Page 10 of 11

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:12 am
by WolfRitter
Praeothmin wrote:
Kahless wrote:Not surprising given the sheer amount of time. There's been plenty of lost technology in Earth's timeline. Look at all that was lost when Rome fell and plunged the world into the Dark Ages.

Its perfectly reasonable to think that there exists a lot of lost tech in SW.
Except that in the case of the Romans, all it took was a few hundred years to gain back all that was lost, and then some.
So I imagine that in a Galaxy spanning civilization, technology that was lost 4000 thousand years ago should have been re-invented a long time ago... :)
Like he said, lost technology isn't as uncommon as you think,, for example the technology and infrastructure required to make that technology for the SR-71 and XB-70 is gone, as well as the stuff required to make new B-52 wings. If we find a crack in their wings, we're fucked.

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:40 pm
by Cpl Kendall
Praeothmin wrote:
Apart from Data, 7 of 9, Tuvok or Worf, we have rarely seen the "strong" races do anything more impressive then their human counterparts.
In fights, human punches seem to hit as hard as any other races.
Races that are, in-universe, recognised for their toughness (Klingons) go down easily in their HtH fights.
This makes all debates such as this one hard for anybody to prove anything...
I'm reluctant to get back into this thread due to the crap being touted but I will comment on this. We have real evidence showing what RL troops can do and we have evidence showing what ST forces can do so we can have a debate no problem. It devolves into the "stupid" because people actually think that a battle is somehow going to become HtH despite the presence of ranged weapons capable of reaching out to 2km or more if on a high point. It's so rare that the few examples of it in RL might as well be an anomoly. Why there are races in Trek that prefer to engage in this combat is beyond me.

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 5:44 pm
by Praeothmin
WofRitter wrote:Like he said, lost technology isn't as uncommon as you think,, for example the technology and infrastructure required to make that technology for the SR-71 and XB-70 is gone, as well as the stuff required to make new B-52 wings. If we find a crack in their wings, we're fucked.
Maybe so, but that technology hasn't been around for ages, isn't something that is casually used on droids barely bigger then humans, and in use in everyday applications like SW shields are.

When do we use Stealth applications on our cars, on our motorbikes, in our everyday life?
There's no logical reason for that kind of tech to suddenly disappear and not come back in a society that uses all available research on military devellopment.
And you cannot convince me that personnal, portable shields wouldn't be useful in an age of Blaster weapons and Lightsabres.
Cpl Kendall wrote:We have real evidence showing what RL troops can do and we have evidence showing what ST forces can do so we can have a debate no problem. It devolves into the "stupid" because people actually think that a battle is somehow going to become HtH despite the presence of ranged weapons capable of reaching out to 2km or more if on a high point.
I can see I wasn't clear enough.
I agree we have enough military evidence to know who would kick who's behind in a military conflict, or in small engagements.
What I meant was that when we try to quantify how strong Races A and B are in order to know what advantage they have in HtH combat, this is where we start having problems.
Kira Nerys, no matter how good a shape she's in, should not hit as hard as a full grown, burly human (or Klingon).
So should we assume then that by the visuals, Kira Nerys can bench-press 200 pounds?

That's the problem I was taking about.
Sorry for not being clearer, I guess since we were talking about HtH, my post was clear enough...

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:18 pm
by GStone
Praeothmin wrote:What I meant was that when we try to quantify how strong Races A and B are in order to know what advantage they have in HtH combat, this is where we start having problems.
Kira Nerys, no matter how good a shape she's in, should not hit as hard as a full grown, burly human (or Klingon).
So should we assume then that by the visuals, Kira Nerys can bench-press 200 pounds?
Things like this can easily be explained away as being caused by adrenaline and knowling weakness of similar biology based on body structure without needing to make Kira able to bench press fully grown men right after she wakes up with no warm up.

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:22 pm
by Cpl Kendall
GStone wrote:
Things like this can easily be explained away as being caused by adrenaline and knowling weakness of similar biology based on body structure without needing to make Kira able to bench press fully grown men right after she wakes up with no warm up.
Wait a sec. If Bajorans have the same strength as humans (and Kira doesn't appear to be an exceptionly fit soldier based on her muscle definition in the pilot) but gets stronger with adrenaline, shouldn't a Klingon (already bigger than her and stronger than a human) be ahead of her because of a similar burst of adrenaline or does that not happen to them?

