One of the reoccuring questions I have concerning Firely is how are they travelling from system to system?
In "Out of Gas" we have the ship adrift in space far off the well-traveled spacelanes. The shuttles are launced as escape vehicles. They may not make it to civilization but they are the only hope of survival for a little while.
But how do they accomplish all this? Do the shuttles have FTL capability? Obviously Serenity does or else they wouldn't get from system to system. Still, the FTL aspect isn't covered. What's it like? How does it work?
Similarly it's obvious they have artifical gravity. Of course, what SciFi civilization doesn't? (Yes, B-5 tried to explain theirs away with rotating sections of the ship but this falls a little flat upon closer inspection)
You listen to some of the dialogue of Firefly and you almost get the sense that everything takes place in the same star system. The introductory monologues mention people moving farther and father out. Book's opening monlogue even implies it's all one system with lots of moons.
Found an interesting discussion that is centered on the topic of Firefly taking place in one star system as opposed to many.
Anyone else curious about Firefly's FTL?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Nope. I think they HAVE FTL tech, and that Firefly happens in a multitude of star systems. It's just that FTL is so commonplace and refined, that it really doesn't matter what it is or how it works. No one on the ship really cares about the physics of the engines (hell, not even Kaylee - she just KNOWS), and nor should the audience. That's not what Firefly is about.
...But now having read the thread and seeing that Joss has concluded in the movie that everything is in one system after all, well... Whatever.
Mark
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...Joss has concluded in the movie that everything is in one system..."
Suspension of disbelief : shattered.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Personally, I would prefer them to be scattered amongst many star systems, but after watching the entire DVD set, there's no evidence of any FTL at all. So I guess I have to accept the "one HUGE system" theory.
quote:Originally posted by HerbShrump: (Yes, B-5 tried to explain theirs away with rotating sections of the ship but this falls a little flat upon closer inspection)
I'm curious as to why you say this? I don't remember seeing any problems with the way they showed it.
B.J.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN:
"...Joss has concluded in the movie that everything is in one system..."
Suspension of disbelief : shattered.
Ug.
We just talked about this a week or so ago- the whole notion of "hundreds of worlds" being in one system is just.....
Bad.
But, I did find a nice Firefly poster while looking for more info on the whole "one system" thing and if anyone had noted how many planets were actually shown during the series.
[ September 18, 2005, 01:52 AM: Message edited by: Jason Abbadon ]
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
quote:Originally posted by B.J.:
quote:Originally posted by HerbShrump: (Yes, B-5 tried to explain theirs away with rotating sections of the ship but this falls a little flat upon closer inspection)
I'm curious as to why you say this? I don't remember seeing any problems with the way they showed it.
B.J.
It was made clear in the series that the Earth Alliance didn't have advanced artifical gravity and relied on spin and centrifugal force to create artifical gravity. Only after the alliance with the Minbara and the fusion of Minbari and Vorlon tech to create the White Stars did humans gain access to other forms of artifical gravity.
As an object spins it creates gravity. The amount of gravity lessens toward the center (with 0 gravity at the center) and increases toward the rim. Cylindrical objects work best for this type of gravidty because of the even distribution of gravity all around.
B-5 the station worked pretty good. I don't know how many decks exist away from the center toward the outer rim. However, these decks should have reflected changes in gravity. Maybe the station was big enough that the difference in gravity was negligable. I'm sure the stats for the staion are out there somewhere and someone could do the math to find out.
My impression of ops, however, is one of the flaws. Ops seemed to be right above the entrance to the landing bay. Ops didn't rotate with the rest of the station. Where did the gravity come from?
The same holds for the Earth Alliance ships. There were rotating portions of the ships, but it didn't look like the entire crew and all the ship systems were in that rotating portion. Where was the bridge located? If not in the rotating section, where did the gravity come from?
The Hyperion Class ships don't appear to have a rotating section at all. Where did the gravity come from?
It's little things like that. On the surface I never thought about it. Earth Alliance ships were shown with rotating portions and B-5 obviously rotated to create artifical gravity. But when I started to try to match up the inside with the outside I got a little confused...
It's no big deal for me though. Would cost way to much to have the ships be 0g, therefore science fiction ships have artifical gravity. People don't watch TV to read subtitles all day, so most everyone speaks English all the time. These factors don't ruin my suspension of disbelief.
