Dealing with B5

[Ender]

In the closed thread, Stormbringer said to debate this stuff in a dedicated thread. So here it is.

1) The Main gun of the Excalibur in Racing the Night.
People have said the shockwaves make it GT ranged. Others have said that it is inconsistent because the fireball and aftereffects don't match that type of power.
Video clip of the scene in question located Here

2) G.O.D. Particle beam strength.
This is the weapon that turned against earth in Endgame. I have seen some people claim that it was 100 MT, but others have done work that puts it at 5 TT.
Essay on G.O.D. strength located Here

3) Situations calcs are derived from
Brandon Bray uses some instances to derive numbers from that I have never seen anyone else use. For instance, the Ion Cannon damagin B5 in The Fall of Night. Why is that? Does he use situations that are unreliable for some reason?
Brandon's weapons essays Here.

4) Canon
Exactly what is canon? Are there levels of canon? From what I've been able to tell from debating with Mughi, Adarx, and DarkLord, over at Spacebattles it's more or less whatever supports them at the moment. So what is the actual order of canon, and where can I find it?

5) Vorlon Ship weapons growth
People mention this, but they never say the source or any limits on the number, placement, or power of the weapons that the armor can grow at will.

Thoughts? And if someone could post a link to this over at SB I would appreciate it, as I want to hear what the fivers there think as well, and for some reason I can't access the site.

[Ted C]

1) The Main gun of the Excalibur in Racing the Night.
People have said the shockwaves make it GT ranged. Others have said that it is inconsistent because the fireball and aftereffects don't match that type of power.

Indeed, the "shockwaves" seem to propagate at far greater than the speed of sound, which is inconsistent with a real atmospheric shockwave. Also, I'm not convinced that anyone has scaled the incident particularly well.

2) G.O.D. Particle beam strength.
This is the weapon that turned against earth in Endgame. I have seen some people claim that it was 100 MT, but others have done work that puts it at 5 TT.

High-end estimates of the firepower of EarthForce defense satellites are based on extremely generous interpretations of the phrase "wipe-out the Eastern seaboard". Quite frankly, I think that one of these satellites could easily "wipe out" a large area with just a few dozen KT per second of firepower.

3) Situations calcs are derived from
Brandon Bray uses some instances to derive numbers from that I have never seen anyone else use. For instance, the Ion Cannon damaging B5 in The Fall of Night.

Can't say I'm familiar with those particular essays. I daresay most people avoid trying to analyze that particular incident because the damage isn't easily expressed in terms of melted and/or vaporized metal. A good analysis of the loss of the cargo arm would require analyzing the effects of concussion blasts on the structure, and we know too little about the structure to do a reliable analysis.

4) Canon
Exactly what is canon? Are there levels of canon? From what I've been able to tell from debating with Mughi, Adarx, and DarkLord, over at Spacebattles it's more or less whatever supports them at the moment. So what is the actual order of canon, and where can I find it?

Most people define the "canon" (for B5) as the actual show that aired. Some people will also add in various novels that JMS either wrote or gave his "seal of approval". Others will also add in some information from the B5Wars game based on a marketing introduction that JMS wrote for it.

At BabTech, we consider the events depicted in the show to be the "canon". We consider the show to be documentary footage of actual events. Any other source that contains contradictory information we assume to be wrong.

5) Vorlon Ship weapons growth
People mention this, but they never say the source or any limits on the number, placement, or power of the weapons that the armor can grow at will.

We have seen exactly one incident of a Vorlon ship "growing" a weapon. In this case, Kosh's yacht produced a tentacle with what appeared to be a weapon and a laser-sight on the end and pointed it at Captain Sheridan when he stepped too close to the ship.

I consider this incident to be reasonable evidence that a Vorlon ship can extend at least one anti-personnel weapon from its hull. I do not consider it reasonable evidence that a Vorlon ship can extend an arbitrary number of weapons from its hull, nor is it evidence that a Vorlon ship can produce ship-to-ship weapons from any given point on its hull.

[Captain Jack Frank]

I wish Babylon 5 would win because it was such a cool show, but it looks like its weapons and ships aren't powerful enough to hurt Star Wars stuff.

[Durandal]

In the closed thread, Stormbringer said to debate this stuff in a dedicated thread. So here it is.

1) The Main gun of the Excalibur in Racing the Night.
People have said the shockwaves make it GT ranged. Others have said that it is inconsistent because the fireball and aftereffects don't match that type of power.