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:26 pm
by Praeothmin
And we know that adrenaline doesn't automatically transform humans in the Hulk everytime someone is stressed, or even fearful for their lives...
If it did, then everycop facing a criminal with a weapon, every soldier on the field would be able to flip human beings like rag dolls and throw them around like they were nothing.

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:09 pm
by GStone
Cpl Kendall wrote:Wait a sec. If Bajorans have the same strength as humans (and Kira doesn't appear to be an exceptionly fit soldier based on her muscle definition in the pilot) but gets stronger with adrenaline, shouldn't a Klingon (already bigger than her and stronger than a human) be ahead of her because of a similar burst of adrenaline or does that not happen to them?
I would presume that in Trek biological life, when not talking about humans or earth based creatures, there is some equivient to adrenaline based on the self-preservation principle. There's enough of it on earth to reasonably think that if there is life on other planets, it's got something like adrenaline, too.

We can also assume that the 'self-preservation' enhancement of adrenaline/similar chemical combinations is proportionally the same, depending on the type(s) of chemicals involved for each species. But, for each case, not everyone would have the same amount of 'super' chemicals running through them. There are some fighters that regularly control how their body reacts to adrenaline/stress and it transfers over to when they get into a street fight. But, there are those that will also often let themselves go and just become animalistic.

Whether or not klingons would be super chanrged, too, would be a case by case basis when you bring in specific instances in the canon. Some might be more active movers, crossing greater territory in a fight, while others stalk more and take a longer time to cross the same distance.

But, you also can't assume that even a super charged, chemically flooded klingon is gonna have the best chance of deflecting any and all atempts to up root them just because they are super charged. Being high on adrenaline doesn't make your soft tissue as hard as rock. It just lets you keep going with those injuries. It doesn't increase the force of gravity that's on your body. You can't just be high on adrenaline and squat down, tense your muscles and think you've changed your mass.

When someone is 'hard' (where there is rigidity somewhere in the body), it's much easier to push that area because it is ridgid. Putting force on one area of the body moves another because the ridgid area is connected to the surrounding tissue that's either pliable or ridgid. Where as, when one pushes against an area that is 'soft', the body of the one being pushed moves around the thing that's pushing them more than the area that's 'hard'.

When you look at professional fighting, like MMA, even the more skilled and stronger oppoent can loose because it is all about the situation. Was there a misstep or just a little too much extension of an arm when punching?
Praeothmin wrote:And we know that adrenaline doesn't automatically transform humans in the Hulk everytime someone is stressed, or even fearful for their lives...
If it did, then everycop facing a criminal with a weapon, every soldier on the field would be able to flip human beings like rag dolls and throw them around like they were nothing.
No, but it doesn't mean that it's so useless that wind will knock you over, if someone sneezes on you.

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 3:24 pm
by 2046
WolfRitter wrote:Like he said, lost technology isn't as uncommon as you think,, for example the technology and infrastructure required to make that technology for the SR-71 and XB-70 is gone, as well as the stuff required to make new B-52 wings.
I've been troubled by this line of thinking since I first saw it. While capitalism and trade secrets and such might produce lost techniques (say, if a company closes and its records disappear), and while particular infrastructures might go, it's hardly accurate to declare as "lost tech" a lot of the things people use as examples.

We could re-create and mass-produce the B-52 or SR-71s or Nixie tubes or '65 Mustangs or whatever today, if for some reason it simply had to happen and cost was no object. That last part is the kicker, though.

And, again with price being no object, we could also make a plane externally identical to the B-52 but with updated innards. But spending the money to redesign it within the current exterior constraints makes little sense . . . better to start from scratch.

The youngest B-52 is something like 45 years old right now. It's far easier to keep them running with cannibalized parts than it would be to make new parts. It's not that the tech is lost . . . it's just a question of efficient use of resources. Even if there's some piece of equipment or airframe that came from a specialized factory which is now closed and with no records left, it isn't like we couldn't copy it. It's just probably not cost-effective to do so.

(Similar to the copying idea is what recently happened when Project Constellation guys took apart an old Apollo capsule while trying to design Orion. The Apollo guys had designed from scratch a cable separation mechanism that was robust and problem-free, and our guys wanted to know how so they didn't have to re-invent the wheel.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/const ... ction.html )

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:38 pm
by WolfRitter
2046 wrote:
WolfRitter wrote:Like he said, lost technology isn't as uncommon as you think,, for example the technology and infrastructure required to make that technology for the SR-71 and XB-70 is gone, as well as the stuff required to make new B-52 wings.
I've been troubled by this line of thinking since I first saw it. While capitalism and trade secrets and such might produce lost techniques (say, if a company closes and its records disappear), and while particular infrastructures might go, it's hardly accurate to declare as "lost tech" a lot of the things people use as examples.

