StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Mike Wong has commented on the fact that collisions seem to be highily effective against ST vessels. Is this true for SW ships. The only effective collision I can remember is the crash of an A wing into the Bridge of Executor after it shields have been drops.

The collision of two Star Destroyer during the Chase Scene of Hoth seem not to inflict any great damage on either ( but the siren alone must have driven the Bridge staff deaf)... Would mike agruement hold for SW..What is the tre nature of particle shields?

The ISD's that collided with each other hit a relatively slow speed to each other (it took several seconds for both ships to cross the distance of their own length). The Hoth collisions struck at faster rates of speed and were enough of them to overwealm the light turbolasers. So, the collision with one ISD is not all that impressive. In fact, from the panic inside the bridge, such a collision was considered a matter for concern, so SW ships do seem vulnerable to low energy, high momentum collision.

Even if your ship is invulnerable, no Captain likes a collision. Even if the hull takes it perfectly, your crew most likely won't.

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:Even if your ship is invulnerable, no Captain likes a collision. Even if the hull takes it perfectly, your crew most likely won't.

The captain didn't want to collide with the other star destroyer because it might spook the crew members.

1). Only a small percentage of the crew is going to be on the outer edge of the ship where they can look out a porthole.

2). Any captain most captains don't want to deal with a crew that's spooked when they're ship rocks a little.

The fact of the matter is, most of the crew isn't going to see the collision and wouldn't be afraid of nudging against another ISD if it isn't fatal. But if it is, then they would.

Star Destroyers and other SW capital ships are far more resistant to KE impacts than ships in ST. Note that in SW ramming is only used as a last-ditch tactic, or as a way to have crippled ships deal maximum damage after it is already clear that they cannot survive an engagement (ref. Truce at Bakura, Rebel Stand, Dark Force Rising). In ST, this is not true. In ST, ramming appears to be a viable tactic for fully combat-capable ships, and is one of the few ways in which a smaller ship can cripple or destroy a much larger vessel. In SW, ramming is also only effective against smaller ships, like picket ships, or against capital ships with their shields down. If a capital ship's shields are gone, a medium freighter or smaller can still only hope to destroy a small portion of the ship, and must choose the area in which it strikes the target. In ST, the ramming ship need only strike the enemy vessel somewhere in order to cause massive damage to the entire vessel.

SW ships are far more resilient to asteroids than ST ships, as shown in the episode when the E-D was forced to reroute around an asteroid belt whose asteroids were both smaller and whose velocities were smaller than the observed velocities in ESB, and the ISD's were able to clear a path through the larger asteroids in ESB. All of this indicates to me that SW ships have much greater resistances to KE impacts than ST ships, both because their particle shields are stronger than the ST shields, and because the SW hulls appear to be stronger (ref. ICS).

I am not talking about whether the crew gets spooked. It is canon that the sudden collision did cause a jar that's enough to cause some significant loss of balance. If they got jarred on the bridge, they got jarred throughout the bridge. There will be a few minor injury cases, and if someone bumped into a delicate console or instrument...

Besides, the people that can look out generally are the important people - bridge or gunnery people, two of the more important groups on the ship.

The crew should be rightfully concerned when the ship rocks. It could be an internal explosion in something reactor-related, you know...

Well there are a few fact that we do know about shields:

You can walk thru them, if you are a Droid, or a Walker. Fighters even if they are traveling at a low rate of speed ( Repulsion lifts) cannot.. Apparentily there is an Ionization effects that donot effect ground vessels or droids..

Organic creatures, are killed if they contact a shield..

At Hoths the striking meteors, exploded as if it was struck be a turbo laser blasts.

Apparentily Particle shields are effect against Hi speed micro meteor, small meteors, missiles and figthers.

It also the one weapon system that is highily effective against Particle shield are proton torpedoes. So much that Star Destroyer are cladded in anti proton armor... Why?

From this I conclude that Particle shield must be a cloud of ions or electrical charge particles ( Electrons or heavier Leptons like Mouns or Tau)

Against Low velocity object the particle interact, but not enought to severily damage it.. Organic creature would be frie, but a heavily armor walker or harden battle droid could walk thru.. This would explain the ionization effect that effects Fighters..

A fast moving object, the faster the better, would collide with the particles.. The particles would act as particle beam, heating the object and destroying it via the energy transfer by the collision..A bigger enought object could absorb the damage and still get thru the shield to strike the hull... A small object would be destroy..

