Tie Defenders vs a borg tactical cube

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-10-07 05:06pm

I notice a few of you are acting as though Mike Wong is pretty much George Lucas when it comes to star wars knowledge. He might know some about it, but his stuff is not canon AND is his opinion.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 05:17pm

NF_Utvol wrote:I notice a few of you are acting as though Mike Wong is pretty much George Lucas when it comes to star wars knowledge. He might know some about it, but his stuff is not canon AND is his opinion.

His opinion is always backed up by math and physics and real life engineering knowledge, as well as what is seen in the movies/read in the books. Like Curtis Saxton, his material is based on research. You clearly do not do this. While his opinion is not canon, it always fits well within what is seen in canon.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-10-07 05:21pm

Since when have physics been an actual basis in star wars? I love star wars, but it has almost no basis in actual science. That is why i see it pointless debating it and star trek.

Admiral Patton · Post by **Admiral Patton** » 2002-10-07 05:27pm

seanrobertson wrote: Sean: do we know the range at which Borg weapons could target small craft (hopefully something as small as the Defender?) Do we have any ideas of approximate accuracy in this regard? Have they intercepted missiles/torpedoes or warhead-like projectiles before? (I also don't suppse we know can guess at the accelerations involved in all of the above... thats going to be important)

In the Episode "Best of Both Worlds" Prt. II, a Borg cube is moving in on Saturn or Jupiter, which I cannot remember, and a small formation of Federation Interceptors dart past the camera and are dashing at the ship and the cube fires three energy weapons at them, destroying them all in one shot. Guess on the size of the ships in relative to the size of the planet in the distance behind them and then comparing it to the Cube in front of them, they were no larger than shuttles, making them attack shuttles/interceptors.

I would say that the Cube accurately and easily destroyed those ships at at least a 50k+ KM.

Ender wrote: Proton torps, carries by the Tie Defenders, would be about 478 MT.

Really? What is your evidence. A 478 megaton warhead would do a hell of a lot more damage to a planet than they do in books when Star Destroyers attack and bombard planets (Ex. ISD Whirlwind and fleet attacking Yavin) they would leave an impact crater larger than that of a moderately sized asteroid impacting the surface of the planet at a few hundred miles an hour. Shall I use E=mc^2?

And Ender, I am not using game mechanics, I am using from a variaty material. But if you think you are righteous and one who is purely right, than it is you who are flawed. You are casting down on me for presenting my argument than handling it more maturly and calmly. Hrm, I think I am not in the wrong here.

And what I want to be? I am presenting an arguement based on sources at hands as well as mechanical information provided in physics. So tell me, what are your higher sources. Enlighten me, sir.

The best thing to correct an argument is to show them their wrongs, not berate them. Something else that should be worked on around here.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 05:29pm

NF_Utvol wrote:Since when have physics been an actual basis in star wars? I love star wars, but it has almost no basis in actual science. That is why i see it pointless debating it and star trek.

WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Physics even impact things in SW. Suspension of disbelief allows them to create technology that in RL would be impossible, but almost all of the technology that they have must behave in a manner consistent with physics. Do objects in SW still have momentum and KE? Do objects in SW still have to deal with stress? Of course they do. Suspension of disbelief demonstrates that the technology that we see exists in SW, but it is also still affected by the laws of physics. Incidentally, if you don't like what we do then you can leave at any time. Just, please don't be an idiot on the board while you're here.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 05:30pm

It seemed like the ships in BoBW were bigger than that, to me.

Admiral Patton · Post by **Admiral Patton** » 2002-10-07 05:41pm

Master of Ossus wrote: Just, please don't be an idiot on the board while you're here.

Dude, that is wrong. I would insist you retract that statement. You do not just go around and call people idiots. Grow up! As a Council Member you are to be an example to people, not an ass.

