Validity of the ICS

[Cpl Kendall]

Sure, I'll post them tomorrow in a new thread as it's time for bed here.

[Batman]

Higher canon? I can't recall a single mention of fusion in the movies, leave alone them specifying NUCLEAR fusion. I DO recall them doing things that are impossible to achieve with fusion power. Like, you know, blowing Alderaan to smithereens.

Talking about nuclear fusion is redundant.

I agree, because there is no NOT overridden-by-higher-canon evidence for that being the case.

As for blowing Alderaan up, I'd like to hear how a weapon, which apparently is supposed to work on turbolaser (or near turbolaser) principles, destroyed a planet in the way it did.

*scratches head* DET?

Why is it so fucking hard for you guys to even acknowledge the simple fact that a planet doesn't double boom, with a significant delay in between, and a change of magnitude between both explosions, when hit once by a so called "pure" DET weapon.

Yo may want to elaborate on that. What double boom? Alderaan was hit, resisted long enough to suggest the existence of a planetary shield, and went kablooey.

[Batman]

Oh they definitely CLAIM the numbers are wrong. They just completely fail to show to do so.

You say so.

And you say they aren't. :P

As a side note, it's particularily incredible to see that nevermind how the ICS's figures are so often cited as facts, it's still so hard to find complete quotes from the ICS, about these very shield abilities and mechanics, hyperspace, weapon mechanics, power and range, acceleration and whatelse figures.

Could that, perhaps, be due to the fact that you people refuse to acknowledge them anyway so nobody bothers to provide them because it would be pointless?

Which is in no way supported by ANY of the canon,...

Both novelisations and even EU books have references to fusion based power cores.

BOTH novelisations? There are six SW movies.

Even the kids from TPM knew that, and know that fusion is the leading way of power generation across the whole galaxy, used at different scales.

Ah. Dialogue, by small kids no less. That's DEFINITELY a reliable source.

These kids know that because they also said knowing about the stuffs the space pilots talk about when they stop at Tatooine.

You gotta be kidding me.

No you couldn't. You could link me to a hundred places that CLAIM contradictions. Unsupported ones, as it turns out.

As a matter of fact, there's still that recent thread where we, again, adress the disparity between the ICS's claims, and the power of shields and weapons seen in AOTC, as far as LAATs and geonosian fighters are concerned.

Could you be bothered to point out the posts where it was established the LAATs and geonosian fighters used their maximum firepower? Which would have resulted in not inconsiderable amounts of collateral damage?

But from time to time, on this thread, we also talked about the Slave-I's weapons, such as the mid section main laser cannons, the missiles and seismic warheads, which are all overblown in the ICS.

The lasers are single-figure KT and the seismic charges are single-figure GT by the movies. Does the ICS disagree with that?

There's the claims about thousands of gs of acceleration

Which are supported by the movies. ROTJ. Next.

, while TESB clearly show that ISDs can't achieve more than hundreds of gs to avoid collision.

And that was DEFINITELY a problem of them not having the accelleration as opposed to human error due to the confusion. When ANH and ROTJ REQUIRE 4 fígure g accelerations to work.

We have enough evidence from the films that capital level weapons have certainly not ranges in ten of light minutes, but in fact in a few thousand kilometers at best.

You most certainly have NOT. Show me the scene where they missed or failed to damage a target at light-minute ranges in the movies.

[Mr. Oragahn]

We get a good example of an ICS centric thread on these boards, here: ICS revisited.
In this thread, I put a link to a SB.com thread from 2005.
Page 1 features an inflated and largely incorrect figure for the seismic mine, to fit with the 11.9 GT ICS claim. Some people immediately notice how this is just completely wrong.
Page 2 continues with more intervention showing how the warhead is not going to be in the gigaton range, and certainly in the low megaton range, if not lower than that.
And there's no dialed down shitty exuse here.
The evidence is simple. The range of the weapon is limited. Though it looks like a disc, the fact that it's a ring/wave that expands and dissolves and looses coherence over the distance (there's that concentric blue trail), and has the energy concentrated on that very thin border. With inverse square law being inadequate here, since we have to consider a very flat cylinder expanding, and not a disc or a sphere, we end with a very low initial energy.
Especially since only a small region of the asteroids is shattered, and can only see, sometimes, very moderate heated up matter at the point of impact with the wave.

