So you have nothing to back up your claims so you resort to insults?Mr. Oragahn wrote: LOL, you're not debating but merely typing sentences as fast as possible, putting down anything your brain comes with.
So should I be surprised that what you say right above is nothing but a bold lie?
Quote me making such repetitive claims.
For the reminder and for those who can't read properly, I don't have any problem with the design being inefficient. I think it's pretty clear from what I quote, I even delved deeper into the technical and logistical reasons behind this situation.
Funnily, the real problem you didn't spot in the part you quoted is about how the energy levels are complete bollocks in light of the universe's need of coherence and logic.
That's a radically different topic.
A lava bomb as described would be best used against a planet do to a thick atmosphere and relatively high gravity, using a generator is still insanely wasteful.
One of the defining traits of the Imperium of Man is being inefficient, and lacking coherence and logic.
The quote describes blobs of plasma on or seemingly on the Space Hulk's hull.Mr. Oragahn wrote: No, you are talking about rounded blobs of plasma sticking to the hull of a space hulk, because that is solely your interpretation.
As for the absurd strawman in the second sentence: WTF? Where did I pretend explosions came out of nowhere?
Oh come on, is this going to be the "quality" standard of your entire post?
This is so bad.
Hull's in both the real world and fiction often have fragile things on the outside do to those things(sensor, shield generators, etc) being unable to work if under the armor.
Yes, blister is not meant to be aken literally. Blister describes what the cloud of plasma looks like to the viewer/reader.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Y U SO LITRALL ?
It can be taken as a metaphor. Hellooo!! METAPHOR. It's a figure of speech.
I'm not going to throw S.O.D. out the window. If the description of the event is flaw as you suggest then there is no way to assume gigaton means gigaton either.Mr. Oragahn wrote: ... because a nuclear fireball seen from a high vantage point in the sky wouldn't look like a blister?
As I suggested, once translated to space, if you're expecting some high yield kerosene fireball effect, then it's easier to say that he author might suffer from Hollywoodite.
But that's the silly way to go at it.
The other and more sensible reason could be that an explosion is going to propel a cloud of particles at varying speeds. You will find lingering material while other bits will be cast out at phenomenal speeds.
Above all, the hot spot on the surface will be left glowing, and light will also be scattered through the lingering faint fog of particles.
In other words, from a distance, it is possible you might see a sort of luminous spot. Even more with molten metal and other burning and molten elements still being ejected into space through the newly created holes.
40K ships usually fire from long range. At that distance, any kind of mark left by a mighty nuclear explosion on the surface of a complicated and dense object would look like a luminous spot.
None of which would be described as blisters in a vacuum.
You can see why using a weapon best suited on a planetary surface should not be used in the vacuum of space, good.Mr. Oragahn wrote: The section of interest in the quotation, aka the part of the sentence.
This very section does not feature any mention of any release of energy, only its production.
I didn't say energy does not get released. I'm trying to tell you that the sentence that contains the information about time (the brief moments bit) only refers to production of energy.
FFS, this shouldn't be hard to understand! Read the damn text.
I'm just telling you what we read in the relevant part of the entire quotation fluff.
As for the bomb not even making a hole in the hull yet at a time when it's already creating flaring explosions, then when is the hole supposed to be made? When Jesus returns?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_pow ... nvironment
I fail to see how the effects of something happening in a dense atmosphere are a good model for something happening in a vacuum.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Actually, no. The damaged point would remain luminous for a very long period.
See for example the Deep Impact case against the comet Tempel-1. Awesome stuff there. The impact spot remained luminous for hours and hours and hours after the crash, and we could see the light from behind the comet's core!
I'm not seeing a reason to think the explosion is the damaging aspect rather then the large clouds of plasma released when the "large fusion generator" loses containment.Mr. Oragahn wrote: I don't need to "claim" any explosion because that's exactly what is written. Reread the quotation. Explosions flare up, they're stated to happen, in the opening section of the quoted material.
And hell, if there are no explosions, what's supposed to happen?
Oh I remember, "energy can't be explosive"... it's all a torch...
Sorry, you still fail.
It fits oddly well with Solar flares being a major threat.
