Superlasers - Why so rare?

[Batman]

"Planetary" because they're positioned in a ring around the weapon's perimeter, most likely.

Because of? I'm sorry but I have never seen planetary used to mean, essentially, 'arranged in a circle'.

[SCRawl]

"Planetary" because they're positioned in a ring around the weapon's perimeter, most likely.

Because of? I'm sorry but I have never seen planetary used to mean, essentially, 'arranged in a circle'.

Maybe like a planetary gear? Like this:

[Darth Hoth]

You're kidding, right? The DS2 didn't HAVE powerful defenses yet, hence the need for the planetary based shield generator, a goodly portion of the myriad systems hadn't been installed yet what with the thing still under construction and firing a shipkiller blast every couple of minutes isn't even remotely comparable to being able to fire a planetkilling one. At all.

Does the term 'scale' mean anything to you? The DS2 had a DS2 sized reactor and fired ship killers every minute or so. The Eclipse is about a millionth or less the size of the DS2 and is going to have accordingly less reactor power. So what makes you think it can fire planetkillers AT ALL, leave alone without ludicrously long chargeup times

I'm just saying, since all the Death Star's systems can apparently be powered by one generator of the size given in RotJ, an SSD reactor could probably be quite a lot smaller and still support a superlaser, since it's about a million times smaller and doesn't have to support such vast shields, defensive turbolaser arrays, propulsion, gravity etc. (Or is it just the superlaser's sheer destructiveness that takes up 99 % of the DS's power output? I don't have the scale that clear.)

This requires 2/3rds the firepower of the DS1 how?

IIRC there's an idea that in order to break down planetary-grade shielding you have to apply massive amounts of energy instantaneously at a precise point of the shield to break it; otherwise, you have wear it down slowly over time. (Wasn't that, too, in The Last Command?)

I think if I were facing an enemy that can apparently fire through planetary shields I would be concerned about that regardless of the nature of the weapon he does it with.

Agreed, that was a stupid point to bring up.

[Stark]

The DS's have secondary reactors also: even the ISDs have backup generators for their guns.

If your shot is 2/3s that of the Death Star, it will *still* explode planets, even behind shields. The DS weapon is massive overkill, as shown by the incredible speed of the Alderaan debris. The EU writers just don't know what they're talking about. 'Sear a continent' isn't really that much better than what they'd need for a BDZ in any case, and since they can already direct much/all of their reactor output through their weapons, simply being 'a superlaser' doesn't make it somehow more powerful than any other weapon.

[Darth Hoth]

Just because he required the original Death Star plans and the staff of Bevel Lemilisk to build it does not mean that they are impossible to construct without it; would you go about building a battleship without hiring engineers with experience and consulting previous design's schematics, even if you had access to all the requisite technical knowhow?

The fact that he went to considerable lengths to infiltrate the Coruscant computer core to find the plans when he already had an engineer who should have been able to redo the construction from scratch (especially when it's only the superlaser he is interested in, not any other Death Star technological innovation) suggests that the technology is at least very difficult to research.

Another factor supporting this theory is the fact that no renegade Imperial faction ever devised a Death Star-like weapon, when the Empire proper could produce Tarkins in a matter of months and Death Stars in a few years. They would still have had the resources available, at least in the early years; thus, the know-how was what disappeared.

(Then again, of course, it could just be they learned to prioritise. But given that they're the Empire... )

What are you talking about? There is nothing to suggest that superlaser is not simply parlance for megascale composite-beam energy weapons. They look the same and propagate at the same speeds. What evidence suggests the superlaser is something special, rather than in principle simply an immense composite-beam turbolaser?

Well, I guess there's no evidence either way.

The cost is almost certainly due to the mass; the Death Star I was on the order of hundreds of millions of ISDs in mass (assuming relatively comparable density), and the Death Star II is on the order of tens of billions of ISDs. That's an enormous opportunity cost. Furthermore, its not that it is called a superlaser which is responsible for its relativistically planetary-mass scattering firepower. It requires a reactor to generate the required power for such an event, and capacitors to store it, etc. A weapon operating on the same technical principles as the Death Star I superlaser but on the scale of an Executor-class battlecruiser would require probably thousands of refuelings and endless-capacity capacitors with the main reactor running at full intensity for weeks. A Super Star Destroyer's reactor cannot generate the relativistic planetary-mass scattering (in spite of a deflector shield!) that the Death Star I's reactor can.