But they do provide fodder to dwell on.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Ops didn't rotate with the rest of the station."
Yes, it did.
"Where was the [Omega-class destroyer's] bridge located?"
In the rotating section.
"Where did the [Hyperion-class cruiser's] gravity come from?"
From nowhere, Hyperion crews were strapped in.
(Now, you could argue that the gyroscopic precession caused by rotating such a large mass around the longitudinal axis of the ship would make maneuvering an Omega a bit hairy, but that's really neither here nor there. (Helicopters manage it too, after all.))
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"We just talked about this a week or so ago- the whole notion of 'hundreds of worlds' being in one system is just.....
"Bad."
Yeah, but I didn't see anyone say in there that it would actually be established in the movie. As long as it isn't established, one can continue believing everything makes sense.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
To elaborate on what Cartman said,...
quote:Originally posted by HerbShrump: Ops seemed to be right above the entrance to the landing bay. Ops didn't rotate with the rest of the station. Where did the gravity come from?
Ops wasn't above the entrance, it was below (*and* above - that'll confuse you). There were two ops stations, one on either side of the bay entrance, and only one was operating at any one time. From the perspective of the ops personnell, the ships were entering the bay above their heads. As Cartman said, the whole section was rotating, even the bay entrance, so yes, they did have gravity.
B.J.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN:
"We just talked about this a week or so ago- the whole notion of 'hundreds of worlds' being in one system is just.....
"Bad."
Yeah, but I didn't see anyone say in there that it would actually be established in the movie. As long as it isn't established, one can continue believing everything makes sense.
(sigh)...I guess so.
It's amazing how picky we can be about minor crap in Trek but let so much slide in other shows. I recall back in Enterprise's first season, a bunch of people were really pissed about the physics (gravity mainly) displayed on that comet they visited....that was pretty minor by comparison.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
The external shots made it look like Ops was stationary and located right under those two huge non-rotating mandibles that stretched out in front of B-5.
Regardless, that close to the central hub, Ops should have had less gravity than at the rim.
As for the other ships, I stand corrected.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
So... What should it look like when people seasoned to changes in gravity walk in 1/3 gee conditions?
I mean, this question should arise fairly often in visual science fiction, what with Mars being a frequent flier destination and all. Under lunar gravity (1/6 gee or so), there's no point in trying to walk "normally", at least not when you are outside and not at risk of bumping your head onto the ceiling. But under 1/3 gee (which is what B5 Ops would also have), would it be impossible to just walk very tenderly?
Alternate means of motion would probably be difficult to find. Kangaroo jumps would be too tiresome; using hands to assist movement might be great, but not all corridors can be narrow enough for that to work. Velcro on your soles wouldn't be practical, but perhaps a little bit of magnetic attraction..?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
They didn't usually move around much in their control room, anyway.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Well, you'd expect rounded corners and padding.
Mabye a magnetic moving strip along the coridors (like Asimov's "expressways" from The Caves of Steel) to facilitate moving in a emergency.
There should probably be handholds and railings along the ceiling in case of gravitty loss (or just so crewmen in low grav areas can move more efficently in a crisis- heck, I could see them lowering the gravity during battle conditions and increasing it tenfold if the sation is boarded or to quell their all-too-frequent riots).
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
I bet the part that looks like it rotates on an Omega is really the only part that doesn't Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The rotating part is a giant rotissire.
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
In B5 Ops, you could always see a rotating star field and shadows from the 'mandibles'.
In Firefly, it's possible that they are in multiple binary star system.. with dozens of planets, habitable mooms, and tereformed worlds. Another thing that occured to me, is that they might be in a very dense star cluster where star systems are within a Ly of each other.. close enough for non-FTL travel between them.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
A light year?
Those cows were only in the cargo hold for a month. Long enough for them to forget they were cows, but short enough to put those two planetary systems really close to each other without FTL.
If they were at a minimum of 1 LY apart, each episode would cover a year. Unless you want to get into relativity and time dialation.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
But you probably would.
The complication there would be the total elimination of "old flame" or "stubborn nemesis" storylines, since once you departed a planet, you'd never again see the people there. If you returned next week, you wouldn't meet your lost love, but her great-grandson instead.