You are doing that typing to yourself thing again. It is annoying.Mr. Oragahn wrote: You know, the chances of having a fusion reactor blowing up because its internal force field cannot constrain the energies are far higher than a reactor managing to extend a force field past its own volume, against the logic of the reactor's design itself! Even instincts would tell us that a reactor has more chances to blow up before some magical phenomenon would have the internal force field manage to form outside of the reactor and conveniently contain BOTH the super hot plasma that would damage the hull AND the reactor itself, while NOT destroying the reactor.
For some kind of convoluted and non-efficient design, that's amazingly hardcore on the scale of super advanced systems. Safe that it does not even make sense as a reactor design.
Have you ever heard of Occam's razor by chance?
Now who's got a bad theory again?
Never needed it nor is it actually part of what I've been arguing.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Oh, now you've ditched the mysterious force field.
The magic Star Wars blaster like containment bubble is what you require.
No we are not. We are dealing with a "Large Fusion Generator" that has lost containment. It's like those nasty warhammer 40K solar flares that knock down full strength shields and damage hulls..Mr. Oragahn wrote: As I said, you don't seem to realize the magnitude of energies involved here. We're dealing with a star-like plasma torch.
Read the quote a bit more carefully. The gigatons you keep harping about stored in the plasma that is released from the LARGE FUSION GENERATORS.Mr. Oragahn wrote: The vast majority of the plasma is not going to slowly float away! Why? Because there has been some multi-gigaton explosions.
The SEVRAL GIGATONS are stored in the plasma. What we are looking at seems to an artificial Solar Flare, and those are murder to 40K ships.
Not if the explosion is only there to cause the LARGE FUSION GENERATOR to lose containment.Mr. Oragahn wrote: In fact any explosion in space, no matter the yield, is going to naturally produce that very tidy little round hemisphere your mind has conjured.
The plasma from the LARGE FUSION GENERATOR does not need to be contain after the LARGE FUSION GENERATOR loses containmentMr. Oragahn wrote: Well, unless you think you can contain, outside of the device, gigatons of energy with much less power.
Wow. These Imperium techs have access to a technology that's impressive indeed.
The SEVRAL GIGATONS is in the plasma released when the LARGE FUSION GENERATOR traveling towards the space Hulk loses containment. The released plasma will continue traveling towards the space hulk do to Newtons Laws of motion, but the plasma will also spread out in other direction do to the loss of pressure in the LARGE FUSION GENERATOR..Mr. Oragahn wrote: In general, one would wisely think that you need to spend more energy, because of waste, in order to get enough left to counter the "enemy" energy.
Ya anti listening.Mr. Oragahn wrote: A still fail?
And need I quote you claiming that the blisters result from the energy being contained?
Your post: "And what does the rest of the sentence say, It talks about the blisters of flame. There aren't going to be blisters of flame unless something contains the energy. In the scene something is causing the Lava Bomb's energy to be slowly released. It it just exploded there would only be a bright flash."
In another post, you say: "The blister of fire is on the outside of the hull working its way in."
And another one: "2) We don't know why the plasma is forming blisters on the hull. If there is a field holding the plasma in a dome shape then it may be part of the normal operations of the generator."
Perhaps you've changed your theory AFTER my reply, but then it's stupid to accuse me of criticizing your old theory without being able to predict your next creative contribution. :/
By definition the plasma is not going to slowly form, bulge or drift. It's not going to slowly burn like a bubble of fuel in a 0g environment either, as I told you. It's simply not going to happen.
Now, on the other hand, if we're talking about the boiling type of plasma that's found in 40K (and assuming "boiling" isn't just used because of mere bubbles going up due to buoyancy), I already gave some suggestions about how it may be some kind of biofuel called plasma that turns critical (not super critical) when leaking from a core, and may be used in a wide range of exotic weapons.
But this has nothing to do with your pet theory.
You sound like Mike Wong, Brian Young, and Kirkskywalker, and STARWARSSTARTREK right now. You're completely misrepresenting what I've been say'in kid.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Still a bad cop out since I shoot down each of your arguments you try to bring up in defense of your theory. You talk about inefficiency but your theoretical design's problem is one of efficiency or lack thereof, but of complete nonsense. It doesn't even begin to make sense as a crappy in efficient power plant. It is simply totally inane.