Here, you have a good take on the absurd lightspeed claim.

Ridiculing the kiloton weaponry claims for starfighters.

There is, of course, the ROTS novelisation comment about capital ship turbolasers having enough power to vapourize a small town, a figure of speech which, literally, indicates a strict low end, but which is equally often used to describe the best figure an element can achieve.

THE SFJ thread about BDZ.

KE against ISD armour, or how a kiloton impactor seems to be fairly enough to get rid of that ship. That said, I wonder if this figure can fit with acceleration and structural stress. This would be matched with the use of inertia dampeners, I think, but this would probably lessen the effective mass, and thus density of armour when activated.

We have, however, to consider the power here. Or how fast that energy was transfered, which will up the figure a bit, and possibly make it easier to fit with acceleration figures.
Any comment? <- if yes, try to post them in the relevant thread.

Are the ICS accurate?, a 7 pages long and detailed thread. Which shows how the thread here is just a rehash of what was adressed.

There's still the Lost Scrolls thread, where I wanted to know where those alleged old gigaton calcs for ISDs could be found.

Our take on the Slave-I missiles and asteroid destructions in AOTC.

An old poll about an ISD's firepower.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Talking about nuclear fusion is redundant.

I agree, because there is no NOT overridden-by-higher-canon evidence for that being the case.

Please clarify your point.

As for blowing Alderaan up, I'd like to hear how a weapon, which apparently is supposed to work on turbolaser (or near turbolaser) principles, destroyed a planet in the way it did.

*scratches head* DET?

Please. There's obviously some energy involved there, but the problem lies in the way it was deposited or generated.

If it's the DET acronym that irks you, then think it terms or uber TL then. That's basically Wong's claim, reported by so many.

Why is it so fucking hard for you guys to even acknowledge the simple fact that a planet doesn't double boom, with a significant delay in between, and a change of magnitude between both explosions, when hit once by a so called "pure" DET weapon.

Yo may want to elaborate on that. What double boom? Alderaan was hit, resisted long enough to suggest the existence of a planetary shield, and went kablooey.

What double boom?

...

Okay.

I supposed that by now, everyone one should be, at least, plainly aware of this *slight detail* about Alderaan's explosion.
I mean, you don't even need to go frame by frame to notice it!

Ah, besides, the shield argument is completely bogus.

[Mr. Oragahn]

As a side note, it's particularily incredible to see that nevermind how the ICS's figures are so often cited as facts, it's still so hard to find complete quotes from the ICS, about these very shield abilities and mechanics, hyperspace, weapon mechanics, power and range, acceleration and whatelse figures.

Could that, perhaps, be due to the fact that you people refuse to acknowledge them anyway so nobody bothers to provide them because it would be pointless?

Oh please.

Every single universe had its fans copy and paste many detailed extracts from some Babylon 5 or Stargate transcript, WH40K or Halo book or else, etc.
Yet, it's a pain in the A to find such quotes from the ICS.
It has nothing with believing them, because the figures for aother universes, which did require the posting of so many extracts, were always received particularily coldly. That's precisely why fans were asked to prove this or that.
Yet, there's not much to found about the ICS. It's hard.
Or maybe I didn't search well enough, but your excuse if particularily poor, really.
No offense, though. Nothing to do with you in particular.

Both novelisations and even EU books have references to fusion based power cores.

BOTH novelisations? There are six SW movies.

Oh fuck. Bad wording.

Even the kids from TPM knew that, and know that fusion is the leading way of power generation across the whole galaxy, used at different scales.

Ah. Dialogue, by small kids no less. That's DEFINITELY a reliable source.

Ah, same old argument.
Why the kids would even have many stories and second hand explanations about fusion related power sources to begin with?
Why would they all talk about fusion cores, instead of anihilation cores, if fusion cores were not THE power sources in Star Wars?
I mean, why bother? Why invent babble about fusion cores, and never get one single mention of anihilation cores?

You know it doesn't add up.

These kids know that because they also said knowing about the stuffs the space pilots talk about when they stop at Tatooine.

You gotta be kidding me.

No. The film show that Anakin got told a few tales from the pilots. The novelisation shows that the kids were learning their stuff from pilots.

