What is the actual weapons range of Millenium Falcon?

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-03-02 07:26pm

Kazeite wrote:<snip Wayne and IP contradicting each other>
Now I'm thoroughly confused

Don't worry, for all intents and purposes, it's just semantics. All you have to know is that IP's list of levels of canon/officiality is accurate. Don't worry about the actual titles of classification.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2003-03-03 01:27am

Kazeite wrote: No. It means that you may be somehow unable to grasp the idea that whatever ranges the NJO displays they may be actually wrong?

Not unless you can prove that the canon ranges are absolute. (which you haven't.)

Yes! Because that's exactly what happened! You speak about some 'wild energy', and I'm unable to find it becasue that phrase was translated differently.

RIIIIIGHT!

Just call me Mighty Morphin' Power Kazeite

I could call you idiot instead. But I'm not going to.

This little dirade was answer to your question about my proof, in case you forgot, Captain Sclerosis

How cute, and utterly irrelevant.

And now one must disprove chaos theory, which is you problem.

No, I simply had to ignore your attempt to create "reasonable doubt" in the EU by bringing up an irrelevant issue. You didn't do squat to actually prove a specific inconsistency where range is concerned. Hence, I can just ignore you.

I agree. But that still doesn't seem any different from WW2 and modern gunfights.

So?

However, if I'm not mistaken, he doesn't say that in the actual movie. Unless he said that when camera wasn't looking, this doesn't count as the proof for reduced mobility. (because "canon overrides official").

Wayne dealt with this.

You are reffering to your previous post that "Manual targeting/visual ranging can be more reliable in certain instances (...), but that by no means limits them COMPLETELY to manual targeting."?

That true, of course, but during DS trench run they were still able to use targeting computers.

Not very reliably (again, due to the jamming, at least). You'll note they couldnt fire until they were virtually on top of the targets. They could acquire the trench from several tens of km away, but they couldnt actually hit it from that far.

Oh, you mean laser blasts striking off-center, right? Personally I would disregard them as VFX errors, but I agree that makes movies different from X-wing game.

So you're going to throw "lets ignore scientific method and suspension of disbelief" in with "lets ignore the EU" as well?

This gets better and better.

Oh, I didn't know that. Oh well, so let's review all sources:

ANH Alderaan scene: <500m

ANH Trench run: 3km (very rough estimate. Feel free to disagree with it.)

ROTJ battle: <1 km, but this rather can't be considered "maximum range".

X-wing series games: 1.2 km. (in early games laser blast were just dissapearing after that distance, in 'Alliance' they explode.)

"Han Solo at Star's End" - tens to hundreds of km.

NJO - um, even more?

There's also the EGW&T (Which deals mostly with Pre NJ) - which suggests hundreds to thousands of km (more towards thousands) and the Corellian Trilogy novels (which suggest even more than Destiny's Way.)

You're also ignoring the fact that a.) TLs and lasers are lightspeed weapons (ref AOTC ICS), b.) The SW culture does not progress technologically much, if at all, so they would not make massive increases in range over the course of a few years or decades (so at most, the Destiny's Way figures are maybe an order of magnitude off) and c.) the various factors involved with targeting.

At the absolute worst, the limitations only apply to the ANH timeframe, and do not neccearily do so beyond that (they might upgrade with existing technology - as Mike pointed out, it IS a smuggling freighter.) but that changes nothing.

ClaysGhost · Post by **ClaysGhost** » 2003-03-03 05:40am

Connor MacLeod wrote:
ClaysGhost wrote: Why can't the computers use visible-band sensors?
Who says they can't?

Page 194: "Maintain visual scanning," Blue Leader directed. "With all this energy flying, they'll be on top of you before your scope can pick them up. Remember, they can jam every instrument on your ship except your eyes."

The ONLY reliable method of detection was the Mk1 eyeball.

There is nothing all-powerful about eyes. Shine a laser in them, they're jammed. Hell, shine a bright light in them, they're jammed. Distort optical emissions with gravitational fields, even, they are jammed.

