Kane Starkiller wrote:Starwman. I simply said that we don't know what range the seismic charge has not that it will continue to expand for 10,000km. In any case it shattered every asteroid it encountered never loosing integrity or slowing down. No upper limits can be derived.
For the seismic mine, there is a thread for that. You seem to have points to make, so do it where it's meant to be done.
If you don't care adressing the arguments in the thread in question, so be it. The discussion is closed here.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:The survival of structures, documents and one guy, at least. You can get more info on google or even using the search button for this forum.
Scavenger Hunt wrote:As instructed, I have remained behind until the last of our transports departed safely into hyperspace. Imperial Star Destroyers have so thoroughly blasted Dankayo that I fear for my safety, even in this deep-planet survival shelter.
As you can see the guy who survived did so because he was in deep-planet survival shelter. And he
still feared for his life.
That's not the only quote. There were the moping up troopers who, among other things, recovered docs from an agent. The fact that they found the log of the guy above is sufficient to realize that the upper base couldn't have not been utterly blasted like wankers would like it to be, that is, completely leveled, crushed and flooded with lava.
It is stupid to turn to lava a base, only to send troops inside later on for a mop up operation and to find docs, especially when you completely blockade and encircle the planet and the base.
It is not even a question of demonstration. It's simply stupid.
There is no logical, safe reason to wank the interpretation and even take the word slag literally.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:I can understand that it is a problem to you, but we all know that firepower and shiel or armour rating are all related, and proportional. Simply put, it would make no sense to have starfighters rated with weapons in the kiloton range, and see troop transports unable to cope with kilograms of TNT. Which we have shown, based on simple movie observation of the events on Geonosis.
Same for starships. It would not stand to claim super strong armour blocking gigatons of energy, when a star destroyed sees a large chunk of its structure utterly blasted apart by a moderate kiloton level kinetic impact at a sloped angle, due to an asteroid that is around 50 meters wide. As proven in TESB.
You haven't shown that shields and armamanet energy are in disagreement. You ignore the fact that ISDs were in a dense asteroid field where even Millenium Falcon and TIE fighters had great difficulties evading the asteroids and ISDs were being hit by roughly 1 asteroid per second. How many asteroids hit it before shield failure?
There
is a severe disagreement. See:
1. The fact that even fighters and small cargos had issues evading asteroids is irrelevant. Yes, the ISDs were hit by asteroids. But the impacts will never ever endanger the absurd dissipation rates implied by the AOTC/ROTS ICS for the later ISDs, during the Galactic Empire era.
2. You've been reading Wong's page too much. That one asteroid per second frequency is simply not there to be seen on screen. For all the long sequences shot within the asteroid field, there is absolutely no evidence at all that the ships were hit at a rate of one asteroid per second. On the contrary, we see that the rate if far lower than that.
But of course, I know that the EU has a word on that, is responsible for that claim as well, as much as the megaton concussion explosion claims. Trouble is that all impacts we've seen hardly reach that level, and the rate is not that high at all.
If the rate is right, then we are speaking about asteroids that were so small that we couldn't even see them, but yet, we know we should have seen them get flash vaporized against the shields, because that's precisely what happened in the film when a small asteroid slammed not far from the belly's dome.
3. There is
no proof that there has ever been any form of shield failure. Besides, it's not the argument you guys use, which is more about "shields lowered to allow holonet comms".
Remember capital ships exchanging terajoules in the EU? Now couple that with the
power (not energy) of the asteroid impacting against the shields, several kilotons within a fraction of a second (which would probably turn out to be about high kilotons in the end), and I think we have a good idea of what the shields could withstand. Shields, or hull, if you think the shields were down.
That said, no matter if shields were up or down, the asteroid event hits the wankers in the balls.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:So you do the maths. A ship as big as a troop transport, armed to the chin, can't come with a shield that can conveniently protect its troops from very very low level of firepower from enemy fighters, both built by war industries.
