"Have you seen that new VT16?"

Jean Paul · Post by **Jean Paul** » 2004-10-07 02:32pm

I hear it's quite a thing to see..

Okay, what is the VT16? Is it covered or defined anywhere?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-10-07 02:41pm

It's BT-16, actually. The member's user name is a typo.

It's a droid:

CUSWE wrote:BT-16
a perimeter patrol droid manufactured by Arakyd, the BT-16 had a bulbous main body supported by a set of spider-like legs. These droids proved to be extremely reliable, being incredibly stable on their legs over a variety of terrain. They were equipped with a number of highly-sensitive sensor packages, and were armed with a Taim & Bak repeating blaster cannon. It was rumored that the B'omarr Monks used these droids as carriers for their disembodied brains. (GG7, TME, FTD)

And yes, it IS BT-16, not VT.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-10-07 02:41pm

LOL I was just going to answer!

*Nostalgia*

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-10-07 02:48pm

Indeed.

That was a fun thread. Until it went to crap and went on and on, of course.

McNum · Post by **McNum** » 2004-10-07 03:59pm

One thing I find a bit odd is that the subtitles (English subtitles on Danish version DVD) on the ANH DVD has it listed as VT-16, not BT-16. Is there both a BT-16 and a VT-16?

Jean Paul · Post by **Jean Paul** » 2004-10-07 04:40pm

The subs on the British (Region 2, PAL) version say V not B.

Macross · Post by **Macross** » 2004-10-07 04:46pm

I dont know, if the B'omarr Monks are using BT-16s then I doubt the Stormtrooper would have referred to them as "new".

I had alwayd thought the stormtrooper was referring to a new speeder or blaster, something that they would be useing, and not a droid.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-10-07 04:47pm

I think the manuscript or something said 'B', that´s why it was the correct term.

then I doubt the Stormtrooper would have referred to them as "new".

Could just be a new model.

Executor32 · Post by **Executor32** » 2004-10-07 08:38pm

Actually, it is VT-16. Both the clearer dialog of the DVD and the subtitles confirm it.

Icehawk · Post by **Icehawk** » 2004-10-08 12:03am

Yes I must concede that after seeing the DVD version it does appear to be "VT-16" after all. I cranked up my surround sound and its pretty clear on that.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-10-08 03:25am

From the old thread:

Icehawk wrote:Since the screenplay says it is in fact BT-16, it is more than likely they were talking about the BT-16 perimeter defence droid.

Executor32 · Post by **Executor32** » 2004-10-08 12:38pm

Screenplay is lower canon than the actual movie.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-10-08 04:50pm

Executor32 wrote:Screenplay is lower canon than the actual movie.

*Puts fingers in ears* LalalalalaLALALALAA

Seriously, if the screenplay says 'B' and the wording could be interpreted as either 'B' of 'V' (two similar-sounding letters), I choose to go with 'B'. The guy talks so fast, I can´t really be sure. There´s been other cases where I´ve heard someone say something and I interpreted it slightly wrong. Could be the same here.

And it makes most sense that they are talking about a ground-craft, since they´re stormtroopers and work with stuff like that all the time. Like computer-geeks and new software....

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-10-08 05:07pm

It's definately BT-16. That's what he's said for almost 30 damn years, and what everything else confirms that he's said for almost 30 damn years.

Plus, there is definition on what a BT-16 actually is (which I provided above), while no such entry on a VT-16 exists.

Macross · Post by **Macross** » 2004-10-08 05:23pm

Executor32 wrote:Screenplay is lower canon than the actual movie.

And Subtitles have a higher canon staus then screenplay!

It does sound like VT-16 to me. Maybe GL changed it for the SE.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-10-08 06:15pm

And Subtitles have a higher canon staus then screenplay!

That makes the Norwegian translation of "invincible" to "invisible" canon! OMG ANAKIN CAN MAKE HIMSELF INVISIBLE! wwwooo

Macross · Post by **Macross** » 2004-10-09 02:57am

VT-16 wrote:
And Subtitles have a higher canon staus then screenplay!
That makes the Norwegian translation of "invincible" to "invisible" canon! OMG ANAKIN CAN MAKE HIMSELF INVISIBLE! wwwooo

Only in Norway!

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2004-10-09 05:11am

I dont know, if the B'omarr Monks are using BT-16s then I doubt the Stormtrooper would have referred to them as "new".

Why? The Ford Thunderbird came out in the 1950's... however, nowadays you most certainly CAN go buy a NEW Ford Thunderbird. BT-16 (or VT-16, or whatever) is probably a name that they recycle over and over... maybe occasionally switching up a number at significant milestones (like how the Lincoln Mark VII switched up to the Lincoln Mark VIII).

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-10-09 05:53am

maybe occasionally switching up a number at significant milestones (like how the Lincoln Mark VII switched up to the Lincoln Mark VIII).

That reminds me, the differentiation of model applies to the two AT-ST-types in ESB and ROTJ, too (since they had slighty different appearances). I know I´ve seen the designation for the Hoth AT-STs somewhere, that sets it apart from the "normal" AT-STs on Endor. It´s in a guide-book or something. Does anyone know what I´m talking about?