Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A

VS debates involving other fictional universes than Star Trek or Star Wars go here, along with technical analysis, detailed discussion, crossover scenario descriptions, and similar related stuffs.
Post Reply
Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A

Post by Lucky » Sun Mar 24, 2013 9:34 am

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?

User avatar
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

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:10 pm

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

User avatar
Mith
Starship Captain
Posts: 765
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:17 am

Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A

Post by Mith » Sun Apr 21, 2013 6:20 am

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?
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.

User avatar
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

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sun Apr 21, 2013 10:47 am

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
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.
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.

theta_pinch
Bridge Officer
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A

Post by theta_pinch » Sun May 11, 2014 9:30 pm

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.)

User avatar
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

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Mon May 12, 2014 11:46 pm

theta_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.)
What? Does that mean even a nuke couldn't melt tritanium? o_O

theta_pinch
Bridge Officer
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Trinium VS Tritanium VS Gundanium Alloy VS Titanium-A

Post by theta_pinch » Tue May 13, 2014 12:44 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
theta_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.)
What? Does that mean even a nuke couldn't melt tritanium? o_O
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.

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.

Post Reply