Besides, you misunderstand fusion, plasma, how fuel burns, misread words (mine and from the quote), etc. This is not good.
There's only been one theory on my part.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Even if this is your new theory, then you'll still have to admit that there's no way around the fact that star-hot plasma is going to escape insanely fast (even more since it's compressed).
So you'll have to bury your literal interpretation of blister deep down. Then we'll be able to focus on the energy levels instead...
Which would explain those explosions before the blisters for. Sound similar in effect to a cluster munitions only with plasma instead of bomblets.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Yes, imprisonned by internal forces, most likely that of a magnetic field generated by the reactor inside itself.
It doesn't change the fact that once there's a hole in that, it's going to burst nastily. As GIAGATONS NUCLEAR EXPLOSION nasty.
That's a very basic fact I've been covering over several posts again and again. It gets very tiring.
If you just can't understand that, then stop thinking too hard and boot out of this thread at once, thanks.
It's also a fact according to the Lava Bomb quote that the FUSION GENERATOR is considered large by IOM standards.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Thank you for admitting they fail, after all.
Anyway, they'd fail precisely because they would obviously reach a point where they can't maintain safe working parameters.
My point precisely was that the Imperium just needs to dial those generators down so they never get there. It still gives those ships stupid levels of power, because we're talking about small generators that fit in a section of a rocket.
What you typed is what I responded to, but you fail to read the quote.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Did you read what I typed?
No.
Purhaps you should read the Lava Bomb quote?Mr. Oragahn wrote: Ah?
You know that how?
Or are you just making shit up now?
Death of Integity wrote: the bomb generated several gigatons of explosive energy,
Several as the definition states means more then 2 but not many. We are looking at a small number of gigatons.http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/several wrote: 1sev·er·al adjective \ˈsev-rəl, ˈse-və-\
: more than two but not very many
The fact that the speaker uses non-technicle terms like explosive energy tells us that he or she is trying to make the Lava Bomb seem as impressive as possible, and yet he or she only states the Lava Bomb releases several gigatons instead of tens, or hundreds tells us the actual yeild must be a rather small number of gigatons. I was absurdly generous when I used 20 gigatons in my calculation.
Since you ignore words in the given quote that make your interpretation impossible...Mr. Oragahn wrote: LOL, I say gigatons could mean something close to teratons and this is supposed to be lowballing?
o_O
The use of the word SEVERAL puts hard limits along with soft limits on how many gigatons you can assume. You certainly can't get hundreds of gigatons out of the quote.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Oh, obviously. That's quite a heavy assumption you've got there. Like when one speaks of the kilotons or megatons of a nuke when said nuke can release multiple digits of it at once?
Why not download a Battlefleet Gothic PDF, and analyze it? GW seems to be literally giving it away.Mr. Oragahn wrote: Not only 40K isn't super fast (that's typical Connorish BS and totally contrary to the concept of age of sail in space), but even super speeds solve nothing.
Super speeds mean ships are still very fast, torpedoes still largely dumb projectiles for the most part (documented fact) so unable to correct course, and such speeds mean super sensors and lots of power, thus lots of firepower, and therefore no problem to shoot down small but already ship sized torpedoes.
Mr. Oragahn wrote: As for the links, the first one disagrees with the super size torps, and the second provides no clear, direct source at all (like the first one).
Vague mentions of books don't cut it.
Finally, I'm not sure I'd have enough time to crawl through the texts that awaits me beyond the third link.
BFG Basic Rule Page: 28 wrote:
TORPEDOS
The term 'torpedo' has always been used to describe any long-range missile carried by a spaceship. A typical anti-ship torpedo is over 200 feet long and powered by a plasma reactor, which also acts as a sizable portion of its warhead, turning it into a devastating plasma bomb. The area of the ship given over to the torpedo tubes is a massive space criss-crossed by lifts, hoists and gantry cranes for moving the huge missiles from the armoured magazine silos where they are stored to the launch tubes.
Once a torpedo is launched, the plasma drive propels the torpedo forward at high speed, whilst beginning an energy build-up which will culminate in its detonation. Torpedos have a limited ability to detect a target and will alter course to intercept it they pass within a few thousand kilometers of a vessel.