Technical Notes from Rebels

For polite and reasoned discussion of Star Wars and/or Star Trek.
359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by 359 » Sat Nov 15, 2014 12:50 am

REB: "Out of Darkness":

Blasters:
1)A shot from a blaster pistol reliably kills a medium sized predatory creature.

Ships:
1)A hit from the Phantom's dorsal canon will destroy a TIE fighter.
2)Hitting a large rock of unknown composition with the Phantom's dorsal canon results in small low-velocity debris and a dust cloud.
3)LAAT gunship hull armor, as well as the Phantom's hull and storage crates, can be torn apart by medium sized predatory creatures.
4)Scraping the hull on a rock at <100 m/s ruptures a fuel line and throws off the steering.
5)A short hyperspace jump, enough to get to another system, is roughly the amount of time it takes to run a diagnostic on the Phantom.
6)The fuel the Phantom runs on is an ordinary green fluid. Also seen leaking from a TIE in the entanglement short.

Other:
1)Rydonium is considered to be a potent explosive. A barrel, containing an unknown quantity of the stuff, generates an explosion between 5 and 10 meters across.


Honestly the ability of the creatures to tear apart the hull is probably best ignored and simply chalked up to necessity of the plot. Otherwise a human, being of similar levels of strength as seen when one attacks Ezra, could damage a ship's armor with their bare hands. Which needless to say is a silly idea.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Nov 15, 2014 2:47 pm

359 wrote: Honestly the ability of the creatures to tear apart the hull is probably best ignored and simply chalked up to necessity of the plot. Otherwise a human, being of similar levels of strength as seen when one attacks Ezra, could damage a ship's armor with their bare hands. Which needless to say is a silly idea.
The problem is, how many times are we expected to use that kind of logic?
That's why I never bothered taking the CGi shows seriously. Plot fiat reigns supreme. In a movie, you'd have gotten sparkles or perhaps very superficial dents at best.
The CGI shows are cartoonish with unrealistic representations. You need much more than a grain of salt when analyzing this, and I'd rather limit myself to very generalistic principles and narratives guidelines.

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by 359 » Sat Nov 15, 2014 5:39 pm

It's not like that is an event unique to cartoons, and it has not been encountered before now in the series, so it's not really that big of a deal.

I'm not ready to give up on the new and fun material simply because: A)tailored to children, and B)because it's in animated form. It is still full and rather engaging. even more so than many, actually most, live-action shows, especially nowadays. Even better, I would argue, than much of the six Star Wars live-action movies.

And plot has always reigned supreme, many of the TNG and VOY episodes raised conflicts with other episodes or within themselves due to the necessity of keeping the plot of the show engaging and forty minutes long. I don't intend to simply ignore whatever is in those series simply because they occasionally (and more often than Rebels) contradict themselves or present some stupid idea for the sake of plot. Rebels (and TCW) are no different.

As for what you'd get in a movie regarding to effects of the creatures, you'd see the same thing. The creatures needed to be a permanent threat, they had a ship, thus the creatures needed to get at them even inside the ship. The fact that this was done in animation has nothing to do with it. In fact, due to the method by which it is created, animation offers a greater ability to realistically represent events than physical props you can't actually dent, shatter, etc...

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

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by theta_pinch » Sat Nov 15, 2014 5:50 pm

I just found out about this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8_PCwya0do
At 4:33 seconds it's said or at least implied so strongly that it's virtually impossible to argue against that the Superlaser is powered by 8 gigantic Kyber Crystals.
Since this was on Star Wars official youtube channel, it's now official that the Death Star is not a beam of 2e+38 joules of energy.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sun Nov 16, 2014 1:37 am

theta_pinch wrote:I just found out about this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8_PCwya0do
At 4:33 seconds it's said or at least implied so strongly that it's virtually impossible to argue against that the Superlaser is powered by 8 gigantic Kyber Crystals.
Since this was on Star Wars official youtube channel, it's now official that the Death Star is not a beam of 2e+38 joules of energy.
I dan't understed whats you're meant? Lik err, teh krisstolz, them makee lasers mucha more powarfoul?

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

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by theta_pinch » Sun Nov 16, 2014 11:25 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
theta_pinch wrote:I just found out about this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8_PCwya0do
At 4:33 seconds it's said or at least implied so strongly that it's virtually impossible to argue against that the Superlaser is powered by 8 gigantic Kyber Crystals.
Since this was on Star Wars official youtube channel, it's now official that the Death Star is not a beam of 2e+38 joules of energy.
I dan't understed whats you're meant? Lik err, teh krisstolz, them makee lasers mucha more powarfoul?
Is that a Jar-Jar impression?