On top of that, Dodonna clearly states on page 181: "Also, their field generators will probably create alot of distortion, especially in and around the trench. I figure that manuverability in that sector will be less than point three." This produced more murmurs and a few groans from the assembly.

In other words, they're distorting spacetime to hamper mobility (possibly the jammers.. but this might be some tractor-beam like technology - what it is is irrelevant ATM) - but that also means it would foul up optical targeting.

First, as I think I mentioned a while back, the power requirements for such a feat are formidable, probably comparable to the energy output of the death star. Secondly, if it screws up optical targetting, it would screw up what the eye sees too.

Perhaps because its an active sensor pulse? I imagine you'd need to use a couple of those to get a solid "lock" on a target. If you're using sensor or computer-assisted targeting that is. (Manual targeting would carry its own limitations.) I imagine you dont always get a shot off just because you get a "lock on" flicker.

Well, yes, but why use an active sensor pulse?

Not quite. Beam weapons require pin-point precision to land on target (they have a fairly narrow focal point) and targets like TIEs have very narrow profiles. And there is still EW.

Pinpoint precision should easily be available from an advanced targetting computer hooked up to even single-sensor optics. The targetting computer receives an image. Unless the TIE is tens of thousands of km away, the TIE will not be able to move its own length before it is hit, if TLs do travel at c. It's image processing, exactly as the eye would do, except much faster.

Jamming, distortion fields, take your pick in the case of Yavin. If you remember, also, that they only felt the targeting computer COULD make the hit under the conditions of the Death Star battle (jamming, distortion, etc.)

Yes, this is true.

I already conceded about the debris. Did you miss that?

It seems so

Kazeite · Post by **Kazeite** » 2003-03-04 04:45pm

Lord Poe wrote: Sorry But you're wrong. Read the page again. It is correct.

No, it's not. It took about seven seconds to fly from the left side of the ISD to the bridge tower. The actual distance could be even shorter than 1600. I have no idea how Brian Young could've come with 4.8 km figure.

Um, Byk-Gówno.

The phrase you are trying to translate would be: "gówno prawda".

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2003-03-05 03:40am

Kazeite wrote:
Lord Poe wrote: Sorry But you're wrong. Read the page again. It is correct.
No, it's not. It took about seven seconds to fly from the left side of the ISD to the bridge tower. The actual distance could be even shorter than 1600. I have no idea how Brian Young could've come with 4.8 km figure.

Then obviously, you can't comprehend what you read.

Brian's figure is perfectly accurate with what we see onscreen.

Lord of the Farce · Post by **Lord of the Farce** » 2003-03-05 05:03am

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Chris Cerasi, of LucasBooks wrote:-snips
As we see here, canon is only identified with the movies.

Novelisations and radio dramas are a higher-tier of official, but still official.

As are EU sources.

Here's the thread page where I made a general continuity hierarchy based on all evidence and justified why I did everything.

Here it is:

Absolute Canon: (also known as Pure Canon, Movie Canon)
Star Wars Movies
George Lucas' statements (some are inconsistent with his actual films and are often subject to frequent change)

Near-Canon:
LFL Continuity Fixes/Changes
Official Screenplays/Scripts
Movie Novelisations and Radio Dramas
Movie Comic Adaptations

High-level Official:
Incredible Cross Sections + Worlds of... series.
Holonetnews.net and it’s SW Insider incarnation
Visual Dictionaries
SW.com (fits here; Official site but not made by Lucas)

General EU Official:
Novels
Comics (Dark Horse and most Marvel)
Games

EU Reference Sources Official:
Essential Guides
RPG Sourcebooks

Low-level EU:
Certain Games and Certain Marvel comics, other stories which are difficult to reconcile w/out fixes. (Definitely includes lamentable examples of EU literature, such as the Glove of Darth Vader series, which exists in continuity only as a vague version of the overall points of that storyline).

*Scratches head* Ummm... Whatever happened to:

What's 'gospel' and what isn't?
'Gospel,' or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelisations. These works spin out of George Lucas' original stories, the rest are written by other writers. However, between us, we've read everything, and much of it is taken into account in the overall continuity. The entire catalog of published works comprises a vast history -- with many off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any other well-developed mythology.