Proton tropedoe which are proton scattering devices, must use a atomic blast to create a tight beam of protons that are accelerated by the attraction to negative charge particles of the shield.. The proton would still impact with the negative particle, but a hi enought proton density ( why else would 48 proton torpedoes be able to breach a shield) would cause a temporary opening in the shields, also allow a stream of protons to impact the hull ( the need of special of antiproton armor)..

This explaination also help in under standing ray shield.. Apparentily the shield generator can bind the particle cloud surrounding the Ship to act like they are bound in the giant atomic obritals.

Electromagnetic energy ( photons) would interact with the particles.. Being either absorb, scatter, or deflected.. By controling the energy level of the particles you can have particle weakily interact with Photon of normal light frequency and lower ( allowing it to be transparent to light,radars and radio transmission)..But more energic photon, like UV, and xray would interact with the screen... This mode would require more energy than the normal particle deflection function.

I think there is a part of Mike's site that explains while a ships sheilds will hold up against X number of Joules of an energy weapon, the same for a particle weapon is a totally different sitution. Basically talks about the supports holding the shield generator would be the limiting/critical factor.

Obviously I am paraphrasing, and if you want the uber accurate account read the Site under shields!

The ICS says energy absorbed by the shield generators is turned into neutrinos.

And I haven't noticed any vulnerability to KE impacts so far, thats just a bunch of over interpreptation to get the desired result(pseudo-science), and if that where true, kinetic weapons would be in much greater use, they aren't though, simple logic.

Also I don't believe in the theory that the supports, or even that there are any supports, will have to absorb kinetic energy, I believe it is just as the ICS says, it's converted into neutrinos, energy coming in at a greater rate than the generators wattage rating is turned into heat and makes the generator less efficient.

In Which ICS does it state that? The Original, PTM or AOTC one?

As for the KE impact statement, I my self think that Wong was talking about the Star trek... As for Star Wars there is never case of shield generator or emitter shearing off its mount due to a collision..

The conversion of Energy to Neutrinos would involve a complex particle interaction...mostily energy aborb by electrons and other leptons would be reemitted as photons, but conversion factor would mean that it does not deflect an object by applying a force to a moving object ( like a pressor or tractor beam) but by a screen of exotic particles that the incoming object impacts against...

His Divine Shadow wrote:Also I don't believe in the theory that the supports, or even that there are any supports, will have to absorb kinetic energy, I believe it is just as the ICS says, it's converted into neutrinos, energy coming in at a greater rate than the generators wattage rating is turned into heat and makes the generator less efficient.

It is absorbing MOMENTUM, not KE. KE does not necessarily have to be conserved. It can for example be transformed into heat energy in principle. But MOMENTUM has to be transferred. It has to go somewhere.

His Divine Shadow wrote:The ICS says energy absorbed by the shield generators is turned into neutrinos.

And I haven't noticed any vulnerability to KE impacts so far, thats just a bunch of over interpreptation to get the desired result(pseudo-science), and if that where true, kinetic weapons would be in much greater use, they aren't though, simple logic.

1) What's your source?
2) A neutrino converter is highly unlikely to be able to solve the problem of momentum transfer as postulated by Wong. As Object touches Barrier, no matter what happens to the object (it bounces off, it crunches itself against the barrier, it is instantly vaped, it is deflected...), it transfers its momentum into the barrier, forcing it into one direction.
3) Have you considered that it may simply be good bracing that allows SW to treat KE problems as minor, rather than they don't exist at all? It is not over-interpretation. This is more like an inevitable consequence of virtually all kinds of barriers and deflectors.

Actually the particle screen solve the momentum problem.. The fact is the impact of the incoming object with small MEV particles mean two things..

By impacting against particles the energy of the incoming object work against it. It like be exposed to a particle beam. The object own kinetic energy is used to destroy the inbound object..

only a small part of the momentum need to be handle, first If the object explode from the thermal stress, part of the momentum of the original object is redirect in different directions, a large part away from the defensing ship.

Second the remaining parts is impacting against millions of particles, each with a small mass at this point even a powerful magnetic field can redirect the particles away from the defending ship, while the the original mass is either destroyed, slowed or finally deflected..

It almost like having millions of point defense lasers/ particle cannons. each with the KE energy of the incoming object.. So a Fast micro meteor with a velocity of 50% the speed of light is hitting particles that have the energy of being accelerated to 50%beam of light....