Longevity treatments notwithstanding, of course.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I had an odd thought while watching "Safe" the other night. River stops in mid-ramble to announce that she hears crickets. Crickets. On an alien world in another solar system that was once unihabitable. Did they, like, import the crickets from Earth-that-was?
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
---{B5}---
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: heck, I could see them lowering the gravity during battle conditions and increasing it tenfold if the sation is boarded or to quell their all-too-frequent riots).
Good Lord! Just attempting to *change* the rotation rate in a station that size would suddenly smash everyone and everything up against one side of whatever room they're in. Yeah, you'd stop a riot easily that way, but I'd imagine you'd have a nasty visit from Dr. Franklin, the dockworkers, and all the station repairmen. Londo and G'Kar would probably also be yelling at you from both sides, and Lord knows we don't need those two on the same side against you!
---{Firefly}--- The crickets probably just stowed away with some cargo somewhere. I would imagine there's also been a lot of rats and cockroaches deposited amongst all the populated worlds.
B.J.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I've just thought of a really good line of reasoning to prove that Firefly does indeed use FTL travel, even if some of the nomenclature is confusing:
How the heck did all of those millions or even billions of settlers migrate away from Earth in the first place? Without any kind of FTL travel, it would be virtually impossible for anyone to make it out to any other solar system in such a short time frame (around 400 years, allowing for Earth's current near-total lack of spaceflight capability). Therefore, in order to accommodate any large-scale migration, it would be almost a given that there would have to be some kind of FTL capability.
I really don't feel that it would be at all reasonable to have "more than seventy Earths" crammed into one solar system, even if many of them are moon-sized bodies in outer orbits. Even though science fiction often strains credibility, there's still always a sense of some kind of base logic. And having that huge of a civilization -- a civilization that had already migrated from another solar system anyway -- it doesn't make any sense to not have FTL capability.
(Aside on B5: C&C was definitely located just below the central docking bay in the rotating section. You could see it in a few shots, and also the quick zoom-in takes that were in the opening credits in the first few seasons.)
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Yeah, I actually read that article before I made my previous post. And although I agree that all of those theories are possible, none of them are probable. Think about it from this way:
Humanity sends out many STL probes to nearby stars. This in itself is a technological achievement, considering the fastest speed any Earth-made object has achieved is about 70 km/s (about .23 c, actually), and that was just a couple of tiny, solar probes that didn't have much in the way of engines of their own.
The Earth gets "used up" from all the pollution, overpopulation, and warfare.
One of the STL probes just so happens to find one very-close-by star that has over seventy life-supporting or terraform-able planets and moons orbiting it. This would be such a huge coincidence that I find it almost ludicrous, though admittedly still within the realm of some kind of possibility.
Everyone (or everyone who has money or influence, anyway) picks up and moves -- via STL, again -- to this new star system, in a process that would take at least fifty to a hundred years at sub-light speeds.
So, do you really think that all of Human civilization could reasonably pack things up, migrate for decades, and create a whole new infrastructure, completely without the benefit of FTL propulsion? I sure don't.
Finally, I thought of one more tiny bit of supporting (not primary) evidence. Consider the little puppet show from "Heart of Gold"... specifically, the way the exodus from Earth was portrayed. It wasn't a single migration to one place, but rather a scattering in multiple directions. That in itself suggests a widely-distributed range of settlements, and therefore FTL drive. (Yes yes, I know that the puppet show was very stylized, but IMO the concept that the play was trying to convey strongly suggests "FTL" to me.)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by B.J.: ---{B5}---
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: heck, I could see them lowering the gravity during battle conditions and increasing it tenfold if the sation is boarded or to quell their all-too-frequent riots).
Good Lord! Just attempting to *change* the rotation rate in a station that size would suddenly smash everyone and everything up against one side of whatever room they're in. Yeah, you'd stop a riot easily that way, but I'd imagine you'd have a nasty visit from Dr. Franklin, the dockworkers, and all the station repairmen. Londo and G'Kar would probably also be yelling at you from both sides, and Lord knows we don't need those two on the same side against you!
B.J.
Actually that's more a tactic for races with generated gravity (or fields that allow a close aproximation). The concept of a "boarding party" on Trek should be laughable between forcefields, gravity manipulation and remote-controlled depressurization of sections. And ust turning off the airflow would have worked just fine on B5- or flooding in anastetic gas.