... That was supposedly from the interview of the "Continuity and Production Editors at Lucasfilm", from STAR WARS Insider #23 (quote nabbed from Star Wars Technical Commentaries)?

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-03-05 05:07am

How is IP's list in contention with that quote? His simply goes into more detail. I suggest everybody who hasn't already to read the "ICS=Canon, right?" thread which IP linked to.

Lord of the Farce · Post by **Lord of the Farce** » 2003-03-05 05:57am

Robert Treder wrote:How is IP's list in contention with that quote? His simply goes into more detail. I suggest everybody who hasn't already to read the "ICS=Canon, right?" thread which IP linked to.

The "Continuity and Production Editors at Lucasfilm" says that "screenplays, radio dramas and novelisations" are canon, IP's lists calls them "Near-Canon". Which making it sound rather like he is implying that they are close to, but not, canon.

In fact, having taken a second look at the provided link, we have this:

Illuminatus Primus wrote:After the films comes the comic, novel, and radio drama versions of the film. Anything in these not contradicted by the film or LFL Continuity fixes (such as Hobbie and Veers surviving in continuity whereas in the novelization of ESB they did not) is considered the highest level of the "Official" catagory of continuity, also known as Quasi-Canon or Non-Movie Canon.

Which is pretty clear on that he sees that the screenplay, novelisation and radio drama as being quasi-canon (contradicting the interview quote from the Lucasfilm people in charge of such things).

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-03-05 06:08am

I think it's semantics; if IP changed his list to be "First Order Canon" and "Second Order Canon" instead of "Absolute Canon" and "Near Canon," the result would be the same.

Lord of the Farce · Post by **Lord of the Farce** » 2003-03-05 06:36am

Robert Treder wrote:I think it's semantics; if IP changed his list to be "First Order Canon" and "Second Order Canon" instead of "Absolute Canon" and "Near Canon," the result would be the same.

If it was "Absolute Canon" and "Canon", that would be fine. But as it is, and considering this, written in regards to the novelisations (and etc):

Illuminatus Primus wrote:... considered the highest level of the "Official" catagory of continuity...

... It makes a big difference.

Kazeite · Post by **Kazeite** » 2003-03-05 12:48pm

Connor MacLeod wrote:Not unless you can prove that the canon ranges are absolute. (which you haven't.)

I don't understand you. You seem to disregard fact that EU universe us very different from the movies universe. Do I really have to point out every single inconsistence of EU materials with the movies?

How cute, and utterly irrelevant.

You should rather be sad for wasting my time.

No, I simply had to ignore your attempt to create "reasonable doubt" in the EU by bringing up an irrelevant issue.

Then I can just as well ignore your attempts to bring irrelevant issues (like asking me to state obvious facts and then ignoring them) into that discussion.

You didn't do squat to actually prove a specific inconsistency where range is concerned.

Because I don't have to.

Wayne dealt with this.

Let me rephrase that: 'because "movies overwrite novelizations." '.

Not very reliably (again, due to the jamming, at least).

Not very reliably, but they could.

So you're going to throw "lets ignore scientific method and suspension of disbelief" in with "lets ignore the EU" as well?

Read my quote again and THEN make your judgements.

This gets better and better.

I would personally say, weirder and weirder.

There's also the EGW&T (Which deals mostly with Pre NJ) - which suggests hundreds to thousands of km (more towards thousands) and the Corellian Trilogy novels (which suggest even more than Destiny's Way.)

You're also ignoring the fact that a.) TLs and lasers are lightspeed weapons (ref AOTC ICS),

Which means that light in SW uniwerse apparently travels with slower speed than 'our' light.

b.) The SW culture does not progress technologically much, if at all, so they would not make massive increases in range over the course of a few years or decades (so at most, the Destiny's Way figures are maybe an order of magnitude off)

Why do you think that I'm ignoring that?

c.) the various factors involved with targeting.

Oh, another one of your (un)usual judgements.

At the absolute worst, the limitations only apply to the ANH timeframe, and do not neccearily do so beyond that (they might upgrade with existing technology - as Mike pointed out, it IS a smuggling freighter.) but that changes nothing.

