An "ICS fact page"

[l33telboi]

What i find slightly more strange are the ground battles. We're given figures up to 200MT for the missiles on the gunboats (IIRC), yet strangely enough, they look slightly weaker then modern missiles. Same goes for all those beam weapons and stuff that barely manages to kick up some dirt and the like.

EDIT: However, the overal problem with the ICS is that there is no support for what is written in it. The numbers seems to be plucked out of thin air and it doesn't mesh all that well with the rest of the EU.

[Kazeite]

Except you showed no evidence that that explanation is even necessary.

Please, Kane, don't play dumb. You should be well aware of several theories which strive to explain such disrepancy.

There are no fireballs in space.

But there should be fireballs in atmosphere. Refer please to the l33telboi post.

And your evidence that it is undamaged?

My evidence is in the movie. Seriously, Kane, go watch it. It's even better than Episode 2 :)

It has a layer of oxygen so what?

Considering that even our Space Shuttle can enter and exit the atmosphere, I fail to see how exactly it helps you. So "tiny TIEs" are at least as heat resistant as the shuttle. Good for them :)

[GStone]

What I'm curious about is if the arguments to be put on the site that are for the ICS meshing well are gonna be the same ones from before or brand news ones. I'm rooting for new ones because I'm bored with all the old ones.

[2046]

Considering that even our Space Shuttle can enter and exit the atmosphere, I fail to see how exactly it helps you. So "tiny TIEs" are at least as heat resistant as the shuttle. Good for them :)

Kane assumes a ballistic re-entry for the TIEs, evidently, something not necessary with antigravs.

We've seen what a ballistic-style re-entry does to Star Wars hulls, and it ain't pretty.

[Kane Starkiller]

Please, Kane, don't play dumb. You should be well aware of several theories which strive to explain such disrepancy.

What discrepancy?

But there should be fireballs in atmosphere. Refer please to the l33telboi post.

What about his post? You mean the fact that we didn't see 200Mt missiles used? Someone better inform USA that they don't have nuclear tipped AGM-129 cruise missiles since we have seen their cruise missiles used in a fight and they are not nuclear.

My evidence is in the movie. Seriously, Kane, go watch it. It's even better than Episode 2 :)

I just did. I saw a scene which proves that Venator turbolasers actually have a yield of 50 trillion Teratons.
See how easy it is to just vaguely point to "watch the movie" and then make up the "evidence"? :)

Considering that even our Space Shuttle can enter and exit the atmosphere, I fail to see how exactly it helps you. So "tiny TIEs" are at least as heat resistant as the shuttle. Good for them :)

Very good for them since they disprove your silly notion that SW ships get damaged by atmospheric entry UNLESS they have been previously damaged.

We've seen what a ballistic-style re-entry does to Star Wars hulls, and it ain't pretty.

Maybe you could point out a damage that Invisible Hand received during the atmospheric entry itself as opposed to turbolaser fire? Seeing as how its front "windshield" withstood the entry and crash without a scratch.
UNLIKE that observation dome on Enterprise-D I might add.
I don't suppose you are saying that main hull is weaker than 1cm thick large glassy surface.

[GStone]

What about it breaking in half, as it fell? After that, the section beneath the main bridge broke off, leaving the main bridge and the pointed part the thing that crashes into the tower?

There was no visible damage at these 2 areas.

[2046]

We've seen what a ballistic-style re-entry does to Star Wars hulls, and it ain't pretty.

Maybe you could point out a damage that Invisible Hand received during the atmospheric entry itself as opposed to turbolaser fire?

Wow, you trot out all the old claims, don't you?

Hand, just after combat:



Above you can see a few rectangular shapes where there doesn't seem to be the same plated hull, but for the most part the forward armor-looking area is solid, especially on the sides of the hull.

Hand, long after combat and before atmospheric entry:



Above is a slightly closer view.

Hand post-atmosphere, pre-crash:



Here you can see a large number of missing rectangles on the dorsal surface, along with a number of non-rectangular areas that appear to have been burned through (especially on the port dorsal). The portside plating is burned through in places. Also noteworthy are the additional burning areas toward the rear, away from the forward armor.

Now, you can try to cover this up as being the result of improperly mounted hull plates or some such silliness, but the fact remains that the ship dropped from the upper atmosphere, suffering quite badly for the experience well before the semi-controlled collision with the planet.

[Kane Starkiller]

All I see is blackened and on places superheated hull. You have absolutely no evidence that those blackened parts are actually missing hull.
But it gets even better. Look at those antennae behind and in front of the bridge. They are completely intact. What those think long structures survived but the main hull was supposedly damaged? And you still haven't adressed the big glassy surfaces surviving yet supposedly main hull was damaged.

[l33telboi]

What about his post? You mean the fact that we didn't see 200Mt missiles used? Someone better inform USA that they don't have nuclear tipped AGM-129 cruise missiles since we have seen their cruise missiles used in a fight and they are not nuclear.

So you have some kind of evidence that these weren't the same missiles? Or are you just assuming so for no real reason? Because that's the problem with the ICS. Sure, it could all be true. But it would have us assuming some pretty rediculous things and there's nothing backing it up. And of course, these things were highly effective against vehicles. Even the beam weapons that caused some minor dust to spray up ripped vehicles to pieces. Heck, one of these missiles were even used against a Trade Federation core, why would they do that if it had no chance of inflicting damage?