As to a "stellar cluster", you would definitely still need FTL to make it workable- else you could be on a re-spply run to a colony and arrive to find your clients had died decades earlier (or they no longer use what you're selling).
Alien Crickets are not such a big glitch- she may have been mistaken and was listenig to some native bug with a simmular sound- it's not like you often see crickets when they're chirping, after all. ....of course, we see pine trees on most alien worlds too so....
One possibility is that humans deliberately destroy native ecosystems to make them "human friendly" by seeding hardy (biologically enhanced) plants, bugs, baceria, etc. once a planet is detected in a temperate solar region. Possibly the space probes making the initial discovery drop "bio packages" to make eventual terraforming easier down the line.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: But you probably would.
The complication there would be the total elimination of "old flame" or "stubborn nemesis" storylines, since once you departed a planet, you'd never again see the people there. If you returned next week, you wouldn't meet your lost love, but her great-grandson instead.
Longevity treatments notwithstanding, of course.
Timo Saloniemi
It'd also pretty much eliminate any repeat clients for Inara and the rest of the companions.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: Humanity sends out many STL probes to nearby stars. This in itself is a technological achievement, considering the fastest speed any Earth-made object has achieved is about 70 km/s (about .23 c, actually), and that was just a couple of tiny, solar probes that didn't have much in the way of engines of their own.
Yes, that was Helios 2, and your (approximate) 70km/s is correct, but that works out to 0.00023c, which is a LOT slower. The fastest interplanetary probe is Voyager 1 at ~17.2km/s, which is about 0.000057c.
B.J.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Whoops, I converted to meters when I should've left it at kilometers, right? Argh.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
I've been reading the Alacrity Fitzhugh and Hobart Floyt trilogy written by Brian Daley. One of the minor sub-plots (turns major in book 3) deals with these ancient aliens called the Precursors.
Since it's now been firmly established that Firefly is set in one star system, this paragraph I read struck me as interesting.
quote:And so at last, Spica. First magnitude jewel of the Virgin; blue, short-lived supergiant; homeplace of the mightest Precursor work yet confirmed: the Carousel. Twenty-three E-type paradise worlds ina single impossible orbit, blazing gems in an imperial diadem, with no clue as to how the trick was done, confounding and enrapturing Homo sapiens (and incidentally giving lots of people the conviction that their species was the Chosen of the Precursors).
What if that's what happened in the Firefly 'verse? For the most part, people in this trilogy I'm reading aren't interested in the Precursors. They all go about their business. Empires rise and fall, wars are fought, people live their lives and give no thought about the Precursors. It's no big deal to them.
What if the Firelfy 'verse was like that? Somehow this system wound up hosting several hospitable worlds. That's not something that happens in nature. What if it was artifically done? What if it happened long before the Earth was used up and Humanity just happened to discover this system?
And what if it's not that big a deal in the Firefly 'verse. People, for the most part, just don't care, as long as it works.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
The way the map River pulls up in Serenity looks, it woulD really appear that the "system" is in actually a really tight star cluster, something that I mentioned to bX in the PMS we did while making that map. In fact, I'd actually forgotten about the possibility of us working on it.
Culled directly from the PMs:
Interestingly, the shooting script in the SVC has Mr. Universe noting "headlines on 32 planets"...but we've got 44 not including Miranda here. Of those, only 2 are gas giants. Hm.
I was reading through the SVC more last night & today. I saw the stellar map that very clearly seems to imply (as Simon--I believe--mentioned) that it's a globular cluster. I counted 6 stars with varying planets around them. Yet it's always refered to a A system, not "systems" plural. Indeed, on page 113 in the script, the notation reads "...the solar system, glowing lines connecting all the stars and planets...River pushes to one system, one planet."
At the same time, Joss' memo--& the teacher's intro narration--states quite clearly that they found "a new solar system with dozens of planets and hundreds of moons." What if---& this is a weird concept, but it might work--there's a central star (I seem to remember that in the map) & orbiting around that one are the Central Planets, the Core. As it expands out, not only are there a few other planets out there, but FIVE OTHER STARS each in their own orbital run. Each of THOSE stars has a few planets around it as well (the map shows that quite clearly) & then some of the planets have moons. It would explain the light levels, the heat for the CHZ (think a big munging mess of heat & living areas in the middle) AND allow for the vast multitudes of planetary bodies. That would also allow for a LOT more planets (dozens compared to the 20 you have now) & moons (hundreds to your 24). I think that might be what Whedon intended so that anyone can just...make up worlds as they see fit. Which you (we) could easily do.