True. That doesn't change anything: there's still disrepancy reagarding ranges shown in movies, stated in novels, and show in games. I wonder what will be range of weapons in SW: Galaxies

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-03-06 12:31pm

Methinks Kazeite ran out of pot. He isn't smiling so much anymore.

Kazeite · Post by **Kazeite** » 2003-03-06 05:15pm

Happy now?

Kazeite · Post by **Kazeite** » 2003-03-06 05:25pm

Lord Poe wrote:Then obviously, you can't comprehend what you read. Brian's figure is perfectly accurate with what we see onscreen.

What? I'm unable to do what???

It's strange how you contradict yourself... I asked how Brian Young came with 4.8 km figure, which should prove that I was indeed able to comprehend text on that page.

Perhaps you could enlighten me, where did he managed to squeeze two extra ISD lengths into Falcon path. I don't know, maybe Avenger stopped instantly and then went into reverse or something?

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2003-03-07 01:06am

Kazeite wrote:
Lord Poe wrote:Then obviously, you can't comprehend what you read. Brian's figure is perfectly accurate with what we see onscreen.
What? I'm unable to do what???

It's strange how you contradict yourself... I asked how Brian Young came with 4.8 km figure, which should prove that I was indeed able to comprehend text on that page.

Well then, the only other inescapable conclusion must be that you are a motherfucking idiot who sucks Darkstar's cock so hard that your eyeballs roll out of your skull.

Oh, almost forgot:

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2003-03-07 01:56am

Lord Poe wrote:
Kazeite wrote:
Lord Poe wrote:Then obviously, you can't comprehend what you read. Brian's figure is perfectly accurate with what we see onscreen.
What? I'm unable to do what???

It's strange how you contradict yourself... I asked how Brian Young came with 4.8 km figure, which should prove that I was indeed able to comprehend text on that page.
Well then, the only other inescapable conclusion must be that you are a motherfucking idiot who sucks Darkstar's cock so hard that your eyeballs roll out of your skull.

Oh, almost forgot:

Ah! You're being rude to him. That means your arguments are all totally invalidated

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2003-03-07 02:11am

Kazeite wrote:[
I don't understand you. You seem to disregard fact that EU universe us very different from the movies universe. Do I really have to point out every single inconsistence of EU materials with the movies?

I don't really know how to respond to this, aside from thinking "idiotic".

You should rather be sad for wasting my time.

noone ever said you had to respond. If I'm wasting your time, you can stop anytime you wish.

Then I can just as well ignore your attempts to bring irrelevant issues (like asking me to state obvious facts and then ignoring them) into that discussion.

What, pray tell, have I ignored that is relevant to the discussion? Insofar as "ignoring" things go, its all been on your end of the discussion.

Because I don't have to.

No doubt because "you're right and its obvious."

Let me rephrase that: 'because "movies overwrite novelizations." '.

When a direct inconsistency exists. Simply saying "They're different" does not equal inconsistency. Anyone with a brain could realize that.

Not very reliably, but they could.

So? That means they could target the port from many tens of km away. that HELPS our arguments (not to mention if we ignore the travel down all 80 km of the trench).

Read my quote again and THEN make your judgements.

Thats what I did before. Its not my fault you can't accept the fact your "judgements" are full of shit.

I would personally say, weirder and weirder.

I was being sarcastic.

Which means that light in SW uniwerse apparently travels with slower speed than 'our' light.

Why not? You've ignored every other fact of the discussion, why not start ignoring basic science as well?

Why do you think that I'm ignoring that?

Because you're a troll.

Oh, another one of your (un)usual judgements.

Which you obviously can't counter and must holler about being "strange" so it MUST be wrong. Resorting to debating fallacies now, I see.

True. That doesn't change anything: there's still disrepancy reagarding ranges shown in movies, stated in novels, and show in games. I wonder what will be range of weapons in SW: Galaxies

Its only a 'discrepancy' to you, moron. The rest of us can find reasons to accept it.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2003-03-07 02:19am

Connor MacLeod wrote:Ah! You're being rude to him. That means your arguments are all totally invalidated

Rude? RUDE?? Didn't you see the smiley?

