Attn: Technical Comm. Update; Executor hull bumps

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2004-03-07 05:56pm

Well, if they aren't turrets, what are they? Can't be extra armor; would be pointless. Sensors are a possiblity, but I don't think they'd just be scattered randomly (or be that large). Probably they look featureless because the shots just aren't close enough to pick out features; try drawing a house's exact features from a photo taken over >20K away... admittedly, if the bumps are to scale, they're much larger than an ordinary house, but the distance would still render them fairly featureless.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-03-07 06:02pm

Elheru Aran wrote:Well, if they aren't turrets, what are they? Can't be extra armor; would be pointless. Sensors are a possiblity, but I don't think they'd just be scattered randomly (or be that large). Probably they look featureless because the shots just aren't close enough to pick out features; try drawing a house's exact features from a photo taken over >20K away... admittedly, if the bumps are to scale, they're much larger than an ordinary house, but the distance would still render them fairly featureless.

Well, there is a good movie making reason for them being featureless, but we aren't allowed to talk about that, are we?

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2004-03-07 06:07pm

Is the city sprawl on an Executor asymetrical? Could they be shield generators clustered like that to add extra protection to the bridge area?

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2004-03-07 06:15pm

Is the city sprawl on an Executor asymetrical? Could they be shield generators clustered like that to add extra protection to the bridge area?

As far as I can recall, the city sprawl was fairly symmetrical in its layout. Not sure...

And as for the shield generator possiblity, same problem there as having the shield generators being the big domes on top of the bridge-- too obvious. Strafing runs and a HTL barrage to weaken the shields over those areas, then a quick bombing run with Y-wings carrying heavy explosives and they're done for.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-03-07 06:18pm

Both shield generators and projectors are often internal mechanisms.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2004-03-07 06:34pm

and thus we return to the original question... just WTF are those bumps?!

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-07 06:35pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Yes; it is guessing.

On the other hand, one has to wonder where the heavy turrets ARE on the Executor if they aren't those raised bumps. A warship ship that size simply HAS to have serious firepower at its disposal, and I'm not seeing any other features that could be turrets. Since the size of the bumps is said to be similar to that of the HTL's on ISD's, I think it's fairly safe to assume that they are turrets. The uneven distribution is unusual, but probably indicates that the Executor is optimized for BDZing a certain type of world in a certain type of way (ie. fixed approach vectors), and that their coverage is optimized so as to make that operation as easy as possible. In short, Executor is optimized for destroying planets instead of starships. That kind of makes sense, given its role as a command ship, and probably indicates that it was designed exclusively to operate with smaller ships as support vessels.

Elheru Aran · Post by **Elheru Aran** » 2004-03-07 06:39pm

I wouldn't be very surprised if Executor could operate just fine on its own though... IIRC from the EU, there are numerous examples, such as the bit in Shadows of the Empire where it goes and destroys a "Rebel" base on its own (actually one of Xizor's rivals' bases, but whatever...).

This would make sense, really-- it would be useless if it could only operate with auxilary ships. One also has to consider that it probably CARRIES a lot of auxilaries as well...

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-07 06:40pm

The assault on the Vergesso Asteroid base included a small group of escorting destroyers.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-07 09:45pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:Well, there is a good movie making reason for them being featureless, but we aren't allowed to talk about that, are we?

We are in this case, because the effects model is not in the canon by definition (hint: an effects model is never in the canon, since you're Suspending Disbelief).

However, the question that arises is, are these bumps on a model representative of features on the Executor-class ship in-universe, which may be weapons, but the canon is not precise enough to discern determining features?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2004-03-07 10:10pm

If you assume all those bumps are HTL batteries then you have to rationalize that with what we saw at Endor. The Imperial ships weren't disalowed from destroying the Rebel ships, they just had to hold them so the DS2 could also make potshots.

So where was the massive firepower from the Executor that should have spanked a dozen Mon Cal cruisers at once? It would seem the Executor doesn't have sufficent firepower to more then a fraction of its weapons at one time. Its possible that the number of redundant weapons exist to increase refire (HTLs have to cool between firing so having more about means near constant fire with what power you have) and also to avoid attrition (as some HTLs are destroyed, others activate and begin firing).

The only other assumption is gross incompetence on the part of the Executor crew, and thats not a real logical assumption.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-07 10:15pm

It was your assumption that only the 5 cruisers in the ~10 km vicinity could hit the Executor.

At such close ranges though, geometry is highly unfavorable to heavy guns; look at observed accleration rates.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2004-03-07 10:19pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:It was your assumption that only the 5 cruisers in the ~10 km vicinity could hit the Executor.

At such close ranges though, geometry is highly unfavorable to heavy guns; look at observed accleration rates.

I was trying to point out that with the number of guns the bumps might indicate twice the number of cruisers I agree on still would have been killed.

And geometry is still mostly irrelevent. With the sheer number of HTLs claimed with the bumps, the Executor should have been able to blast apart cruisers with ease even taking into account multiple misses. A smoothbore musket might not be accurate, but if you have a thousand of them aimed at a target 200 yards away, your going to score countless hits. There was more then enough bumps that if they were HTLs a single volley should shred a moncal cruiser.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-07 10:22pm

But we don't know the attrition rate on shields, nor do we know how much was contributed by ramship/fireship tactics.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-03-07 10:25pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:We are in this case, because the effects model is not in the canon by definition (hint: an effects model is never in the canon, since you're Suspending Disbelief).

