT and IMPACT WINTERS OF EVERY MAJOR ASTEROID STRIKE SINCE THE CREATION OF LIFE. I thought Wookiepedia took their information from the books. I will check the books, but don't expect the quotes to come quickly... Since the actual sentence isnt explicitly sourced, it may not be exactly worded Then you should have written "The Destruction was complete immediately after the bombardment", it would have helped your arguments... By all means prove your low yield nuclear winter is going to kill everything on the planet And the Caamas bombardment is still countered by the Darksaber one... and Darksaber is thrown out by ESB, since it is specifically said to be conducted at full power which contradicts the asteroid destruction in ESB, your bizarre interpretation of SW canon aside. Nothing is "countered" by another unless it contradicts a higher source, which the bombardment of Darksaber does But it fits with the asteroid vaping calc... If they had such powerful weapons, that means they have very powerful shields, so the asteroids in TESB should not even have been a problem... Who said they were The highest canon, the TESB movie, says they have weak weapons and shields... only by one interpretation The TWC says they have weak weapons or shields... Again only by one interpretation, which involves doppelgangers or shapeshifters The EU (Caamas incident and Darksaber) says they have very strong weapons and shields, or weak weapons or shields, depending on which book you read... Higher canon has more weight... Depends entirely on interpretations, since the books with actual numbers in them cant be true You are ignoring "Rise" been scaled an calced by people far less biased than RSA results 880kilotons- ~100 megatons depending which torpedoes you use for scaling, and taking the vaporization mentioned in the dialog at face value , "Skin of Evil", No fireball, being shot at warp capable shuttlecraft that carries more AM than a salvo of torpedoes "Pegasus", etc.. Your joking right? . Not the Devil at all, just contradicted and superceded by higher canon like the movies and TCW "cartoon"... No just superceded by your interpretation of canon, and incidents in higher canon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted May 16, 2010 Just an aside: Praeothmin, I haven't lost interest, just my free time. I'll have something comprehensive around Tuesday. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 16, 2010 I do not think that the MK 1s had dorsal weapons. Their weapons layout was different than the MK 2s.ISD Mk 1 6xtwin HTL + 2x twin Heavy Ion cannon http://www.theforce....rd/ISD_Guns.jpg ISD mk II 8x octuple HTL http://www.theforce....oklyn/Isd09.jpg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ado Mortumee 500 Posted May 16, 2010 The DS book even states that the Alderaan explosion wasn't just the result of DET, but that a huge portion of the planet was "shunted" in Hyperspace. This seems to indicate that the Superlaser, using some sort of... "NDF effect" ... opened up a rift in Hyperspace when it fired on Alderaan. 1. Most of the planet being shunted into hyperspace was a side effect of a full power shot. 2. If the Death Star can force large parts of a planet into hyperspace that makes is more powerful since it requires a large amount of energy for even an ISD to make a jump. Since an ISD2 has a peak reactor output of 9.28e24w or 2.64 zettatons. How much of it can be directed towards the turbolasers? I mean even just half the output was put towards the turbolasers while blasting away at a planet (assuming the ISD2 can utilize all of it's turbolasers) in a period of 24 hours that is 114.048 zettatons. 342.144 zettatons if you use three ISD2s. How much damage can 342 zettatons do to an earth type planet? Yeah, the numbers are funky and not to be taken too seriously. 1. I thought an ISD at peak reactor output and putting all of it into it's guns was only 2.2 PETATONS per second? That is the number I've always seen thrown around for it anyways. 2. The Boom Table at Atomic Rockets.com says it requires 7 Zettatons to mass scatter an Earth like planet into an asteroid belt orbiting the sun. To mass scatter the planet to infinity requires 69 Zettatons. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted May 17, 2010 How am Ignoring the higher end, TDiC says Earth should be a lifeless planet with 30% of its crust gone. UFP still had no defense againt the breen energy dampening weapon at that point any defenses would have been trivially brushed aside. the Breen had jut gotten through wiping out a fleet remember. Dont ignore higher SW huh, was that a joke? Last I checked ICS was the devil round these parts The problem with that line of thinking, is the fact that Trek and Wars canons are not laid out the same. There is no higher or lower canon in Trek. It either is or it isn't. Which means inconsistencies must be rationalized. TDiC is canon, and like it or not, what happened in that episode has to be dealt with. The same can't be said for the ICS. Within the complicated tiered canon structure of Wars, the ICS is way down on the list. And frankly the numbers it gives don't jive with other works on it's own canon level, let alone higher sources like TCW and the movies. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted May 17, 2010 1. Most of the planet being shunted into hyperspace was a side effect of a full power shot. 2. If the Death Star can force large parts of a planet into hyperspace that makes is more powerful since it requires a large amount of energy for even an ISD to make a jump. 1. I thought an ISD at peak reactor output and putting all of it into it's guns was only 2.2 PETATONS per second? That is the number I've always seen thrown around for it anyways. 2. The Boom Table at Atomic Rockets.com says it requires 7 Zettatons to mass scatter an Earth like planet into an asteroid belt orbiting the sun. To mass scatter the planet to infinity requires 69 Zettatons. I have to recalc the ISD numbers again since I goofed. (Just like I goofed in Trek shield strength.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 17, 2010 ST is just as inconsistent with the added bonus its all the same level of canon. All it proves is Thrawn didnt have access to many ships No one said ST wasn't inconsistent. Would that be one of these "Red Herrings" you like to throw around? And what this proves, dear friend, is that Thrawn, without many ships, was still considered a viable threat, and that an addition of 200 ships made the Republic think that these 200 ships could tip the scale in his favor... 200 ships... In a galaxy supposedly filled with 25 000 SDs and over a million capital ships... Now why is it that only rabid fans think all of this is logical? Unknown the books only say sabotaged, don't elaborate on how. So the power could still have been generated... No mention is ever made of turbolasers or ion cannons on Caamas, who are described in other books as being pacifistic. Nor have you shown how an unknown number of power generators is going to contibute significantly to an extinction level event No problem, they still have Anti-grav, planetary Shield Generators, etc... simple enough See, had you provided that quote in the beginning, the discussion on the Caamas Destruction event would have been closed in an instant... I conceed the Caamas Destruction was done in a day, with all life dead after 24 hours... Nope all I'm arguing is the bombardment lasted no more than a day, and everything died For which you had provided not a shred of evidence until you provided the passage from the NJO sourcebook, while I had researched it and found the Wookiepedia article... Now, show where the hippy scientist's paper says where its going to kill everything on the planet. Right here actually Many investigations, including a number of studies for the