We see a shot of the beam going through the atmosphere, and it fails to vaporize any of the clouds in the sky. Also, the shockwave propagates very quickly, suggesting that the speed of sound in that atmosphere is very high. I'm not really sure how anyone managed to quantify this event, but if it's typical B5 "analysis," I'd like to see it just for a good laugh.

2) G.O.D. Particle beam strength.
This is the weapon that turned against earth in Endgame. I have seen some people claim that it was 100 MT, but others have done work that puts it at 5 TT.
Essay on G.O.D. strength located Here

Typical outofstep bullshit. We're never told which Eastern seaboard will be affected.

Three different sources define "wipe out" as making a said object completely cease to exist. If this doesn't scream vaporize I don't know what does.

A nuclear weapon will "wipe out" a city without vaporizing the whole thing, and a skateboarder will "wipe out" without turning into a giant cloud of water vapor. That, and we've got no timeframe at all. Nothing is even implied. In fact, this would seem to be a highly surgical weapon, requiring lots of individual hits. One giant shot's effects would propagate in a circular fashion, rather than spreading all over the Eastern seaboard exclusively. Since no collateral damage of any significance is mentioned, it's reasonable to conclude that the weapon is surgical.

[Darth Wong]

Russian boomers were said to be capable of wiping out the Eastern seaboard, and they certainly didn't loose a 5 teratons of energy. You can't assume every bit of hyperbole should be translated to "100% fatalities" unless you've got a damned good reason.

[Stormbringer]

4) Canon
Exactly what is canon? Are there levels of canon? From what I've been able to tell from debating with Mughi, Adarx, and DarkLord, over at Spacebattles it's more or less whatever supports them at the moment. So what is the actual order of canon, and where can I find it?

The canon for B5 is, in order, the aired materials, the canon novels (The Shadow Within, To Dream in the City of Sorrows, and the three trilogies) and B5 Wars. B5 wars is open to debate because of policy changes after the canonizing of it and it's never been clarified.

[Ender]

Where do comments from JMS fall? I remember someone saying at one point that he had the right to overrule things and something about contradictions are errors of history or something.

[Stormbringer]

Where do comments from JMS fall? I remember someone saying at one point that he had the right to overrule things and something about contradictions are errors of history or something.

There is no official policy on those. However most weight them as canon or official. So long as canon isn't contradicted they stand.

[Ender]

*bump*

Nobody else?

[Crown]

I could add mostly conjecture and speculation, but nothin' else I am afraid

[XaLEv]

Here's some quotes from JMS about canonicity of novels:

Legions of Fire

All three trilogies

All three trilogies again

Psicorp/Telepath Trilogy

All three trilogies, plus most of two other novels

Del Rey trilogies, plus the last few from Dell

[Crown]

So does this mean that what JMS says is cannon as well?

[Shinova]

So does this mean that what JMS says is cannon as well?

Not if it doesn't match with what's already canon.

[Ender]

So am I going to have to say something mind boggelingly stupid like "B5 0wnerz joo! StarWarz sucks" to make this thread take off or what?

[Connor MacLeod]

So am I going to have to say something mind boggelingly stupid like "B5 0wnerz joo! StarWarz sucks" to make this thread take off or what?

Gimme time..

[Connor MacLeod]

In the closed thread, Stormbringer said to debate this stuff in a dedicated thread. So here it is.

1) The Main gun of the Excalibur in Racing the Night.
People have said the shockwaves make it GT ranged. Others have said that it is inconsistent because the fireball and aftereffects don't match that type of power.
Video clip of the scene in question located Here

Dealt with in detail by others already. Note that this contradicts the rather straightforward estimates from ACTA against the asteroid. In the RTN instance, the target is a a non-inert object (a "tractor beam" - for lack of a better term - that is projecting power to pull the ship down to the planet. Energy has to go somewhere.)

2) G.O.D. Particle beam strength.
This is the weapon that turned against earth in Endgame. I have seen some people claim that it was 100 MT, but others have done work that puts it at 5 TT.
Essay on G.O.D. strength located Here

Outofstep is a moron. Those calcs only work if his interpretation of "wipe out" (IE IIRC melt/vaporize) is accurate. Which is entirely debatable. The only reliable figures would put an upper limit of 100 MT or so, and thats even questionable to some degree.

3) Situations calcs are derived from
Brandon Bray uses some instances to derive numbers from that I have never seen anyone else use. For instance, the Ion Cannon damagin B5 in The Fall of Night. Why is that? Does he use situations that are unreliable for some reason?
Brandon's weapons essays Here.