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sun Nov 16, 2014 3:11 pm

theta_pinch wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
theta_pinch wrote:I just found out about this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8_PCwya0do
At 4:33 seconds it's said or at least implied so strongly that it's virtually impossible to argue against that the Superlaser is powered by 8 gigantic Kyber Crystals.
Since this was on Star Wars official youtube channel, it's now official that the Death Star is not a beam of 2e+38 joules of energy.
I dan't understed whats you're meant? Lik err, teh krisstolz, them makee lasers mucha more powarfoul?
Is that a Jar-Jar impression?
More like a desperate Wongie playing fool, but yeah, could also be me pulling a JJB. :P

Darth Spock
Bridge Officer
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: A Beta Quadrant far far away

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by Darth Spock » Mon Nov 17, 2014 6:22 am

359 wrote:REB: "Out of Darkness":
Honestly the ability of the creatures to tear apart the hull is probably best ignored and simply chalked up to necessity of the plot. Otherwise a human, being of similar levels of strength as seen when one attacks Ezra, could damage a ship's armor with their bare hands. Which needless to say is a silly idea.
Actually, this scene didn't bother me so much. Granted I couldn't see very well the damage done to the LAAT in the dark on my small screen, but its been in there for 10+ years too, so who knows how much damage they could do, gnawing over a long period. The crate was scratched, but still intact. It's latch was broken and the lid had been forced open. Also, the small Phantom only has one compartment, meaning they would have likely have been vulnerable via the cockpit's canopy, even if it is "transparasteel," it still represents a weak point, if nothing else, from the seams were the individual panes were set in the frame.
359 wrote:And plot has always reigned supreme, many of the TNG and VOY episodes raised conflicts with other episodes or within themselves due to the necessity of keeping the plot of the show engaging and forty minutes long.
Most serials suffer in that way compared to movies, cartoon or not. In the case of a CGI cartoon, it should be fairly reliable, since it uses essentially the same process as the movies now for special effects. The 2003 Clone Wars, yeah, that I'd take issue with. On that note, I've long felt that one of Star War's biggest strengths was its vagueness, both for its story, and for versus debate. As soon as they commit to technical details, trying to explain something, they’re locked in, no matter how high they set the bar, it still establishes a ceiling. Not to mention real science stepping in to prove it wrong and make the whole thing look ridiculous. The more material we get, especially in serialized form, the more the franchise's technical detail's will fall apart, in my opinion at least. But hey, as a fan-boy, I'll take it anyway! :D

On the note of differences between the CGI show and the films, I've noticed a change in how TIE's explode. Not surprisingly, they conveniently exhibit less spectacular explosions while in a planet's atmosphere, but even in space, the TIE's destroyed in the SW:Rebels series generally have much larger sections of the hull surviving intact, compared to the negligible rubble left from their destruction in the OT.
It doesn't seem likely there was a change in the TIE's construction, they already seem pretty "tinny" and cheaply made in SW:R, and when a TIE wasn't destroyed from damage in the OT, they usually displayed a fairly rigid frame that didn't show significant warping or breaking from physical collisions. It doesn't fit that weapon power would be a factor either, as these results occur constant within the respective series, regardless of whether their demise was brought on by collision or weapon fire.
The only thing I can think of is either these "short range fighter's" seen so far in SW:R aren't fully loaded out with fuel/ammunition, or else the Empire changed fuel/ammunition type to something more volatile between the time of the show and SW:ANH. Or, ignore it, it's a CGI cartoon...
theta_pinch wrote:Superlaser is powered by 8 gigantic Kyber Crystals.
Since this was on Star Wars official youtube channel, it's now official that the Death Star is not a beam of 2e+38 joules of energy.
Dur, that just help clean up the messy question of how the DS carried so much fuel, and brings it into "realistic" proportions! I'd say the Kyper multiplied the blaster bolts in the Ootuhpow story ark what, 100 times? Make it 1000. Lets say it'd boost a really BIG beam a million fold! Thats still 2e+32 jewels of kaboomy from the reacter!
(phht! I'm sorry, honestly, I'm pro-SW for the most part even, but this inflationist mockery thing really is hilarious!)