Could you be bothered to point out the posts where it was established the LAATs and geonosian fighters used their maximum firepower? Which would have resulted in not inconsiderable amounts of collateral damage?

You'll see that the dialed down argument clearly does not work here.

Please, if you have anything to add about this, try to post in the thread I linked to.

The lasers are single-figure KT and the seismic charges are single-figure GT by the movies. Does the ICS disagree with that?

The "lasers" are not even in 1 digit kiloton.
As for the seismic mines, it would be a miracle if they reached mid or high megaton levels. Observation and reason indicate much lower yields.
Yes, the ICS does disagree with that.

There's the claims about thousands of gs of acceleration

Which are supported by the movies. ROTJ. Next.

An incredibly arbitrary interpretation of some "evidence".
Clicky.
Directly observable, and logically high end, being adressed here.

We have enough evidence from the films that capital level weapons have certainly not ranges in ten of light minutes, but in fact in a few thousand kilometers at best.

You most certainly have NOT. Show me the scene where they missed or failed to damage a target at light-minute ranges in the movies.

The simple fact that they never engage targets succesfully beyond the ranges seen in the films. Evidence from both the films and their novelisations.

[Batman]

Funny, and here I thought I was the one who was not a native speaker. Which particular part of NEEDS TO DIRECTLY CONTRADICT THE EU is beyond you? I'll use shorter words if that makes it easier.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Funny, and here I thought I was the one who was not a native speaker. Which particular part of NEEDS TO DIRECTLY CONTRADICT THE EU is beyond you? I'll use shorter words if that makes it easier.

Are you actually trying to understand what we type?
Doesn't seem to.
I see I'm going to accept your concession, if you don't care about adressing the points I took time writing above.

The choice is yours.

[Batman]

I have yet to see you adress a single one of them other than claiming you have done so and linking to sw-vs-st.net. DO tell me that site is unbiased with a straight face.

[2046]

I have yet to see you adress a single one of them other than claiming you have done so and linking to sw-vs-st.net. DO tell me that site is unbiased with a straight face.

The author claims to have made it as unbiased as possible, though he frequently bends over backwards to give Star Wars the benefit of the doubt, leading to complaints from both sides. What an a**h***!

In any case, nuclear fusion is clearly specified for SW, fuelled using some sort of combustible liquid.

Alternative theories require placing the EU above the films, scripts, and novelizations, or else ignoring various parts of the movies (such as the non-DET effects of the superlaser).

That's just how it is, I'm afraid, and while many have bemoaned this, all counterclaims have inevitably been victim of those same flaws.

[Trinoya]

I'll address a point directly, if you like. That is to say, the seismic charge being in the gigaton range.

Now then, a gigaton is 1,000 megatons, or 71,450 Hiroshima bombs give or take a few... This means if Bobafett where to fire this weapon at say Lemont PA the damage would reach DC and Toronto.



This example above is for one gigaton (give or take a few hundred kilotons), and it is, supposedly, the capability of ONE bounty hunter.

Now tell me, do you honestly see ANYWHERE in ANY MOVIE, with the EXCEPTION of the death star, a blast that reached some 350 miles? No? Good.

(That said, it can get MORE bogus. Lets take that ever famous 200 gigaton shots... 200 gigatons... Lets see here... were dealing with somewhere around... 2,797,200 Hiroshima bombs... carry the 2... or... hmm.. The end of about 1% of all life on earth.)

... On second thought. Think about that in detail. The end of one percent of all of the life on earth. That's a lot of life. The blast energy would go around the earth about 2.7 times. This puts it near the level of small asteroid impacts, no KT event obviously, but one that people on the other side of the planet are sure going to feel. Now then, presented with those numbers... presented with those figures... and since I'm fairly certain I didn't see an earth shattering kaboom except from the death star, I can't help but laugh when someone says they are supported by the movies.


Note: The math and distance estimates here are not exact, but the margin of error should be fairly small... I'm too tired to crunch the hard numbers myself as instead of 2.7 it would be 2.7236729 or some such, if someone else wants to, by all means.

[Who is like God arbour]

This is pretty futile.

We all know that nowhere in the movies were fire power shown that would support the ICS. Even they know it.

But you can say that again and again.

They will always object that that only means that they have dialed down their firepower.