U.S. government, envision the explosion of 5,000 to 10,000 megatons -- the detonation of tens of thousands of nuclear weapons that now sit quietly, inconspicuously, in missile silos, submarines and long-range bombers, faithful servants awaiting orders. The World Health Organization, in a recent detailed study chaired by Sune K. Bergstrom (the 1982 Nobel laureate in physiology and medicine), concludes that 1.1 billion people would be killed outright in such a nuclear war, mainly in the United States, the Soviet Union, Europe, China and Japan. An additional 1.1 billion people would suffer serious injufles and radiation sickness, for which medical help would be unavailable. It thus seems possible that more than 2 billion people-almost half of all the humans on Earth-would be destroyed in the immediate aftermath of a global thermonuclear war. That's for having "only" 5000 to 10000 Mtons used on Earth. Now imagine 235000 Mtons in less then 24 hours... I extrapolate from analyses by Scientific experts analyzing real-world data and science well mastered by modern humans. Data which I provided... Now, what proof do you have that 235000Mtons fired around the world for 24 hours could not do the same? Its pretty irrelevant otherwise, SINCE LIFE ON THIS PLANET SURVIVED THE IMPACT and IMPACT WINTERS OF EVERY MAJOR ASTEROID STRIKE SINCE THE CREATION OF LIFE. You mean, the one impact that KILLED OFF THE MAJOR LIVING RACES ON THE PLANET AT THAT MOMENT? THE ONE IMPACT THAT ALMOST WIPED OUT EVERY LIVING THING ON EARTH EVEN THOUGH IT HAD HIT ONLY 1 LOCATION ON EARTH? Yes, life did survive, because we received 1, and only 1, big impact, and almost all life was extinct. Imagine 24 hours of such bombardment, all over the planet, where no ground is left untouched by such an event... Since the actual sentence isnt explicitly sourced, it may not be exactly worded Well, I looked it up a bit in the books (found them under a pile of other SW books) and it did seem like there were passages here and there, but since I don't have the time or the inclination to read the books at the moment, and since you already provided a quote stating death did happen in 24 hours, I see no need to read them anyways... By all means prove your low yield nuclear winter is going to kill everything on the planet Hhhmm, no. I provided scientific papers by reputed Scientists stating a Nuclear war could very well cause near human extinction, while using only a fraction of my calculated figures for the Caamas bombardment (47 times for 5000Mtons or 23.5 times for 10000Mtons). Why don't you prove 235000Mtons distributed over the world couldn't do that? and Darksaber is thrown out by ESB, since it is specifically said to be conducted at full power which contradicts the asteroid destruction in ESB, your bizarre interpretation of SW canon aside. Nothing is "countered" by another unless it contradicts a higher source, which the bombardment of Darksaber does Well, since TESB contradicts your Caamas figures, since TCW contradicts your Caamas figures, and since your Caamas figures are in the same canon level as Darksaber, then yes, your Caamas figures are countered by Darksaber. Just because you don't like them doesn't make the Darksaber figures any less valid then your Caamas ones. Who said they were The ISD that got its tower destroyed by that low-level Kinetic Impactor says they were... The Captain that said, while reporting to Vader, and I quote: "Considering the damage we've sustained, they must have been destroyed!" They say the asteroids were a problem to your super ISDs... only by one interpretation Yes, the logical one... By the way, by "weak", I mean the low Kton to low Mton range, which are very weak compared to the WankICS. Like I said, I have no problems with the TESB interpretation, it's the one I use... Again only by one interpretation, which involves doppelgangers or shapeshifters What the heck are you smoking? In "Shadows of the Malevolence", Y-Wing fighters are a danger to the big ass Ship of Doomtm of Grevious... In "Downfall of a Droid", AT-TEs are destroying Separatist Capital ships... In "Strom over Ryloth", three Venators are taken out by less then 20 droid starfighters, who are not even using torpedoes or missiles... So no, unlike your very-personal-not-supported-one-bit-by-the-show interpretation, TCW does indeed weak weapons and shields for SW Capships... You know, those very Capships using HTLs equivalent to the ISD ones according to your lovable ICS books (the RotS one)... Depends entirely on interpretations, since the books with actual numbers in them cant be true I agree, it does indeed depend upon interpretations. Some wishful, some depending on facts (like TESB asteroid scenes and TCW battle scenes)... been scaled an calced by people far less biased than RSA results 880kilotons- ~100 megatons depending which torpedoes you use for scaling, and taking the vaporization mentioned in the dialog at face value Exactly, can go from 880Kton up to 100Mtons... 100 Mtons, by the way, is far above what I believe is the correct strenght value, after doing some calculations. I said before I believed ST weapons to be in the 100 to 150 Mtons, but my latest discussions with Questor, and recent revisioning of the movies and shows have me believe far less powerful ST weapons, more in the "Pegasus" levels... , No fireball, being shot at warp capable shuttlecraft that carries more AM than a salvo of torpedoes Well, you'll have to prove that what was seen wasn't a fireball at it would be seen from E-D's postiion... And this was discussed before here, and I stated that the Shuttle's engines had been drained of power (unlike your Caamasi Shield Generators that were only sabotaged), so no more M/AM reaction. But even if it did contribute, and the Torpedo had done only 10% of the damage, this still gives a Torpedo in the 100Mtons range... Your joking right? . Nope, this "low-power" event that Warsies like to use as an example of low Trek Firepower yields results similar to those of TESB... And those are with conservative scaling, using the least likely interpretation of Riker's comment, thus making me use "fragmentation" instead of melting or even vaporization... Please explain why I would be joking... No just superceded by your interpretation of canon, and incidents in higher canon Nope, higher canon is more in line with my calcs and analysis then your interpretation... If you want to argue that higher canon fits with your interpretation, you will, of course, provide all calculations doing so using the higher canon material, such as the movies and TCW series... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 17, 2010 ISD Mk 1 6xtwin HTL + 2x twin Heavy Ion cannon http://www.theforce....rd/ISD_Guns.jpg ISD mk II 8x octuple HTL http://www.theforce....oklyn/Isd09.jpg These diagrams show these weapons could not fire behind the tower or the engines, so no real aft fire coverage for the ISD I or II... Thanks for the images btw... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 17, 2010 1. Most of the planet being shunted into hyperspace was a side effect of a full power shot. Where did you read that? And also, how can a shot only 1/3rd power "only" crack a continent, if a full powered shot explodes an entire planet violently? How can a full-powered shot explain the secondary explosion? 2. If the Death Star can force large parts of a planet into hyperspace that makes is more powerful since it requires a large amount of energy for even an ISD to make a jump. Again, how do we know that? The ICS says it takes a lot of energy to shift a ship into Hyperspace, but I don't recall the novel mentioning this... 1. I thought an ISD at peak reactor output and putting all of it into it's guns was only 2.2 PETATONS per second? That is the number I've always seen thrown around for it anyways. Not familiar with all the numbers being thrown around... 