People will follow you and respect you if you are good to them, not tyrannical. Come on, retract that statement.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-10-07 05:44pm

Master of Ossus wrote:
NF_Utvol wrote:Since when have physics been an actual basis in star wars? I love star wars, but it has almost no basis in actual science. That is why i see it pointless debating it and star trek.
WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Physics even impact things in SW. Suspension of disbelief allows them to create technology that in RL would be impossible, but almost all of the technology that they have must behave in a manner consistent with physics. Do objects in SW still have momentum and KE? Do objects in SW still have to deal with stress? Of course they do. Suspension of disbelief demonstrates that the technology that we see exists in SW, but it is also still affected by the laws of physics. Incidentally, if you don't like what we do then you can leave at any time. Just, please don't be an idiot on the board while you're here.

Argh, im not the idiot in this argument, buddy. Look, the star wars movies do not take into effect Physics or reality! I suggest you return to earth for a few hours each day, friend.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 05:45pm

Admiral Patton wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote: Just, please don't be an idiot on the board while you're here.
Dude, that is wrong. I would insist you retract that statement. You do not just go around and call people idiots. Grow up! As a Council Member you are to be an example to people, not an ass.

People will follow you and respect you if you are good to them, not tyrannical. Come on, retract that statement.

Oh come now. Part of this board is mockery of stupid people. I gave him several chances in the past, and he has continued to spam our boards with stupidity. Besides, half the mods constantly flame people and I look at them as being more responsible than I am.

Now, NF_Utvol completely ignored the premise of both this site and the debates that we have here. He further ignored the logic behind assuming that physics operate in all sci-fi universes, and he ignored Mike's website (while simultaneously insulting Mike's integrity). If that doesn't deserve flaming, what does?

Admiral Patton · Post by **Admiral Patton** » 2002-10-07 05:49pm

Look, you should not have to monitor someones site to be part of this forum. And if this forum is here to mock stupid people, thank this forum is no more than garbage. Come on, don't make fun of people who may not know as much as you, help them.

And if a lot of the mods make fun of people not as knowledgible than them, then they are all asses. It is not right to treat people this way when they do not know things they potentially should.

And not going to Mikes site is not slamming his integrity, he is not God nor is there or should there be a requirement to see it. I must say it is an interesting way to get a lot of hits on his page.

No one has the right to be flamed, we all deserve a mutual form of respect.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-10-07 05:49pm

IT IS SCI FI!!! Look, it is not physics, math, or other real world situations. You seriously need to take into consideration that George Lucas cooked all this up in his head without taking into effect the laws of physics or science. It is all a fairy tale, not reality! Dude, grow up!

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 05:59pm

Admiral Patton wrote:Look, you should not have to monitor someones site to be part of this forum. And if this forum is here to mock stupid people, thank this forum is no more than garbage. Come on, don't make fun of people who may not know as much as you, help them.

And if a lot of the mods make fun of people not as knowledgible than them, then they are all asses. It is not right to treat people this way when they do not know things they potentially should.

And not going to Mikes site is not slamming his integrity, he is not God nor is there or should there be a requirement to see it. I must say it is an interesting way to get a lot of hits on his page.

No one has the right to be flamed, we all deserve a mutual form of respect.

1. I do try to help people who ask for help. I get angry with them and begin flaming them when they ignore explanations that are given to them that are reasonable. Should we make fun of people who think that black people/asian people/other minorities are all stupid or pathetic? Should we try to help them first, and then attack them when they refuse to listen to us? Should we make fun of people who utterly disregard reason in favor of madness?

Now, when people come to the board spewing out arguments that we have heard a hundred times it makes things bad for everyone. It is BORING to refute their arguments. People should be familiar with Mike's website, because it covers many areas that we have already gone over. If they attack particular facets of the website, then great! We can discuss that aspect of the site and draw conclusions. I refuse to believe that no one deserves to be flamed. If you read my debates with DarkStar, I am pretty sure that you would change your mind. The fact is that nothing could possible force him to concede on even a single point, even when he was SHOWN to be wrong. He would not concede anything. He was clearly illogical. I flamed him, and I'm proud that I flamed him. He deserved it. I tried to explain why he was wrong on several points, first, and then flamed him when he argued with my explanations (frequently inserting his own demands that I disprove things, or saying that I could not read, or saying that I had failed to make the slightest dent in his arguments while bringing up pages of red herrings and strawmen).