Problem is slow moving or massive object... A slow moving object might still be damage by the particles, but not enought to destroy it. Just look at the fact that A AT-AT can walk thru a planetary Defensive shield or Battle Droids thru Gundad Threater shield...

The particles do interfere with electronic, by inducing a electrical charge in the object, but the walking droids and AT-AT are grounded so the charge does not, a star fighter isnot..

A large enought object just aborb the damage and get thru...

omegaLancer wrote:By impacting against particles the energy of the incoming object work against it. It like be exposed to a particle beam. The object own kinetic energy is used to destroy the inbound object..

So? That's what happens when objects strike hard armour, too.

only a small part of the momentum need to be handle, first If the object explode from the thermal stress, part of the momentum of the original object is redirect in different directions, a large part away from the defensing ship.

And you think that by changing the direction of movement, you don't have to "handle" the momentum? Here's a hint: momentum is a vector. If you don't know what that means, go back to school.

I know momentum is a vector.( and there is no need to be insulting OK). The point is that if an object explodes , only the fragments of matter heading in your direction are a problem, at least half of the mass is heading away from the ship..

And hopefully this will keep happening until the all the fragments are destroy ,vaporize or strike the hull...

In the case of Armor that part of the ship, the ship is taking the impact ( kind of defeat the purpose) and usually if the armor is breach the ship hull is breach...

In the case of the particle screen, the particles are impacting the incoming object, you only got to stop the individual particles, and it doubt ful that they would be carry the momentum of the original incoming object. It like firing a million machine gun bullets at a income missile, you get the kick back from each bullet fired not the the force of the missile striking you ..

You still have to handle momentum but only the momentum of the particles you emitted and are attempting to stop..


This is different than if you caught the missile with an invisible force ( just image you are superman and you grap the incoming missle) now you are handle the momentum of the missile, it acting against you as you are acting against it .

If you are superman it better to throw million pebbles at the missile, until it stop or is pounded to dust and then with super speed catch the million peddles( one at a time) that are knock back...

The Particle screen is method of stoping or shielding against incoming object with having to actually apply a braking force to stop it. You just destroy the object.. Just look at the Hoth screens, The meteor that are stop act like they were vaporize, just as if they were hit by a point defense turbolaser. None of them are stop in their track or deflected away..

Let's see your particle screen. It is composed of mysterious neutrino-converting particles that are probably suspended somehow to form a cohesive defensive screen. That field is itself held in the correct position by other fields and forces, and all eventually link back to the projector.

Now, let's use a real simple example. ONE, just ONE incoming particle. AFter all, a real impact is just made of of countless little impacts. The incoming particle will hit a neutrino converting particle. But even as the incoming particle is being converted, its momentum WILL be transferred to the neutrino converter, which is currently being held in place by the forcefield. The neutrino converter will move back, and transfer its momentum into the field, and the field would move back slightly, and will push very slightly on the projecting fields, which will transfer that force back into the red blocks in Wong's diagram.

To perceive it the way I suspect Wong and I are doing, take Wong's infamous diagram. Use Paint's airbrush function and airbrush a nice spread of orange particles inside the light blue shield boundary (the rectangular thing.) Those are your Neutrion-Converter particles, being suspended in the shield.

Your alternate layout (apparently a widespread neutrino shooter) will go solve part of the momentum bounceback problem. There will be some neutrino particles that will deflect off in angles that will miss the hull, so you save some force on that account. But you are wasting a lot of neutrino conversion particles (you can't store them up into a field of high density,) and still have to catch those that do bounce back or else they would hit your hull and convert part of that into neutrinos. Of course, the guys that bounce back have their momentum...

If they are shot at a low enough relative velocity (that saves power, unless it just so happens your particles are massless), and you accelerate fast, you might even outrun some of the neutrino-converters you shot out seconds earlier and force them to smash into the field you set up to stop them from hitting your hull.

Then you have to consider how the hell are you going to make the field so the neutrinos can go out and not back in, a problem that won't arise with a fixed field. Are you planning on making it a Star TREK style OSCILLATING shield? My heart gorges at it.

Besides, the evidence strongly suggests mostly a fixed distance shield with limited and discrete thickness, which is more like our shield. Generally, ships are safe outside the shield boundary, or inside. Only when they bump the relatively thin slice do they have problems.

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:1) What's your source?

1) The ICS :p

2) Before the Storm where that NR ship is getting fired at by the planetary railgun, it's shields overheat before they would be torn from their casings.