2. The Boom Table at Atomic Rockets.com says it requires 7 Zettatons to mass scatter an Earth like planet into an asteroid belt orbiting the sun. To mass scatter the planet to infinity requires 69 Zettatons. And you have the visuals showing us Alderaan did wind up as an asteroid belt around its Sun? Or to infinity, and beyond? Anyway, been thinking about it, and it really doesn't matter. The DS fires, the planet goes boom, everyone on it is dead, it really doesn't matter how the result was obtained. The weapon is not at all identical to a TL, since TL's don't shift their targets to Hyperspace, so the main argument I had with Questor is: Scaling the reactor sizes to obtain the available energy doesn't work... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted May 19, 2010 Where did you read that? And also, how can a shot only 1/3rd power "only" crack a continent, if a full powered shot explodes an entire planet violently? How can a full-powered shot explain the secondary explosion? Why is this novel canon, but not the ICS? This very argument is the reason for my stance as a strict canonist. Given the fact that neither the authors, writers, or special effect people were actually consistent, we need to pick one group to believe. Not being Jason, I have chosen the special effects people. They aren't even consistent, but at least I can ignore all the extraneous -badly written - crap. It also allows me to ignore TCW as a side benefit. As if animation is something we can analyze with the same confidence as live action. Again, how do we know that? The ICS says it takes a lot of energy to shift a ship into Hyperspace, but I don't recall the novel mentioning this... See above Not familiar with all the numbers being thrown around... Neither am I, but I want to see the calcs behind them before I ignore them. And you have the visuals showing us Alderaan did wind up as an asteroid belt around its Sun? Or to infinity, and beyond? While it is the standard assumption, it is only an assumption. Thanks for the site, it's fun. Anyway, been thinking about it, and it really doesn't matter. The DS fires, the planet goes boom, everyone on it is dead, it really doesn't matter how the result was obtained. The weapon is not at all identical to a TL, since TL's don't shift their targets to Hyperspace, so the main argument I had with Questor is: Scaling the reactor sizes to obtain the available energy doesn't work... Hi. I'm a strict canonist - have we met? Granted warsies of my stripe are rather rare, but we're that much more dangerous. On the statement that a blaster should have ridiculous energy density: I'm pretty sure that blasters don't have hypermatter reactors. On superlasers. We have seen the arrangement exactly one other time. My own pet theory is that they cannot build the equivalent of barrels that can handle the energy in the initial bolt. Perhaps the limit of the technology is barrels that can handle 1/8 the energy at that length (length does seem to be related to power amplification - just like with bullets) Perhaps they are using a toroidial gravity field to merge the beams into a single one. That would require some work to get everything set up so that constructive interference would work - but it might be the only way to make the blast happen. That might also explain the ball turrets in AOTC. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 19, 2010 Why is this novel canon, but not the ICS? The ICS is just as canon as the novel. The novel's explanation is simply closer to the effects we see in the movie (two explosions?). Like I said, the DS is extremelly powerful, and I've said before it is the ultimate weapon, and the Feds have nothing to compare, but this doesn't mean it has to be a purely DET weapon... This very argument is the reason for my stance as a strict canonist. Given the fact that neither the authors, writers, or special effect people were actually consistent, we need to pick one group to believe. Not being Jason, I have chosen the special effects people. They aren't even consistent, but at least I can ignore all the extraneous -badly written - crap. It also allows me to ignore TCW as a side benefit. As if animation is something we can analyze with the same confidence as live action. See, even only using the movies, pure DET doesn't cut it... But that's where we differ mostly I believe: All sources need to be considered, but the one which most closely fits the movie takes precedence over the others... Neither am I, but I want to see the calcs behind them before I ignore them. Calculations are only as good as the premise from which they originate. I don't doubt about the 1e+38 Joules required to blow up a planet from a pure DET POV, but we first need to make sure the pure DET is the right option before we accept these results… While it is the standard assumption, it is only an assumption. Exactly, it is only an assumption, but the ANH novelization states that Han came out of Hyperspace 1 planetary distance away from where Alderaan should have been, and he was still, after all this time, in "the thick of things". If this explosion had been as powerful as stated, shouldn't most of the debris have been moved beyond that point after all this time (a few minutes at least after the explosion)? On the statement that a blaster should have ridiculous energy density: I'm pretty sure that blasters don't have hypermatter reactors. Ah, but you see, SW blasters and TLs use the same mechanism, according to SW.com: The interior mechanisms of a tiny hold-out blaster, a blaster pistol, a large blaster rifle, and a turbolaser cannon are based on the same theories and principles While the Superlaser isn't. So while the ISD may have a Hypermatter reactor, it`s not used in its weapons, only to power up the ship. That big of a reactor may simply mean (and this is what I believe) that it can go a long, long time without refueling… On superlasers. We have seen the arrangement exactly one other time. My own pet theory is that they cannot build the equivalent of barrels that can handle the energy in the initial bolt. Perhaps the limit of the technology is barrels that can handle 1/8 the energy at that length (length does seem to be related to power amplification - just like with bullets) Perhaps they are using a toroidial gravity field to merge the beams into a single one. That would require some work to get everything set up so that constructive interference would work - but it might be the only way to make the blast happen. That might also explain the ball turrets in AOTC. While I'm not sure about the "barrel" issue, the rest of your theory works for me, except that, if we are to scale the two weapons, just as I did with the Handheld weapons, we would get yields that are unsupported by canon… So I'm still against simple scaling to obtain energy capacity of a weapon… Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 19, 2010 No one said ST wasn't inconsistent. Would that be one of these "Red Herrings" you like to throw around? And what this proves, dear friend, is that Thrawn, without many ships, was still considered a viable threat, and that an addition of 200 ships made the Republic think that these 200 ships could tip the scale in his favor... 