We could re-create and mass-produce the B-52 or SR-71s or Nixie tubes or '65 Mustangs or whatever today, if for some reason it simply had to happen and cost was no object. That last part is the kicker, though.

And, again with price being no object, we could also make a plane externally identical to the B-52 but with updated innards. But spending the money to redesign it within the current exterior constraints makes little sense . . . better to start from scratch.

The youngest B-52 is something like 45 years old right now. It's far easier to keep them running with cannibalized parts than it would be to make new parts. It's not that the tech is lost . . . it's just a question of efficient use of resources. Even if there's some piece of equipment or airframe that came from a specialized factory which is now closed and with no records left, it isn't like we couldn't copy it. It's just probably not cost-effective to do so.

(Similar to the copying idea is what recently happened when Project Constellation guys took apart an old Apollo capsule while trying to design Orion. The Apollo guys had designed from scratch a cable separation mechanism that was robust and problem-free, and our guys wanted to know how so they didn't have to re-invent the wheel.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/const ... ction.html )
I'm sorry, but I'd prefer to take my information from somone who actually was involved in the Cold War and has seen the documents involving those aircraft. Rather than some arm-chair general such as yourself.

Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:35 am
by Mr. Oragahn
WolfRitter wrote:
2046 wrote:
WolfRitter wrote:Like he said, lost technology isn't as uncommon as you think,, for example the technology and infrastructure required to make that technology for the SR-71 and XB-70 is gone, as well as the stuff required to make new B-52 wings.
I've been troubled by this line of thinking since I first saw it. While capitalism and trade secrets and such might produce lost techniques (say, if a company closes and its records disappear), and while particular infrastructures might go, it's hardly accurate to declare as "lost tech" a lot of the things people use as examples.

We could re-create and mass-produce the B-52 or SR-71s or Nixie tubes or '65 Mustangs or whatever today, if for some reason it simply had to happen and cost was no object. That last part is the kicker, though.

And, again with price being no object, we could also make a plane externally identical to the B-52 but with updated innards. But spending the money to redesign it within the current exterior constraints makes little sense . . . better to start from scratch.

The youngest B-52 is something like 45 years old right now. It's far easier to keep them running with cannibalized parts than it would be to make new parts. It's not that the tech is lost . . . it's just a question of efficient use of resources. Even if there's some piece of equipment or airframe that came from a specialized factory which is now closed and with no records left, it isn't like we couldn't copy it. It's just probably not cost-effective to do so.

(Similar to the copying idea is what recently happened when Project Constellation guys took apart an old Apollo capsule while trying to design Orion. The Apollo guys had designed from scratch a cable separation mechanism that was robust and problem-free, and our guys wanted to know how so they didn't have to re-invent the wheel.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/const ... ction.html )
I'm sorry, but I'd prefer to take my information from somone who actually was involved in the Cold War and has seen the documents involving those aircraft. Rather than some arm-chair general such as yourself.
Please paste the stuff here.

Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:47 am
by 2046
WolfRitter wrote:I'm sorry, but I'd prefer to take my information from somone who actually was involved in the Cold War and has seen the documents involving those aircraft. Rather than some arm-chair general such as yourself.
I'm sorry . . . did you have something to say? Linking to some SDN guy's profile and slinging a weak barb my way does not a response make.

Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:52 am
by GStone
Besides, only those that are signed up at SDN can access a member's profile.

Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 1:46 pm
by consequences
Given the ability that contributors here have displayed to respond to posts in the SDN HoS, a members only forum, that's an exceptionally weak excuse.

Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:23 pm
by Praeothmin
Last time I went to browse the HoS, I wasn't asked to log in, I was able to peruse the threads freely.

So anybody can highlight and copy parts of threads I'm sure without the need to log in.

But when I tried to go to the link, I was immediately asked to log in.

There may be a few who can log in and read the info, but for those who don't, would it be possible to post the info here?

And I have to agree that people who served in the Air Force and worked on these planes will tend to know a lot more then people who didn't.

Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:53 pm
by Mr. Oragahn
consequences wrote:Given the ability that contributors here have displayed to respond to posts in the SDN HoS, a members only forum, that's an exceptionally weak excuse.
Well, weak or not, not everybody can read what's on the other side of that link, so either paste the stuff here or don't insist. ;)