For the most part, the "low end" calcs are reasonable and reasonably done. Some of his "assumptions" are rather questionable (the armor modifier for one..) and are the only rela problems with his calculations (I dont know if he simply has not edited them out, or what... I'd say the most questionable calcs tend to be the Excalibur ones.. although the first one calcs involving the planet are somewhat problematical as well.

4) Canon
Exactly what is canon? Are there levels of canon? From what I've been able to tell from debating with Mughi, Adarx, and DarkLord, over at Spacebattles it's more or less whatever supports them at the moment. So what is the actual order of canon, and where can I find it?

Ugh.. I hate discussing this. B5 canon is too ambiguous because it lacks a policy. This allows Fivers ample opportunity to play games with sources and materials.

5) Vorlon Ship weapons growth
People mention this, but they never say the source or any limits on the number, placement, or power of the weapons that the armor can grow at will.

Depends on the ship. In almost all cases, less than a dozen weapons for a Vorlon ship though.

Thoughts? And if someone could post a link to this over at SB I would appreciate it, as I want to hear what the fivers there think as well, and for some reason I can't access the site.

The Fivers will deny it, insist we're being biased/unfair/not considering all the evidence, or invent some excuse (like they do with B5 Wars and the whole "JMS doesn't support the gameplay aspects as canon, just the fluff!" BS.)

[Connor MacLeod]

Here Mike.. your old buddy Stilgar

Note that this is probably the ONE calculation that is total BS on the B5tech site, and its not Tigerclaw's calc. PErsonally, I'd just like to think this appearing was an anomaly

http://www.b5tech.com/science/weapons/p ... ebeam.html

PARTICLE BEAM POWER OUTPUT
EARTH, AEGIS SATELITE


The weapon under consideration is a Particle Beam Cannon, and its theoretical destructive capability and the possible colatoral damage this weapon might have caused when Earth Alliance President William, Morgan Clark aimed this weapon system at his own home world - a final act of vengence when it had become clear that he was about to be defeated and held responsible for his crimes against humanity.

The composition of the Particle Beam and its role in the weapon is unclear; the role can be anything from polluting the target area with radiation to enhancing the way the energy is delivered. One constant remains: however the energy reaches its target, the delivered amount of it, and hence the effective power output of the weapon can be calculated.

The starting information for the calculation is as follows: the Particle Beam Cannon is able to MELT, "turn into glass" an area of the Earth's crust, 400,000 square kilometers (this is 4*1011 square meters), to the depth of 4 centimeters (this is 0.04 meters) in 30 seconds sustained fire at maximum power.

Earth's crust is composed of between 60 - 65% of silica by weight, also known as silicon dioxide, its chemical formula is SiO2. Silica occurs in the form of sand as well as other common minerals such as quartz, flint agate, and a lot of others. For our purposes let's take the 65% as the value for silica in Earth's crust.

Alumina, or aluminum oxide, its chemical formula is Al2O3, is the other most common mineral in Earth's crust, it is the component of a variety of minerals. The 3 elements' oxygen, silicon, and aluminum account for 84% of Earth's crust by weight. The other major components of the crust are calcium, potassium, sodium, and magnesium with other elements occurring in smaller quantities. By these numbers most of the crust is composed of silica/ (silicon and oxygen) and Alumina/ (aluminum and oxygen), with only about a fifth left for the compounds of the other elements. A lot of the compounds outside the major two, will have similar melting properties on average to the two. All this considered it is a valid and relatively small approximation, to say that Earth's crust is composed of 65% of silica and 35% Alumina, both by weight - basically we substitute the properties of Alumina for the minority of the remaining compounds and retain the value for silica. Since the density of silica and Alumina are 2.6 g/m3 and 4.0 g/m3 respectively, it is a straightforward calculation to show that 65% of silica and 35% of Alumina, both by weight, is the same as 74% of silica and 26% of Alumina, both by volume.

The whole process of melting a substance involves two distinct steps, which take up energy. First the substance has to be raised to the temperature at which it begins to melt. Second the melting substance takes up energy it needs for the process but its temperature does not rise until all of it is melted, any hot pockets in the already melted part are reabsorbed into melting the solid. The two steps require differing amounts of energy described in differing ways because of the specifics of each step, and so, the energy for each step has to be calculated separately.