200 ships... In a galaxy supposedly filled with 25 000 SDs and over a million capital ships... Now why is it that only rabid fans think all of this is logical? Irrelevant So the power could still have been generated... Or it might not have, and if so yield is unknown No problem, they still have Anti-grav, planetary Shield Generators, etc... As you have said before no mention is made of it in the books, and the shields were of course sabotaged Right here actually Funny how it isnt in the actual paper That's for having "only" 5000 to 10000 Mtons used on Earth. Now imagine 235000 Mtons in less then 24 hours... I extrapolate from analyses by Scientific experts analyzing real-world data and science well mastered by modern humans. Data which I provided... Now, what proof do you have that 235000Mtons fired around the world for 24 hours could not do the same? You keep neglecting the molten ejecta flung into orbit, that is going to fall back down all over the planet starting planet wide wildfires and when in doubt there's always the Multiple Impact theory You mean, the one impact that KILLED OFF THE MAJOR LIVING RACES ON THE PLANET AT THAT MOMENT? THE ONE IMPACT THAT ALMOST WIPED OUT EVERY LIVING THING ON EARTH EVEN THOUGH IT HAD HIT ONLY 1 LOCATION ON EARTH? Yes, life did survive, because we received 1, and only 1, big impact, and almost all life was extinct. Imagine 24 hours of such bombardment, all over the planet, where no ground is left untouched by such an event... As shown on p.80; orbital ejecta will potentially leave no part of the planet untouched Hhhmm, no. I provided scientific papers by reputed Scientists stating a Nuclear war could very well cause near human extinction, while using only a fraction of my calculated figures for the Caamas bombardment (47 times for 5000Mtons or 23.5 times for 10000Mtons). Why don't you prove 235000Mtons distributed over the world couldn't do that? And much greater releases of nonnuclear energy have failed to wipe out life on earth time and time again http://www.unb.ca/pa...ameterSort3.htm Every crater 22km+ represents an impact greater than 250 gigatons of which there are 38 or so Well, since TESB contradicts your Caamas figures, since TCW contradicts your Caamas figures, and since your Caamas figures are in the same canon level as Darksaber, then yes, your Caamas figures are countered by Darksaber. Just because you don't like them doesn't make the Darksaber figures any less valid then your Caamas ones. Explain how it contradicts ESB, as I said DS explicitly states the TL to be at max power, and the damage is less than ESB, contradicting higher canon. TCW can also be considered to contradict higher canon if you take the TCW visuals at face value The ISD that got its tower destroyed by that low-level Kinetic Impactor says they were... The Captain that said, while reporting to Vader, and I quote: "Considering the damage we've sustained, they must have been destroyed!" They say the asteroids were a problem to your super ISDs... Yup after days of wandering around the asteroid field being hit all the time and the whole lack of shields. Yes, the logical one... By the way, by "weak", I mean the low Kton to low Mton range, which are very weak compared to the WankICS. Like I said, I have no problems with the TESB interpretation, it's the one I use... Yes and pretend it somehow represents a upper limit What the heck are you smoking? In "Shadows of the Malevolence", Y-Wing fighters are a danger to the big ass Ship of Doomtm of Grevious... In "Downfall of a Droid", AT-TEs are destroying Separatist Capital ships... In "Strom over Ryloth", three Venators are taken out by less then 20 droid starfighters, who are not even using torpedoes or missiles... So no, unlike your very-personal-not-supported-one-bit-by-the-show interpretation, TCW does indeed weak weapons and shields for SW Capships... You know, those very Capships using HTLs equivalent to the ISD ones according to your lovable ICS books (the RotS one)...As I said taking TCW visuals at face value would contradict G canon I agree, it does indeed depend upon interpretations. Some wishful, some depending on facts (like TESB asteroid scenes and TCW battle scenes)... Which appear to contradict G canon when taken at face value Well, you'll have to prove that what was seen wasn't a fireball at it would be seen from E-D's postiion... An actual 500megaton-1 gigaton explosion would create a fireball that lasts 73-100 seconds not the fraction of a second seen in SoE And this was discussed before here, and I stated that the Shuttle's engines had been drained of power, so no more M/AM reaction. Odd the episode makes no mention of deactivated antimatter. Also if it was truly powerless as you claim, blowing it up so the alien couldn't leave the planet was redundant, with no power for shields 500-1000 megatons to destroy a shuttle is excessive and entirely out of character for Picard But even if it did contribute, and the Torpedo had done only 10% of the damage, this still gives a Torpedo in the 100Mtons range... As shown by this torpedo warhead, It is nowhere nearly big or heavy enough to possibly contain enough anti-deuterium for a 500-1000MT explosion(23-46kg minimum) Given how hes barely holding it I doubt it contains enough antimatter for a 100MT explosion either Nope, this "low-power" event that Warsies like to use as an example of low Trek Firepower yields results similar to those of TESB... And those are with conservative scaling, using the least likely interpretation of Riker's comment, thus making me use "fragmentation" instead of melting or even vaporization... Please explain why I would be joking... You just used skin of evil as an example of high firepower . If you want to argue that higher canon fits with your interpretation, you will, of course, provide all calculations doing so using the higher canon material, such as the movies and TCW series... Which you've already dismissed out of hand, dodonna quote, reactor scaling etc. And of course you keep insisting ESB is some sort of upper limit which is patently wrong. Using your logic, presuming the asteroids vaporized were the same size as the one that struck the bridge tower(to prevent them from blowing up the bridge tower) produces energy figures in the same order of magnitude as I calced for a single shot And of course here you go wanting to throw out the EU again Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Khas 12,158 Posted May 19, 2010 Irrelevant Or it might not have, and if so yield is unknown As you have said before no mention is made of it in the books, and the shields were of course sabotaged Funny how it isnt in the actual paper You keep neglecting the molten ejecta flung into orbit, that is going to fall back down all over the planet starting planet wide wildfires and when in doubt there's always the Multiple Impact theory As shown on p.80; orbital ejecta will potentially leave no part of the planet untouched And much greater releases of nonnuclear energy have failed to wipe out life on earth time and time again http://www.unb.ca/pa...ameterSort3.htm Every crater 22km+ represents an impact greater than 250 gigatons of which there are 38 or so Explain how it contradicts ESB, as I said DS explicitly states the TL to be at max power, and the damage is less than ESB, contradicting higher canon. TCW can also be considered to contradict higher canon if you take the TCW visuals at face value Yup after days of wandering around the asteroid field being hit all the time and the whole lack of shields. Yes and pretend it somehow represents a upper limit As I said taking TCW visuals at face value would contradict G canon Which appear to contradict G canon when taken at face value An actual 500megaton-1 gigaton explosion would create a fireball that lasts 73-100 seconds not the fraction of a second seen in SoE Odd the episode makes no mention of deactivated antimatter. Also if it was truly powerless as you claim, blowing it up so the alien couldn't leave the planet was redundant, with no power for shields 500-1000 megatons to destroy a shuttle is excessive and entirely out of character for Picard As shown by this torpedo warhead, It is nowhere nearly big or heavy enough to possibly contain enough anti-deuterium for a 500-1000MT explosion(23-46kg minimum) Given how hes barely holding it I doubt it contains enough antimatter for a 100MT explosion