How did the AT AT's breach the shield

[Captain Seafort]

I used to have that book and I don't remember it ever being mentioned in the novelization. the book did mention some weapons.

The novelization repeated Leia's assertion from the film that Alderaan had no weapons, followed by a comment from Vader post-destruction that the test was "as impressive as it was thorough" because "the defence systems on Alderaan...were as strong as any in the Empire".

not really sure how it can be inferred from watching the explosion. sounds like an interpretation based kinda thing.

Because there's a visible shield flash in the first few frames after the superlaser impact, propagating across the planet's surface far to fast to be atmospheric heating.

[texanmarauder]

The novelization repeated Leia's assertion from the film that Alderaan had no weapons, followed by a comment from Vader post-destruction that the test was "as impressive as it was thorough" because "the defence systems on Alderaan...were as strong as any in the Empire"

the novels aren't canon anymore anyway. and even then, that doesn't mean it was a planetary shield. its never explicitly stated.

Because there's a visible shield flash in the first few frames after the superlaser impact, propagating across the planet's surface far to fast to be atmospheric heating.

in other words, you tried to impress our laws of physics onto a fictional weapon that follows no laws of physics? that's called speculation. nobody has ever actually proven that Alderaan had a shield. this is why.

[texanmarauder]

plus, how would anybody know what a shield flash is from a planetary shield? we have never seen one at that point. plus, we never saw that effect from the shield on scarif either.

[Khaat]

The general weapon/shield effect had been witnessed already at that point: when the Tantive IV was being chased, right after the opening scroll. Unless you hypothesize a reason the visual effects of a planetary shield/weapon interaction wouldn't look the same?

The scene over Skarif does skip the shield/superlaser interaction: the beam passes between rebel ships (above shield) /cut/ (under shield) beam passes through top of tower and impacts ground beyond. We know there's a shield, and we know the beam has passed through it, but we weren't shown the interaction; certainly doesn't mean there wasn't one.

[Shroom Man 777]

What's so unacceptable about the notion that Alderaan has this shield that went glowy when the superlaser hit it?

I mean... nobody's also proven that Alderaan actually has toilets either.

[Simon_Jester]

Alderaan might well have no weapons and still have a powerful planetary shield. Indeed, you'd think that having no weapons would give you all the better reason to have a powerful shield. That way you can at least 'turtle' if some random bunch of pirates attacks, and hold them off until outside help drives them away.

[texanmarauder]

the point being that alderaan having a planetary shield is unproven speculation. so saying for sure that it does is dishonest at best. even in legends it didn't have one that I have found. legends relies on the novel and even the novel never stated it was a shield, only as "defense systems" which could mean anything. the only source that actually straight up called it a planetary shield was AOTC ICS and it was never canon for the films to start with.

[Khaat]

Ever see the film? If so, you have seen the shield interaction, even if you don't recognize it (it is only something like 2 frames at 30fps). More obsessive fans have done incredibly nit-picky, frame-by-frame analysis of the scene. Unless you are being particularly obstinate, the evidence is there, showing Alderaan had a shield. Do you need a character to say it before it's true for you?

So I guess my question to you is this: do you have a point? Alderaan having or not having (in denial of available evidence) didn't save it from the Death Star. So: what's your point? A page later and you're still just running a wall of ignorance defense on a planet that had less screen time than Lucas' kids!

[texanmarauder]

planetary shields didn't even exist until ROTJ and neither did the theory that alderaan had one before that. that shield is nothing more that speculation. yes, I own all of the star wars movies, on VHS and blu ray. so how do you know that its not just the atmosphere ionizing with all that energy? the only thing that you have besides those 2 frames of "shield interaction" (which depends on interpretation) is one statement in the novel that doesn't even call it a shield, it calls it a "defense system". a statement that was NOT in the movie and is no longer even canon. by your logic we should have seen some kind of shield interaction on the two liberty class mon calamari cruisers during the battle of endor. we didn't. more obsessive fans also have a habit of interpreting things in a very biased manner. that or they read too much wookieepedia.

[DarthPooky]

planetary shields didn't even exist until ROTJ and neither did the theory that alderaan had one before that.

Are you KIDDING ME? Just go watch Rogue One ok.

[Crazedwraith]

planetary shields didn't even exist until ROTJ and neither did the theory that alderaan had one before that.

Are you KIDDING ME? Just go watch Rogue One ok.

He's talking out of universe, not in.

[Captain Seafort]

He's talking out of universe, not in.