And when you ask why they should have done that, they can't give you a plausible reason - but demand that you prove that it would be impossible that they have only dialed down the fire power.

Or they ignore all already made arguments and demand again and again that you show them a proof for your argument, which they will only again ignore with specious reasons.

It's irrelevant what you say. They won't accept it. Insofar they don't have a difference to the creationists, they attack continuous on SDN. Their bible is the ICS.

[Mr. Oragahn]

I have yet to see you adress a single one of them other than claiming you have done so and linking to sw-vs-st.net. DO tell me that site is unbiased with a straight face.

• So you're unable to notice that for example, there's a link that leads to a thread where the LAAT & geonosian firepower is directly adressed.
• When we mention the kids stories, you dismiss them as pure nonsense, nevermind if it makes no sense to have them totally resolve around the idea that fusion is the be and end all of power generation in SW, if it was precisely not the case.
  
  Ask yourself why these stories do not say that annihilation is what powers everything in SW.
  Saying annihilation isn't harder than saying fusion, and in the end, it shouldn't make a difference for the kids' stories.
  It's not like the kids are ought to understand what fusion is, so you couldn't say they choose fusion because it's easier to grasp.
  The simple fact that they think dragons live in all fusion based things, is just enough to know that they have no clear idea about what fusion is, or what it represents.
  They just know that it exists, both under natural and artificial states.
  Yet, they never make any mention of annihilation.
  
  They probably all know that repulsors are used by starships, yet I very much doubt that one single kid could tell you how this is supposed to work. Same deal here.
  
  Besides, the fact that Anakin actually built his podracer, gives incredibly more weight to his points, and of course, since he's part of these kids, I'm sure it wouldn't take much long for Anie to tell those kids that there's nothing such as fusion powering everything in SW.
  But sure, go on. Annihilation is behind everything.
• Fusion cores, in the EU, are mentionned in the following sources:
  
  Star Wars Screen Entertainment: talks about fusion cores powering the A-wings.
  Star Wars Sourcebook: says that atomic cores were replaced by fusion cores, at a time in history. Describes sublight engines as beign fusion based.
  also says that fusion power is the most popular source of starship power, notably used for hyperspace jumps (and the hyperspace tech is actually heavily documented in others books, all agreeing on fusion).
  Tyrant’s Test: says the same stuff about fusion power.
  Han Solo's Revenge and Han Solo and the Corporate Sector: say that the Pho Ph'eahians handed the fusion tech to the old republic a very long time ago.
  Vision of the Future: mentions Braxxon-Fipps producing fusion generators.
  Secrets of the Sisar Run: mentions the portable Draxton-12 fusion generator, used by explorers and scouts.
  Spore: Galaxy of Fear Book 9: says that ethromite is one of the minerals used to create fusion reactions in starship power generators.
  Star Wars: Customizable Card Game - Premiere Edition: talks about fusion generator supply tanks, which are used to store fusion energy, once it has left a generator. They can store the energy for later use, for powering up
  vehicles and small installations.
  The Star Wars Essential Guide to Vehicle and Vessels and The Truce at Bakura Sourcebook: say that the Ssi-ruuvi swarm-class drones used fusion power for everything, from engines to weapons.
  
  There's an assembly of sources, from the ANH novelisation, to WEG sourcebooks and Dark Empire I, where a couple of them apparently claim that Death Star cores are fusion powered.
  