either You just used skin of evil as an example of high firepower Which you've already dismissed out of hand, dodonna quote, reactor scaling etc. And of course you keep insisting ESB is some sort of upper limit which is patently wrong. Using your logic, presuming the asteroids vaporized were the same size as the one that struck the bridge tower(to prevent them from blowing up the bridge tower) produces energy figures in the same order of magnitude as I calced for a single shot And of course here you go wanting to throw out the EU again First of all, even combined, the ejecta hitting Earth didn't do NEARLY as much damage as the inital 100 teraton blast did. Not even close. About the Nuclear Winter thing, while it is true most life would survive the initial conflict, the effects of cold, darkness, fires, and radiation would wipe out most of the survivors. This wouldn't be a Hiroshima or Nagasaki-like scenario, where the U.S. provided medical aid during the occupation of Japan. There would be little infrastructure left, if any, and if any hospitals survived, they'd be so under-staffed and under-equipped that there'd be little hope for anyone. If any life would survive the after-effects, it would be radiation-resistant bacteria and life at geothermal vents in the deep ocean. Why would most life in the ocean be wiped out? Just after the Hiroshima blast, the radioactive fallout from the bomb causeed water to condense around it, and a black rain fell. This rain was radioactive due to the fallout serving as the condensatory nucleus, and wreaked havoc on the ecosystem and survivors. This black rain would inevitably fall into the oceans, and on a planet-wide scale, would do immense ecological damage. Why is the ball that's holding the antimatter so small? Maybe the antimatter is in a dense state. There are denser concentrations of matter in real life. A matchbox-sized amount of material from a white dwarf has the same mass as an elephant. And why does it seem so light? Inertial Dampeners? Technobabblium? As for the fraction-of-a-second fireball, probably was just due to none of the writers knowing or really caring about how long the mushroom cloud would last. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 19, 2010 First of all, even combined, the ejecta hitting Earth didn't do NEARLY as much damage as the inital 100 teraton blast did. Not even close. Which is irrelevant to the original point About the Nuclear Winter thing, while it is true most life would survive the initial conflict, the effects of cold, darkness, fires, and radiation would wipe out most of the survivors. This wouldn't be a Hiroshima or Nagasaki-like scenario, where the U.S. provided medical aid during the occupation of Japan. There would be little infrastructure left, if any, and if any hospitals survived, they'd be so under-staffed and under-equipped that there'd be little hope for anyone. If any life would survive the after-effects, it would be radiation-resistant bacteria and life at geothermal vents in the deep ocean. Why would most life in the ocean be wiped out? Just after the Hiroshima blast, the radioactive fallout from the bomb causeed water to condense around it, and a black rain fell. This rain was radioactive due to the fallout serving as the condensatory nucleus, and wreaked havoc on the ecosystem and survivors. This black rain would inevitably fall into the oceans, and on a planet-wide scale, would do immense ecological damage. Also irrelevant TLs dont cause radioactivity. Asteroids also cause nuclear winter effects( impact winters) yet failed to wipe out life on Earth many times. Why is the ball that's holding the antimatter so small? Maybe the antimatter is in a dense state. There are denser concentrations of matter in real life. A matchbox-sized amount of material from a white dwarf has the same mass as an elephant. And why does it seem so light? Inertial Dampeners? Technobabblium? Occam's razor bitchslaps you in the face As for the fraction-of-a-second fireball, probably was just due to none of the writers knowing or really caring about how long the mushroom cloud would last. And if we want to go down this road, TCW FULLY SUPPORTS ICS Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Khas 12,158 Posted May 19, 2010 And if we want to go down this road, TCW FULLY SUPPORTS ICS D'OH! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted May 19, 2010 The ICS is just as canon as the novel. The novel's explanation is simply closer to the effects we see in the movie (two explosions?). Like I said, the DS is extremelly powerful, and I've said before it is the ultimate weapon, and the Feds have nothing to compare, but this doesn't mean it has to be a purely DET weapon... I think this is a case where we're going to pound on each other without agreeing. The novel's effects are nowhere NEAR what we see in the movies. Not being an engineer, I'm not exactly sure what dumping that much energy into a planet would do to it, but I think I can imagine ways the second explosion could happen. Reflections and shit. See, even only using the movies, pure DET doesn't cut it... But that's where we differ mostly I believe: All sources need to be considered, but the one which most closely fits the movie takes precedence over the others... See above Calculations are only as good as the premise from which they originate. I don't doubt about the 1e+38 Joules required to blow up a planet from a pure DET POV, but we first need to make sure the pure DET is the right option before we accept these results… OK Exactly, it is only an assumption, but the ANH novelization states that Han came out of Hyperspace 1 planetary distance away from where Alderaan should have been, and he was still, after all this time, in "the thick of things". If this explosion had been as powerful as stated, shouldn't most of the debris have been moved beyond that point after all this time (a few minutes at least after the explosion)? Unfortunately, this is completely at odds with the movie, which shows that the debris is cleared out of the area around Alderaan at a significant fraction of the speed of light. Ah, but you see, SW blasters and TLs use the same mechanism, according to SW.com: Ambiguous quote. Are they talking about the mechanisms involved in generating the power (what I'm talking about) or the mechanisms involved in the bolt (what I interpret that quote as talking about) While the Superlaser isn't. Right, the gravity lens would be a significant difference. So while the ISD may have a Hypermatter reactor, it`s not used in its weapons, only to power up the ship. That big of a reactor may simply mean (and this is what I believe) that it can go a long, long time without refueling… Is this a joke? While I'm not sure about the "barrel" issue, the rest of your theory works for me, except that, if we are to scale the two weapons, just as I did with the Handheld weapons, we would get yields that are unsupported by canon… So I'm still against simple scaling to obtain energy capacity of a weapon… Its not the weapon, its the reactor feeding it power. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 20, 2010 Irrelevant Relevant because the EU is all over the place, just like ST, and as I stated before, for every quote of great power or great numbers of ships, there's another one to the contrary… Or it might not have, and if so yield is unknown The possibility is still there, and it can have an effect… As you have said before no mention is made of it in the books, and the shields were of course sabotaged They have the Shield Generators that we know of, and all the advanced races in SW seem to have anti-grav, so I went with a logical assumption, but I don't mind if we ignore it… Funny how the paper, again, mentions only 5000 to 10 000 Megatons in its analysis, while my calculations show, at minimum, 23 to 47 times that number of impacts and power… You keep neglecting the molten ejecta flung into orbit, that is going to fall back down all over the planet starting planet wide wildfires and when in doubt there's always the Multiple Impact theory That theory talks about 2-3 impacts, and not necessarily at the same time. You also seem to ignore that, since these impacts are localized, their effects over the rest of the world will be less then locally, and will have taken a lot of time, allowing survival of the fittest… And you keep ignoring all the fires and firestorms that will be created by these 259 200 1Mton bolts hitting the surface of the planet, plus the dust storms, plus the earthquakes, plus the falling buildings in the cities, etc, etc… Almost all the surface of the world would be affected by these events, because these blasts would be local blasts all over the world, and thus their effects almost instantaneous and the entire planet would be covered by the dust clouds created by these blasts. That would result in an uninhabitable surface, with polluted oceans, and no remaining eco-system: the Death of the planet… And these are only with the main guns, still ignoring the damage from the secondary guns, and assuming a ROF of 1 1Mton shot per second. If they fire 2 shots per second… Right, exactly like what would happen with 259 200 blasts of 1Mton each impacting all over the planet within 24 hours… And much greater releases of nonnuclear energy have failed to wipe out life on earth time and time again http://www.unb.ca/pa...ameterSort3.htm Every crater 22km+ represents an impact greater than 250 gigatons of which there are 38 or so Impressive how our planet survived 38 such hits at the same time… Oh, wait, except they didn't all hit at once, they hit many years apart, and each of these hits was localized… Explain how it contradicts ESB, as I said DS explicitly states the TL to be at max power, and the damage is less than ESB, contradicting higher canon. TCW can also be considered to contradict higher canon if you take the TCW visuals at face value Let's see, we're supposed to believe that your Caamas calculations, that yielded around, what, 1 Teraton per guns, are in line with TESB, which shows us low Kilotons to low Megatons, even from HTLs? We're supposed to believe that the HTLs were dialed down a million times for the asteroid scene destruction? Yeah, right… Yup after days of wandering around the asteroid field being hit all the time and the whole lack of shields. <BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"> Really, that scene was a few days long, AND they didn't have any shields left after only a few days? Wow, I wonder what could have taken those shields out, after all, they can take Petatons before failing, and those asteroids were barely in the Kiloton range (the one that destroyed the tower, at least)… Yes and pretend it somehow represents a upper limit Well, first of all, I don't pretend it's an upper limit, I say it is close to their maximum power. I don't mind believing they can fire 10 times this power, but at least my calculations are better then some wanked up imaginary numbers dreamed up by people using 1 instance in the lowest canon which is also contradicted by another incident in the same level of canon… As I said taking TCW visuals at face value would contradict G canon Problem for your imaginary numbers is that TCW (low kiloton) is closer to TESB in Firepower then your wanked up Caamas numbers, show similar power to RotS, so guess what source contradicts G canon more… Which appear to contradict G canon when taken at face value Oh, by the way, in case you had not seen the prequels, TCW weapons effects are in line with what is seen in RotS, as far as Capship vs Capship damage is concerned, as well as Clones vs Droids… Much, much closer to G-canon then imaginary numbers coming from a questionably interpreted event in the EU… An actual 500megaton-1 gigaton explosion would create a fireball that lasts 73-100 seconds not the fraction of a second seen in SoE You're right, I agree, the actual yield must be smaller…<BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"> Odd the episode makes no mention of deactivated antimatter. Also if it was truly powerless as you claim, blowing it up so the alien couldn't leave the planet was redundant, with no power for shields 500-1000 megatons to destroy a shuttle is excessive and entirely out of character for Picard Right again, I thought the Warp Drive had been disabled, but it was only the Impulse Engine, and one Nacelle had been ripped out… So the Warp Core reserves probably did contribute to the blast… As shown by this torpedo warhead, It is nowhere nearly big or heavy enough to possibly contain enough anti-deuterium for a 500-1000MT explosion(23-46kg minimum) Given how hes barely holding it I doubt it contains enough antimatter for a 100MT explosion either Well, 10% of 1Gton is 100Mtons. But I do agree that the blast, due to fireballs needing to last longer for higher yields, cannot be 1Gton, and so the torpedo cannot be 100Mtons…<BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"> You just used skin of evil as an example of high firepower<BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"> And I just admitted I was mistaken for the "Skin of Evil" example… But "Pegasus" still stands as a valid example of Trek Firepower which is comparable to TESB, as well as the battle scenes in DS9, where we see ships destroying others in one shot (shots which, using visuals, often seem to vaporize much hull materials, sometimes sections between 50-100 meters wide), while the rest of Trek compares to RotS and TCW… Which you've already dismissed out of hand, dodonna quote, reactor scaling etc. And of course you keep insisting ESB is some sort of upper limit which is patently wrong. Using your logic, presuming the asteroids vaporized were the same size as the one that struck the bridge tower(to prevent them from blowing up the bridge tower) produces energy figures in the same order of magnitude as I calced for a single shot The very vague Dodonna quote which, for those of us using common sense, was referring to the Turbolaser emplacements… How would the Superlaser's power be important to fighters which are small enough to evade it, and to pilots who will only have to worry about those Turbolasers? The reactor scaling has been quite clearly shown to be highly questionable and illogical… Unless, of course, you can provide handheld weapons examples that match the scaling? What I do not ignore is all the instances in TESB, RotS and TCW that show much more numerous examples of actual SW Firepower, far from the wankfest that is the Warsie interpretation of the Dodonna quote, or the scaling of reactor cores… And of course here you go wanting to throw out the EU again I'm not, you're the one who wants to ignore Darksaber because it contradicts your wankfest, while the Darksaber example is closer in scope to TESB, RotS and TW displayed Firepowers… Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 20, 2010 I think this is a case where we're going to pound on each other without agreeing. The novel's effects are nowhere NEAR what we see in the movies. Not being an engineer, I'm not exactly sure what dumping that much energy into a planet would do to it, but I think I can imagine ways the second explosion could happen. Reflections and shit. <BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"> Yeah, I think we've both said our piece, and neither of us will be convinced by the other, so let's just agree to disagree once more… Thanks for an interesting debate though… Unfortunately, this is completely at odds with the movie, which shows that the debris is cleared out of the area around Alderaan at a significant fraction of the speed of light. Not sure I agree