Not going to Mike's site does not attack his credibility, but saying that his conclusions are not valid without bringing up any evidence or even a vague example of when he was wrong assumes that he was incorrect. That is not acceptable. If you think someone here is wrong, then great, but it is not enough to say "They're wrong because I say they're wrong." It takes a little more tha that.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 06:01pm

NF_Utvol wrote:IT IS SCI FI!!! Look, it is not physics, math, or other real world situations. You seriously need to take into consideration that George Lucas cooked all this up in his head without taking into effect the laws of physics or science. It is all a fairy tale, not reality! Dude, grow up!

So, in this "fairy tale" (actually, it's a myth, but I don't expect you to understand the difference) does the vaporization energy of iron suddenly change? The premise of this site and this board is to examine science fiction by applying scientific principles to them.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-10-07 06:02pm

One thing that peeves me off about you guys is your absolute hatred of any religion. It is not your place to put someone down because of their religion, or to say if it is right or not. Just shut up and leave people who believe in something and have a point in life (other than arguing star trek and star wars) alone!

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-10-07 06:05pm

Master of Ossus wrote:
NF_Utvol wrote:IT IS SCI FI!!! Look, it is not physics, math, or other real world situations. You seriously need to take into consideration that George Lucas cooked all this up in his head without taking into effect the laws of physics or science. It is all a fairy tale, not reality! Dude, grow up!
So, in this "fairy tale" (actually, it's a myth, but I don't expect you to understand the difference) does the vaporization energy of iron suddenly change? The premise of this site and this board is to examine science fiction by applying scientific principles to them.

Oh, and you are saying that things in star wars like Transparisteel and Proton Torpedoes are realistic! And about the vaporization energy of iron, if they wanted to show a match melting iron in a movie, they could, and it would be 'canon' at that point in the star wars universe!!!! Boy, you make a good argument now!!!

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 06:06pm

NF_Utvol wrote:One thing that peeves me off about you guys is your absolute hatred of any religion. It is not your place to put someone down because of their religion, or to say if it is right or not. Just shut up and leave people who believe in something and have a point in life (other than arguing star trek and star wars) alone!

Oh, look, Hitler believes he should kill all the Jews, let's just sit back and let him do that because otherwise we would be violating his ability to practice his beliefs!

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2002-10-07 06:10pm

What the...

That has absolutely no basis in this argument...

Im sick of you people, im outta here.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 06:10pm

NF_Utvol wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:
NF_Utvol wrote:IT IS SCI FI!!! Look, it is not physics, math, or other real world situations. You seriously need to take into consideration that George Lucas cooked all this up in his head without taking into effect the laws of physics or science. It is all a fairy tale, not reality! Dude, grow up!
So, in this "fairy tale" (actually, it's a myth, but I don't expect you to understand the difference) does the vaporization energy of iron suddenly change? The premise of this site and this board is to examine science fiction by applying scientific principles to them.
Oh, and you are saying that things in star wars like Transparisteel and Proton Torpedoes are realistic! And about the vaporization energy of iron, if they wanted to show a match melting iron in a movie, they could, and it would be 'canon' at that point in the star wars universe!!!! Boy, you make a good argument now!!!

The PREMISE of this site is that we make scientific observations about the SW films and books and things like that, then we figure out what that means in terms of science and engineering, and compare technologies. If they wanted to show a match melting iron, then they could. We would then look at that, determine how much iron was melted, and decide how much chemical energy (or whatever) was released by the match in the form of heat. They have not done that, which means we move under the assumption that they do not have the technology to do that. Boy, you have a good argument. All you have to do is remove a postulate or two and you can destroy mathematics. A prerequisite for this site, dumbass, is that we assume that what we are seeing in the movies are actual observations about the state of the SW universe. We then quantify and qualify those observations by making hypotheses and theories about them. You are clearly introducing red herrings. Cease and desist, troll.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 06:11pm

NF_Utvol wrote:What the...

That has absolutely no basis in this argument...

Im sick of you people, im outta here.

