Could a 200GT TL destroy an asteroid the size of Texas?

[Galvatron]

Just a little prelude to the inevitable Star Wars vs. Armageddon debate...

[AdmiralKanos]

How big is Texas, after you remove the Bush family ego?

[Robert Treder]

According to the CIA World Factbook 2001, Afghanistan is "slightly smaller than Texas" and it has a total area of 647,500 sq km.

The size of the Bush Family EgoTM is unfortunately incalculable, as its full extent is not comprehensible to sane minds. Or something like that.

When I find more precise stats on Texas's size, I'll drop a line.

[Robert Treder]

Oh, the CIA World Factbook 2001 also says that Kazakhstan is "slightly less than four times the size of Texas", and Kazakhstan is 2,717,300 sq km (including water area; w/o water is 2,669,800 sq km).

Turkey is "slightly larger than Texas" at 780,580 sq km (again, including water area; w/o water is 770,760 sq km).

South Africa is "slightly less than twice the size of Texas" at 1,219,912 sq km (w/o water 1,219,912 sq km).

Botswana is "slightly smaller than Texas" at 600,370 sq km (w/o water is 585,370 sq km).

Well, the CIA website seems to like using Texas as a yardstick, so there are a lot more, but I don't feel like finding them. I just looked up the ones I thought were about Texas-sized or would use a Texas yardstick.
Looks like Texas is about 650,000-something sq km.

[Doomriser]

ROFL, I figure that a one-mile diameter asteroid would take nearly 200 GT to vapourize, though if you really want to know, Darth Wong's site has an asteroid destruction calculator...

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

With ~200 gigatons you can vaporize a 3 km in diameter asteroid made of nickle-iron.

[Galvatron]

ROFL, I figure that a one-mile diameter asteroid would take nearly 200 GT to vapourize, though if you really want to know, Darth Wong's site has an asteroid destruction calculator...

So...

Would the full arsenal of an Imperator-class star destroyer be able to reduce such an asteroid, which I'll classify as an Alamo-type, to harmless debris?

[Crazy_Vasey]

Eventually, might take a while like heh.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

Given several days, yes, an ISD could vaorize such an asteroid.

What do they men "the size of Texas"? The same surface area?

[Stravo]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I happen to know from a very reliable source that 200GT lasers do not exist.....

[consequences]

yes, user099 is a very reliable source of stupidity

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

Yes, 200 GT turbolasers don't exist, but they're not impossible.

[Mr. B]

Oh, the CIA World Factbook 2001 also says that Kazakhstan is "slightly less than four times the size of Texas", and Kazakhstan is 2,717,300 sq km (including water area; w/o water is 2,669,800 sq km).

Turkey is "slightly larger than Texas" at 780,580 sq km (again, including water area; w/o water is 770,760 sq km).

South Africa is "slightly less than twice the size of Texas" at 1,219,912 sq km (w/o water 1,219,912 sq km).

Botswana is "slightly smaller than Texas" at 600,370 sq km (w/o water is 585,370 sq km).

Well, the CIA website seems to like using Texas as a yardstick, so there are a lot more, but I don't feel like finding them. I just looked up the ones I thought were about Texas-sized or would use a Texas yardstick.
Looks like Texas is about 650,000-something sq km.

George H.W. Bush was once the CIA director. Coincidence?

And BTW Texas is the size of New Hampshire after you remove the Bush Family Ego.

[Darth Wong]

OK, so let's say Texas is 650,000 km^2, disregarding the volumetric effect of the Bush family ego. If we assume that the asteroid in Armageddon has a projected area the size of Texas, this would imply that it is a spherical asteroid roughly 900km wide.

This is a huge asteroid; more of a moon. For an asteroid of such large size, physical fragmentation energy is insignificant compared to gravitational binding energy. If we assume it is made of hard granite, its mass would be 9E17 tons and its GBE would be 1.7E7 gigatons. Yup, that's right: 17 million gigatons.

So, a 200 gigaton blast would have very little effect on an asteroid the size of Texas.

[Graeme Dice]

OK, so let's say Texas is 650,000 km^2, disregarding the volumetric effect of the Bush family ego. If we assume that the asteroid in Armageddon has a projected area the size of Texas, this would imply that it is a spherical asteroid roughly 900km wide.

This is a huge asteroid; more of a moon. For an asteroid of such large size, physical fragmentation energy is insignificant compared to gravitational binding energy. If we assume it is made of hard granite, its mass would be 9E17 tons and its GBE would be 1.7E7 gigatons. Yup, that's right: 17 million gigatons.

So, a 200 gigaton blast would have very little effect on an asteroid the size of Texas.