A couple smaller things:
The currency bills. They have a solar system pattern. What if that pattern is the system that the planet is located in of those 6 stars? Notice the one shown has that last planet in an orbital plane totally out of line with the rest?
In the "Worlds Of The Alliance" image, Sihnon is shown to has 4 small moon bodies--unnamed--next to it.
On page 14, Hera, Shadow, & Persephone are stated to be outer planets, so it looks like you were right about Hera being Independent territory.
So ther'e probably not even a NEED for FTL.
Posted by Chris (Member # 71) on :
Well that depends. Sure, we can go from Earth to Mars easily enough, but its quicker if we go FTL.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
But the issue ALSO comes with a brand new map of the solar system complete with recent & upcoming IP missions . On it, some of the sidebar text mentions that the current count of moons in this system ALONE is a little over 170.
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY.
I'm thinking that although a star cluster is more likely, the idea of the single system is more & more viable, especially if you consider that gas giants like Heinlein & Georgia might be failed stars like Jupiter with excessive heat radiation.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Well, the count of 170 moons includes moons that look like THE Moon, moons that look like Titan, and moons that look like the little brown nuggets Mr. Bunny poops out on a regular basis. In our system, which is still considered an average star, there are only four, possibly five bodies which could possibly be changed to support open biospheres as on Earth: Venus, Mars, Titan, arguably Europa, and Earth itself. And even then, you're talking about some pretty serious science-fiction to make it happen.
I've no doubt that there are star systems out there with multiple planets potentially capable of openly supporting human life. But dozens, or hundreds? Even with terraforming, it's stretching it. There IS still a "habitable zone" and other basic factors to worry about.
Mark
Posted by bX (Member # 419) on :
Although we don't have a lot of options, maybe we shouldn't assume that our solar system is the norm. We can guess they would have picked a system with an unusually high number of planets in the habitable zone (or at least close enough for terraforming) before they set out in the colony ships. The advanced but unexplained terraforming science employed by The Alliance (includes the above discussed gravity manipulation), so that even small rocks we might consider improbable hosts could be converted.
Posted by Chris (Member # 71) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: In our system, which is still considered an average star, there are only four, possibly five bodies which could possibly be changed to support open biospheres as on Earth: Venus, Mars, Titan, arguably Europa, and Earth itself.
What about Io?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Io is the most volcanically active body in the solar system. It's constantly warped by Jupiter's extreme gravity and magnetic field, and it's way too unstable. I cringe every time they mention the "Io Colony" on Babylon 5.
I agree with Mark; although it's certainly possible, it's still highly unlikely that there could be that many habitable bodies in a single star system.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Io is very close to Jupiter, whose tidal forces keep the place extremely tectonically and volcanically active. Jupiter itself is very radioactive (in fact, it's the ONLY planet in the system that gives off more energy than it recieves from the Sun), and Io has no measurable magnetosphere to protect itself. There is no heavy atmosphere despite the volcanoes going off all the time, either. Also, there's a unique phenomenon called the "Io flux tube", whereby a constant stream of charged particles (two TRILLION watts!!) flows between the moon and Jupiter. This renders the upper atmosphere of the moon constantly charged, prone to lightning, etc.
So no, Io isn't really posible. Well, unless you WANT to live on the surface of what is basically a constantly erupting volcano with nuclear weapons going off all the time.
Mark
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
I guess the danger money would be good.
Besides, wasn't most of the base in orbit of Io guarding the gate thingy? But dispite this weak idea, there is still a bit on the surface, which frankly, is about as likley as the Pope growing dreads, lighting a spliff and becoming a rasta.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I was under the impression that the surface installation was on Ganemede, the Io base was always reffered to as the "Transfer point off Io", which to me implies a purely orbital facility.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Still, I don't think jms put too much though into it. Perhaps said flux tube could power a massive jumpgate facility, or somehow facilitate entry into hyperspace. Hyperspace in B5 has always been a bit wonky anyway - have they EVER had an explanation as to why people simply can't travel from a gate at point A to their final destination at point B? All too often you had cargo ships or refugees or whatever getting attcked while they were flying in the middle of nowhere...