How could other fighters suddenly have kiloton levels weapons, and shields able to deal with a number of such direct shots?
Answer: it could not.
Again who said that troop transports and fighters have the same level of shielding? Secondly how many fighter level hits can an average fighter take? I seem to recall that when hit by enemy fire fighters explode almost instantly.
So troop transports can't deal with more than low gigajoules at best, but the fighters can easily shrugg off terajoules of firepower.
Why even bother putting shields on the transports then? Care to explain?
And what about the geonosian fighters themselves? The sheer fact that they didn't show the ability to slightly increase the yield of their weapon to deal critical hits to the LAAT shows that it's all we can expect from them.
It would be particularily interesting if the novelization, or the EU, had references about geonosian fighters actually downing Jedi starfighters, ARC fighters (in ROTS) or other supposedly heavily shielded small ships.
For example, the clone wars cartoons featured the
Battle of Muunilinst, where
Nantex-class starfighters were used against
V-19 Torrent starfighters.
Would the CIS use geonosian fighters for defense (as they did for other worlds), against republic fighters armed with weapons between a thousand and a million times more powerful? Not even talking about shields!
We would have to, of course, believe that the CIS starfighters are between e3 and e6 times less powerful than the republic fighters.
Oh, besides, as far as Jedi starfighters shields are concerned, they're taken down by nothing more than
small asteroid cracking bolts.
Or, again, more proof that it's just pure wank:
How even an AAT tank does more damage to a N-1 than droid fighters do (TPM). Same droid fighters up to Revenge of the Sith,
decades later. Yet, we got a very good demonstration of the tanks' firepower in the Naboo battle, against the Gungan army. At best, in the low gigajoule range.
Or what about the TIE fighters not harming asteroids when they missed the Falcon? A level of firepower which is, mind you, very consistent with the level of firepower demonstrated by geonosian starfighters in AOTC, when they hit the rock cliff - and yet, those geonosian fighters are supposedly stronger than TIEs, since sources give them a couple of tractor beams and other gadgets.
Yes, swallow those big facts.
All from the movies.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Absurd, in the light of yields claimed. The C'baoth trilogy had a wing of fighters engaging an ISD and poking a hole in the belly's shield, with no noticable help from any capital ship firing at the same spot, as far as I can remember (Katana fleet battle).
Kilotons of energy would not make a difference with shields which can deal with teratons of energy per second.
Which again proves just how Saxton ignored much of the EU to introduce his fanwank, poor EU consistency be ever more damned than before.
To use your favorite line: Films trump EU. In films fighters by themselves are COMPLETELY useless as proven by TPM battle.
1. Nice. Then you concede that a major battle in EU history is wrong and is paradoxically impossible, because the films tell otherwise; that it's not possible.
Funny that you don't use that when it... doesn't suit you.
2. Let's be reasonable and serious for a moment.
Let me remind you that Qui-Gon Jinn had doubts that the plan would work. The fact that his estimation, despite his experience, lead him not to outright condemn that attack and paint it as suicide, reveals that it's possible for fighters to deal damage to starships, in certain cases, and that even with N-1, Qui-Gon considered that there was a chance they could do something.
Like in the EU, with fighters using their
laser cannons as well... which would be, according to ICS craze, still short of billions of joules against shield dissipation rates of imperial star destroyers... still manage to dent capital grade shields.
Let's also remember that the Droid Federation Control ship was filled with extra power generators, and was twice as big as an ISD would be, which easily explains why the N-1 had no chance to down the shields. However, we never knew how much damage they actually caused to the shields. But they hardly had time to attack it with their full force, as they were assaulted by swarms of droid starfighters, which were crippling their already low numbers.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Nice spin.
Diesel engines can power everything. But they do not power everything.
A folklore story which never mentions annihilation cores. Quite a feat for an universe where, according to Saxton, most starships are powered by annihilation cores. Dismissing them as kid story doesn't negate the fact that you can't wrap your head around that there's no reason for Tatooinian folklore to be completely devoid of one single reference to annihilation cores powering even one single type of system.