Or in other words, those were some awfully big nukes they planted in that asteroid to push either half around the planet.

[Darth Wong]

Or in other words, those were some awfully big nukes they planted in that asteroid to push either half around the planet.

And magical too, since there's no reason the asteroid should have cleanly split in half instead of fragmenting in all directions. And I suspect that scaling of the asteroid fragment movements on the NASA display screen from the DVD might reveal that the figure is even larger, since their rate of separation was probably very large, once scaled against the size of the Earth.

The clean planar split is rather bizarre, isn't it? Perhaps Bruce Willis borrowed some seismic charges from Jango Fett, and then supercharged them by squeezing really hard on the detonation trigger.

[TrailerParkJawa]

Mabye it was some sort of super space shale, created from the left overs of organic space creatures. Creatures which are much more powerful than anything made of metal.

[Galvatron]

So, a 200 gigaton blast would have very little effect on an asteroid the size of Texas.

Could a BDZ handle such a beast?

[Darth Wong]

Could a BDZ handle such a beast?

Depends on just how powerful a BDZ really is. Conservative estimates based on mission requirements of zero survivors and zero witnesses (even in a technologically advanced society) are around the quarter-million gigaton mark (156 salvoes from 8 200-gigaton emplacements), but you need 17 million gigatons to overcome the asteroid's gravity, so I would say no.

[Omega-13]

so , slap a hyper matter engine on an asteroid that big, and its the perfect weapon, gives off very little light, and doesn't stick out like a sore thumb like a battle cruiser

[Galvatron]

Could a BDZ handle such a beast?

Depends on just how powerful a BDZ really is. Conservative estimates based on mission requirements of zero survivors and zero witnesses (even in a technologically advanced society) are around the quarter-million gigaton mark (156 salvoes from 8 200-gigaton emplacements), but you need 17 million gigatons to overcome the asteroid's gravity, so I would say no.

Are we assuming that an ISD's heavy TLs are 200GT emplacements?

[Lusankya]

Or in other words, those were some awfully big nukes they planted in that asteroid to push either half around the planet.

And magical too, since there's no reason the asteroid should have cleanly split in half instead of fragmenting in all directions. And I suspect that scaling of the asteroid fragment movements on the NASA display screen from the DVD might reveal that the figure is even larger, since their rate of separation was probably very large, once scaled against the size of the Earth.

The clean planar split is rather bizarre, isn't it? Perhaps Bruce Willis borrowed some seismic charges from Jango Fett, and then supercharged them by squeezing really hard on the detonation trigger.

How many times do I have to tell you people that Bruce Willis is invincible? He'd beat the crap out of ripped shirt Kirk with one arm behind his back, no shoes and a banana in his left ear any day.

I believe it's due to the energy created by thousands of Bruce fans who yerll out "Brooooooce" every time they see him. they are the ones who destroyed that meteor, not the bombs.

[Graeme Dice]

Or in other words, those were some awfully big nukes they planted in that asteroid to push either half around the planet.

And magical too, since there's no reason the asteroid should have cleanly split in half instead of fragmenting in all directions. And I suspect that scaling of the asteroid fragment movements on the NASA display screen from the DVD might reveal that the figure is even larger, since their rate of separation was probably very large, once scaled against the size of the Earth.

The clean planar split is rather bizarre, isn't it? Perhaps Bruce Willis borrowed some seismic charges from Jango Fett, and then supercharged them by squeezing really hard on the detonation trigger.

Also remember that oxygen is not required for fires in cargo holds, and that the best approach to an object you want to land on is to come up at such a high speed that you will be smashed to pieces by rocks moving at the same speed as it.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

The asteroid must be magical. I mean, since when could machine gun bullets rip through a titanium hull? And I think the Bush family ego is a cubic measurement.

[His Divine Shadow]

Could a BDZ handle such a beast?

Depends on just how powerful a BDZ really is. Conservative estimates based on mission requirements of zero survivors and zero witnesses (even in a technologically advanced society) are around the quarter-million gigaton mark (156 salvoes from 8 200-gigaton emplacements), but you need 17 million gigatons to overcome the asteroid's gravity, so I would say no.

Going by some RPG stats and conversions, an HTL is around 2.5 Teratons, or 2500GT.
There was also a calc wich gave an HTL a value of 29TT

There 32 such guns on one side of an ISD2, IOW a broadside, thats 80.000GT per broadside, that translates to about 212 broadsides required.

They can probably fire a broadside atleast every 10 seconds given that an HTL requires 4 seconds to generate an adequate charge(EGWT).

So it might take them half an hour or more.