Starfleet Jedi

After SW's teratons that make a return and 40K that never got annoyed by real facts (the Warp only being dwarfed by the infinite ocean of semen Hammies wade through), with Haloites crossing their fingers so hard that they're now fused in the vain hope to have frigates shoot teratons again (several Haloties keep citing their silly encyclopedia), we also get Starcrat's getting teratons. Not for some super rare weapons mind you, but literally ship-to-ship weapons, featured in a protoss internal fight. Evidence of that, however?
Nothing.

huh. i guess starcraft wins, then. pack it up and go home, guys. it's over.

The saddest thing is the insane 'wankaton' levels of firepower being used with such flimsy evidence pretty much opens it up to any franchise (save for star trek because of some invisible tech of the week rule). It gets to a point where people pull out figures for B5, hell I even saw someone who did it for nBSG a few years ago trying to get into the hundreds of gigatons.

It's just literally an internet debate arm race... *sigh* it makes reason debate difficult to say the least.

This is a trend I've been noticing is increasing in frequency over the years, but most especially in the post airing of SW:TCW as that series has largely discredited SW firepower and technology. It seems that the new wanking is now focused almost exclusively on WH40K as the poster child for uber firepower, and much of the same fanatical mentality that we saw in much of the Warsie camp has transfered itself to the WH40K franchise.
-Mike

Trinoya wrote:(save for star trek because of some invisible tech of the week rule)

If it makes trek look good it must be a tech of the week even if it is done repeatedly.

Trinoya wrote:The saddest thing is the insane 'wankaton' levels of firepower being used with such flimsy evidence pretty much opens it up to any franchise (save for star trek because of some invisible tech of the week rule). It gets to a point where people pull out figures for B5, hell I even saw someone who did it for nBSG a few years ago trying to get into the hundreds of gigatons.

It's just literally an internet debate arm race... *sigh* it makes reason debate difficult to say the least.

Is that for Cylon nukes in Miniseries? Even then, I wonder what he was smoking.

But Star Trek is one of oldest sci fi series, and most popular, so it is just logical people attack it.

Picard wrote:
Is that for Cylon nukes in Miniseries? Even then, I wonder what he was smoking.

But Star Trek is one of oldest sci fi series, and most popular, so it is just logical people attack it.

Yeah, well, for any nukes in the show really... *Sigh* just seems so pointless to let figures get so out of control...

That sounds like SWST thinking right there with his claiming gigatons and teratons of firepower for Star Wars ships based on the trading card image of a BDZ and a comic book panel. Even though the visuals don't support it, he'll make the claim anyway, and stick dogmatically to it.
-Mike

Picard wrote:

Trinoya wrote:The saddest thing is the insane 'wankaton' levels of firepower being used with such flimsy evidence pretty much opens it up to any franchise (save for star trek because of some invisible tech of the week rule). It gets to a point where people pull out figures for B5, hell I even saw someone who did it for nBSG a few years ago trying to get into the hundreds of gigatons.

It's just literally an internet debate arm race... *sigh* it makes reason debate difficult to say the least.

Is that for Cylon nukes in Miniseries? Even then, I wonder what he was smoking.

It's done based on the explosion effects seen from space. In the miniseries, it's completely mad. You could literally go up to teratons without any problem. Later in the show and the TV films, you'd also get some big explosions. The Plan is all over the place, with mid kilotons to couple megatons to near gigatons seen from space.

Best to go with dialogue, where we know the Cylons launched 50 MT nukes at the cities, among other nuke types (they used both MIRV-types and full nukes) from their launchers. A thing many people forget in fact, in that those launchers are the only ones the Basestars could use to attack colonial ships. Yet for some reason, not only many VS bashers will say that Basestars could not throw megaton nukes at Battlestars, but also that they used the 50 KT nukes the Raiders used, despite the huge difference of size and the fact that a 50 KT nuke was used against a civilian ship (yes, they were using nukes against ships where a single conventional bunker buster type would have already been overkill). They also go to say that a kiloton nuke used against the Galactica crippled her when the extent of the damage on the hull actually reached beyond even what a 50 KT nuke could achieve in space. For comparison, Pegasus took no less than three nukes and despite suffering some valve issues for the FTL drive, didn't display any major sign of damage on her hull. They forget about charges placed internally blew up a piece of the ship's hull and made the water tanks leak their precious liquid. The hull at that point was clearly as ruined as when a nuke hit, but you didn't have an entire nacelle burning. They completely ignore how tough alloys are in this universe, even transparent one, or the energy density of tylium, something like 500 TJ/kg iirc. Tylium which happens to be used for anything that requires energy, from fuel to mines.
They forget that the simple missiles used during Viper training cracked open with innards glowing an asteroid that was dozens of meters wide. Such missiles could carry varying payloads. Often they refuse to consider that "conventional" projectiles used against Basestars or Battlestars could be tylium based armour piercing devices.
What kills BSG in general is its short ranges in capital ship exchanges and the lack of warships dedicated to the support of one or two major weapons, and their speed (although Basestars are considerably more agile when not used as sitting duck launching platforms).