How much of the DS reactor output went into the superlaser and how much into maintaining shields, weapons, propulsion, life support, etc? A somewhat scaled-down reactor aboard an Eclipse-class SSD would not have to support all that, and for the entire battle station the reactor shown in RotJ seemed quite small. There might also have been increases in power generation in the years since the Death Star's construction; in DEII, Han mentions the Imperial turbolasers have grown more powerful, IIRC.

Its factually incorrect; the "searing continents" requisite firepower is on the order of at least a hundred billion times less than the firepower required to cause an event consistent with the destruction of Alderaan as depicted in Episode IV. The Death Star's main reactor is required to generate that firepower - the vessel is not for show, its a brute-force solution to its role: it is a really, really large warship with a really, really large reactor feeding a really, really large composite-beam turbolaser.

Apparently the figure currently in use was 2/3rds of one of the superlaser proton beams. I stand corrected. But at least that explains the craziness away; it's more reasonable it could handle that output.

The Eclipse's normal weaponry is not inadequate, we lack adequate information regarding its intended role and expected opponents, and we do not know the target acquisition, firepower, and combat longevity etc. of its weapons, so we do not know its capability. The Death Star II generated Mon Calamari cruiser-obliterating blasts every few minutes. What would make you think they compared to the firepower required to scatter an Earth-like planet's mass at velocities close to the speed of light?

Assuming its armaments are as powerful individually as those of the Executor, Palpatine's flagship is weaker than that of his apprentice in conventional firepower. That does not seem reasonable, given Imperial/Sith philosophy and Palpatine's personal gigantomania.

As for the superlaser power, as I said above, I was apparently mistaken.

I doubt this, otherwise the bulk and firepower of the Death Star is stupid and useless. Even if we grant this, its through the power of technobabble.

It was supposed to be a terror weapon; that was likely the primary reason they overdid it like they did, with firepower enough not merely to destroy a planet, but utterly annihilate it. Most of the superstructure and stuff, IIRC, was there to provide defenses for the superlaser. There were also large communications facilities etc, since it was to be used as a sector/oversector command ship.

This is circular logic. You assume that Thrawn's gambit reminds them of superlasers and then use it as evidence to support that superlasers = automatic shield penetration. Not to mention its a no-limits fallacy: "its called superlaser, it can beat any shield!!!shift+one!"

Yes, I admit that was stupid reasoning. I was a little tired yesterday...

[Darth Hoth]

The DS's have secondary reactors also: even the ISDs have backup generators for their guns.

If your shot is 2/3s that of the Death Star, it will *still* explode planets, even behind shields. The DS weapon is massive overkill, as shown by the incredible speed of the Alderaan debris. The EU writers just don't know what they're talking about. 'Sear a continent' isn't really that much better than what they'd need for a BDZ in any case, and since they can already direct much/all of their reactor output through their weapons, simply being 'a superlaser' doesn't make it somehow more powerful than any other weapon.

The initial figure I gave was apparently incorrect; it's supposed to be merely 2/3rds of one of the individual proton beams.

As it appears, about the one reason such a superlaser would be useful is its shield-breaking capacity. And yes, that it could do what supercharged turbolasers cannot sounds distinctly like somewhat uninformed technobabble, but that's what we're given.

[VT-16]

The superlaser is a supercharged turbolaser. :P

[Darth Hoth]

The superlaser is a supercharged turbolaser.

I don't know... it looks similar to one on-screen, but then there's the description of "proton beams" versus the turbolaser's energised plasma, and of course the shield-breaking abilities ascribed to superlasers. They seem to be somewhat different in their workings.

[VT-16]

No, it's a matter of power-generation. It's always been the reason behind the superlaser's development.

[NecronLord]

The Death Star II generated Mon Calamari cruiser-obliterating blasts every few minutes. What would make you think they compared to the firepower required to scatter an Earth-like planet's mass at velocities close to the speed of light?

Didn't Palpatine order the moff to fire on Endor if the shield went down, in the novellisation? I'd assume the DS2, at that point in time, was capable of destroying a planet, given that.

[Mange]

The Death Star II generated Mon Calamari cruiser-obliterating blasts every few minutes. What would make you think they compared to the firepower required to scatter an Earth-like planet's mass at velocities close to the speed of light?