Mark
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: I was under the impression that the surface installation was on Ganemede, the Io base was always reffered to as the "Transfer point off Io", which to me implies a purely orbital facility.
I'm pretty sure that there were references to an actual colony on Io. It was always referenced in apparent equal status of importance to Mars as a colony. For example, William Edgars had an estate on Io. I find it hard to imagine that an "estate" would be on a space station... (ref) Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Well from that link I can't see anything to directly contradict the idea that the Io colony isn't on the surface itself. Who's to say that there isn't am orbiting space colony in a similar vein to the Babylon Stations (though obviously not as complex) in addition to the spinning wheel station that we saw? Which is probably little more than a customs checkpoint/EA outpost. Such a structure would be more geared towards commerce, trade and the mega-corps, which makes sense given that it'd be sat right next the Sol's Jumpgate and it'd be easy to imagine Edgars having an estate in a rotating cylinder.
Though I do agree with Mark so far as JMS probably didn't think in such great detail.
[ December 01, 2006, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: Reverend ]
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I can certainly accept that the concept of Io being a full-fledged space colony, with the "transfer point" being a separate station, I think it's less likely considering the facts of the B5 universe. Consider that Babylon 5, the station, was considered a massive and expensive undertaking, and was barely worth the resources needed to keep it in operation. When there are two or three habitable moons within a literal stone's throw of Io, it makes very little sense for there to be an orbiting space colony holding tens of thousands of people.
Ah, well.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Babylon 5 was a threadbare, thrown together, scraping the bottom of the barrel operation, not because those stations are so dreadfully expensive and difficult to build, but because they had spent the budget and then some on the FOUR station before this one.
As to why build a space colony over Io when Europa, Callisto & Ganymede are right there (well, relativity) perhaps it's all about economics. It's right by the jumpgate for a whole system which means loads of traffic, traffic means there's a demand for R&R, currency exchange, business, trade, with all the support systems and profit that comes with it all. ...but we stray off topic.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
I wonder why out by Io & not, say, just inside the Mars-asteroid belt space.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
But they could put the jump gate anywhere... right? Shouldn't there be another gate in orbit of Earth, too? I don't think there can only be one gate per system... after all, in "Endgame," there were separate beacons (implying gates) for Earth and Mars.
quote:...but we stray off topic.
This is Flare. It's unusual when we DON'T go off-topic. Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I would think you would want to put the gate at a point that's a good compromise between not being too close to your main inhabited areas (because who knows who might come through?) and not being too far away from same (because who wants a travel farther than they have to to get to it?).
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I think placing the jumpgate in the Jovian system is a way of creating a bottleneck, for both economic and defensive purposes. (Think Panama or Suez) It'd make it easier to manage the small fry traffic that has to use the gates to get around, while the beacons are for the larger military ships to jump around wherever want since they don't need the gate.
Indeed the reason for putting the gate over Io could be precisely because it's uninhabitable, so it can't be used by smugglers, raiders etc as a staging area near the jumpgate but still provide a stable gravity well to orbit around.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
But how fast are B5's sublight engines? We know it only takes a matter of minutes to jump from Mars to Earth, and likely the same for Jupiter. Somehow I'd think that it would be just as sensible to have bigger defenses around an Earth-orbit gate as make every single commercial transport truck out at a small percentage of sublight out to Jupiter before getting out of the system. Especially because it would never stop any military from attacking, because they'd be able to form their own jump points anyway.
I think there's got to be an (unseen) gate near Earth, that just wasn't used in "Endgame" because of strategic necessity.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I agree that a Jumpgate, or lack there of would have the slightest effect on an enemy fleet (that's what the ODP's and the early warning system is for.)
However, your assumption that all the commercial traffic is going to be slowed down significantly by the distance to Earth may be misplaced. I mean, do we think Earth actually produces anything (other than red tape) anymore? My feeling is that Mars and the Jovian moons are the industrial centers of the Earth Alliance; why else oppress Mars so much and how else could they hope to be independent unless they had an established economic infrastructure?
If that is the case then Io is indeed the ideal place to route the system's comercial traffic through.