Let's deal with silica first:

One mole (a mole is a standard number in chemistry, used not unlike a "dozen", except that a mole is very large. One mole is 6.022*1023.) of SiO2, silica/silicon dioxide, molecules has mass of 60.09 g (g for grams).

The density of silicon dioxide is 2.6*106 g/m3. The area under question, 4*1011 m2 (square meters), to the depth of 0.04 m (meter), gives a volume of 1.6*1010 m3 (cubic meters).

Since silica makes up 74% of crust by volume (see above), the volume of silica here is 0.74 * 1.6*1010 m3 = 1.2*1010 m3, which is 1.2*1010 m3 * 2.6*106 g/m3 = 3.1*1016 g, which is 3.1*1016 g/60.09 g = 5.1*1014 moles.

The molar heat capacity, the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of one mole of a substance by one K (Kelvin), of silicon dioxide is 44 J/Kmol (J stands for Joule, a unit of energy, K is unit of temperature, mol stands for mole).

The melting point for silicon dioxide is 1700 degrees C (Celsius). Let's take the temperature before the weapon hits as 25 degrees C, a pleasant, cool summer day, or a normal room temperature. Hence, to reach its melting point the temperature of the silicon dioxide has to be raised by 1675 degrees C, or 1675 K, as one Kelvin equals one degree Celsius.

So the energy required to raise the silica in our volume to its melting point temperature is 1675 K * 5.1*1014 mol * 44 J/Kmol = 3.8*1019 J.

The molar heat of melting for silica is 8 kJ/mol (kJ stands for kilojoule, one thousand joules), so the energy required to melt the silica in our volume once it reached its melting temperature is 5.1*1014 mol * 8*103 J/mol = 4.1*1018 J.

In total the amount of energy required to melt the silica in the volume being melted by the Particle Beam Cannon is 4.2*1019 J.

Now to the Alumina component:

Alumina has the following properties: melting point of 2045 degrees Celsius; density of 4.0*106 g/m3; molar heat capacity of 79 J/Kmol; molar heat of melting of 109 kJ/mol; one mole of Alumina has mass of 101.96 g.

Hence similar to above, since the Alumina makes up 26% of the volume of 1.6*1010 m3, from its density it follows the mass of the Alumina to be melted is 1.7*1016 g, which is 1.6*1014 moles. Starting from 25 degrees Celsius, the Alumina has to be raised through 2020 K to its melting temperature.

Following the same procedure in calculations as above for silica, the energy required to raise the Alumina in our volume to its melting point temperature is 2.6*1019 J, and the energy required to melt the Alumina in our volume at it melting point temperature is 1.8*1019 J.

In total the amount of energy required to melt the Alumina in the volume being melted by the Particle Beam Cannon is 4.4*1019 J.

Therefore, the total amount of energy required to melt Earth's crust over an area of 400,000 square kilometers down to the depth of 4 centimeters is 8.6*1019 J. Since this is to happen in 30 s (seconds), the power of the Particle Beam Cannon is 8.6*1019 J/30 s = 2.7*1018 J/s = 2.7*1018 W (watts), as one J per second is one watt. In more familiar terms the power of 2.7*1018 W is 2.7 million Terawatts.

The above result still has to be corrected for one more thing. Mixtures of chemical compounds, that is impure compounds, tend to melt at lower temperatures than the pure compounds in them. The mantle, the part of Earth's surface directly under the crust, starts to melt at around 1500 degrees Celsius. The comparison of this to silica's and alumina's melting points of around 2000 degree Celsius would indicate that the melting points are lowered by around 20 - 25% due to the compounds making themselves mutually impure. Say it is 25% on average. Assuming that it takes about the same amount of energy to melt the impure compounds once they are heated to their melting points, the energy required to reach the melting points is reduced by 25%. Reducing the energies above for reaching melting points gives a value for energy required to melt the silica in our volume of 3.3*1019 J, and 3.8*1019 J for the Alumina in our volume.

Hence the total energy required to melt Earth's crust over an area of 400,000 square kilometers (this would be an area of radius of 357 kilometers), corrected for being an impure substance, is 7.1*1019 J. Since this happens in 30 s, the power is 7.1*1019 J/30 s = 2.4*1018 W which is 2.4 million Terawatts.

CONCLUSION: Assuming that the Particle Beam Cannon can melt Earth's crust over an area of 400,000 square kilometers, down to the depth of 4 centimeters, in 30 seconds, it means that the power output of the Particle Beam Cannon is 2.4 million Terawatts.