He's still wrong, because planetary shields were explicitly referred to in ESB, albeit not on a global scale.

[Crazedwraith]

He's talking out of universe, not in.

He's still wrong, because planetary shields were explicitly referred to in ESB, albeit not on a global scale.

True enough. I mean you could quibble planetary = global. But the RotJ shield might not count on that score either.

[Khaat]

planetary shields didn't even exist until ROTJ and neither did the theory that alderaan had one before that. that shield is nothing more that speculation.

Your argument really is "no one said it!" The observed effect is still fits the planetary shield conclusion even if the explicit definition is not canon. Disney buying LucasFilm neither undid those frames, nor broke the reasoning behind the conclusion.

so how do you know that its not just the atmosphere ionizing with all that energy?

It expands too fast to be "atmosphere ionizing"; consider the scale of the flash and the diameter of the beam: something is deflecting the beam's energy. It also looks just like a shield hit by weapons fire, like we saw earlier in the same film.

the only thing that you have besides those 2 frames of "shield interaction" (which depends on interpretation) is one statement in the novel that doesn't even call it a shield, it calls it a "defense system". a statement that was NOT in the movie and is no longer even canon.

"You only have the actual film that is clearly anything else in my expert and skeptical opinion, because no one said it was a planetary shield on screen!" Really, that's what your Wall of Ignorance translates to. Skepticism is good, but do your research: all your points to this part have been addressed, and dismissed. That's right: your speculation doesn't fit the facts as well.

What do you think a "no weapons" defensive system is? Puppy and kitty billboards visible from space ("don't shoot, we're cute!")?

by your logic we should have seen some kind of shield interaction on the two liberty class mon calamari cruisers during the battle of endor. we didn't.

Yay! That is actually an excellent point. Except that there also wasn't a visible shield interaction when the TIE Interceptor missed the turn and plowed into the recessed bay (to no visible hull damage) of the Mon Cal ship. Now, one could argue that the TIE was a physical collision, so there was no energy-weapon-y energy to disperse.

But there was also a lot of TIE fighter fire flying around, and I (running on a recent review of a tiny low-res YouTube video) don't see every blast that hit a Mon Cal ship creating a shield interaction (maybe due to the lower power of the TIE's guns?), nor damage to the hull indicating there were no shields up (or maybe the armor is just that good?) If it's a scale thing (starfighters/MF), (Star Destroyer/MonCal cruiser), (DS/planetary shield), maybe big enough shields don't necessarily flash when a lower-order attack hits them, or flash when overwhelmed by a higher-order attack.

I don't know if anyone's studied the "Mon Cal cruiser destruction by DSII" in detail. The Mon Cal's shields didn't appear to resist the superlaser blast for long (even 2 frames!) Would it make sense for ship shield so suddenly and massively overwhelmed to have a blip of shield interaction? Sure, maybe, but it would depend on how fast it was overwhelmed, wouldn't it? A parallel: a glass window "resists" a bullet for a really, really, really tiny time before it fails, right? So would we see that tiny time at 30 fps? Probably not. A high-speed camera? Yeah, we would.

more obsessive fans also have a habit of interpreting things in a very biased manner. that or they read too much wookieepedia.

Yeah, funny thing about fans (and film-making juggernauts), they like not having pants-on-head-stupid holes in their films. You also discount that obsessive fans are the folks who find the errors when filmmakers don't think things through. There are channels full of that: How It Should Have Ended, Everything Wrong With _, etc.

Wookieepedia at least lists sources. But fans who love to tinker don't stop there, they go past what we're told, and delve into what we're shown. The kind you're talking about might; I don't know, you haven't actually pointed fingers yet.

So far you have taken an off-the-cuff mention of what most folks think "yeah, okay, so Alderaan maybe had a shield - didn't help!" and turned it into an indirect argument that "unless someone says the words in a current canon source, IT CAN'T EXIST!"
Again I ask: to what end? What is your point? This is the second time, I'd appreciate some kind of answer.

If you have issue with speculation, you're on the wrong board (and should stop using both speculation and the board). If you're trying to revive "the vs debate", you're really too late a decade way the fuck too late.

Even if explicit mention is now Legends, that still doesn't mean that what we saw before now must have a different explanation. Canon made Legends doesn't mean "now denied in canon", it means "not canon." And we've seen things jump back to canon from Legends, so it's never really over.

[edit: grammar is my friend, grammar is my friend....]

