Current SW Low End Calcuations

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-09-22 05:44pm

Alright fokes thought I'd do this today, been meaning to

Anyway, This is current SW Low End Calcuations on weaponry and shielding Strength, I'll update it on Hyperdrive speed and Com range soon, Though if you happen to have the Low ends handy, don't be afraid to post them

Current ISD shield strength Low end is 30TT or 30,000 Giga-tons

Source is Isards Revenge where two ISDs Fight each other, firing broad sides into each other and after five and a half(Roughly, we round it down) the shields Colapse and the ship starts taking damage

Now then because this is low end, we ignore Medium Guns and LTLs and the Captians Sneer at his punny enemys, basicly everything but the HTLS

Ok 5 Volllys,
30 Guns(Rounding down) For a Broad side of HTLs
So 30x5=150 Indivudal Shots times 200 Giga-tons=30,0000 Giga-tons or 30Teratons for an ISD MK II

Ok Minium Weapon Strength
Laser Cannons=6MT(ICS)
LTL=100 Megatons(Taking HTLs and dividing by alot, Also based on Torp Calcs)
MTL= 50 Giga-tons(Taking HTL and Diving by 2 then diving by 2 agian to be fair)
HTL=200 Gigatons(The Heavy Weapons on a 20 Year old Transport, ICS)

More to come

XaLEv · Post by **XaLEv** » 2002-09-22 05:57pm

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=2496

Shadow · Post by **Shadow** » 2002-09-22 06:29pm

Mr Bean wrote:(Taking HTL and Diving by 2 then diving by 2 agian to be fair)

You simply say, "(taking HTL and dividing by 4)," which is much simpler.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-09-22 07:12pm

Normaly yes, but this time I'm trying to emphzize how much I'ml lowering PLs here

*Edit Saw that Thread, I won't sticky it but I will update

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2002-09-22 09:09pm

I was thinking of the high end based on only "canon" (Many Trekkies probably only want ot exclude the EU because it has stuff that hurts their arguments).

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2002-09-22 09:15pm

Why do people always call the 200 GT TLs HTLs? There is absolutly zero support for them being such. They are not nearly the same size, and nowhere in the official literature are they refered to as such. In fact, every source says they are standard turbolasers, or MTLs.

Using the movie derived ratios, and using them as the MTLs, I arrive at the following numbers:

50 GT LTLs
200 GT MTLs
6250 GT HTLs

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-09-22 09:21pm

Ender.. LOW end, IE we are doing everything from kicking SW in the balls and hiting it over the head with the idiot stick
This is abosulty LOW END

Worst it could possibly be

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-09-22 09:22pm

Ender wrote:Why do people always call the 200 GT TLs HTLs? There is absolutly zero support for them being such. They are not nearly the same size, and nowhere in the official literature are they refered to as such. In fact, every source says they are standard turbolasers, or MTLs.

Using the movie derived ratios, and using them as the MTLs, I arrive at the following numbers:

50 GT LTLs
200 GT MTLs
6250 GT HTLs

Because these are suppose to be low end, thus the HTL assumption.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2002-09-22 09:34pm

LE??? I have seen alot of talk against the ICS HTL (mainly the 200 GT is the max output (not normal operational output) and have a low refire rate at this setting (not to mention the range depletion problems).

I have seen lower low ends.

As an aside is the ICS written in universe? as in its Fred the OR engineer or is it written like its the author commenting on SW tech?

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2002-09-22 10:30pm

It is a low-end maximum calc, if that makes sense.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2002-09-22 10:45pm

As in if you are sitting on the end of the HTL and the HTL puts as much possible power into it as it can and everything goes right then you get 200 GT (I remember something about it being a quad so each one only put out 50 GT but I didnt read much on it).

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2002-09-22 11:01pm

This is the low-end calculation for maximum yields, much as the asteroid destruction in TESB was used to find a low-end calculation of the maximum firepower of a TL.