Didn't Palpatine order the moff to fire on Endor if the shield went down, in the novellisation? I'd assume the DS2, at that point in time, was capable of destroying a planet, given that.

Yes. On a side-note, SW.com has the following information in its Q&A section:

So a less ambitious, more malleable officer was placed in charge of the second Death Star to keep such temptation in check. Jerjerrod wasn't entirely devoid of spine, though, as is evidenced by scenes cut from Return of the Jedi. A scene of Jerjerrod being ordered to blast Endor with the Death Star's superlaser was cut, including his objections to the order, citing that many of the Empire's best troops were on the moon.

[Darth Hoth]

No, it's a matter of power-generation. It's always been the reason behind the superlaser's development.

While this would appear logical, it does not seem to be supported by canon, in which superlasers are ascribed shield-breaking capabilities that conventional weapons of roughly comparable firepower lack. The Executor, roughly equal in size to the Eclipse, could not bring down even a partial shield on Hoth, even aided by Death Squadron, while the latter ship's superlaser can easily penetrate planetary shields. The Eclipse's power output cannot reasonably be superior to the Executor's by orders of magnitude, and as Stark pointed out, even standard ships can channel most of their power into their weapons. There appears, therefore, be something unusual in the superlaser's composition, rather than merely brute power.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

It would seem obvious to me that the "Planetary" designation means that the were originally designed to be mounted on planets, like the Grand Cannon in Robotech. Such a weapon firing from behind planetary shields could destroy entire attacking fleets, and there's plenty of space for huge reactors.

Yes, I know that would destroy the atmosphere on a habitable planet--but why does it need to be on one? For example, if we wanted such firepower defending Earth, cover Earth in planetary shields, cover the moon in planetary shields, and then mount planetary-scale superlasers on the moon. We've just given ourselves an invincible orbital Gibraltar, in pre-Death Star terms.

Anyway, the "2/3rds" of the power is clearly not even one of the eight--it's one of the very small tributary beams. After all, it's supposed to be able to "sear continents in a flash"; the firepower required for that is an infestimal amount in comparison to the firepower the Death Star generates. The Eclipse SL could well have a mere 2/3rds of the firepower of the very smallest tributary beam on the Death Star I.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I'm just saying, since all the Death Star's systems can apparently be powered by one generator of the size given in RotJ, an SSD reactor could probably be quite a lot smaller and still support a superlaser, since it's about a million times smaller and doesn't have to support such vast shields, defensive turbolaser arrays, propulsion, gravity etc. (Or is it just the superlaser's sheer destructiveness that takes up 99 % of the DS's power output? I don't have the scale that clear.)

To the last query: yes. According to the ROTS ICS, true warships can focus 100% of their reactor output through their weapons systems; furthermore, the EGtV&S informs us that the Death Star I took a day's worth of capacitor charging to fire the prime weapon; this probably means the reactor had to run at near 100% for that long to build a planet-obliterating blast. If it was only a small fraction, why not just dedicate the reactor directly and have it only take a minute or less? Furthermore, the laws of thermodynamics dictate that heat must be radiated; when a starship is moving most of its heat is being carried away by exhaust - when it is firing, its being carried away by weapons' fire. The Death Star cannot be running at full-intensity all the time, and there's nothing to suggest the myriad shielding and drives and small weapons require constant power output, otherwise we'd be able to see many times the energy content of the Alderaan blast being emitted from the Death Star: it should glow white.

IIRC there's an idea that in order to break down planetary-grade shielding you have to apply massive amounts of energy instantaneously at a precise point of the shield to break it; otherwise, you have wear it down slowly over time. (Wasn't that, too, in The Last Command?)

Yeah, and you don't think the quantity of energy matters? Have you taken physics? The Alderaani shield safely absorbed a 1e22 megaton beam for a few fractions of a second before failing and the planet being destroyed. A SSD cannot hope to generate anything close to that wattage; so it should be easily dissipated.

Just because he required the original Death Star plans and the staff of Bevel Lemilisk to build it does not mean that they are impossible to construct without it; would you go about building a battleship without hiring engineers with experience and consulting previous design's schematics, even if you had access to all the requisite technical knowhow?

The fact that he went to considerable lengths to infiltrate the Coruscant computer core to find the plans when he already had an engineer who should have been able to redo the construction from scratch (especially when it's only the superlaser he is interested in, not any other Death Star technological innovation) suggests that the technology is at least very difficult to research.