[texanmarauder]

Are you KIDDING ME? Just go watch Rogue One ok.

rogue one wasn't around then. star wars is famous for flip flopping the continuity. for example, they didn't have ion torpedoes at that time either until R1. just like they didn't have the hammerhead corvettes until rebels.

[texanmarauder]

He's still wrong, because planetary shields were explicitly referred to in ESB, albeit not on a global scale.

wrong. they are described as "an energy shield protecting an area on the sixth planet of the hoth system". that's not an explicit reference to planetary shields without making a huge stretch that isn't supported by the evidence.

[Shroom Man 777]

by your logic we should have seen some kind of shield interaction on the two liberty class mon calamari cruisers during the battle of endor. we didn't

Maybe the Mon Cal were too busy exploding instantly... the inconsistencies might mean that Alderaan's shields were stronger than that of Scarif's (which might not have had the glowy interaction appearance and was also penetrated by a less-than-planetkilling Death Star beam?).

[texanmarauder]

Your argument really is "no one said it!" The observed effect is still fits the planetary shield conclusion even if the explicit definition is not canon. Disney buying LucasFilm neither undid those frames, nor broke the reasoning behind the conclusion.

that "observed effect" is also not consistent. something that I haven't seen pointed out yet is that a fraction of alderaan is still in darkness, the same side as the superlaser impact point. its just as plausible that what you are seeing isn't a planetary shield, since all we see lit up is the dark fraction of the planet, not beyond it. since I know somebody is going to bring up the shield in R1, that shield was at least mid to high orbit, which would make it around 10,000km from the surface. yet that "shield interaction" just happens to stop where the planet is lit up but not beyond? that would put the shield a few kilometers above the surface. which, considering that everybody flies everywhere plus the fact that the shield would interfere with natural weather, wouldn't be practical or useful.

It expands too fast to be "atmosphere ionizing"; consider the scale of the flash and the diameter of the beam: something is deflecting the beam's energy. It also looks just like a shield hit by weapons fire, like we saw earlier in the same film. You only have the actual film that is clearly anything else in my expert and skeptical opinion, because no one said it was a planetary shield on screen!" Really, that's what your Wall of Ignorance translates to. Skepticism is good, but do your research: all your points to this part have been addressed, and dismissed. That's right: your speculation doesn't fit the facts as well.

dismissed by who? somebody with better speculation? by definition speculation is a theory with no proof. the wall of ignorance goes both ways.

What do you think a "no weapons" defensive system is? Puppy and kitty billboards visible from space ("don't shoot, we're cute!")?

the novels aren't even canon anymore. that's the only time we hear of any defensive system. and the movies were always a step above the novels in terms of absolute canon. so the question now is "what defensive system?"

yay! That is actually an excellent point. Except that there also wasn't a visible shield interaction when the TIE Interceptor missed the turn and plowed into the recessed bay (to no visible hull damage) of the Mon Cal ship. Now, one could argue that the TIE was a physical collision, so there was no energy-weapon-y energy to disperse.

its already been firmly established that the shields don't stop physical objects. otherwise the falcon would not have been able to land on the Avenger.

But there was also a lot of TIE fighter fire flying around, and I (running on a recent review of a tiny low-res YouTube video) don't see every blast that hit a Mon Cal ship creating a shield interaction (maybe due to the lower power of the TIE's guns?), nor damage to the hull indicating there were no shields up (or maybe the armor is just that good?) If it's a scale thing (starfighters/MF), (Star Destroyer/MonCal cruiser), (DS/planetary shield), maybe big enough shields don't necessarily flash when a lower-order attack hits them, or flash when overwhelmed by a higher-order attack.

speculation to prove speculation. not being an ass, just calling it as I see it. star wars doesn't exactly have a good track record for consistency on special effects.

i don't know if anyone's studied the "Mon Cal cruiser destruction by DSII" in detail. The Mon Cal's shields didn't appear to resist the superlaser blast for long (even 2 frames!) Would it make sense for ship shield so suddenly and massively overwhelmed to have a blip of shield interaction? Sure, maybe, but it would depend on how fast it was overwhelmed, wouldn't it? A parallel: a glass window "resists" a bullet for a really, really, really tiny time before it fails, right? So would we see that tiny time at 30 fps? Probably not. A high-speed camera? Yeah, we would.

considering that those ships had triple shielding it would make sense to see something at least. but we don't. just like we don't see anything when the turbolasers from the executor hit green leaders A-wing and send it out of control. but like I said, consistency is a huge problem for star wars in terms of special effects.