  Of course, none of these sources, most of them being from the EU, had any mention about annihilation.
• The seismic mine is adressed in that post, and leads to calcs which clearly demonstrate how bollocks Saxton's claims are.
• The lightspeed argument? Doesn't even need to be adressed. Any dumbfuck twit who looks at the movie sees that 100% of bolts don't move at lightspeed, and 99.99999% of them deal damage when the visible bolt hits.
  Only some moron who wants to wank this up, and thus favour momentum calculations based on kinetic displacement from photon impacts will try to defend this ridiculous notion at all costs.
• The super armor? ROTS shows low yield shots going through armour. TESB shows a low kiloton impact literally ripping the whole tower of a star destroyer.
• Slave-I missiles thread. Another one you can't be arsed to read, or even acknowledge?
• As for the pages from Robert, stop dismissing them with claims about bias. You don't even have to read what Robert wrote, but just look at the pictures for pet's sake!
• The one who's biased is the one who looks at the asteroids in AOTC and says that the Slave-I was completely destroying them, or even more, vaporizing them.
• The one who's bisaed is the one who considers that SW's weapon ranges rate in light minutes, while ALL the movies show that they're worth of a few thousand kilometers.
  As I said, even Vector Prime fits with this. The best example from the movies has to be the Trade Federation blockade. They started shooting at the Naboo yatch at a range of 100 km more or less.
  The ROTS book mentions fire exchanged between capital ships at hundreds of kms. The simple fact that the ships need to be so close to each other should tell enough about ranges as well.
• At this point, it's just a question of being honest. If you're dishonest enough to dismiss those simple facts, you're just proving that the likes of you, which compose the crowds of SDN, are just worthless of a discussion, completely unreasonable, and just as bad, scientifically speaking, as the religious zealots you love to mock for their faith. You're not doing better.
  
  Right now, I'm talking to a brick wall.
  What have you done, in this thread, to adress the points mentionned here and there?
  Simple, you just post one single sentence, claiming that one guy is utterly biased, and that the rest has not been adressed.
  
  I'd like to consider that you conceded all these points, but I'm afraid that a such a concession from you would have no flavour, no value, considering the amount of intellectual effort you put into these claims.

[Batman]

I have yet to see you adress a single one of them other than claiming you have done so and linking to sw-vs-st.net. DO tell me that site is unbiased with a straight face.

• So you're unable to notice that for example, there's a link that leads to a thread where the LAAT & geonosian firepower is directly adressed.

Which directly contradict the ICS firepower figures-how?

[*] When we mention the kids stories, you dismiss them as pure nonsense, nevermind if it makes no sense to have them totally resolve around the idea that fusion is the be and end all of power generation in SW, if it was precisely not the case.
Ask yourself why these stories do not say that annihilation is what powers everything in SW.

Because they're kids stories? Seriously, are you saying we should ignore canon sources because of dialogue that is the in-universe equivalent of FAIRY TALES?
SNIPPY because basically you want us to accept fairy tales over the observed feats of the SW forces because it happens to suit your point.

[*] Fusion cores, in the EU, are mentionned in the following sources:
Star Wars Screen Entertainment: talks about fusion cores powering the A-wings.
Star Wars Sourcebook: says that atomic cores were replaced by fusion cores, at a time in history. Describes sublight engines as beign fusion based.
also says that fusion power is the most popular source of starship power, notably used for hyperspace jumps (and the hyperspace tech is actually heavily documented in others books, all agreeing on fusion).
Tyrant’s Test: says the same stuff about fusion power.
Han Solo's Revenge and Han Solo and the Corporate Sector: say that the Pho Ph'eahians handed the fusion tech to the old republic a very long time ago.
Vision of the Future: mentions Braxxon-Fipps producing fusion generators.
Secrets of the Sisar Run: mentions the portable Draxton-12 fusion generator, used by explorers and scouts.
Spore: Galaxy of Fear Book 9: says that ethromite is one of the minerals used to create fusion reactions in starship power generators.
Star Wars: Customizable Card Game - Premiere Edition: talks about fusion generator supply tanks, which are used to store fusion energy, once it has left a generator. They can store the energy for later use, for powering up
vehicles and small installations.
The Star Wars Essential Guide to Vehicle and Vessels and The Truce at Bakura Sourcebook: say that the Ssi-ruuvi swarm-class drones used fusion power for everything, from engines to weapons.
There's an assembly of sources, from the ANH novelisation, to WEG sourcebooks and Dark Empire I, where a couple of them apparently claim that Death Star cores are fusion powered.
Of course, none of these sources, most of them being from the EU, had any mention about annihilation.

And none of those sources mention NUCLEAR fusion as we understand it and ALL of them are overridden by the movies. Which show the DS1 blowing Alderaan to smithereens, ship accelleration utterly IMPOSSIBLE to achieve with fusion power, and those sources are STILL overridden by the ICSes.

[*] The seismic mine is adressed in that post, and leads to calcs which clearly demonstrate how bollocks Saxton's claims are.

No it doesn't. Because, you see, unlike you people Saxton actually knows what he's talking about. Why don't you demonstrate how Saxton's calculations are bollocks HERE.