Do you think aircraft carriers are radical, cutting-edge technological applications? Because the USN is the only naval force on the planet which has successfully consistently deployed CTOL nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. The French have modern warships, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, etc.; and their CVN is a big headache. Engineers are not magicians; they require technical data and so on and so forth. If New Republic data security is so porus and shitty that rat-like creatures can run through ducts to access it from diplomatic reception halls, if you were Bevel Lemilisk, would not you request such immensely useful data at such relatively ridiculously low cost?

Another factor supporting this theory is the fact that no renegade Imperial faction ever devised a Death Star-like weapon, when the Empire proper could produce Tarkins in a matter of months and Death Stars in a few years. They would still have had the resources available, at least in the early years; thus, the know-how was what disappeared.

Or you do not waste millions-of-ISDs worth of materials and construction infrastructure on single white elephant projects in the midst of civil war and disintegration of the state apparatus. That comes with a heavy opportunity cost. Its simply less useful and more risky to engage in than dedicating the same resources to conventional military build-up. That is assuming that building Death Star-capable superlasers was possible given the effect wholesale disintegration of the Empire would have on delicate economies of scale. The Tarkin was a superlaser test bed; there is no evidence that its firepower would be sufficient to overpower Alderaan-level shields, and therefore, it would fail to serve in the same role and effectiveness as a Death Star. Not to mention, the logistics sink and risky supply tail of such a vessel while you cannot even trust your fleet commanders to stay loyal argues against its deployment.

Well, I guess there's no evidence either way.

Wrong. We see intermediates between "pulse" turbolasers and superlasers such as the SPHA-T, we see blaster-equivalents of the superlaser in the composite beam turrets, we see superlaser utilized for civilian purposes and called such. There is no evidence that they are purely unique aside from scale and firepower. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that the superlaser is just an unusually massive-scale application of given technology, and you need to disprove that. By relying on your interpretation under the cover of "no evidence either way" (which is untrue), is an argument of ignorance.

How much of the DS reactor output went into the superlaser and how much into maintaining shields, weapons, propulsion, life support, etc?

Why would these require 100% reactor output at all times? Why would shields, weapons, propulsion etc. require reactor output when idle? Why would life support require anything close to the power required to relativistically scatter a shielded planet? How come we do not see that constant reactor output emitted thermodynamically?

A somewhat scaled-down reactor aboard an Eclipse-class SSD would not have to support all that, and for the entire battle station the reactor shown in RotJ seemed quite small.

The Eclipse's reactor is much smaller than the DS2's.

There might also have been increases in power generation in the years since the Death Star's construction; in DEII, Han mentions the Imperial turbolasers have grown more powerful, IIRC.

Cite your sources clearly, please. And the rational conclusion from the evidence and political stasis of the GFFA is that there has been relatively static technological/scientific progress.

Apparently the figure currently in use was 2/3rds of one of the superlaser proton beams. I stand corrected. But at least that explains the craziness away; it's more reasonable it could handle that output.

Since we do not know the output of the technobabble beams, or the mechanism by which the final 1e22 beam is generated from them, this is a meaningless standard. Meanwhile, the physical damage description is much more subjective and suggests a hundred billionth output compared to the DS1.

Assuming its armaments are as powerful individually as those of the Executor, Palpatine's flagship is weaker than that of his apprentice in conventional firepower. That does not seem reasonable, given Imperial/Sith philosophy and Palpatine's personal gigantomania.

Firstly, the Eclipse is a gigantic glorified Imperial yacht. Secondly, you're relying on an assumption of individual parity in weapons, when we know the Executor visually does not boast many weapons larger than that of an ISD, yet much larger more powerful weapons are known to exist. Unwarranted assumption.

It was supposed to be a terror weapon; that was likely the primary reason they overdid it like they did, with firepower enough not merely to destroy a planet, but utterly annihilate it. Most of the superstructure and stuff, IIRC, was there to provide defenses for the superlaser. There were also large communications facilities etc, since it was to be used as a sector/oversector command ship.

Why would any of those require bulk relative to the generation of the superlaser blast, capacitating its power requirements, storing the fuel, moving the huge assembly, reaction mass required to move the assembly, and dissipating all the attendant heat?