That's why some people take a look at the ICS, laugh once and then promptly dismiss it.

[2046]

All I see is blackened and on places superheated hull. You have absolutely no evidence that those blackened parts are actually missing hull.

Wow. You totally just said that.

But it gets even better. Look at those antennae behind and in front of the bridge. They are completely intact.

Yes, the antennae are behind the bridge. Ergo, with the ship coming in at a bit of an angle a la the shuttle, they are protected just like the shuttle doors. You can even see this effect in the film. And as Anakin says in the script, "I'm going to shift a few degrees and see if I can slow us down."

What those think long structures survived

What?

but the main hull was supposedly damaged?

Yes, it was.

"The bucking of the ship had become continuous. White-hot sparks outside streamed backward past the view wall windows. Those sparks, according to the three different kinds of alarms that were all screaming through the bridge at once, were what was left of the ablative shielding on the nose of the disabled cruiser."

"Now one last fragmentary ship screamed into the atmosphere, coming in too fast, too steep, pieces breaking off to spread apart and stream their own contrails of superheated vapor;"

""Tell me what they require."
Needa glanced down at the boil of hull plating that was burning off the falling cruiser, and even as he looked, the ship broke in half at the hangar deck; the rear half tumbled, exploding in sections, but whoever was flying the front half must have been one of the greatest pilots Needa had ever even heard of: the front half wobbled and slewed but somehow righted itself using nothing but a bank of thrusters and its atmospheric drag fins.
"First, a flight of fireships," Needa said, more calmly now. "If they don't get the burnoff under control, there won't be enough hull left to make the surface. And a hardened docking platform, the strongest available; they won't be able to set it down. This won't be a landing, it will be a controlled crash. Repeat: a controlled crash.""

"On the downbeat, atmospheric drag fins deploy; as he tweaks their angles and cycles them in and out to slow the ship's descent without burning them off altogether {...}"

Or:

"SPARKS begin to fly outside the windows.

PALPATINE: The hull is burning up!"

"The ship starts to glow, and pieces break off."

And you still haven't adressed the big glassy surfaces surviving yet supposedly main hull was damaged.

Much of the bridge was protected . . . watch for the scene of the chunk flying off the bow, and you can see the plasma off the bow, with the next significant area only near the upper bridge segment. A slight angle change such as the one specified to slow them down would help even further.

But beyond that, why would I need to? We can see into the missing hull sections, we're told hull is burned and burning off, and the fact that it was heated to glowing is confirmed.

You evidently want to claim that the thermal properties of the bridge area and its transparisteel windows (so easily broken by thrown sharp things) are all uberfied, and thereby claim that the canon facts of what happened to the hull are thus nullified. That is entirely wrong-headed.

[Kane Starkiller]

So you claim that dorsal surface was damaged (you even point out to supposed missing "rectangles") yet the bridge which is unaerodinamicallly jutting out above it is somehow protected? How does that work exactly?

Naturally you still haven't provided any evidence that the parts that got blown off by atmospheric entry weren't already heavily damaged by previous battle.

[l33telboi]

So you claim that dorsal surface was damaged (you even point out to supposed missing "rectangles") yet the bridge which is unaerodinamicallly jutting out above it is somehow protected? How does that work exactly?

We don't know how, but we do know it does. Perhaps additional shielding around the bridge, who knows?

[Kane Starkiller]

This entire tangent is largely irrelevant anyway since ICS never claimed that ship's bare hull can withstand anything close to 200 gigatons.

[Kazeite]

The very same "bare hull" thats supposedly made from neutronium? :D

I dare you to state that Grevious' ships hull isn't made from neutronium, but Acclamator' is :)

[Mr. Oragahn]

Well you should be, because it explains why the "powered down weapons" explanation is absurd.

Except you showed no evidence that that explanation is even necessary.

Oh, there are examples. Like the LLAT shields. Basically, an assault troop transport. Let's see... weren't there any megaton shielding claims around?

Let's see what destroys a LAAT... geonosian fighters.
Let's look at their firepower... ah, yes.
Kicks sand puffs off dunes, and create small sparkles and sub-grenade explosions when hitting rock walls.

POint is, for all the yields claimed in the ICS, every single time they can be verified in the films, they are shown wrong. That also applies to the Slave-I weapons.

There are no giant explosions whatsoever. One would think that 200 gigatons thrown around would result in hundreds of specatular fireballs, but the're curiously absent.

There are no fireballs in space.

Sure, but there are birght flases either. Plus what about the flammable materials composing a spaceship? Hull, fuel, etc. Atmosphere. This would be significantly heated up.
Now, there's a limit to that argument, since even other shows aren't coherent in that domain.

Well, yeah, considering that we can see undamaged parts peeling off in atmosphere.

And your evidence that it is undamaged? Oh yeah you have none.

No. The right question is any evidence that all the hull was damaged?

There's simply none.

Naturally, I do no such thing. Considering that oridinary human beings can effortlessly survive in "the atmosphere of a gas giant as witnessed in TESB", this doesn't exactly prove your point.

It has a layer of oxygen so what? How does this disprove my point of tiny TIEs easily entering and exiting atmosphere?

Controlled reentry, ffs. Even the NASA can manage a controlled reentry.