CmdrWilkens · Post by **CmdrWilkens** » 2002-09-22 11:03pm

TheDarkling wrote:As in if you are sitting on the end of the HTL and the HTL puts as much possible power into it as it can and everything goes right then you get 200 GT (I remember something about it being a quad so each one only put out 50 GT but I didnt read much on it).

Here's the problems:

1) They AREN'T HTLs. The weapons on the /Acclamator/ are, according to WOTC, Turbo Quadlasers which are suppossed to be several degrees less powerful than an HTL (comparison of dice total would indicate close to 4 times)

2) The ICS specifically says "per shot" which means that each barrel sends out 200 GT unless you have evidence that "per shot" means multiple barrels are fired at once.

LordShaithis · Post by **LordShaithis** » 2002-09-23 05:13am

You'd have to divide the low-end numbers by a hundred to come up with HTLs that would't vape the best Federation ship in one shot, so who really cares? hehehe

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-09-23 07:50am

Thus the lowest possible Shield ratings and HTL, MTLs and LTLs possible by doing everything and inculding kicking SW in the balls and hiting it with the idioit stick

IE WORST CASE
This is how much SW can do

Anyone want to take a stap at *Medium aka most likley numbers?

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2002-09-23 11:22am

Mr Bean wrote:Thus the lowest possible Shield ratings and HTL, MTLs and LTLs possible by doing everything and inculding kicking SW in the balls and hiting it with the idioit stick

IE WORST CASE
This is how much SW can do

Anyone want to take a stap at *Medium aka most likley numbers?

Low-end?

A light TL would be 250 terajoules/bolt. That's as bare low-end as you
can get.

I disagree that a more reasonable "low end" would go up to something
like GIGAtonnage...sorry, guys, but there's simply no way a LTL is
that powerful. I keep seeing references to light turbolasers being somewhere around 50 gigatons per shot...? Their true analogues can be found on the Acclamator's light guns at a maximum of 6 MT/shot.

Also, I'm dubious about the whole "medium turbolaser" thing. I've
never seen any proof of such existing, and never heard the term
actually referenced in the EU (though I might have some idea where this comes from...). Michael doesn't say anything about it anywhere on the site, either, so far as I know...

Anyway, I'd see the ISD's shields as at least comparable to the Acclamator's are, relative to their reactor outputs. Thus, an ISD
should have 2.5E24W at peak dissipation.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-09-23 11:35am

Sean I told you this before we standerisded to Tonnage here on SD.net, we only use Watts when nessary as Tonnage gives us a nice cleaner figure

Also, I'm dubious about the whole "medium turbolaser" thing. I've
never seen any proof of such existing, and never heard the term
actually referenced in the EU (though I might have some idea where this comes from...). Michael doesn't say anything about it anywhere on the site, either, so far as I know...

They are mentioned in WEG and in AA's books along with I belive Bacta War

greenmm · Post by **greenmm** » 2002-09-23 01:50pm

Hmmm...

IIRC, 250 TJ becomes 60 kilotons, right?

And 2.5E24 W (or 2.5E12 TW) works out to about 600 Teratons/second, right?

Heh... try dividing ST weapons by about 2-3 trillion, then, to have them even be a threat to the Empire...

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2002-09-23 01:55pm

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2002-09-23 02:42pm

Mr Bean wrote:Sean I told you this before we standerisded to Tonnage here on SD.net, we only use Watts when nessary as Tonnage gives us a nice cleaner figure

They are mentioned in WEG and in AA's books along with I belive Bacta War

Right...you did mention that. I forgot! Sorry--

Still, I don't get it. 50 gigatons/shot for light guns? There are 4.18
terajoules in a kiloton, 4,180 TJ/MT, and so on. 209 million terajoules
per light gun seems excessive. The canon low-end would be
250 TJ-2000 TJ if one is conservative in their assumptions.

I also think tonnage, or any quantification of energy, can be misleading when talking about Wars shields. 60 teratons is 251 billion terajoules (2.5E23J). That's a full order of magnitude below what the ISD's peak shield rate might be if one subscribes to the idea that Curtis quantified its reactor at 1E25W (and that shields can charge to a quarter of that, as
the Acclamator's can IIRC).