with the speed, but I didn't do the calcs, so I'll concede this point. I've always agreed the DS is very powerful though, where I disagree is where you consider all the mass of the planet scattered through DET, while I disagree for reasons already stated… Ambiguous quote. Are they talking about the mechanisms involved in generating the power (what I'm talking about) or the mechanisms involved in the bolt (what I interpret that quote as talking about)<BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"> Both: A squeeze of a trigger emits volatile blaster gas into a conversion chamber, where it is excited by energy from the weapon's power source. The agitated gas is then funneled through the actuating blaster module, where it is processed into an intense particle beam. A prismatic crystal focuses the beam, and passes it through a refinement chamber which "galvens" the beam into its final bolt. The main difference would be: Turbolasers often have cryogenic components to help cool the weapon in between firings as well. Because of the time required to build up energy, turbolasers have a lower rate of fire than standard laser cannons in return for its increased firepower. But they're essentially the same type of weapon, which the Superlaser isn't... Right, the gravity lens would be a significant difference. So would be the continuous beams when compared to the bolts of TLs… Is this a joke? Nope! Say you have a car, with a fuel capacity of 60 liters, an engine with 250HP and your car lighter (the TL) that can charge cell phones. If you add another fuel tank, or if you find a way to compress the fuel even more, does that automatically make your engine more powerful, or grant your car lighter connector the capacity to charge another car instead of a cell phone? No, the only thing it does is allow your car to do all these things for a longer period of time. Just because they have a big reactor, doesn't mean their weapons can channel all its output through their cannons… Its not the weapon, its the reactor feeding it power. Same difference… Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 21, 2010 Relevant because the EU is all over the place, just like ST, and as I stated before, for every quote of great power or great numbers of ships, there's another one to the contrary… None of which are terminally irreconcilable with higher showings The possibility is still there, and it can have an effect… Which is irrelevant, since you can't quantify it in any way Funny how the paper, again, mentions only 5000 to 10 000 Megatons in its analysis, while my calculations show, at minimum, 23 to 47 times that number of impacts and power… Which you have made out to much more severe than demonstrated You also seem to ignore that, since these impacts are localized, their effects over the rest of the world will be less then locally, and will have taken a lot of time, allowing survival of the fittest…Since when is an impact capable flinging super heated eject around the world localized And you keep ignoring all the fires and firestorms that will be created by these 259 200 1Mton bolts hitting the surface of the planet, plus the dust storms, plus the earthquakes, plus the falling buildings in the cities, etc, etc… Which does jack outside the blast radii of the individual 1 MT shots Almost all the surface of the world would be affected by these events, because these blasts would be local blasts all over the world, and thus their effects almost instantaneous and the entire planet would be covered by the dust clouds created by these blasts. As it would be by a much by a much larger teraton+ impact That would result in an uninhabitable surface, with polluted oceans, and no remaining eco-system: the Death of the planet… Which you have privided no evidence to support, As shown on p.742 the nuclear winter effects (to include global firestorms caused by ejecta) failed to wipe out everything on the planet And these are only with the main guns, still ignoring the damage from the secondary guns, and assuming a ROF of 1 1Mton shot per second. If they fire 2 shots per second…Still doesn't add up to the sum of known event that failed to wipe out life on Earth Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 21, 2010 I'll post the rest later, the board keeps trying to eat my post or display a bunch of gibberish Oh and read post #104 you've apparently missed something Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted May 21, 2010 I'll post the rest later, the board keeps trying to eat my post or display a bunch of gibberish Oh and read post #104 you've apparently missed something Please leave a bug report about what exactly is happening so Paul can look into it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted May 21, 2010 Right, exactly like what would happen with 259 200 blasts of 1Mton each impacting all over the planet within 24 hours… Which you've provided no evidence to support Impressive how our planet survived 38 such hits at the same time… Oh, wait, except they didn't all hit at once, they hit many years apart, and each of these hits was localized… Yet the 38 mentioned are each individually more powerful than the figure you keep harping out Let's see, we're supposed to believe that your Caamas calculations, that yielded around, what, 1 Teraton per guns, are in line with TESB, which shows us low Kilotons to low Megatons, even from HTLs? Actually it was Megatons per shot as I explained in post 104 We're supposed to believe that the HTLs were dialed down a million times for the asteroid scene destruction? Yeah, right… Ahh not paying attention again, nowhere in this thread have I claimed teratons per shot. My initial premise was three SDs delivering 1 petaton over 24hrs. Incidentally this is 6 times less than the postulated wilkes or shiva impacts with 48km asteroids Really, that scene was a few days long, AND they didn't have any shields left after only a few days? Presumably they were being hit contantly as per the novelization, and having to negate bridge smashing asteroids the entire time all of which takes energy Wow, I wonder what could have taken those shields out, after all, they can take Petatons before failing, and those asteroids were barely in the Kiloton range (the one that destroyed the tower, at least)… Except I never claimed petatons Well, first of all, I don't pretend it's an upper limit, I say it is close to their maximum power. I don't mind believing they can fire 10 times this power, but at least my calculations are better then some wanked up imaginary numbers dreamed up by people using 1 instance in the lowest canon which is also contradicted by another incident in the same level of canon… Obviously you werent paying attention when I got megatons for individual shots, and that same contratdict you keep harping on directly contradicts higher canon, my calc is in the same OoM required to negate a bridge smashing asteroid Problem for your imaginary numbers is that TCW (low kiloton) is closer to TESB in Firepower then your wanked up Caamas numbers, show similar power to RotS, so guess what source contradicts G canon more… really now? Oh, by the way, in case you had not seen the prequels, TCW weapons effects are in line with what is seen in RotS, as far as Capship vs Capship damage is concerned, as well as Clones vs Droids… All of which is quite unquantifiable Much, much closer to G-canon then imaginary numbers coming from a questionably interpreted event in the EU… Which as you have shown, you have paid no attention to since my calc worked out to megatons per shot But "Pegasus" still stands as a valid example of Trek Firepower which is comparable to TESB, as well as the battle scenes in DS9, where we see ships destroying others in one shot (shots which, using visuals, often seem to vaporize much hull materials, sometimes sections