Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
A challenge: Defend SD.net!
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by PsyLiam: [QB] Let's not drag this off into a pro-anti B5 debate eh? I liked the show. I loved the show. Season 5 was, bar one or two episodes, complete wank. Also, the financial situation of B5 was not necessarily seperate from the type of show that it was. The argument "imagine if it had Trek's budget" doesn't hold up, because there's a chance that B5 would have had exactly the same viewing figures that it got anyway, and thus wouldn't have [i] deserved Trek's budget. On the thread subject, let's pick an example where Wong appears to have altered the figures in order to make himself right. What follows relate to hull strengths. Obviously ST hulls crumple into dust if they are sneezed upon, and SW hulls can withstand GOD HIMSELF! From [URL=http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Shields/]Mike Wong's site regarding the destruction of the Odyssey:[/URL] [QUOTE]In the DS9 episode "The Jem'Hadar", the USS Odyssey was destroyed after an exchange of fire which lasted for less than 30 seconds, as seen in this Divx5 video clip. As it turned to flee, a Jem'Hadar fighter (which can be generously approximated as a 100 metre diameter, 25 metre high saucer) with a mass of perhaps 10,000 tons deliberately rammed the Odyssey at a velocity of roughly 600 m/s (it took 5 frames at 30 fps to cover its own length onscreen as it entered the frame). If we generously assume that it accelerated to 1 km/s by the time of impact, its kinetic energy would have been roughly 5E12 J (1.2 kilotons), and its momentum would have been roughly 1E10 kg�m/s (less than 1% of the TESB asteroid's momentum). The Odyssey was so heavily damaged by the impact that the entire deflector array was destroyed and the plunging fighter smashed its way into the primary hull, thus destroying the entire forward area and leaving multiple decks exposed to space (it goes without saying that a warp core breach followed almost immediately afterwards). The duration of the impact was roughly 2 frames at 30 fps (0.07 seconds), so the reaction force would have been roughly 1.4E11 N (less than 1/400 of the TESB asteroid's impact force). Of course, the reflexive Trekkie response to this incident will be to find an excuse to dismiss it, so they might argue that the ship had suffered prior damage, so all onboard systems should be presumed non-functional (funny how they dismiss that possibility for the TESB asteroid, eh?). However, that would be ignoring the real point, which is that this incident conclusively demonstrated that the ship's physical structure cannot withstand that much force, and since its physical structure ultimately must absorb an impact regardless of whether it comes to its shields or its hull, this gives us an idea of the ship's general resistance to impact (a point hammered home by lethal 1 km/s ramming attacks against fully shielded Klingon cruisers in "Tears of the Prophets" and "All That You Leave Behind").[/QUOTE]Counter argument by [URL=http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWweakhull.html]Guardian 2000[/URL] (who posts here, I believe): [QUOTE]After assuming that a downloaded clip of the special effects of that episode was representing the total time of the battle (hence that silly "30 seconds" comment), he gives the Jem'Hadar fighter an estimated size and estimated mass. What goes unmentioned is that the density he uses for the Jem'Hadar fighter is 50 kg/m3, or 5% of water's density! He does make up for this a bit by "generously" quadrupling the actual speed of the Jem'Hadar fighter. [/QUOTE]Suspicious, no? (No, for those who stopped caring). And to be fare to Bernd here, this isn't about SW vs ST. That argument is, quite rightly, boring. It's about, in a large sense, how having a web-site and using complicated maths is a great way of getting anyone to believe whatever you want. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3