However, the question that arises is, are these bumps on a model representative of features on the Executor-class ship in-universe, which may be weapons, but the canon is not precise enough to discern determining features?

If were can't used the effects model, then what is the point of this thread? The original page linked uses the effects model in it's discussion exclusively and therefore is unusable.

With that being said, the movie doesn't show guns. Your images showed raised panels which were just as featureless as the model that Saxton had photos of (funny thing about that). Have we ever seen any fire from them or anything to indicate that the featureless panels are weapons? If we are suspending disbelief, we've never seen any indication that they are weapons and they do not have any features to lead us in that direction. If we are to draw any sort of conclusions about what, exactly, they are, we may have to resort to an extra-universial discussion, in which case my knowledge of special effects will be of some use and we might get somewhere.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-07 10:26pm

You can use it, but only in terms to discuss how this is representative of materials which are visible and measurable in-universe, on-canon.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2004-03-07 10:28pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:But we don't know the attrition rate on shields, nor do we know how much was contributed by ramship/fireship tactics.

Unless your arguing that ISDs and Mon Cal cruisers have to shoot eachother for half an hour before shields go down, I should think its obvious that something like 100 times the number of guns an ISD has should be sufficent to knock out a Mon Cal very quickly.

FYI, VSD MK1 (missile carrying VSDs) have less then the total firepower of an ISD MK2 yet the concussion missiles are sufficent to knock out a section of shields on an ISD MK2. This indicates the total firepower of an ISD MK2 is not required to knock out a section of shields. Mon Cal cruisers are roughly comparable. Now lets through 100 times the firepower of an ISD MK2 against a Mon Cal. I should think that is enough to take out the cruiser quickly.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-03-07 11:03pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:You can use it, but only in terms to discuss how this is representative of materials which are visible and measurable in-universe, on-canon.

What I was going to say was that when movie makers make models they intend to shoot, less can be more. In fact, when making movies with ship models, there is very frequently two models. One is the fly by model, which is a huge model used for close up shots and have as many details on it has humanly possible. For instance, for StarTrek: The Motion Picture, a 13 foot long Enterprise was built and it was so finely detailed that even the windows lit up (it's a beautiful model).

However, there is a second type of model called a motion model, which is used for moving models that you are filming. Movie makers found that in moving models, you don't want to highly detail it. This is because when the models move, they found that they looked unconvincing. So they made them with only relatively rough details. Enough indicate a feature but not so detailed that it looks weird. A good example of this is the taxi cab in the Fifth Element, which in the motion model that you saw fly around, the jet exhaust vents were made out of spray painted wheel pasta. It looks convincing when the thing is moving fast enough to be blurry. This also works for distance shots.

In the case of the Executor, this theory comes into play. They made a huge model, but that's because it was a huge ship. But the thing is that the model had to move and only at long distance shots, so it couldn't be that hugely detailed, or it would look weird. So they put on raised panels (which are probably little styrene bit) to convey that there was stuff on the surface. There could be anything, but they are not featureless, if you use a bit of imagination or don't and are watching the movie for entertainment (which is 99.9999% of people watching).

However, you cannot arrive at this with suspension of disbelief. If we suspend disbelief, there is nothing there but featureless bumps, because that's exactly what we see if we look closely. So you can suspend disbelief and those things will just be raised panels and nothing more, or you can be a little bit flexible and have those things be things, and possibly the weapons banks you are looking for. That's up to you.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-07 11:09pm

So I take it you believe any Executor guns are in the cortex?

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-03-07 11:12pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:So I take it you believe any Executor guns are in the cortex?

I believe that the bumpies could be weapons for reasons listed above, but not if we suspend disbelief. Then they are featureless panels.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-07 11:14pm

Under SoD they're undeterminate bumps; you cannot use images outside the canon to constrain the canon itself.

I'm sure if you took a magnifying class to the effects models you'd find all kinds of shit that would fuck SoD.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-03-07 11:18pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Under SoD they're undeterminate bumps; you cannot use images outside the canon to constrain the canon itself.

I'm sure if you took a magnifying class to the effects models you'd find all kinds of shit that would fuck SoD.

No kidding, there is a suprising amount of spraypainted pasta used in movie models.

But if we look closely at the movie itself, they are featureless panels. Using SoD, they are nothing more, since that is what we see. At any rate, they are certainly not HTLs.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-03-07 11:31pm

I realize the filmic canon doesn't tell you they are cannons; my point was that the canon isn't precise enough to prove they cannot be, although the default conclusion is simply that they're nondescript bumps.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-03-08 01:32am

Your eyes must be a lot better than mine Gil, in the movie shots I can't even tell the features are square.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-03-08 04:00am

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Gil Hamilton wrote:Of course the 17.6km Executor does. Complete with appropriately scaled up raised squares, which the model shows.
Can you tell that they're just raised squares in the only known movie shot?

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/given/by/bumps1.jpg

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/given/by/bumps2.jpg

I note that in those shots the bumps on the port side seem to be missing entirely.

The assault on the Vergesso Asteroid base included a small group of escorting destroyers.

And the Rebels actually were using the base. It belonged to one of Xizor's rivals, which was his motivation for ratting them out, but they were doing work for the Rebels and Rebel Nebulon B frigates were present at the battle.