YAAAY he's gone. Incidentally, WTF was he responding to with this message?

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2002-10-07 06:46pm

Admiral Patton wrote:
seanrobertson wrote: Sean: do we know the range at which Borg weapons could target small craft (hopefully something as small as the Defender?) Do we have any ideas of approximate accuracy in this regard? Have they intercepted missiles/torpedoes or warhead-like projectiles before? (I also don't suppse we know can guess at the accelerations involved in all of the above... thats going to be important)
In the Episode "Best of Both Worlds" Prt. II, a Borg cube is moving in on Saturn or Jupiter, which I cannot remember, and a small formation of Federation Interceptors dart past the camera and are dashing at the ship and the cube fires three energy weapons at them, destroying them all in one shot. Guess on the size of the ships in relative to the size of the planet in the distance behind them and then comparing it to the Cube in front of them, they were no larger than shuttles, making them attack shuttles/interceptors.

I would say that the Cube accurately and easily destroyed those ships at at least a 50k+ KM.

Tac fighters are 25 meters long and far slower and less manuverable then Ties.

Ender wrote: Proton torps, carries by the Tie Defenders, would be about 478 MT.
Really? What is your evidence.

I used your numbers. 2.5 x 191 = 477.5

A 478 megaton warhead would do a hell of a lot more damage to a planet than they do in books when Star Destroyers attack and bombard planets (Ex. ISD Whirlwind and fleet attacking Yavin) they would leave an impact crater larger than that of a moderately sized asteroid impacting the surface of the planet at a few hundred miles an hour. Shall I use E=mc^2?

Yes because since we are talking about torpedoes, let us talk about turbolasers.

RED HERRING.

And Ender, I am not using game mechanics, I am using from a variaty material.

Your speed, torp flight time, range and firepower percents all come from the games. The only outside bit of information you have is the yield of the concussion missile, which you claimn is a proton torpedoes.

And I join in with the rest of the forum in wanting to know where the fuck you got that measurement for MGLTs from.

But if you think you are righteous and one who is purely right, than it is you who are flawed. You are casting down on me for presenting my argument than handling it more maturly and calmly. Hrm, I think I am not in the wrong here.

Attacking me instead of my argument. This qualifies as a pathetc Ad hommie, correct?

And what I want to be? I am presenting an arguement based on sources at hands as well as mechanical information provided in physics. So tell me, what are your higher sources. Enlighten me, sir.

The 5000 G acceleration in ICS Fighters pulling "high fractions of C" in Star By Star. Coralskippers doing about .95 in Rebel Stand. A frigate, a ship far more massive then a starfighter, blowing up when it's inertial compensators failed while doing .6 C

The best thing to correct an argument is to show them their wrongs, not berate them. Something else that should be worked on around here.

I showed you wer wrong in using game mechanics, and in terminology, not to mention logical assumptions. As to my behavior, thin skinned are we? I suggest you look around. I am not rude to anyone who does not bring it down upon themself through their actions

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2002-10-07 06:50pm

Admiral Patton wrote:Look, you should not have to monitor someones site to be part of this forum.

Not but most of your "points' were already addressed there so reading the sie would have saved the bandwidth of your post and us the time correcting your stupidity.

And if this forum is here to mock stupid people, thank this forum is no more than garbage. Come on, don't make fun of people who may not know as much as you, help them.

ooh, smooth move, insult the forum! As to helping you, that is what the site is for! You know, the site you don't think should be monitered?

And if a lot of the mods make fun of people not as knowledgible than them, then they are all asses. It is not right to treat people this way when they do not know things they potentially should.

Wow, insult the people who can ban your ass. Smart.

And not going to Mikes site is not slamming his integrity, he is not God nor is there or should there be a requirement to see it. I must say it is an interesting way to get a lot of hits on his page.

Reading the page simply means we don't have to suffer through your drivel and that you are better prepared for what you will find here. as to getting hits, he gets those anyways when you go to the main site to click the link to here.

No one has the right to be flamed, we all deserve a mutual form of respect.