There is also no reason why kid's stories SHOULD make references to annihilation cores is there?
If such antimatter cores were there, there is no reason why they would be left out of the Tatooine folklore, a planet full of pilots, bounty hunters and smugglers.
Besides, as I said, Anakin was very much talented in mechanics for his age. He built his own podracer, and of course, that means he knew that a fusion core would power it. Yet there's no reference about how he'd dispute the idea that fusion powers everything.
For fraking sake, he's working in Wattoo' shop, which sells everything, from hyperdrives to whatever scrap part you need for your landspeeder. His junkyard even had huge rocket nozzles lying there.
Tell me that Anakin wouldn't be aware of the antimatter cores if they existed.
Are there any Earth folklore stories concerning nuclear reactors or electric engines? Or even diesel engines?
Dude, that's a very, very, bad analogy. If you wanted to make a point, you'd rather have to find first a tale that makes a claim about power sources used on Earth.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:If we had an answer, it would be an easy thing. One thing for sure is that it has little to do with uniquely using a beam of hyper energetic particles, because those things don't *pause* when they blow things up.
Explain the pause in Alderaan's destruction, or concede and serve as an example.
Yes, I'm direct, but I'm tired of your appeal to ignorance and repeated dodges.
First of all you are lying.
There is no pause in Alderaan's destruction: at no point does the explosion stop, wait for a second and then continues.
There is only a secondary explosion that overtakes the first one, NO PAUSES.
*sigh* That
is the pause.
You also admit you don't have an answer but then demand in yellow text that I provide explanations or concede. How nice. You get to claim chain reactions without any explanation or backup but I must explain everything right?
This is fallacious. It's not because one has no explanation that he must accept anything in lieu of a good one. Namely, I should not have to accept your explanation, just because it seems to properly explain what happens - which it does not.
But fine let's see what we know.
1. We know that superlaser can be set to various yields ranging from ship destroying bursts to planetary destruction yields.
The DS2 one, yes. Not the first one, unless you have evidence of that.
2. We know that superlaser has variable speeds. It traveled at speeds of 100,000km/s when it destroyed Alderaan and at perhaps 100km/s when it was fired against ships in ROTJ.
Different weapon. Prove that they're the same.
Thus, as I said, the superlaser might not have equal energy content along it's beam and slowed down as it vanished from camera's view. Therefore when the energy spike in energy content reached the expanding planetary matter a larger explosion was created.
Now I have provided a theory that while not perfect does not contradict anything we have seen in the films and does not introduce ANY NEW mechanism to the superlaser that we have not already seen in the films.
The flaws: you are claiming that the bit of the beam that was left, was actually the most energetic one, by many orders of magnitude, and that a large segment of the beam didn't dump that much energy between the two explosions: once the first one occurs, there's no gradual increase in power, nor do we see the rest of the planet is not seen to explode violently. Actually, the level of destruction doesn't seem to be more than a couple of low petatons over a tightened portion of the facing hemisphere, at best.
Then, the remainder of the beam is slowed down, because it's going through a cloud of superheated plasma and debris.
We have a beam which travels at c (its a super turbolaser, remember), but is considerably slowed down when moving through hot gas, so much that it takes 18 frames for this bit of the beam to actually hit the planet, when the head of the beam, at the same distance from the planet, only needed one frame more to already deal damage.
Besides, since it slows down when it's caught in the cloud, shouldn't it be diffusing its energy within this cloud of hot gas and debris?
The end of the beam slowed down, conveniently when it was too far, and too deep within the first explosion cloud.
It also fails to explain why the second explosion occured on the other side of the planet, while only the surface of the facing hemisphere was damaged (we can still see the horizon of Alderaan, several frames after the first explosion started to expand).
As for you you IGNORED my point that diminishing concentration of planetary matter as it expanded would decrease any chain reaction hence the secondary explosion PROVES it is not a chain reaction.