As for how fast their sublight engines are; good point, no idea, it was never really addressed. Having said that we've seen a Whitestar (admittedly the fastest ship around) get from Ganymede to Jupiter in about 2 minutes. *dose some quick and quite possibly inaccurate calculations* That's about 1.32 AU per hour, or 0.18 C. Assuming an Omega-Class is about half as fast (once it's had time to accelerate), it could make the trip from Earth to the Transfer Point in as little as....oh bugger it, I never was very good that this stuff. Suffice to say that I doubt most in system freighters have to travel for much more than a few days, a week at the outside (depending on it's course) to get from TP to Earth. For most people and goods that's an acceptable amount of time and for the rich and important, I'm sure jump point capable ship are available for a price.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Round it to 1 AU per hour for a fast ship, and it would take between roughly 4 and 6 hours (depending on which side of the Sun each planet is) to make the run. Multiply depending on how much slower an average transport is. (i.e. an Omega could be 8 to 12 hours, a barge 16 to 24 hours...)
I suppose it's not as bad as I originally thought (I was thinking a few days, honestly). However, when that trip can be cut to a few minutes, I think that there would be plenty of people willing to build a jumpgate right on Earth's doorstep. Especially considering that the people owning the gate would get to charge for it. Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I think what were really disagreeing on is if Earth is the hub of the Solar system or is it the Jovian System.
For me the proof is simply that we know Jupiter has a jumpgate and we've never seen even a hint of one near Earth (or more logically, Luna.)
Of course it is possible that there is one, I just don't think it's needed. To me the only evidence that there should be on there is the presence of a jumpgate over some of the other race's homeworlds'. I'm pretty sure Drazi had one and the Markab homeworld, Centauri prime I'm not sure about, neither do I think we saw one over Mimbar or Narn.
Getting back to sublight speeds, think how difficult it would be to track and intercept a fast shuttle or fighter wing if they jumped from a gate in Earth orbit before they could do some significant damage. With the gate over by Jupiter, such hit and run attack (military & criminal) are more managable. There's also safety to consider, just what kind of damage would it do if someone blew the gate in orbit of an inhabited planet? Bare in mind, when we saw the "bonehead manoeuvre", the whitestar barely cleared the blast radius and it took about 30 seconds.
Yet another reason to park it over Io.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Yeah, that's a lot of energy going through the gate.
As for sublight speed, anyone remember how far Sector 14 (where B4 was located) was from B5? For some reason, I seem to remember Sinclair and Garibaldi saying that the trip would take 5 hours.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
It was three hours, but they were using shuttles and Starfuries. I'm sure other ships would have been able to get there faster, but at that time they didn't have the Whitestar or any capital ships floating aroudn to be used.
Mark
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Some actual info (some reliable, some not):
(Hmmm, HTML brackets not allowed?) Google "wikipedia Io Babylon 5" and hit the first result.
From JMS, it looks like Io is indeed a space station (with accompanying moon-side base). The distance is due to security.
Posted by Chris (Member # 71) on :
HTML brackets allowed, parentheses and underscores aren't, IIRC.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I liked the bit about taking down the Centauri bought gate from Earth orbit due to security concerns. Makes you wonder if Earthdome thought the sneeky, pointy haired buggers might have rigged it somehow.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Er, what? When was that? It's been a while since I've seen any B5.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Earth originally purchased hyperspace technology from the Centauri ages ago, which supposedly included Earth's first jumpgates. Earth has since figured out how to build their own, of course, and most of the gates we see are Earth or Centauri gates (which look pretty much the same). The Narn use gates with three "limbs", and the Minbari and Vorlons tend to use ships that make their own jump points when they're not using other species' gates.
The only Vorlon "gate" we've seen was that ridiculous sarcophagus we saw in that ridiculous Thirdspace movie...
Mark
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
nonono... I knew that Earth at first bought from the Centauri, and later built their own based on the Centauri gates. I was asking about the "taking down the Centauri bought gate from Earth orbit" bit - I don't remember hearing that.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
It was in the wiki article Mucus pointed to. It originally comes from one of JMS's numerous postings.
[quore]"Yes, this is the primary jumpgate for Earth. It's positioned at Io (most of the base is actually in orbit outside Io, some of it on the surface, as we showed in "Chrysalis") to keep Earth a bit safer by removing it some distance, and because putting it near the huge energy field of Jupiter makes it more difficult for weapons to target it from a distance. It's mainly a tactical decision."
-- posted by J. Michael Straczynski (JMS) on America Online 96-03-27 04:20:09 [/quote]
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)