Trinium from Stargate SG-1
VS
Tritanium From Star Trek
VS
Gundanium Alloy from Gundam Wing
VS
Titanium-A from Halo
Which is the best super material, and how do they compare?
Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A
-
- Jedi Master
- Posts: 2239
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
- Mr. Oragahn
- Admiral
- Posts: 6865
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
- Location: Paradise Mountain
Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A
I'm not particularly impressed by the performances of Titanium-A. I think the advantage had more to do with weight.
Trek's materials are very impressive though, notably in general in their resistance to heat.
As for SG's trinium, I once tried to come with some facts about it. Not easy.
Attempts to compare trinium gouging with plasma torches vs steel:
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 721#p19721
Trek's materials are very impressive though, notably in general in their resistance to heat.
As for SG's trinium, I once tried to come with some facts about it. Not easy.
Attempts to compare trinium gouging with plasma torches vs steel:
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 721#p19721
- Mith
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 765
- Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:17 am
Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A
Probably between Star Trek and Stargate. Gundanium is good, but nothing compared to those two. Titanium-A isn't all that impressive. Probably better than modern materials, but nothing too great.Lucky wrote:Trinium from Stargate SG-1
VS
Tritanium From Star Trek
VS
Gundanium Alloy from Gundam Wing
VS
Titanium-A from Halo
Which is the best super material, and how do they compare?
- Mr. Oragahn
- Admiral
- Posts: 6865
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
- Location: Paradise Mountain
Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A
Refined trinium was alloyed with titanium for the SGC's second iris, and alloyed with naqahdah for the construction of Tau'ri ships. Tollans used it extensively for their tech.Mr. Oragahn wrote:I'm not particularly impressed by the performances of Titanium-A. I think the advantage had more to do with weight.
Trek's materials are very impressive though, notably in general in their resistance to heat.
As for SG's trinium, I once tried to come with some facts about it. Not easy.
Attempts to compare trinium gouging with plasma torches vs steel:
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 721#p19721
Asgards mixed it with carbon.
Trinium-made objects in Stargate are very light, can be very sharp and tough.
In show it was said that trinium, obviously the refined product, was a hundred times stronger and lighter than steel.
What to understand there was complicated though.
Lighter materials theoretically allow to put more of it, that is, to produce thicker armour plates.
I guess the idea is that for an armour plate, its capabilities with one centimeter of trinium would be equivalent to one of 1 meter (100 cm) of homogeneous steel.
In return, a 1 cm thick plate of trinium would be 100 times lighter than a similarly sized plate, made of steel.
Being alloyed probably allows that rather strong material to also benefit from other material's known high heat tolerance levels. Refined naqahdah is remarkably, if not absurdly high, allowing massive transfers of energy. It is also very strong, but particularly heavy.
-
- Bridge Officer
- Posts: 174
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A
TRINIUM: 100 times lighter and stronger than steel.
TRITANIUM: 21 times harder than diamond, beyond the Federation's technology to melt (presumably meaning thermally rather than exotic transporter/replicator means.) Doesn't even start to glow at 12,000 degrees Celsius. Can survive a crash into an icy mountain at high velocity.(Voyager Quantum Slipstream drive crash.)
TRITANIUM: 21 times harder than diamond, beyond the Federation's technology to melt (presumably meaning thermally rather than exotic transporter/replicator means.) Doesn't even start to glow at 12,000 degrees Celsius. Can survive a crash into an icy mountain at high velocity.(Voyager Quantum Slipstream drive crash.)
- Mr. Oragahn
- Admiral
- Posts: 6865
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
- Location: Paradise Mountain
Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A
What? Does that mean even a nuke couldn't melt tritanium? o_Otheta_pinch wrote:TRINIUM: 100 times lighter and stronger than steel.
TRITANIUM: 21 times harder than diamond, beyond the Federation's technology to melt (presumably meaning thermally rather than exotic transporter/replicator means.) Doesn't even start to glow at 12,000 degrees Celsius. Can survive a crash into an icy mountain at high velocity.(Voyager Quantum Slipstream drive crash.)
-
- Bridge Officer
- Posts: 174
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A
Apparently so. Riker did say they couldn't melt tritanium and seeing as they've gone beyond nukes and the Enterprise could expect to survive one even while damaged and it was made out of a duranium tritanium alloy instead of pure tritanium.Mr. Oragahn wrote:What? Does that mean even a nuke couldn't melt tritanium? o_Otheta_pinch wrote:TRINIUM: 100 times lighter and stronger than steel.
TRITANIUM: 21 times harder than diamond, beyond the Federation's technology to melt (presumably meaning thermally rather than exotic transporter/replicator means.) Doesn't even start to glow at 12,000 degrees Celsius. Can survive a crash into an icy mountain at high velocity.(Voyager Quantum Slipstream drive crash.)
On a side note about them having tritanium bulkheads yet not being able to melt it, Riker might have only, been talking about thermal melting; more exotic methods like transporters would be used.