 | | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
---...--- (...) That one's easy to answer,the Enterprise!! (24 years ago, 16-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) Don't be too sure about this one. The Enterprise E is the David in a battle of Goliaths. Battlestar Gallactica's landing bay is 1K long making the ship about 2K. A fully-stocked Battlestar has almost 300 little fighters, not to mention the (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) which (...) Turbo (...) from (...) flying (...) Okay, I started this mess, and I have to say I agree on most points here. Does ANYBODY remember the Battlestar episode where they discovered the Battlestar Pegasus had also survived? Did they (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) Can't argue with that. :) (...) Earth Force ships lack shields, in fact, I don't think ANY B5 race has them, but the Vorlons have a similar technology. Defence is in the form of pulse guns that shoot at incomming shots to block them (as well (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) Actually, you've got that backward-- EAS Agamemnon has no shields; no B5 ship has "shields" in the "project energy all around the ship" sense. Some of the organic technology vessels can absorb energy, though. Agamemnon relies on heavy armor (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) have (...) The Agamemnon would be blown apart in a matter of seconds. One LIGHT Turbolaser bolt imparts roughly 30 terrawatts of energy on a target. (let alone the kinectic energy imparted by the plasma) The Agamemnon's main weopons impart a (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) Actually, in the "project energy all around the ship" sense, the Interceptors *do*. However, it doesn't protect the ship from damage in an armor sense, it acts as a scrambler of sorts vs. enemy targetting. No, it's not in the show, but it is (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) Just for my own physics-illiterate curiosity, what laws specifically do you consider the Death Star to break? Dave! (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) Even if the Death Star used its entire structure (160km diameter for DS1, 600km diameter DS2) to fuel its hyper-matter reactor it still would not have sufficent energy to blow apart a planet. I'd say that is a major physics problem that was (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) Yeah, that's what I figured you were talking about. Maybe Alderaaaaaan had a core of highly unstable material just itching to explode, and the Death Star simply set it off... Nah! Dave! (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) As I know of DS1 and DS2 diameters are 120 and 160 km (or thereabouts) respectively. Where do you get these numbers? Of course I could be wrong, but I just want to learn about your source, since the diameter of second one extremely large with (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: A couple stupid SW questions...
|
|
(...) than (...) only (...) its (...) you (...) 600km (...) The 120 and 160 km numbers are arbitrary ones created by offical sources. If you hang around the newsgrourp alt.startrek.vs.starwars long enough you will find many references to people to (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