Wrong Sparky. Respect must be earned before it is given.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2002-10-07 06:50pm

Admiral Patton wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote: Just, please don't be an idiot on the board while you're here.
Dude, that is wrong. I would insist you retract that statement. You do not just go around and call people idiots. Grow up! As a Council Member you are to be an example to people, not an ass.

People will follow you and respect you if you are good to them, not tyrannical. Come on, retract that statement.

Why should he, you have given no evidence that he is wrong in such an assumption

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-10-07 07:29pm

I am, quite frankly, stunned that calling someone an idiot on this board would have caused the kind of controversy that it did, particularly since NT has been asking for it in several threads. Nonetheless, Admiral Patton used it as an excuse to attack me on not just this thread, but also on another thread. He also sniped at DW and several mods while he was at it. At least he's done, now.

Eleas · Post by **Eleas** » 2002-10-07 07:58pm

NF_Utvol wrote:Since when have physics been an actual basis in star wars? I love star wars, but it has almost no basis in actual science. That is why i see it pointless debating it and star trek.

Then get out. You don't like it, what the hell are you doing on this board?

Eleas · Post by **Eleas** » 2002-10-07 08:21pm

Admiral Patton wrote: In the Episode "Best of Both Worlds" Prt. II, a Borg cube is moving in on Saturn or Jupiter, which I cannot remember, and a small formation of Federation Interceptors dart past the camera and are dashing at the ship and the cube fires three energy weapons at them, destroying them all in one shot. Guess on the size of the ships in relative to the size of the planet in the distance behind them and then comparing it to the Cube in front of them, they were no larger than shuttles, making them attack shuttles/interceptors.

I saw that episode. The ships traveled in a straight trajectory and closed to within spitting distance before the cube even attempted to fire. Also, we don't know how large it is. A guesstimate isn't going to cut it, I'm afraid.

I would say that the Cube accurately and easily destroyed those ships at at least a 50k+ KM.

And I would say you're deluded, as the cube was clearly visible and large. How you in one breath can scale them relative to each other and the next say they're fifty thousand kilometers away is amazing, and shows a prodigous bias on your part.

Ender wrote: Proton torps, carries by the Tie Defenders, would be about 478 MT.
Really? What is your evidence. A 478 megaton warhead would do a hell of a lot more damage to a planet than they do in books when Star Destroyers attack and bombard planets (Ex. ISD Whirlwind and fleet attacking Yavin)

Except the warheads are penetrative, as detailed in among other volumes Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology, so this would not necessarily be true. And, of course, an ISD wouldn't carry any concussion missiles in the first place. Oops.

they would leave an impact crater larger than that of a moderately sized asteroid impacting the surface of the planet at a few hundred miles an hour. Shall I use E=mc^2?

E=mc^2 is useless when comparing blast yields in this fashion, you utter moron.

And Ender, I am not using game mechanics, I am using from a variaty material.

That you refuse to name, making it worthless.

But if you think you are righteous and one who is purely right, than it is you who are flawed. You are casting down on me for presenting my argument than handling it more maturly and calmly. Hrm, I think I am not in the wrong here.

Actually, he's breaking your argument like a rotten matchstick. Your assertions are without a shred of proof, which is why you now attack Ender the person rather than his argument.

And what I want to be? I am presenting an arguement based on sources at hands as well as mechanical information provided in physics.

No, you don't. You don't present any sources, or any relevant physics. All you have is arrogance and bluster.

So tell me, what are your higher sources. Enlighten me, sir.

Higher sources are defined by the Lucasfilm statement of canonicity. Obviously you haven't read it. Now is a good time to do so.

Based on this, our evidence is easy enough to follow.

ANH acceleration. Near-relativistic speeds reached by the X-Wings as they closed with the DS.

Luke's strafing run, same movie. Establishes at least 60 GJ per shot from X-Wing cannon, and that is an extreme lower limit.

The best thing to correct an argument is to show them their wrongs, not berate them. Something else that should be worked on around here.

Maybe you should have thought about that before arrogantly assuming us to be as ignorant as you, making wild statements without a shred of proof, and not even having read the very web page that spawned this board.