Yeah, funny thing about fans (and film-making juggernauts), they like not having pants-on-head-stupid holes in their films. You also discount that obsessive fans are the folks who find the errors when filmmakers don't think things through. There are channels full of that: How It Should Have Ended, Everything Wrong With _, etc.

like during the Kenobi vs Anakin duel when Anakin tries to force Kenobi to cut his own head off and the lightsaber that Kenobi is holding switches between Kenobi's to anakins to kenobis? I'm one of em lol. not to mention how the falcon goes from one star system to another on sublight speed? I wondered about that until they retconned a backup hyperdrive in. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that. I'm just saying that there are those who take speculation way too far and then take it as gospel.

Wookieepedia at least lists sources. But fans who love to tinker don't stop there, they go past what we're told, and delve into what we're shown. The kind you're talking about might; I don't know, you haven't actually pointed fingers yet.

even wookieepedia is occationally guilty of the whole "turning speculation into proof" thing. for example, recently they put a synopsis for SWR "Zero Hour" up. in that synopsis they listed that the AT-AT walkers used by thrawn had shield generators, contradicting EVERYTHING known about them from canon. this came from small charges capable of taking down a small AT-DPs legs not cutting the mustard (hick as hell phrase, I know) against huge by comparison AT-AT walkers. plus, there is zero evidence that those shield generators exist since there was no shield interaction visible when everything we have seen about that type of shield says that there should be. plus, there is never anything said that would even give the impression that shield generators were equipped.

So far you have taken an off-the-cuff mention of what most folks think "yeah, okay, so Alderaan maybe had a shield - didn't help!" and turned it into an indirect argument that "unless someone says the words in a current canon source, IT CAN'T EXIST!"
Again I ask: to what end? What is your point? This is the second time, I'd appreciate some kind of answer.

to put it succinctly, and to answer the rest of your posts, I have no problem with speculation. we all do it. on the other hand, passing off speculation as hard evidence rubs me wrong. im kinda OCD about that. I'm not trying to be an ass to anybody. plus, im used to debaters from youtube that are far worse than anybody I have met on here. for that matter, im the same way in st debates. I tend to try to avoid the versus debates just because there are too many people on both sides that take it waaaaaaaaaay to personally. star wars canon has always been somewhat fluid, which is what makes it hard to have a conversation (or debate) that doesn't involve some kind of speculation.

[Galvatron]

He's still wrong, because planetary shields were explicitly referred to in ESB, albeit not on a global scale.

wrong. they are described as "an energy shield protecting an area on the sixth planet of the hoth system". that's not an explicit reference to planetary shields without making a huge stretch that isn't supported by the evidence.

What are you arguing here? What you just quoted said that the shield was protecting an area of the planet. What else would you call that if not a planetary shield?

[texanmarauder]

What are you arguing here? What you just quoted said that the shield was protecting an area of the planet. What else would you call that if not a planetary shield?

it seems we have two different definitions at play here. are you are taking "planetary shield" to mean encompassing the entire planet or a shield that is simply on a planet, regardless of size?

[Galvatron]

Both.

The post that you quoted even conceded that the planetary shield in TESB wasn't global. That's why I'm confused about your disagreement.

[seanrobertson]

Err, Texas?

The film novelizations are still canon. Look at this.

[Galvatron]

Why does it even matter if Alderaan had a shield?

[Khaat]

that "observed effect" is also not consistent. something that I haven't seen pointed out yet is that a fraction of alderaan is still in darkness, the same side as the superlaser impact point. its just as plausible that what you are seeing isn't a planetary shield, since all we see lit up is the dark fraction of the planet, not beyond it.

^-- yeah, see that "dark fraction" here for 1/30 of a second (which isn't the end of the interaction)

^-- this is the one you think is "ionizing atmosphere"? Out beyond the thermosphere (where aurora occur, and satellites enjoy weather-free traffic)? Out in the exosphere and beyond?
[If we presume that Alderaan is a sphere: effect is roughly 20% of the diameter above the surface: post-it-on-screen measurements: Alderaan ~26mm d (measured pole-to-pole and diagonal on un-obscured edges), explosion +5mm]

since I know somebody is going to bring up the shield in R1, that shield was at least mid to high orbit, which would make it around 10,000km from the surface. yet that "shield interaction" just happens to stop where the planet is lit up but not beyond? that would put the shield a few kilometers above the surface. which, considering that everybody flies everywhere plus the fact that the shield would interfere with natural weather, wouldn't be practical or useful.

