how many cannons the Delta-7 has?

[Lord Revan]

just what title says. Has Delta-7 2 or 4 cannon (it has 4 barrels, 2 ballers share the same structure inside the figther(2 structures per craft)). Also what color bolt those cannons fire (green, red or blue).

[Spanky The Dolphin]

It has two double-barreled cannons.

[Lord Revan]

It has two double-barreled cannons.

But can it fire 4 bolts at once or just 2.(Falcons guns have 8 barrels can only 4 bolts (almost at once).

[Spanky The Dolphin]

I would assume it can do either, depending on the firing mode selected, or if both or only one trigger is pressed.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I believe its like the Falcon; the emitters are fed by a single cannon, and that implies to me its simply a beam splitter to increase shield (but not armor) penetration effectiveness.

[Lord Revan]

I believe its like the Falcon; the emitters are fed by a single cannon, and that implies to me its simply a beam splitter to increase shield (but not armor) penetration effectiveness.

How?

[Spanky The Dolphin]

I believe its like the Falcon; the emitters are fed by a single cannon, and that implies to me its simply a beam splitter to increase shield (but not armor) penetration effectiveness.

Yeah, I just looked at the ICS2, and I think that's exactly what they show.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

I believe its like the Falcon; the emitters are fed by a single cannon, and that implies to me its simply a beam splitter to increase shield (but not armor) penetration effectiveness.

How?

Multiple weaker shots are more effective than a single stronger shot of equal firepower due to how shields operate. Having more shots makes it easier to wear them down and break the energy peak.

I think that's how it basically works.

[Mange]

This is off-topic, but did the AOTC ICS show the Delta-7 with deployable wings (flight stabilizers)?

[Lord Revan]

This is off-topic, but did the AOTC ICS show the Delta-7 with deployable wings (flight stabilizers)?

it didn't as har as I can see.

[Gil Hamilton]

Multiple weaker shots are more effective than a single stronger shot of equal firepower due to how shields operate. Having more shots makes it easier to wear them down and break the energy peak.

I think that's how it basically works.

Wouldn't that be less effective since you are spreading out the amount of time that the total energy is hitting the shield? If you put one unit of energy in the emitter and it splits it into four shots that each hit the target one after another, that means it will take at least four times as long for all of that unit of energy to hit.

This is even worse of a problem is the target and the turret are moving relative to each other, which means each shot might not hit the same spot on the defensive field of the target.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Wouldn't that be less effective since you are spreading out the amount of time that the total energy is hitting the shield? If you put one unit of energy in the emitter and it splits it into four shots that each hit the target one after another, that means it will take at least four times as long for all of that unit of energy to hit.

No, the shots are split, so they are coincident and the wattage is identical.

This is even worse of a problem is the target and the turret are moving relative to each other, which means each shot might not hit the same spot on the defensive field of the target.

They're not supposed to, or there'd be no point to splitting the shot. Apparently shields can concentrate its deflection ability on single hits more easily than multiple ones; perhaps this is why there seem to be a plateau for turret and gun sizes even as you move up into the Empire's mightiest battleships.

[Gil Hamilton]

No, the shots are split, so they are coincident and the wattage is identical.

I wouldn't say identical, since you are bound to lose power due to inefficiency in the beam splitter.

They're not supposed to, or there'd be no point to splitting the shot. Apparently shields can concentrate its deflection ability on single hits more easily than multiple ones; perhaps this is why there seem to be a plateau for turret and gun sizes even as you move up into the Empire's mightiest battleships.

I'm not sure I follow. StarWars shields aren't point defenses that target and shoot down individual shots, they are energy fields. If you spread out energy across the field at several points, at any one point you the effect is going to be less intense that if you focused all your energy on one point. That would decrease the chances of getting through the shield, as at a given point (where the seperate bolts hit) the amount of energy is four times less. If all the energy hit at the same place on the field, it would have more impact on the shield at that point, increasing the odds of penetration.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Except its not like a physical barrier; intensity is not an issue.

[Connor MacLeod]

Actually I think Gil has a point, Primey. Shields (and Armor) actually have superconducting properties (the energy is spread across a larger surface area to reduce overfall effect) Deliberately diffusing the bolt only makes it EASIER to dissipate it.

On top of that, it would also induce some rather interesting range limitations (you extend the range of the beam by makinig it more coherent, not less. I believe this also may have some effect on the energy loss of the bolt itself.)

Frankly the "splitter" aperture on the Falcon's guns makes no real sense, unless it has some sort of "superlaser" like function (maybe it gives the bolt better off-axis firing, or some such - the capability is observed against the Sentry TIEs when escaping the DS in ANH.)

[Gil Hamilton]

Except its not like a physical barrier; intensity is not an issue.

Sure intensity is, assuming that the shield is a field. Field intensity is the vector sum of all the forces exerted by a field at a given point in the field. You'd better believe that the intensity of energy being applied to a given point on an energy field is an issue, since the more energy being exerted on a single point of that field, the more its counteracting the intensity of the field. Ergo better odds of defeating the shield at that point.

[Connor MacLeod]

Interestingly enough, Brian Young did have something to say on this (And some of what he says inspired what I suggested earlier.):

In this image, the Millennium Falcon's cannons have an enlargement close to the end as well. At first glance, this appears to be similar to the forked cannons present on Imperial walkers, but differences appear upon close inspection. Perhaps the device described above is housed inside the barrel? This would provide lower firing arcs, but would protect the device from micro-meteorites, etc. It does appear that the twin bolts are traveling at slightly different angles from their respective barrels.