On a more serious note, the scene in SW:R: "Breaking Ranks", were the TIE gets caught in the blast from the destroyed Kyber crystal and gets "disintegrated," I couldn't help but feel I'd seen that effect before in Star Wars... In SW:ANH when Vader's wingman collides with him, we see a bright flash of colors, and the TIE's panel trails a green glow that dissipates to reveal that the corner of the panel is "gone." Interestingly enough, in the last frames we see of Vader's TIE, it too appears to have a ragged portion of the panel near the point of collision missing.
Quick and dirty reference:
http://youtu.be/aQFrl5rpXMg?t=2m45s
Originally I had tucked that observation away for possible analysis of different shield types in Star Wars. Although the similar damage to Vader's ship calls the usefulness of such a "shield" into question, and given the similarities of these rather unusual occurrences, I thought it might be relevant. Any thoughts?

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

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by theta_pinch » Mon Nov 17, 2014 1:49 pm

Darth Spock wrote:
theta_pinch wrote:Superlaser is powered by 8 gigantic Kyber Crystals.
Since this was on Star Wars official youtube channel, it's now official that the Death Star is not a beam of 2e+38 joules of energy.
Dur, that just help clean up the messy question of how the DS carried so much fuel, and brings it into "realistic" proportions! I'd say the Kyper multiplied the blaster bolts in the Ootuhpow story ark what, 100 times? Make it 1000. Lets say it'd boost a really BIG beam a million fold! Thats still 2e+32 jewels of kaboomy from the reacter!
(phht! I'm sorry, honestly, I'm pro-SW for the most part even, but this inflationist mockery thing really is hilarious!)

On a more serious note, the scene in SW:R: "Breaking Ranks", were the TIE gets caught in the blast from the destroyed Kyber crystal and gets "disintegrated," I couldn't help but feel I'd seen that effect before in Star Wars... In SW:ANH when Vader's wingman collides with him, we see a bright flash of colors, and the TIE's panel trails a green glow that dissipates to reveal that the corner of the panel is "gone." Interestingly enough, in the last frames we see of Vader's TIE, it too appears to have a ragged portion of the panel near the point of collision missing.
Quick and dirty reference:
http://youtu.be/aQFrl5rpXMg?t=2m45s
Originally I had tucked that observation away for possible analysis of different shield types in Star Wars. Although the similar damage to Vader's ship calls the usefulness of such a "shield" into question, and given the similarities of these rather unusual occurrences, I thought it might be relevant. Any thoughts?
Definitely a possibility, but that could also be explained with that part of the wing breaking of in the explosion when it hit Vader's fighter, and the green trail as maybe a coolant or it might be fuel like the kind we saw leaking from the Phantom in "Out of Darkness."
Kyber crystals to my knowledge aren't used in star fighters so I'm leaning towards the latter explanation.

Darth Spock
Bridge Officer
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: A Beta Quadrant far far away

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by Darth Spock » Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:28 am

theta_pinch wrote: Definitely a possibility, but that could also be explained with that part of the wing breaking of in the explosion when it hit Vader's fighter, and the green trail as maybe a coolant or it might be fuel like the kind we saw leaking from the Phantom in "Out of Darkness."
Kyber crystals to my knowledge aren't used in star fighters so I'm leaning towards the latter explanation.
True, and no, I don't think they are using kyber crystals in fighters either, although in Vader's custom TIE, maybe. TIE panels have been whacked before without spewing green glowing goop, but maybe smacking two of those panels together is a bad idea with whatever all is actually going on inside them. Honestly, I don't even have a half baked theory on it, but given the unusual similarities I thought I'd bring it up.

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Technical Notes from Rebels

Post by Lucky » Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:33 am

359 wrote: 6)The fuel the Phantom runs on is an ordinary green fluid. Also seen leaking from a TIE in the entanglement short.
That sounds like what was being pumped out of the ground in the Zillo Beast story lines in Clone Wars?

359 wrote: 3)LAAT gunship hull armor, as well as the Phantom's hull and storage crates, can be torn apart by medium sized predatory creatures.

Snip

Honestly the ability of the creatures to tear apart the hull is probably best ignored and simply chalked up to necessity of the plot. Otherwise a human, being of similar levels of strength as seen when one attacks Ezra, could damage a ship's armor with their bare hands. Which needless to say is a silly idea.
It's not that hard to believe such a creature could do that unless you think Star Wars ships are made from materials that are substantially better then real world stuff.

Give a human a clawed glove or something like a knife and that can do some real damage to something like a Hummer, helicopter, or jet, and your average dog have been known to rip cars apart back when cars had metal panels.

We've also seen clone troopers rip battle droids apart with their bare hands.

General Grievious was able to damage the hull of the Invisible hand, and he wasn't much stronger then a human.

Post Reply