I ignored your expansion claim because we can clearly see that Alderaan is not much expanding during the first explosion, and that only the surface facing the Death Star was put on fire and blasted into space.
I'm not necessarily a fan of the chain reaction either, and I have no idea what happens in details in Alderaan. I have long been playing with the idea that the beam drilled a hole and deposited or triggered something in the core, but due to the power, went slightly beyond the core, on the other side.
What it did there is up to anyone. A sort of bomb, a spacetime anomaly, a matter conversion phenomenom, an antimatter buildup, something, I don't know.
Earth has a mass of 5.9736 e24 kg. Mantle and core associated represent nearly 100 of Earth's mass.
Let's say there's a reaction that uses 50% of Alderaan's mass, and that Alderaan is relatively similar to Earth.
That mass turned into energy would provide 2.6844 e41 J of energy, more than what is necessary to blast the planet like it happened during the second explosion.
So, here, if I had to go with an idea, I'd really argue that the beam drills through the curst, mantle and even core (or slightly misses the core) and triggers a reaction down there.
Exotic technobabble?
Huh, like if the mines dropped by Jango were not some crazy shit, really.
Now I am asking you.
Will you FINALLY PROVIDE any explanation as to why secondary explosion points to a chain reaction and provide a hypothesis, a physically sound one, as to why there was a secondary blast. If you don't do that then concede and serve as an example.
You're only showing how you don't understand that I'm not to provide an explanation. It's a kind of reasoning that is as bad as if you don't like film X, then do films instead of criticizing.
No one has to provide a better explantion to be allowed to point the flaws of a theory. As simple as that.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Hey, care to read? He was co-author. It's like using bits of the bible to back up the bible. It's circular.
Flawed analogy. Inside the Worlds and ICS are NOT one and the same book unlike the Bible. Therefore there is nothing circular about it.
It's just flawed in the sense that the Bible is one and unique book. I should have used another one of those holy scriptures for my example.
But the idea stands. You're defending Saxton claims with more material which Saxton fiddled with.
But there is also SW official page that states that "The Death Star's prime weapon unleashed unthinkable levels of raw energy capable of tearing apart entire worlds."
A continent is a world as well. ;)
j/k
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Admirable. So your claim is simple: the ship accelerated, and massively decelerated, within the cut.
Pink unicorn.
You know when I first read this I laughed my ass off and almost decided not to reply anymore because really this is a new low.
So ship being able to decelerate is "pink unicorn" now?
No, the pink unicorn here is how you argue that everything that supports your claim happens off screen, during the cut that separates the two sequences which show you horribly wrong:
The first one, which actually shows how fast his ship was accelerating to leave the place.
The second one, which shows how fast his ship passed in front of CIS warships parked in orbit.
Both completely blow your claim to smitherens. Nevermind, it does not stop you from making a baseless claim.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Probably because we see Dooku coming from the planet, and the core ships orbiting around, and Dooku's ship is hardly zapping like a bullet like it would if it had been pushing the gas pedal like you claim, with god knows how many gees worth of thrust.
Where do you get that core ships were "orbiting around"? Have you watched the films? The Trade Federation was RUNNING AWAY. Thus their ships would logically be ACCELERATING away from the planet as fast as they could. Secondly do you know whether Dooku's ship was still accelerating when it reached the ships? You know nothing: Core's ship current acceleration, Core's ship current relative velocity with the planet, Dooku's ship current acceleration, Dooku's ship current relative velocity with the planet. So where do you get off making contradiction claims?
It is simple. Watch the video and notice which direction the lucrehulks are pointing in. If they were accelerating to escape, we'd easily
see it, especially since they're not pointing in the same direction as Dooku's sailship.
The ship Dooku passes in front of is pointing to the left of Dooku's ship. So basically, it's roughly perpendicular. If they were escaping, they'd be smashing the gas pedal, and with the thousands of ICS gees, you'd see that.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:People described it as an after effect. We know that getting out of hyperspace leaves particles, in the EU. Some crono traces or whatever. I suppose, that if I had to craft an EU friendly theory, a massive concentration of such particles would provoke distorsion effects.