The initial figure I gave was apparently incorrect; it's supposed to be merely 2/3rds of one of the individual proton beams.

As it appears, about the one reason such a superlaser would be useful is its shield-breaking capacity. And yes, that it could do what supercharged turbolasers cannot sounds distinctly like somewhat uninformed technobabble, but that's what we're given.

This is unrealistic; overwhelming a shield is based on intensity of power-delivered, not the name of the weapon delivering it. Furthermore, it asserts an impossibly retarded wastefulness and incompetence on the part of the Empire, building a weapon as large as the Death Star to deliver 1e22 megaton firepower when the Alderaani shield, according to you, was not merely so strong it could dissipate the 1e22 megaton beam for a fraction of a second but not longer, but rather because it was called a superlaser and they have "roll d6 for shield penetration magic."

Remember, secondary sources also claimed that ion cannons could insta-penetrate any shield, and this is totally misinformed. The Death Star superlaser can be visually CONFIRMED to not magically penetrate the shield; rather it was held off for some time before being overwhelmed and failing.

The superlaser is a supercharged turbolaser.

I don't know... it looks similar to one on-screen, but then there's the description of "proton beams" versus the turbolaser's energised plasma, and of course the shield-breaking abilities ascribed to superlasers. They seem to be somewhat different in their workings.

No, they are not. Most turbolaser/laser weapons are c-propogating beams with a visible "tracer" pulse. The Death Star superlaser is a c-propogating beam. "Plasma" mechanisms make no sense for any evidence presented in the films. The only apparent difference is composite-beam weapons' beams are visible along their entire length, rather than a particular isolated tracer component.

While this would appear logical, it does not seem to be supported by canon, in which superlasers are ascribed shield-breaking capabilities that conventional weapons of roughly comparable firepower lack. The Executor, roughly equal in size to the Eclipse, could not bring down even a partial shield on Hoth, even aided by Death Squadron, while the latter ship's superlaser can easily penetrate planetary shields. The Eclipse's power output cannot reasonably be superior to the Executor's by orders of magnitude, and as Stark pointed out, even standard ships can channel most of their power into their weapons. There appears, therefore, be something unusual in the superlaser's composition, rather than merely brute power.

The shield heat sink capacity and heat dissipation ceilings are not attributed, so we have no way of comparing results. Not all deflector shields are created equally. You're relying on name-game argument again. Alderaan had a high-performance shield that could safely absorb/dissipate a 1e22 megaton Death Star beam for a fraction of a second. The (apparently low-performance) Coruscanti shield in The Krytos Trap could be defeated from underneath by salvos from HIMS Lusankya. We should assume defeating shields is a matter of conventional overwhelming of capacity unless proved otherwise. We should not arbitrarily invent magic technobabble, and certainly not on the basis of name games.

Furthermore, the idea the Eclipse could punch out shields is retarded in of itself, because it renders the Death Star obsolescent after only a decade of progress in a technologically static galaxy.

I think you're a tad bit undereducated in physics (particularly thermodynamics), and a bit rusty on the scientific method. We do not ignorantly accept secondary sources technological/physical claims if they are not reasonably consistent scientifically and observably with the filmic canon or in outright defiance of common sense.

[VT-16]

The new Starships of the Galaxy book mentions the Eclipse-class massing much more than any other SSD ever made, and this was due solely to the superlaser and its support systems. At least it shows it's got a much more massive reactor to support that superlaser weapon, than even the Executor-class.

[Stark]

Not to be rude, but that's fucking obvious. Anyone with eyes can see that Eclipse has many times more volume than Executor. Having an SDN-level superlaser isn't without a role (although it's implicit it won't be able to destroy a decent planetary shield in one shot, as the DS does), but directly comparing it to the Death Stars when there's no real evidence beyond 'sears continents' is crazy.

It's what? A millionth the size?

[VT-16]

Yeah, but I was just pointing out that unlike all other conventional warships, the Eclipse-class had a massive reactor simply to power that superlaser, not just conventional weaponry.

[TC Pilot]

The Alderaani shield safely absorbed a 1e22 megaton beam for a few fractions of a second before failing and the planet being destroyed.

The Death Star superlaser can be visually CONFIRMED to not magically penetrate the shield; rather it was held off for some time before being overwhelmed and failing.