However, that's only assuming that the 60 TT was delivered over
a full *second*. If all those guns nailed the shield in, say,
1/15th of a second, it might surpass the ISD shield's peak rate
at 3.7E24W (again subscribing to the aforementioned assumed
reactor-shield ratio).

FWIW, I'm undecided as to how this applies to Trek shields. Sometimes
they seem to have a higher peak dissipation rate than they
do more "long-term" endurance; e.g., handling a Klingon
disruptor blast better in a tenth/sec. vs. staying in orbit of
a star for awhile. Other times, you can knock the shield down
pretty rapidly with a powerful burst ("The Survivors"), yet
the shields can be "reassembled" to field a similar blast seconds
later. Weird...

Still, I think you're on the right track...I really like your find from
_Isaard's Revenge_. I think Dennis [Aspo] mentioned it to me
once but I've since forgotten.

CmdrWilkens · Post by **CmdrWilkens** » 2002-09-23 04:02pm

seanrobertson wrote:
Still, I don't get it. 50 gigatons/shot for light guns? There are 4.18
terajoules in a kiloton, 4,180 TJ/MT, and so on. 209 million terajoules
per light gun seems excessive. The canon low-end would be
250 TJ-2000 TJ if one is conservative in their assumptions.

No the low-end with several assumptions reducing the value would be 701 TJ. I've spent the better part of the last year working on every improving versions of the LTL Calcs, please see my site. Most likely the true low-end would be closer to 2,700 TJ based on Dengar's Nickel-Iron quote.

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2002-09-23 04:12pm

CmdrWilkens wrote:
seanrobertson wrote:
Still, I don't get it. 50 gigatons/shot for light guns? There are 4.18
terajoules in a kiloton, 4,180 TJ/MT, and so on. 209 million terajoules
per light gun seems excessive. The canon low-end would be
250 TJ-2000 TJ if one is conservative in their assumptions.
No the low-end with several assumptions reducing the value would be 701 TJ. I've spent the better part of the last year working on every improving versions of the LTL Calcs, please see my site. Most likely the true low-end would be closer to 2,700 TJ based on Dengar's Nickel-Iron quote.

I've seen it--good stuff. But 701 does fall within the 250-2,000 range, as I said

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-09-23 05:02pm

Mr. Robertson, are you honestly questioning the existence of MTL's? LOOK AT THE FUCKING MODEL OF AN ISD! It has light turbolasers (and, perhaps, even laser cannons), it has Heavy Turbolasers and turbolaser batteries. In the mid range it has lots and lots of weapons that are between the smaller guns and the larger guns in terms of size. Those weapons make up the vast majority of the weapons fire we see in RotJ, during the battle going on there. They are also confirmed by WEG, Bacta War, and IIRC Isard's Revenge.

I don't agree with the low end ISD shields that are being tossed around. While shields and reactor power obviously are somewhat related, shields cannot possibly take as much energy to put up as they can deflect (the whole point is to make your enemy spend more energy to hit you than you have to spend to hit him). Since an ISD is clearly a warship, and an Acclamator is a transport, it is unlikely that the Acclamator maintains a similar ratio of reactor to shield strength as an ISD.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-09-23 05:54pm

TheDarkling wrote:LE??? I have seen alot of talk against the ICS HTL (mainly the 200 GT is the max output (not normal operational output) and have a low refire rate at this setting (not to mention the range depletion problems).

I have seen lower low ends.

As an aside is the ICS written in universe? as in its Fred the OR engineer or is it written like its the author commenting on SW tech?

200 gigaton is NOT MAX. it never says MAX.

PROMETHEUS · Post by **PROMETHEUS** » 2002-09-23 06:23pm

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:200 gigaton is NOT MAX. it never says MAX.

Out of curiosity, why do you guys use gigatons for lasers? Isn't watt a better term?

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Current SW Low End Calcuations

Current SW Low End Calcuations

Re: Current SW Low End Calcuations