It's a bit like the rotating space background when a ship goes into hyperspace in the OT. I think.
Well, anyway, I say it's a blooper. It's a minor piece of evidence, again much more evidence that the DS2 is not that large.
Yet no such distortions were ever seen anywhere else in the films. Funny that. Oh but you have an explanation "some crono traces or whatever". Yeah I think I'm gonna stick with canon OBSERVATION thanks.
Ah, you will? Then you'll stick with the 160 km wide DS2, because as we demonstrated on these forums, there's simply more canon material that proves the DS2 is closer to 160 km than to 900 km.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:I hardly see why you bother coming with the idea of the DS2 coming closer to Endor. Sorry if I'm missing something, but is that relevant, somehow?
It would explain why the Death Star looked bigger relative to Endor.
Huh? It actually looked smaller, relative to Endor, as the rebels approached it. Not bigger.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Please, this would have us to believe that the weapons dissipate too fast and so soon after leaving the barrel that this method to keep them coherent is still necessary even at very close ranges.
Indeed, all engagements we see display weapons which dramatically cross spaces at low speeds, nevermind if the target is just one or two kilometers ahead. The battle in ROTS and ROTJ show this.
If you want to defend Saxton's absurd claim, you can do it in the appropriate thread which I have bumped.
What you believe is irrelevant.
You don't get it. If slowing down the beams was a requisite to gain range (and just how stupid is that? anyone would accelerate it to be sure that the weapon would still hit before it looses its shape or else), why do their weapons still not fire at c when at such close ranges? The book nonwithstanding, obviously contradicted as far as weapon speed is concerned.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:And yes, lasers are lame, so we have to go with a complicated nonsense. I mean, why use lasers, which could very powerful and remain coherent, and tactically wise, truly travel at c in a straight path, when you have turbolasers that deplete so fast that you need to reduce their speed so even ships could evade them, even when firing at a ranges under a few kilometers?
Really.
Do you have anything else to offer other than your incredulity? Did you ever see a capital ship evading turbolaser fire? No? Then what's the point of bumping up the speed if it causes energy bleed.
Who said speed makes the weapon bleed?
They only say that making it spin on itself keeps it coherent longer, but reduces the overall speed to target.
Let's see... over the effective lightminute ranges... oops, apparently even light
hours if we go by what certain SDN enthusiasts say, how good do you think this will be against a distant target that is moving (yes, even a target on a planet, say a base, will be moving, unless you place yourself on geosynchronous orbit... from outside the system), and with weapons which will need to be even slower than what we see on screen (and it's already slow), how can the crew on the ISD ever pretend being able to reach their target?
Yes, because the weapons are already flying at low fractions of c on screen, when ships are battling tens or hundreds of kilometers apart. Hitting a target that's several AU away, you'll need more range. And thus, you'll have to trade speed for range. However, over AU ranges, your planet will be far less than a spec, and I'm sorry, but I've never seen starships' accuracy be that high enough.
Basically, your sitting-outside-of-the-system ship will need to fire in enormous advance, because the bolt will travel ridiculously slowly, even more than ever, and be aimed at a target which will be ridiculously small, smaller than even a planet.
An absurdly small fraction of an arc minute.
When looking at the accuracy of a Trade Federation ship against the yatch which was flying on a straight path, towards the TF ship, the TF cannons were providing a "DCA"
barrage, since on the hundreds of bolts fired at the ship, only one single bolt actually managed to hit the hull.
That ratio, between distance and target profile, and the noticed accuracy, already shows that we would hardly be able to expect any better when multiplying everything by the same number, say 1,000,000.
Please notice, by the way, that at this moment, the direct hit took the shields down. Yet, the yatch was rocked twice or thrice more. And
survived.
Kiloton level quad lasers? No.
Flak bursts? Yes.