Not to take this too much off-topic, but is it really accurate to say Alderaan's shield held the superlaser off? After all, the time between when the superlaser strikes the shield and the time the planet explodes is somewhere along the lines of two tenths of a second.

The way I've seen it is that the superlaser simply blasted a hole through the shield, the sheer power of which caused the rest of the shield to become visible as if it were a "shockwave" effect like the blaster impacts on destroyer droids or when theater shields lose power in Rouge Squadron.

Because if a superlaser cannot "magically penetrate the shield," I wonder how things like torpedo spheres are viable at all.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Not to take this too much off-topic, but is it really accurate to say Alderaan's shield held the superlaser off? After all, the time between when the superlaser strikes the shield and the time the planet explodes is somewhere along the lines of two tenths of a second.

A few tenths of a second is an eternity for 1e22 megatons to not cause any obvious phase transitions in the matter underneath that shield.

The way I've seen it is that the superlaser simply blasted a hole through the shield, the sheer power of which caused the rest of the shield to become visible as if it were a "shockwave" effect like the blaster impacts on destroyer droids or when theater shields lose power in Rouge Squadron.

If it failed immediately you would expect the explosion to begin immediately, not to mention, if the shield is failing to absorb/reradiate the beam, why is it glowing? Why does it exist at all, because the planet beneath should be ablating on a continental scale? Hard for a shield equipment to be working in that environment.

Because if a superlaser cannot "magically penetrate the shield," I wonder how things like torpedo spheres are viable at all.

They loiter relatively close to a shield for hours or days, and then salvo-blast imperfections in a shield in the hope of opening a microsecond duration gap which may be very small, through which a turbolaser might be able to knock out some shield equipment. The Death Star stood off at many planetary diameters and just fired dead-on at the planet. Torpedo spheres probably are more effective with some types of shields than others (they should have zero effectiveness with multi-layered shields like the Coruscanti shield of Wedge's Gamble, as the turbolaser pulse delivered through the brief window will simply be absorbed harmlessly by the next inner layer). Certainly, an Eclipse-class superlaser burst could probably deliver similar gap-openings to a torpedo sphere, but that's not the kind of magic shield penetration he is talking about. Furthermore, the description of the torpedo sphere refers to banks of sophisticated computers (coordinating missile salvos with fluctuations in shield dynamics), specialized torpedoes (technobabble penetration heads?), and specialized sensors (detecting and analyzing shield dynamics). The combat capability of a torpedo sphere is more through its computing power and specialized shield analytical capabilities than any technobabble that one could assign arbitrarily to anything called a superlaser.

Furthermore, describing the Death Star as such a wasteful use of resources in spite of equivalent tactical capabilities at immensely lower costs is asserting an extraordinary claim of stupidity on the Empire, the CIS, and the Republic; such an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. It makes more sense the Death Star was built to crack nuts the conventional fleet would have prohibitive difficulty with. Not to mention there might be even more formidable defenses than Alderaan's, given the Death Star II's size and probably proportionally immense firepower.

[Batman]

You're kidding, right? The DS2 didn't HAVE powerful defenses yet, hence the need for the planetary based shield generator, a goodly portion of the myriad systems hadn't been installed yet what with the thing still under construction and firing a shipkiller blast every couple of minutes isn't even remotely comparable to being able to fire a planetkilling one. At all.
Does the term 'scale' mean anything to you? The DS2 had a DS2 sized reactor and fired ship killers every minute or so. The Eclipse is about a millionth or less the size of the DS2 and is going to have accordingly less reactor power. So what makes you think it can fire planetkillers AT ALL, leave alone without ludicrously long chargeup times

I'm just saying, since all the Death Star's systems can apparently be powered by one generator of the size given in RotJ,

A size that would be?That pesky 'scaling' thing again, you know. And how do you know that was the ONLY generator, aas others have pointed out?

an SSD reactor could probably be quite a lot smaller and still support a superlaser, since it's about a million times smaller

As based on-you saying so and actually that's a reason it couldn't. On account of being a million times smaller.

since it's ab and doesn't have to support such vast shields, defensive turbolaser arrays, propulsion, gravity etc.

Propulsion, defensive turbolasers and shields are an complete nonconcern when they're NOT OPERATING. Which is a lot of the time. As already explained by, I think, IP.

(Or is it just the superlaser's sheer destructiveness that takes up 99 % of the DS's power output? I don't have the scale that clear.)

