Lucky wrote:Where in those pictures is the TURBINE even talked about? The TURBINE is the source of the turbo in turbolaser. Without the TURBINE there is no turbo, and you just have a picture of a Star Wars style laser cannon.
I think you miss the point entirely here. You said the ICS doesn't have turbolasers. I proved there are TL in the ICS.
I'm not sure what you want. I didn't disagree with the turbine part either. You mentionned a cooling system. We have evidence of its existence.
Really, let's go back to the crux of it: is there any unsolved issue or what?
It is a contradiction weather the artist made a mistake or if the guy writing the text made a mistake.
A contradiction between what and what?
What the Revenge of the Sith ICS say has no bearing on what the Attack of the Clones ICS say as they are two different books.
Mr. Oragahn wrote: OK, just to make things clear. ICS is an acronym for
Incredible
Cross
Sections, a series of books which covers no less than FOUR volumes.
Although not having "numbers", the E3:ICS contains clear marks of Saxtonian fluff or even barely veiled figures that are easy to understand and make fit with the E2:ICS.
Hence why I also talk about it, because it fits.
In fact, one could also include the OT:ITW since it was largely featuring ideas handed by Saxton himself since he was a contributor to the book, and makes some of its data as fishy as what you could find in E2:ICS.
See:
Judging Saxton's official work: which sources are OK?.
Your doing the talking to the voices in your own head thing again. This isn't a reply to what you are replying to.
First of all, it's you're, not your.
Secondly, your second sentence is rather cryptic.
The point is that I figured out that by ICS, you refered to only ONE book, which is a mistake.
"ICS" covers more than one book. Hence why you say ICS has no turbolaers, and why I proved that we do find TLs in the ICS.
This, overall, doesn't seem to be rather useful to this thread.
I'm also sorry but some of your replies are just totally unintelligible.
I'll just skip them.
You're taking what I said out of context. It is at best rather rude.
If someone says something that confuses you, the proper thing top do is to ask for clarification in a polite manner.
Actually YOU should probably bother typing more detailed sentences instead of [EU "facts" are irrelevant to this thread] if you don't want me to correct you.
Time you assume your mistakes.
What the EU says is irrelavent to the extent of Non-ICS sources in this thread, but you knew that. I don't have to defend any non-ICS quote I post so what the EU says on a topic is irrelevant.
What?
. . .
WHAT??
Let me try to decipher that sentence, dammit.
"What the EU says is irrelavent to the extent of Non-ICS sources in this thread,"
Pardon me? EU sources are part of the non-ICS sources.
What is you meant?
"but you knew that"
You mean I knew something I don't understand?
Is this getting religious or something?
"I don't have to defend any non-ICS quote I post so what the EU says on a topic is irrelevant"
Err... what? Who said you had to defend any non-ICS quote?
Geez. And how the hell can you say that the EU is irrelevant after I proved the contrary with the OP????
Is that soup you have in your head or what?
Mr. Oragahn wrote: An atmosphere is something.
Considering that TL bolts are more than often likened to physical projectiles, energized and bottled plasma with perhaps a capacity to explode (so they double as bombs), their speed and impact with an atmosphere will obviously generate a relevant amount of problems about projectile reentry at such velocities, especially when they can't benefit from high density structures, contrary to orbital bombardment rods for example.
It's also a good thing that the EU had the Empire use dedicated siege crafts (torpedo spheres for example, also largely meant to punch through shields).
Lucky wrote:
You need to stop posting to your self. The atmosphere in what is considered interplanetary space is so thing no one cares.
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Geez, stop being such a dick.
I'm talking about *science* here. You know, friction and all that.
Blaster, laser and TL bolts are composed of matter, even if gaseous or plasmic. They can't ignore the rules of friction upon reentry.
Thankfully, as far as I'm concerned, I consider these projectiles to come, sometimes, with some limited burrowing ability, which works very well against dense matter (rock or even armour, see Slave-I's shots) and would do wonders against atmosphere at super or hyper sonic speeds.
Star Wars blaster, lasers and Turbolasers have a maximum range in the vacuum of space. I'm not aware of Star Wars weapon ranges actually being effected by an atmosphere.
By default they should be affected in atmosphere. They also should have a certain range in space since they cannot be eternal either. Aside from computations that would limit effective range, a bolt doesn't strike me as being as long lived and as robust as a shell that can drift for billions of years. I mean, those bolts are even designed to flak most of the time. They're already built to be volatile.
The Malevolence was out of range even though everyone on the bridge of the Republic Attack Cruiser could see it with their naked eyes, and it was basically parked.
Then you have all the example of the Star Destroyers that suddenly stop firing on the Falcon over Tatooine.
Then you have the Falcon being in visual range of T.I.E., but not being in weapons range.
OK.
OTOH, Echo Base's ion cannon on the ground could hit a star destroyer sitting thousands of km away in space.
I think a "clear sky", a lack of jamming and the path and size of the target matter a lot.
Or are we going to pretend that Solo couldn't even hit the TIE fighter even if he had attempted to aim manually at such a short distance?
Actually, the idea of this short range being an inherent mechanical limitation of the MF's guns seems to be pretty much disproved later in the movie when Solo
perfectly lands a few shots on a TIE while diving his Millennium Falcon at the trench, where some mild sensor disturbance is to be found (but apparently not much outside of it).
So his shots even had to account for the somewhat perpendicular course of his target.
Therefore, unless Solo got his ship's guns fixed while on Yavin IV, we can chalk it up to Alderaanian asteroid dust and crap like that. In fact, both ideas are possible.
Mr. Oragahn wrote: An atmosphere is something.
Considering that TL bolts are more than often likened to physical projectiles, energized and bottled plasma with perhaps a capacity to explode (so they double as bombs), their speed and impact with an atmosphere will obviously generate a relevant amount of problems about projectile reentry at such velocities, especially when they can't benefit from high density structures, contrary to orbital bombardment rods for example.
It's also a good thing that the EU had the Empire use dedicated siege crafts (torpedo spheres for example, also largely meant to punch through shields).
You need to stop posting to your self. The atmosphere in what is considered interplanetary space is so thin no one cares it is there.
1. If I post to myself, why do you reply?
2. Why do you repeat the same quotation as above?
3. We were talking about bolts landing on ground targets. Planetary bombardments. You should know that objects coming from space and entering atmosphere at a very steep angle are going to be met with a wall of friction. Of course that's nothing different than what I've already said, but somehow you don't seem to compute that very easy concept.
Really, do get some sleep or something, your latest posts during the past week have been truly terrible.