3) Dark Apprentice, a Dreadnaught takes turbolaser fire with enough momentum to visible shove a multi-million ton ship and it's shields are not torn from their casings either, but hold.

Pg. 160: Turbolasers struck the starboard side of the Vendetta, shoving it visibly to one side with the momentum of the blasts.

(ref: Champions of the Force)

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:3) Have you considered that it may simply be good bracing that allows SW to treat KE problems as minor, rather than they don't exist at all? It is not over-interpretation. This is more like an inevitable consequence of virtually all kinds of barriers and deflectors.

I do consider it minor, I do not consider SW shields to be anymore vulnerable to kinetic and momentum impacts because if they where, such weapons would be the main type of weapons, yet those weapons according to the EGWT became obsolete many thousands of years ago.

Actually you would have a cloud of particles, kept in place by some kind of field... My theory is that they are Leptons of some kind.. First Leptons ( electrons are one type) interact not only electrically but also via the Weak force which is the main source of Nuetronios ( other than fusion).

Yes the particles will be moving, obriting the ship like electrons around an atom, ( kept in place by the field), yes they will be some momentum transfer, but instead of one massive Impulse, it will be spread over many microseconds and over many particles... and would be in small amounts rather than one big impulse... The field ( let say magnetic) would stop the particles from impacting the ship ( and this is where the heat to generator come in, just think eddie currents). And energy can be converted to neutrinos via having the particles change from electrons, to Mouns, to tau and back again, using the energy that absorb via the impact with incoming matter...

it easier catching one at a time millions baseballs that have the total momentum of cannon ball than the cannon ball it self..

Mt= Me1+Me2+Me3+.......

Additional particles can be emitted to replace any not lost from the field..

No oscillations. Any way what are Star trek force fields oscillating?....

I agree that only a massive Ke impact would be a problem.. other than the Sun crusher impact thru a star destroyer ( the Sun Crusher was shedded in indestructable Quantum Armor and travel at a hi relativitic Velocity) no other Impact seem to effect a star Destroyer with it shields up...

I agree that the Shield projector must also be mounted on bracing, if the TL require Bracings to withstand force generated by gigaton explosions, as the novel "Slave Ship" state, similiar mounting would be avaliable to withstand any momentum generated by hi speed impact.

I just trying to come up with a Mechanism that explains why Hi KE impact are ineffective, while a low velocity object seem to be able to walk thru a particle shield and the other behaviors that shields seem to display...

His Divine Shadow wrote: 1) The ICS :p

2) Before the Storm where that NR ship is getting fired at by the planetary railgun, it's shields overheat before they would be torn from their casings.

3) Dark Apprentice, a Dreadnaught takes turbolaser fire with enough momentum to visible shove a multi-million ton ship and it's shields are not torn from their casings either, but hold.

Pg. 160: Turbolasers struck the starboard side of the Vendetta, shoving it visibly to one side with the momentum of the blasts.
(ref: Champions of the Force)

I know the ICS, but which ONE, on which PAGE, and what's the quote, for I can't find it, and I have two ICSs out of the three (though my search quote skill sucks)

2 and 3 really don't go against me at all. I congratulate the bracings for having the needed strength. And 2 are multiple hits over several minutes, and they could have a high KE:momentum ratio (it is not hard, use small and fast projectiles.)
-----------------------
Now for Omega_lancer:

Fine, they are Leptons. You know more about quantum particles than I do.

So we have a lepton field held into place by a magnetic field. It really makes no practical difference. We plan on taking a significant amount of time and space to stop the thing to begin with. Time frames of microseconds, as you postulate, will be insignificant. The instantaneous reaction force will not be significantly reduced.

Catching a million baseballs with the total momentum of the cannon ball is only better forcewise IF you can take more time to stop it. Otherwise, it is no better.

And catching a million baseballs is much harder for a human than catching one big cannonball

It is a relief to know that you are not thinking of oscillators. The page you want is here:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Myt ... ience.html

Read up Frequency Myths.

I appreciate your effort, but AFAIK, forcewise, it is not going to significantly reduce the stresses on the braces.

The fact is does. Not every collision will result in a particle being shot back, in some cases it will stick... The fact also it there a big different over instantous impulse of momentum then a series of impulses that would be require if you suddenily stop the object via a direct force transfer.. Part of it the fact that you will hopifully destroy the object...