THAT much is obvious.

[Connor MacLeod]

The only "shield piercing" properties I've ever seen ascribed to a superlaser is that "coupled neutrino charge" nonsense from the DESB. In theory a beam of neutrinos might penetrate the shields but it will do precisely squat to the planet underneath (I daresay I don't have to explain why a neutrino weapon is silly.) Moreover, there's no possible way this "coupling" could facilitate anyy such penetration for the other part of the superlaser - a neutrino's penetrative ability is related to its charge as well as its low reactivity with matter (hence neutrino radiators.) "linking" the neutrinos to the superlaser blast will not change this because of the sheer energy/momentum of the superlaser blast itself (and if it did the superlaser loses much of its ability to damage the planet.)

Outside of a few obscure computer game references (like the shield disabling weapon in Force Commander) I've never heard of any specialized "shield disrupting" energy weapons, certainly none linked to lasers or turbolasers (and a superlaser IS just a compound turbolaser, just as a turbolaser is a compound laser. Its all a matter of scale and complexity.) Since shields have not been rendered obsolete by "shield piercing" turbolasers of any kind, its unlikely they exist absent anyy other example.

The "shield affecting" properties of a torpedo sphere, btw, ,are a specialized device (the latest Starships of the Galaxy IIRC, lumped the torp sphere torps along with the Black Fleet Crisis shield buster torps and also gave the Acclamators a similar type of weapon.) They still do seem to rely on raw firepower to SOME degree even with technobabble (The "penetration" aids just help somewhat.) In addition the T-33's from BFC were capable of inflicting physical damage (in conjunction with other weapons, ,like concussion missiles.) and the warheads themselves can be more than just energy (like a nuke would be - concussion missiles have "blast like" kinetic effects even in space, despite having nuclear-scale yields.) Coordination is a factor (timing and concentration are important) but not an insurmountable one (Rogue Squadron utilized similar tactics in coordination in weapons fire, ,as have other ships.) and the need to spend such huge amounts of time scanning shields for weak points has as much to do with locating the weak points as it does with shields (or at least very strong ones) being hard to scan through effectively (shielding seems to interfere with sensors as wlel as blocking weapons fire, which makes sense since it can futz up communications as well.)

IIRC "exploiting gaps" occured in BFC as well (seams/weak spots in the shields) as partt of the tactics. Which also begs the question - if beam weapons had "shield penetrating/ignoring" properties, why did the Empire (Torpedo spheres) and New Republic (T-33 plasma torpedoes) bother messing around with specialized ordanncec to allow energy fire through shields?

[TC Pilot]

A few tenths of a second is an eternity for 1e22 megatons to not cause any obvious phase transitions in the matter underneath that shield.

Well, considering that (in the DVD release, at least) we go from "shield resisting" to "half the planet's surface ignited" over the course of one frame, I wonder if this is merely the "phase transitions" simply not being visible at the camera distance. After all, the Liberty-class Mon Cal cruiser hit by the Death Star II (albiet there's the fact it was significantly weaker shot) took about two or three frames to completely explode, and I would wager no one in their right mind would claim the shield resisted the superlaser.

If it failed immediately you would expect the explosion to begin immediately, not to mention, if the shield is failing to absorb/reradiate the beam, why is it glowing?

I would say that it did begin immediately, only that it takes "much" longer than you seem to expect from a 1^22 megaton blast, since parts of Alderaan are still visible four frames after the planet is obviously starting to explode.

Why does it exist at all, because the planet beneath should be ablating on a continental scale? Hard for a shield equipment to be working in that environment.

I would imagine the shield failed concurrently with the planet's destruction, with the shield being knocked out as defense facilities were obliterated by the superlaser blast.

Even this late into the planet's destruction: *no bandwith theft, even if it's from him- Vympel* there still seems to be some vestiges of the shield, assuming that light aura around the planet is the shield (and God help me for actually using Darkstar's site for this picture).

*snip thorough torpedo sphere description

I'm sorry, I misread your previous post. I think we're operating under differing definitions of "magically penetrates the shield."

Furthermore, describing the Death Star as such a wasteful use of resources

When did I argue the Death Star as such a wasteful use of resources?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Well, considering that (in the DVD release, at least) we go from "shield resisting" to "half the planet's surface ignited" over the course of one frame, I wonder if this is merely the "phase transitions" simply not being visible at the camera distance. After all, the Liberty-class Mon Cal cruiser hit by the Death Star II (albiet there's the fact it was significantly weaker shot) took about two or three frames to completely explode, and I would wager no one in their right mind would claim the shield resisted the superlaser.