~Written by Stilgar

[Isil`Zha]

Typical outofstep bullshit. We're never told which Eastern seaboard will be affected.

Actually, we are.

"Target?"
"North America... it'll wipe out most of the eastern seaboard."

[Vympel]

Typical outofstep bullshit. We're never told which Eastern seaboard will be affected.

Actually, we are.

"Target?"
"North America... it'll wipe out most of the eastern seaboard."

Irrelevant. The Russian SSBN fleet was said to be capable of doing just this. Should we take it to mean they do this by vapourizing everything with 100% casualties

[Isil`Zha]

Typical outofstep bullshit. We're never told which Eastern seaboard will be affected.

Actually, we are.

"Target?"
"North America... it'll wipe out most of the eastern seaboard."

Irrelevant. The Russian SSBN fleet was said to be capable of doing just this. Should we take it to mean they do this by vapourizing everything with 100% casualties

It would still take a good amount of firepower to create a blast that would wipe out the eastern seaboard of North America

[Vympel]

It would still take a good amount of firepower to create a blast that would wipe out the eastern seaboard of North America

Interesting exercise, let's do a count:

Let's say the Eastern Seaboard is (naturally) being targeted by the Russian Northern Fleet (the Pacific Fleet boomers have targets on the western side, obviously- though range really isn't an issue)

In 1989 the Northern Fleet consisted of the following:

6 Typhoon SSBNs
4 Delta IV SSBNs
5 Delta III SSBNs
4 Delta II SSBNs
9 Delta SSBNs
1 Yankee II SSBN

That's the absolute maximum number of subs at the time.

6 Tpyhoons: 1,200 warheads- 100KT each
4 Delta IV SSBNs: 640 warheads- 100KT each (assuming each missile it's carrying it's maximum 10 warhead load)
5 Delta III SSBNs: 560 warheads- 100KT each (assuming each missile it's carrying it's maximum 7 warhead load)
4 Delta II SSBNs: 64 warheads- 1.5MT each (western source- estimate)
9 Delta SSBNs: 108 warheads- 1.5MT each (western source- estimate)
1 Yankee II SSBN: 12 warheads- 500kt each

Total firepower in megatons? (can't be bothered doing the math)

[Connor MacLeod]

It would still take a good amount of firepower to create a blast that would wipe out the eastern seaboard of North America

Interesting exercise, let's do a count:

Let's say the Eastern Seaboard is (naturally) being targeted by the Russian Northern Fleet (the Pacific Fleet boomers have targets on the western side, obviously- though range really isn't an issue)

In 1989 the Northern Fleet consisted of the following:

6 Typhoon SSBNs
4 Delta IV SSBNs
5 Delta III SSBNs
4 Delta II SSBNs
9 Delta SSBNs
1 Yankee II SSBN

That's the absolute maximum number of subs at the time.

6 Tpyhoons: 1,200 warheads- 100KT each
4 Delta IV SSBNs: 640 warheads- 100KT each (assuming each missile it's carrying it's maximum 10 warhead load)
5 Delta III SSBNs: 560 warheads- 100KT each (assuming each missile it's carrying it's maximum 7 warhead load)
4 Delta II SSBNs: 64 warheads- 1.5MT each (western source- estimate)
9 Delta SSBNs: 108 warheads- 1.5MT each (western source- estimate)
1 Yankee II SSBN: 12 warheads- 500kt each

Total firepower in megatons? (can't be bothered doing the math)

Is the total number of warheads per sub, or the total for the class?

If its the latter, the total is 504 megatons.

If its the former, roughly 3100-3200 megatons total.

[Vympel]

Bugger it I'll make my first foray into calcs!

Typhoon total: 120MT
Delta IV: 64MT
Delta III: 56MT
Delta II: 96MT
Delta: 162MT
Yankee II: 6 MT

Total firepower: 504 megatons of death and destruction

This is the absolute upper limit for the circa 1989 Soviet Northern Fleet.

[Vympel]

Is the total number of warheads per sub, or the total for the class?

If its the latter, the total is 504 megatons.

If its the former, roughly 3100-3200 megatons total.

LOL, posted at the same time.

Per class. I forgot to add each. There's no way a single sub could carry 1,200 100kt warheads, incidentally

So there you have it.

[Connor MacLeod]

Lets see.. and it took the particle beam on that particular platform ~10 minutes to charge up..

504 / 600 seconds = 840 kilotons per second, or 3.52e15 watts

If we did the 3200 megatons.. 5.34 megatons per second - 2.23e16 watts