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2003-03-07 03:21am

Lord Poe wrote:
Connor MacLeod wrote:Ah! You're being rude to him. That means your arguments are all totally invalidated
Rude? RUDE?? Didn't you see the smiley?

Oh silly me. I forgot that the smiley always makes things better.

I guess I forgot the smiley so I just invalidated all my arguments

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2003-03-07 03:50am

ClaysGhost wrote: There is nothing all-powerful about eyes. Shine a laser in them, they're jammed. Hell, shine a bright light in them, they're jammed. Distort optical emissions with gravitational fields, even, they are jammed.

I never said they were all powerful. I'm pointing out that if they have them, they must be able to jam them (although one could also infer that such sensors were not employed on the X-wings for one reason or another, although I don't recall any reason they wouldn't have them. But if they didn't mount those kinds of sensors, it becomes irrelevant.) It was a bit presumptive of me to assume they do mount them, but if they do then the quote comes into effect.

First, as I think I mentioned a while back, the power requirements for such a feat are formidable, probably comparable to the energy output of the death star. Secondly, if it screws up optical targetting, it would screw up what the eye sees too.

1.) How do you know the power requirements of such an effect? And how does this exactly affect the claim about the DS's jammers?

2.) Correct, which is probably why they have to get close to obtain a kill.
(I suppose that we must note that they didnt appear to use visual targeting at Yavin.)

Well, yes, but why use an active sensor pulse?

To burn through the jamming and get a more accurate "picture" of the target? Aside which, is there a particular reason why one wouldn't use active sensing?

Pinpoint precision should easily be available from an advanced targetting computer hooked up to even single-sensor optics. The targetting computer receives an image. Unless the TIE is tens of thousands of km away, the TIE will not be able to move its own length before it is hit, if TLs do travel at c. It's image processing, exactly as the eye would do, except much faster.

Even if the computer can figure out where the target is, that doesn't guarantee an instant-hit. The computer cannot automatically control fighter manuvering and gun control systems - the weapon itself could be contributing to inaccuracies. A greater output of energy means a greater resistance to movement. This means there is a tradeoff between accuracy and rise time/settling time in the control system. Think of a battleship turret - could it instantly hit any kind of target? SW fighters toss out kiloton-level energy (often times multiple bolts per second) - this is not a minor issue. Moving kiloton-level energy through the gun will result in control-system difficulties (as well as recoil issues.)

Kazeite · Post by **Kazeite** » 2003-03-07 03:53am

So, at this point discussion has migrated into personal attacks and insults. So, let me refrain from answering to them and instead focus on topic.

I think that DS scene is the best example of ANH Falcon capababilities. No doubt Han had to pass DS shields first, but he had about 30 seconds of flight to open fire, but he waited to the proverbial last moment to fire. The basic question is: what was the range of DS jamming field? We know that X-wings flying close to the surface were unable to detect T/Fs, but Yavin was able to detect their "signals".

Lord Poe, I'm still would like to know your expert opinion about Falcon's path above Avenger.

And Connor, I'm also curious how can you claim that "TLs and lasers are lightspeed weapons", since none of the bolts observed in movies was flying with such speed,

ClaysGhost · Post by **ClaysGhost** » 2003-03-07 04:19am

Connor MacLeod wrote: I never said they were all powerful. I'm pointing out that if they have them, they must be able to jam them (although one could also infer that such sensors were not employed on the X-wings for one reason or another, although I don't recall any reason they wouldn't have them. But if they didn't mount those kinds of sensors, it becomes irrelevant.) It was a bit presumptive of me to assume they do mount them, but if they do then the quote comes into effect.

I just don't see why the jamming by optical distortion (for which I can see no evidence in the films, which is surprising given that we saw two large battles) is going to prevent effective use of cameras but not of eyeballs.

1.) How do you know the power requirements of such an effect? And how does this exactly affect the claim about the DS's jammers?