Saxton's Alderaan Shield Commentary; I contend not that the beam was "absorbed" per se, I do not think it was definitely stopped, I only feel that it was very briefly delayed by the shield system. That it functions on a capacity within some appreciable level comparable to the Death Star as we see explains handedly why such a weapon was strategically mandated.

Last Frame Before Impact. No atmospheric effects, no shield effects.

First Frame of Impact. Impact; shield has been hit by beam, light is being radiated by the shield across around a quarter of a hemisphere of Alderaan.

Second Frame of Impact.Shield continues to hold, the reradiating surface now includes nearly an entire hemisphere. Note: as the shield appears to be only a few hundred to maybe a thousand kilometers above the planet's surface, this would definitely correspond to a momentary halting of the beam, which propagates at about c.

Third Frame of Impact. Shield fails; beam penetrates and much of a hemisphere is now immolated by the blast.

I would say that it did begin immediately, only that it takes "much" longer than you seem to expect from a 1^22 megaton blast, since parts of Alderaan are still visible four frames after the planet is obviously starting to explode.

See above. Three frames from impact to immolation for a c propogating beam are quite a long time, wouldn't you say? The Alderaani shield is obviously momentarily delaying it before abruptly failing.

I would imagine the shield failed concurrently with the planet's destruction, with the shield being knocked out as defense facilities were obliterated by the superlaser blast.

Perhaps parts of it remained longer, which delays the prorogation across the surface as you theorized.

When did I argue the Death Star as such a wasteful use of resources?

Your argument seems to be implying that the Death Star's firepower was not necessary in order to overwhelm Alderaan's defenses. I think the visual evidence suggests something like the Death Star was strategically mandated for an progressively authoritarian-to-totalitarian political program such as that of the Empire in order to render such defenses obsolescent.

[VT-16]

and I would wager no one in their right mind would claim the shield resisted the superlaser.

We know that the DSI could vary its firepower like the DSII (In Death Star, it destroys a Rebel Lucrehulk using only 3% of it superlaser's power, IIRC), so having the Liberty's shield resist slightly in ROTJ, isn't too far-fetched.

[TC Pilot]

I contend not that the beam was "absorbed" per se, I do not think it was definitely stopped, I only feel that it was very briefly delayed by the shield system.

While I can see how you come to that conclusion (particularly given how the superlaser seems to "engulf" the visible half of Alderaan in the theatrical release), I'm not sure it's particularly consistent with how a regular turbolaser would operate against shields

That it functions on a capacity within some appreciable level comparable to the Death Star as we see explains handedly why such a weapon was strategically mandated.

However, is it really accurate to say the Death Star was ever "strategically mandated"? I also do not want to go too much into the topic of the Death Star's role, since it almost inevitably brings up the rather unpleasant destruction on planetary scales.

Shield continues to hold, the reradiating surface now includes nearly an entire hemisphere. Note: as the shield appears to be only a few hundred to maybe a thousand kilometers above the planet's surface, this would definitely correspond to a momentary halting of the beam, which propagates at about c.

I think this comes down to a difference of opinion on what the light's source is. You see it is the shield reacting to being struck by the superlaser. I see it as a blinding light unleashed by the superlaser impact.

See above. Three frames from impact to immolation for a c propogating beam are quite a long time, wouldn't you say? The Alderaani shield is obviously momentarily delaying it before abruptly failing.

Again, I don't think it's "obvious" either way. I'll concede that, as of the unmodified theatrical release, the superlaser is clearly held off by something that causes the beam to actually spread out over Alderaan, but as of the more recent editions, that light could just as easily be the light generated by the superlaser impact.

Your argument seems to be implying that the Death Star's firepower was not necessary in order to overwhelm Alderaan's defenses.

Ah, I see. Actually, it's somewhat the opposite. What I meant to convey is that if a planetary shield could actually resist 1^22 megatons concentrated on a single point, even for a few tenths of a second, what possible hope could something as measly as a torpedo sphere have? The perception that I'm expressing with this argument is that the superlaser is so powerful that it simply blasted a hole through Alderaan's shield.