Even turbo laser have momentum but just check the different in momentum generated by a turbolaser and the impact of meteor as describe by Mike shielding page... Just think how bad it would be for a projectile fired from a hypervelocity gun. Just check out some of the later agruements posted in the Andromeda Vs SW forum, some of the momentum generated by 1 kilogram missiles accerelated at 95 % speed of light is intense..But if it collise with a cloud of dust or in this case electrons, it will destroy it self without massive force being apply by the Shield generator...





Momentum is a problem. The longer the period of time you stretch it out the better it is from an engineering stand point....

His Divine Shadow wrote:I do consider it minor, I do not consider SW shields to be anymore vulnerable to kinetic and momentum impacts because if they where, such weapons would be the main type of weapons, yet those weapons according to the EGWT became obsolete many thousands of years ago.

Because they can be shot down in flight, unlike an energy weapon. Unless they're guided missiles, which have not become obsolete, and are still used (although they, too, can be shot down at long range).

There is no dilemma here. As for official literature which seems to contradict the laws of physics, official literature is of distinctly lower status than canon films, and when official literature ignores the laws of physics without canon precedent, it is in turn ignored.

omegaLancer wrote:I know momentum is a vector.( and there is no need to be insulting OK). The point is that if an object explodes , only the fragments of matter heading in your direction are a problem, at least half of the mass is heading away from the ship.

Ummm ... you do realize that the half which is headed toward you will be moving much faster than the whole projectile originally was, right? Momentum is not lost; the explosion accelerates some particles away, but the particles which are headed toward you will now be going a lot faster. The only advantage is if you blow up the projectile so far away that much of it scatters and misses you entirely, but we have seen that particle shields are quite close to the hull, so this is not the case here.

And hopefully this will keep happening until the all the fragments are destroy ,vaporize or strike the hull...

Vapour still has momentum; that's how rockets work.

In the case of the particle screen, the particles are impacting the incoming object, you only got to stop the individual particles, and it doubt ful that they would be carry the momentum of the original incoming object. It like firing a million machine gun bullets at a income missile, you get the kick back from each bullet fired not the the force of the missile striking you ..

Your analogy is inappropriate. If the particle shield acted on incoming objects while they were a kilometre away it might make sense, since much of the forward-moving mass would miss the ship entirely. But since it doesn't have any effect until the incoming objects are within a few dozen metres, the forward momentum must still be dealt with.

You still have to handle momentum but only the momentum of the particles you emitted and are attempting to stop..

If you emit enough particles to abruptly decelerate an incoming object, then the impulse is the same, and the scenario I outline on my shields page holds true. If you only shatter the object, then it will still strike your ship, since it is not being shattered so far away that the forward-moving debris would largely miss.

This is different than if you caught the missile with an invisible force ( just image you are superman and you grap the incoming missle) now you are handle the momentum of the missile, it acting against you as you are acting against it .

Actually, it isn't. If you have to hit an incoming object with enough particles to stop its forward movement, then your particles must have the same momentum as the object. Therefore, it is not different at all; you have merely added another term into the equation (your particle stream, which is not supported in any canon or official source; the ICS uses neutrino radiators in order to dump waste heat, since neutrinos would be a ridiculously stupid way to slow down an incoming object due to the mean-free-path problem).

If you are superman it better to throw million pebbles at the missile, until it stop or is pounded to dust and then with super speed catch the million peddles( one at a time) that are knock back...

Watch the movies. Incoming objects stop abruptly, as if they hit an invisible wall. There is no slow deceleration from a steady stream as they approach the object. The situation does not change; even if they used this imaginary particle stream you speak of (where are the projectors? How do the particles get through the solid hull? Why don't we see them?), the abrupt nature of the deceleration means that they all have to be emitted in a fraction of a second, so the impulse is the same.

The Particle screen is method of stoping or shielding against incoming object with having to actually apply a braking force to stop it. You just destroy the object.. Just look at the Hoth screens, The meteor that are stop act like they were vaporize, just as if they were hit by a point defense turbolaser. None of them are stop in their track or deflected away.

This hardly changes anything. Objects which strike solid barriers vapourize from the conversion of kinetic energy into work heating upon impact. Do you expect a million-ton asteroid to simply bounce like a rubber ball? The fact that this barrier is so close to the ship indicates that it's a forcefield, since forcefields weaken over distance. There is no conceivable reason to make a particle-stream defense active against incoming impactors only when they are so close, so your alternate theory does not make any sense.

BTW, ISD's already have a technological apparatus for vapourizing incoming impactors before they strike: it's called a turbolaser cannon.