[*] The lightspeed argument? Doesn't even need to be adressed. Any dumbfuck twit who looks at the movie sees that 100% of bolts don't move at lightspeed, and 99.99999% of them deal damage when the visible bolt hits.

And your explanation for the remainder is...?

Only some moron who wants to wank this up, and thus favour momentum calculations based on kinetic displacement from photon impacts will try to defend this ridiculous notion at all costs.

Only a moron who has no clue what he is talking about but is desperate to sound like hew does would post something like THAT. You DO realize that was complete garbage.

[*] The super armor? ROTS shows low yield shots going through armour.

Lie. Your evidence that those shots were low yield or ever went through the armour in the first place is?

TESB shows a low kiloton impact literally ripping the whole tower of a star destroyer.

Lie. Demonstrate the asteroid impact was low kiloton and did ANYTHING to the Stardestroyer other than interrupting its holographic communications.

[*] Slave-I missiles thread. Another one you can't be arsed to read, or even acknowledge?

If your behaviour in this thread is anything to go by yes.

[*] As for the pages from Robert, stop dismissing them with claims about bias. You don't even have to read what Robert wrote, but just look at the pictures for pet's sake!
[*] The one who's biased is the one who looks at the asteroids in AOTC and says that the Slave-I was completely destroying them, or even more, vaporizing them.

A pity we don't, then.

[*] The one who's bisaed is the one who considers that SW's weapon ranges rate in light minutes, while ALL the movies show that they're worth of a few thousand kilometers.

When there is CANON EVIDENCE FOR LIGHTHOUR RANGES IN THE EU. Yeah, I'm the biased one. Show me the movie scene that actively CONTRADICTS THIS fucktard.

As I said, even Vector Prime fits with this. The best example from the movies has to be the Trade Federation blockade. They started shooting at the Naboo yatch at a range of 100 km more or less.
The ROTS book mentions fire exchanged between capital ships at hundreds of kms. The simple fact that the ships need to be so close to each other should tell enough about ranges as well.

To one as desperately trying to ignore reality as you perhaps. SHOW ME THE DIRECT CONTRADICTION DICKHEAD.

[*] At this point, it's just a question of being honest. If you're dishonest enough to dismiss those simple facts,

None of which show the ICS to be wrong, but you'll no doubt continue to deny that.

[Trinoya]

No it doesn't. Because, you see, unlike you people Saxton actually knows what he's talking about. Why don't you demonstrate how Saxton's calculations are bollocks HERE.

I'm calling you out on this, I produced evidence, you called it crap. Why is it crap? GIVE ME numbers here... I want YOU to back up YOUR claim that we don't know what were talking about. I even gave a visual, but here is hoping that you just didn't understand the math and aren't just trolling the forums...

Note: I'm a little mad here that you have the audacity to say that we don’t know what were talking about, Saxton does, and then go on to NOT refute any of our claims?… That’s bullshit. Here is what I'm going to do though, I'm going to put the math out in front of you.

Okay, a 10,000 kiloton blast reaches from DC to Baltimore. This distance will be some where between 30-34.5 miles depending on placement of the bomb, terrain, etc. Lets go with 30.

30 miles is our diameter for 10 megatons.

So, C = pi * D = 94.24 miles.

That means for every 10 megatons you have a blast with a 30 mile diameter and a 94 mile circumference. An area around oh… lets see here. Pi * R^2 = … 706.8 miles is effected, it would be a bit more but then you are getting into 1 PSI effects and those are relatively trial on this scale anyway.

So, what does this mean? Well we take the total area effected for a 10 megaton blast and convert to a single gigaton.

706.8 X 100 (megatons) = 70608 miles.

Or I can simplify it and say, it will reach roughly from Toronto to DC.


What does this mean? It means Bobafett did not use a gigaton weapon, there are no earth shattering kabooms from your common bounty hunter, and Saxton didn’t know what the hell he typed when he put gigaton level firepower for the seismic charge.

You find me a blast in the movies that was that big that didn’t come from or involve the death star, and I will bow down to the ICS. No one has produced one yet, and I doubt they will any day soon. The closest I’ve seen was a rock running into a star destroyer... and that's pitiful.