It may otherwise serve the purpose of focusing the beam just before it exits the barrel. But this does not explain the varying firing angles once the bolts have exited the barrels. The EGW&T states that this device splits the bolt into 2 smaller bolts. In this image, it is clear that this is simply not the case. Also, there are no clear advantages in splitting a blaster bolt into weaker bolts, as this would probably be less effective against shields.

However, images of the quad-gun do suggest that there are two openings at the end of the barrel. But the fact remains that only one bolt is seen leaving each barrel when the gun is fired. Perhaps the two openings alternately release the bolt, to control overheating? Another possibility is that the two openings fire simultaneously, and the resulting small bolts combine to form one bolt, similar to the firing method of the Death Star's superlaser.

[Connor MacLeod]

Except its not like a physical barrier; intensity is not an issue.

Sure intensity is, assuming that the shield is a field. Field intensity is the vector sum of all the forces exerted by a field at a given point in the field. You'd better believe that the intensity of energy being applied to a given point on an energy field is an issue, since the more energy being exerted on a single point of that field, the more its counteracting the intensity of the field. Ergo better odds of defeating the shield at that point.

You'd be better off pointing out the fact that the "bolt splintering/visible flash" phenomenon is proof of this, although its liklier that shields have a volumetric effect rather than just area (so depth can be just as important as the other dimensions.)

As an example we can point out that the splintering effect does "spread" across the area/volume of the shields (for example, Droideka shields in TPM, which is also seen in ANH as well.) and as the bolts spread/splinter further, the decay becomes more pronounced. In fact, the flashes themselves would be examples of the "spreading" effect.

As a final point, given that SW shields are in fact an energy absorption/reradiation mechanism, which also serves to reinforce the point Gil makes.

[Lord Revan]

I was asking this because I wanted to know what would be the peak firepower of the Delta-7 (we know it's 1 kt max per shot, so I need to know how many shots can be fired at once)

[Alan Bolte]

Um, something really bugging me here folks. About all our explanations of laser and turbolasers:
If the lightspeed beam does the damage, and the visible part is just a tracer, then what does the appearance of tracer fire and tracer-sheild interaction tell us about laser emission and laser-shield interaction? How can it possibly tell us much of anything except for the trajectory of the beam?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Actually I think Gil has a point, Primey. Shields (and Armor) actually have superconducting properties (the energy is spread across a larger surface area to reduce overfall effect) Deliberately diffusing the bolt only makes it EASIER to dissipate it.

On top of that, it would also induce some rather interesting range limitations (you extend the range of the beam by makinig it more coherent, not less. I believe this also may have some effect on the energy loss of the bolt itself.)

Frankly the "splitter" aperture on the Falcon's guns makes no real sense, unless it has some sort of "superlaser" like function (maybe it gives the bolt better off-axis firing, or some such - the capability is observed against the Sentry TIEs when escaping the DS in ANH.)

Yeah, I know it makes no sense whatsoever rationally, but it is C canon, and I can't find any explicit contradiction... I think you could try to dismiss it on the grounds that the other sources involving shield mechanics analysis contradict it. But I don't know how firm that is.

[Connor MacLeod]

Yeah, I know it makes no sense whatsoever rationally, but it is C canon, and I can't find any explicit contradiction... I think you could try to dismiss it on the grounds that the other sources involving shield mechanics analysis contradict it. But I don't know how firm that is.

I think you need to actually read the quote in question:

The unusual splitter coupling slightly disperses the energy beam, forcing the target's shields to deflect energy simultaneously from two hits and increasing the liklihood of overloading the shields and inflicting greater damage.

simply "diffusing" the bolt is meaningless (in fact, Cracken's Reble Field Guide makes mention of "dispersing" a blaster bolt, and that doing so does in fact greatly reduce its damage!)

The fact it describes two separate, simultaneous hits, makes it sound more like a "superlaser" like effect, or the "double blaster" the criminal Skynxnex used in "Jedi Search."

[Illuminatus Primus]

That's what I thought; that it was suggesting that two coincident hits were more difficult for a shield to deflect than a single beam equal to the sum of their energy.

[Connor MacLeod]

Um, something really bugging me here folks. About all our explanations of laser and turbolasers:
If the lightspeed beam does the damage, and the visible part is just a tracer, then what does the appearance of tracer fire and tracer-sheild interaction tell us about laser emission and laser-shield interaction? How can it possibly tell us much of anything except for the trajectory of the beam?

Its not neccesarily a tracer, just a harmless side effect (which is not just indicated by the AOTC ICS - the EGW&T call sthe visible botl a "harmless side effect." ) of the weapon's nature/creation. The fact it CAN be used as a tracer (Shadows of the Empire, Wraith Squadron, Cracken's Rebel Field guide, EGW&T) is only an incidental advantage. In fact, the EGW&T suggests the "visible" nature is simply a preferential setting, not neccesarily even a requirement for capital scale weapons.)

[Connor MacLeod]

That's what I thought; that it was suggesting that two coincident hits were more difficult for a shield to deflect than a single beam equal to the sum of their energy.

Not if you spread what is normally a single full powered bolt into two smaller half-power bolts (particularily if those half powered bolts are not hitting the same area). That would still dictate that such an impact would be EASIER to deflect than an "undiffused" bolt. (based on how shields work)

The only way the quote makes sense is if the two "hits" are both full powered shots that combine superlaser-style, which means the "quad guns" are effectively an octet, for all intents and purposes - only that the two bolts are "combined" into a single one that strike the same point at the same time. This may have been what further dictated the increased power draw/improved cooling that the EGW&T Han Solo supposedly made to those guns.