You can work it out. Assuming that X-wings really can accelerate at rates of several thousand g, and guessing the mass of an X-wing as maybe a tonne (impossible given their acceleration capabilities, but very conservative), and knowing the strength of the gravitational interaction you can work how much energy a field would require to limit the acceleration significantly. It's probably stored in this board somewhere.

It affects the claim about the jammers in that if every SW ship can deploy these devices, they must all be able to support the power requirements, and if they can all support the power requirements, they should all be capable of running deathstar-like weapons.

2.) Correct, which is probably why they have to get close to obtain a kill.
(I suppose that we must note that they didnt appear to use visual targeting at Yavin.)

In fighter/fighter combat they did, and as I recall one of the shots of the DS turrets shows a bunch of funky-dressing guys manually aiming the weapon.

To burn through the jamming and get a more accurate "picture" of the target? Aside which, is there a particular reason why one wouldn't use active sensing?

Active sensing is far easier to jam! You just transmit a false signal, or arrange to scatter the incoming signal. The power requirements are far less than this semi-cloaking device that must work from sub-mm through UV.

Even if the computer can figure out where the target is, that doesn't guarantee an instant-hit. The computer cannot automatically control fighter manuvering and gun control systems - the weapon itself could be contributing to inaccuracies. A greater output of energy means a greater resistance to movement. This means there is a tradeoff between accuracy and rise time/settling time in the control system. Think of a battleship turret - could it instantly hit any kind of target? SW fighters toss out kiloton-level energy (often times multiple bolts per second) - this is not a minor issue. Moving kiloton-level energy through the gun will result in control-system difficulties (as well as recoil issues.)

A battleship turret is very different from a TL, and is not a product of a supposedly advanced society of tens to hundreds of thousands of years standing. Consider the speed of a battleship shell - it may travel at, what, ~km/s speeds? And can successfully engage at km distances against large, slow targets. Lightspeed weapons travel a million times faster, but in SW they can still only engage at km (or even less) distances.

That aside, correcting for misalignment and inaccuracy is something that a decent control system should provide for, if not by standard negative feedback techniques then at least by knowing the mechanical and thermal characteristics of the weapon (which is presumably made from the usual SW super-materials). The energy concerned is a minor issue when the accelerative capabilities of the weapons platform is taken into account - there is no good reason why the system cannot align decently, especially when the weapon has a magic tracer. If the recoil really was a problem, then the power per shot could be lowered. The logic would be that you could then hit your enemy further out and faster, and by the time their more powerful weapons were in range, they'd be dust. But even uncountered recoil could only be a fighter problem. The turrets on the DS and large SW warships should not have to have even a suggestion of engine control at all.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-03-07 05:33am

It affects the claim about the jammers in that if every SW ship can deploy these devices, they must all be able to support the power requirements, and if they can all support the power requirements, they should all be capable of running deathstar-like weapons.

You assume that the field-generators are intentional jammers and that every ship has them tho, I think they might be related to the DS's hyperdrives.[/quote]

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2003-03-07 05:35am

Still, this is simple, they jam, your instruments are out, manual targetting only thing left, shit happens.

Why don't they affect eyes? Well maybe it's not the jamming of the instrument but the thing processing the info gained from the instrument?

Maybe the human brains "crudeness" compared to hypereffective quantum computers is not as easily affected?

ClaysGhost · Post by **ClaysGhost** » 2003-03-07 03:34pm

You assume that the field-generators are intentional jammers and that every ship has them tho, I think they might be related to the DS's hyperdrives.

Aren't there other examples of this sort of jamming from the novels?

His Divine Shadow wrote:Still, this is simple, they jam, your instruments are out, manual targetting only thing left, shit happens.

Why don't they affect eyes? Well maybe it's not the jamming of the instrument but the thing processing the info gained from the instrument?

Maybe the human brains "crudeness" compared to hypereffective quantum computers is not as easily affected?

Then use a cruder electronic computer. Quantum computing is both over-complicated and unnecessary for this application. Further, if the flight controls can continue to work under jamming, and R2-D2 can continue to work under jamming, then a simpler targetting computer should be easily capable of continuing to work under jamming.