between 50-100 meters wide), while the rest of Trek compares to RotS and TCW… Whatever...given your other examples it seemed you were insinuating more The very vague Dodonna quote which, for those of us using common sense, was referring to the Turbolaser emplacements… How would the Superlaser's power be important to fighters which are small enough to evade it, and to pilots who will only have to worry about those Turbolasers? Oh Lets see other sources the specifically state the quote also refers to the superlaser, and common sense and RotJ tell us the fleet also has capital ships to which the superlaser represents a threat The reactor scaling has been quite clearly shown to be highly questionable and illogical… Unless, of course, you can provide handheld weapons examples that match the scaling? What I do not ignore is all the instances in TESB, RotS and TCW that show much more numerous examples of actual SW Firepower, far from the wankfest that is the Warsie interpretation of the Dodonna quote, or the scaling of reactor cores… Yet the energy has to come from somewhere, and as you have shown you consider anything not explicitly shown to be wrong, unless it is a poor showing of course I'm not, you're the one who wants to ignore Darksaber because it contradicts your wankfest, while the Darksaber example is closer in scope to TESB, RotS and TW displayed Firepowers… Darksaber contradicts ESB thus is invalid, my calcs are closer to ESB then the explicit non-nuclear effects in darksaber Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Airlocke 12,014 Posted May 21, 2010 Seriously. Fucking seriously. Are we actually discussing shit from Darksaber? From Kevin Anderson. From hackzilla. Really. Anything from that pos should be dismissed by default. I hate that fucker. (note to all. this is a rant about KJA, having nothing to do with current technical discussion. Carry on.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted May 21, 2010 InvaderSkooj, I was going to reply to your individual points, but then I realized it would take too much time.Basic points: You claimed the Caamasi incident was a Dino-Killer incident that happened within a day, while not providing (at the time) one shred of evidence to back up your claim. Point in fact, it was worse, because, as the passage you finally quoted stated, all Caamasi and plant life was dead after the Bombardment, which lasted a day. You claim it can be done with 36MT (give or take a few KT) per cannon, assuming each of an ISD's cannons fire 1 shot per second, for which, again, you failed to provide supporting evidence that all 100 cannons could fire at the same time. You say your estimates are not far out, except for the fact that HTLs are supposedly much more powerful then MTLs, which in turn are much more powerful then LTLs. So in fact, your calculations use a RoF far too high, and would leave the HTLs at levels far above your 36MT per cannon… I stated that 3 ISDs firing 1 cannon each, at 1MT per cannon, every second for 24 hours would do the same. I provided a calculation on how many MT this would represent, 259 200MT. I mentioned the "Nuclear Winter" paper which stated that a 5000MT war would be devastating to the human race. While the death toll in the articles (relating to the paper) to which I had access were exaggerated a bit, the facts remain that 5000MT over multiple days would be an ecological disaster. I then pointed out how this is 47 times less energy then would be distributed by the 3 ISDs in 1 day, and that it could wipe human life of the planet, based on what 5000MT could do. I provided a model taking into account the physical devastation, the fires that would be started by the blasts, and the firestorms that would also be created by the Bombardment. There's also the poison gases released by all the chemically created compounds, such as plastics, rubber, etc… You argued that the "Dino-Killer" meteor had many times that energy, and it only wiped out the Dinosaurs, much of the plant life, many types of mammals and birds, and not instantaneously, and that in spite of the "ejecta" covering the entire world, just like my scenario. Yet you failed, once again, to provide proof that this localized impact will in fact be equivalent to an equally distributed Bombardement, and affect the rest of the world equally, such as with the dirt clouds, even the "molten ejecta" you claim would be thrown across the world. Which is surprising considering the number of times you request proof of anything I say when you disagree with me… You also mention that fires and all other effects (building destructions, power plant explosions, etc…) will only be found within the blast radii, as if fires would stop automatically outside of the blast radius if they still had "fuel" to burn… Same with the poison gases that would be released by the burning of all the artificial compounds, they would not stop at the end of the blast radius with any wind current transporting them… And again, you conveniently ignore the fact that I'm using only 1 HTL per ship, while they could also fire 1 MTL per second (likely in the KT range) and LTLs… It's clear I've failed to convince you, and you've definitely failed to convince me, so just like with Questor, let's agree to disagree, less we start going 'round and 'round again on our arguments… Obviously you werent paying attention when I got megatons for individual shots, and that same contratdict you keep harping on directly contradicts higher canon, my calc is in the same OoM required to negate a bridge smashing asteroid Answered above: your MTs are a cheat, since you assume equal Firepower for all 100 cannons and you also assume they can all fire at the same time… really now? Yup, really now… All of which is quite unquantifiable Oh, but they are. You can take a look at the size of the holes that are made in the ships being fired at, from the holes you can estimate a volume of material being destroyed, use 10% of that number for actual density, and calculate the numbers for that volume of Iron being vaporized. We can then compare to other showings in RotS, TCW, and even compare to similar events in DS9, and do similar calculations Whatever...given your other examples it seemed you were insinuating more The other examples were to indicate that Trek also had high showings (though nowhere near the ICS, of course), but I had thought I was clear that I believed the "average" was much lower, just as in SW… Oh Lets see other sources the specifically state the quote also refers to the superlaser, and common sense and RotJ tell us the fleet also has capital ships to which the superlaser represents a threat And what source would that be? Dodonna was giving a briefing to fighter pilots, not Capship pilots, and that SW.com heavily implies Dodonna was indeed only talking about the TLs: It had a formidable array of turbolasers and tractor beam projectors, giving it the firepower of greater than half the Imperial starfleet. Yet the energy has to come from somewhere, and as you have shown you consider anything not explicitly shown to be wrong, unless it is a poor showing of course Not sure what you mean here. The energy for the DS's Superlaser has to come from the reactor, of course, but it doesn't make the reactor output scalable, or the ISD TLs able to output all their reactor energy into a single bolt… Darksaber contradicts ESB thus is invalid, my calcs are closer to ESB then the explicit non-nuclear effects in darksaber You do realize that both our calcs are also non-nuclear in effect, right? And that Darksaber is much closer to TESB then your calcs, except of course you prefer yours because they are higher… So no, Darksaber is no more invalid then your calcs, and I'm still left with the capacity displayed in TESB, RotS and TCW… Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