Yeah, I'm going to want to see your calculation for "mid to high orbit" and "10,000 km from the surface" for the Skarif shield, because it looks to me like it could be much closer, say 300-400km, based on a rough estimate from images like this:
Diameter of Earth (as a surrogate for Earth-like planets Alderaan and/or Skarif): 12,742km
Depth of Earth's Atmosphere: 480km (satellites cruise at 300+km without weather trouble, that's 2-3% of the diameter!)

Thermosphere
The thermosphere starts just above the mesosphere [to 85km] and extends to 600 kilometers (372 miles) high. Aurora and satellites occur in this layer. [this is around 5% of the diameter]
Exosphere
This is the upper limit of our atmosphere. It extends from the top of the thermosphere up to 10,000 km

I'm sorry, you were saying? "a few kilometers above the surface"? "shield would interfere with natural weather"?

That's right: your speculation doesn't fit the facts as well.

dismissed by who? somebody with better speculation? by definition speculation is a theory with no proof. the wall of ignorance goes both ways.

Dismissed by anyone who's actually looked into it, weighed the visual evidence readily available, and accepted what is seen over the absence of dialog saying there isn't.

"Speculation" is developing a hypothesis, based on observation, which is then tested. Please be more specific with your language. If you mean "a baseless guess", say that. If you mean "I disagree with your evaluation of the evidence", say that.

its already been firmly established that the shields don't stop physical objects. otherwise the falcon would not have been able to land on the Avenger.

Actually, it has not been determined that the MF penetrated shields to do that. That's just a single example of what this thread is all about!

speculation to prove speculation. not being an ass, just calling it as I see it.

Yeah, you're in the wrong place. Until Disney decides to change the canon, we aren't going to find more evidence here. What we have on the screen is what we have to work with, and that supports planetary shield over Alderaan (in the absence of a canon source saying, "Alderaan had no planetary shield").

i don't know if anyone's studied the "Mon Cal cruiser destruction by DSII" in detail. The Mon Cal's shields didn't appear to resist the superlaser blast for long (even 2 frames!) Would it make sense for ship shield so suddenly and massively overwhelmed to have a blip of shield interaction? Sure, maybe, but it would depend on how fast it was overwhelmed, wouldn't it?

considering that those ships had triple shielding it would make sense to see something at least. but we don't.

"Triple shielding"? Now who's ass-pulling Legends? I can play that game too: [Legends] the shields were multiply redundant on Mon Cal ships because they weren't as heavy as the dedicated shields of the Star Destroyers they were expected to face! The trade off was that Mon Cal shields could regenerate faster, even though they were weaker! [/Legends]

not to mention how the falcon goes from one star system to another on sublight speed? I wondered about that until they retconned a backup hyperdrive in. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that. I'm just saying that there are those who take speculation way too far and then take it as gospel.

Yeah, when I hot-rod out my spaceship, I don't use any redundancies. I like the added risk of death by cold, hard space.[/sarcasm]

There is canon, and there is "it certainly makes sense and isn't contradicted by canon", so I'll favor common sense over stupid, pretty much everywhere. Yes, I have been burned more than once by this position.
Was there proof of the MF "backup hyperdrive"? No.
Was it contradicted in canon? No.
So which would you choose to believe? Do you understand your motives for doing so? Do you think a 10,000 year space-faring civilization is cavalier about getting there? Why do you believe that? Is it reasonable?

to what end? What is your point? This is the second time, I'd appreciate some kind of answer.

to put it succinctly, and to answer the rest of your posts, I have no problem with speculation. we all do it. on the other hand, passing off speculation as hard evidence rubs me wrong. im kinda OCD about that.

Speculation isn't the evidence, what we see on screen is the evidence. You are having another language moment: what you have a problem with is conclusions you don't agree with being presented as valid (which has a place outside the boundaries of "canon") in common use.

star wars canon has always been somewhat fluid, which is what makes it hard to have a conversation (or debate) that doesn't involve some kind of speculation.

Actually, canon has been pretty fixed until Disney's acquisition and revision. The quality of content that has been canon has been somewhat variable. Evidence is what it is, and the conclusions drawn from it can range from "you're fucking kidding, right? Did you even see the movie?" to "Makes more sense than anything else so far."

[Lord Revan]

On shield interaction on the Mon Cals at least the Liberty has 2 explotions, 1 when the superlaser hits that looks more like a glow and another a split second later that takes out the whole ship, I suspect that the first "explotion" was either the shield interaction or was hiding it from view.