A minor error on the main site?

Winston Blake · Post by **Winston Blake** » 2004-09-10 10:32pm

Many months ago i sent an email to Mr Wong and i assume it never got through. This should be a quicker way of getting some kind of response. This is what i wrote:

Chris Andrews wrote:Hi, I'm a big fan of your site and it's what got me into Star Wars vs Star Trek. I have a comment on your "Star Wars Armour" page. It may have already been brought to your attention.

Under Reconnaissance Vehicles, the image captioned "A "Flash" speeder firing its anti-tank gun" actually shows a "Gian" speeder.

Your following two paragraphs on Naboo speeders describe the speeders correctly (the "Flash" "has unusually large side-pod engines" and the "Gian" "is a heavier vehicle, sporting three separate blasters instead of one like the "Flash" speeder").

However, the image mentioned shows a speeder with TWO guns visible, and to a Star Wars geek like me, the speeder is definitely a "Gian" speeder.

Page 30 of the "Episode 1: Incredible Cross-Sections" clearly shows both speeders. Page 32 of the "Episode 1: Visual Dictionary" also shows a "Gian" speeder.

Because you conclude "Since that blaster easily pierced TradeFed battle tank armour, it would appear that the "Gian" speeder's guns should be capable of destroying even larger vehicles", some Trekkies may try to claim you are overestimating Naboo speeder firepower.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... ur-SW.html

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2004-09-10 10:37pm

You're right. That looks like a Gian speeder to me.

IRG CommandoJoe · Post by **IRG CommandoJoe** » 2004-09-12 10:19pm

I noticed another possible error:

Its engines, instead of being mounted on broad side-pods for ease of maintenance, are tucked inside its body to prevent a smaller target profile.

Shouldn't it be "present," rather than "prevent"? They wouldn't want to prevent a smaller target profile, they'd want to present a smaller target profile.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman · Post by **Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman** » 2004-09-13 11:46am

Wonder why Mike hasn't been replying to this thread. Hello? Mike? That new porn film can wait, you know

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2004-09-14 12:54am

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:Wonder why Mike hasn't been replying to this thread. Hello? Mike? That new porn film can wait, you know

Appearantly It can't.

. Relax man. He's only human.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-09-14 01:32am

Hint: This would be an excellent use for the Private Message feature of this message board.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman · Post by **Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman** » 2004-09-14 03:30am

Howedar wrote:Hint: This would be an excellent use for the Private Message feature of this message board.

Like "may I borrow that porn" PM?

Winston Blake · Post by **Winston Blake** » 2004-09-14 03:46am

Howedar wrote:Hint: This would be an excellent use for the Private Message feature of this message board.

Hint accepted for future cases.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2004-09-14 01:05pm

I've also seen one error, or rather misconception. I've always also thought the following to be the case:

This latter capability indicates high-velocity fragmentation from the explosive power of the impact, and it was demonstrated twice in ANH: once during the Death Star detention centre break-in, when an officer was killed by a hit to the wall behind him

However, that's not the case. What happens is that after Luke shouts "Watch out!", he fires two shots. If you look at the sequence frame-by-frame, you'll see that the first shot hits the officer in the abdomen while the other shot hits the wall. This is the only error which I've seen, otherwise Mike's site is extremely flawless.