Mike DiCenso wrote:This is a trend I've been noticing is increasing in frequency over the years, but most especially in the post airing of SW:TCW as that series has largely discredited SW firepower and technology. It seems that the new wanking is now focused almost exclusively on WH40K as the poster child for uber firepower, and much of the same fanatical mentality that we saw in much of the Warsie camp has transfered itself to the WH40K franchise.
-Mike

Indeed.
It's only recently that one of the greatest purveyors of super figures is only now admitting the existence of clear references to megaton-level weapons (don't ask for the kiloton ones, it hurts):

Connor McLeod wrote: The only obvious 'gigaton' I ever heard of were the Space Hulk 1st edition hulk killer nukes (112 5 gigaton nuclear warheads, 100 which of each were carried by a battlecruiser.) Other novels have gone with 12 megaton warheads (Deliverance lost), 36 20-megaton directed yield assassin mineds (Imperial armour IX-X), and the Atlas Class ground bobmardment missile which is a megaton yield as well (how many we don't know), but its designed to take out reinforced targets and titans. OH and then there's the usual megaton range tactical bombardments (codexes dealing with hive fleet behemoth and the Battle of macragge, planetstrike, etc.)

Of course it remains extremely selective but it's fairly easy to guess why those are only coming up now, as to make his claims look like objective because despite knowing their existence, there's no reason one shouldn't go with the roflatons! [sarcasm]
Acknowledging the lower end figures and still maintaining the bigger ones makes the later look like they have even more validity to them, precisely because their purveyors can claim that their choice is well substantiated. Hence the dismissal of the lower ones. It makes their position appear well weighed, when it is not.
That doesn't stop him from peddling the same silly numbers he started with though.

Trinoya wrote:

Picard wrote:
Is that for Cylon nukes in Miniseries? Even then, I wonder what he was smoking.

But Star Trek is one of oldest sci fi series, and most popular, so it is just logical people attack it.

Yeah, well, for any nukes in the show really... *Sigh* just seems so pointless to let figures get so out of control...

Battlestar Wiki put Galactica's nukes at 5 - 150 kilotons each. And I don't remember seeing anything close to teratons...

Mr Oragahn wrote: (yes, they were using nukes against ships where a single conventional bunker buster type would have already been overkill).

Nukes in space are not very effective... remember, we have no evidence that they are shaped charge, and even with nuke being fairly close to hull, it will only receive fraction of yield. Is there any way to calculate energy required to melt 1m3 of Galactica's hull?

Mike DiCenso wrote:This is a trend I've been noticing is increasing in frequency over the years, but most especially in the post airing of SW:TCW as that series has largely discredited SW firepower and technology. It seems that the new wanking is now focused almost exclusively on WH40K as the poster child for uber firepower, and much of the same fanatical mentality that we saw in much of the Warsie camp has transfered itself to the WH40K franchise.
-Mike

Well it does make a sort of sense sir. 40K is a less mainstream 'verse than Star Wars making its more insular and easier to maintain concenses than one more absorbed into popular gestalt with all the descrepencies that may bring. Be it the importance of fighters or lowly asteriods claiming an ISD a random poster might baulk at the ICS figures but would have less reason, with evidence less available, to dispute those same figures from 40K. It also has a very low chance of getting a "kiddie" cartoon show so there's that. ;)

Oh I don't know about that. As Mr. Oragahn has show many a time, the WH40K franchise has shown that it has amassed a huge volume of material, and quite a hefty amount of inconsistencies with it. What allows the wiggle room, so to speak, is that most of it is written, and it's the play on words is what lets the 40Kers get away with twisting things around, plus not many people are willing to buy, borrow, or online research the material to go looking for it. It's just too much.
-Mike

Picard wrote:Battlestar Wiki put Galactica's nukes at 5 - 150 kilotons each. And I don't remember seeing anything close to teratons...

I honestly wonder where they got their numbers from.

Mr Oragahn wrote: (yes, they were using nukes against ships where a single conventional bunker buster type would have already been overkill).

Nukes in space are not very effective...

Depends how they're used. Weapon grade nuclear fuels provide so much energy for their mass, compared to chemical reactants, that the gain is very obvious.
Even if only quarter of the energy goes into the hull close to the point of impact, it's still far more than any chemical system can deliver.
What it lacks is momentum, but evens it up by producing a shockwave through the material that is heated up around the very close proximity to the point of impact.
However, against a thick hull, it's not going to do wonders, but no weapons will as a matter of fact.

People forget that while the nuke fired by the Cylon raider was indeed small, the nukes fired by Basestars were big, and that means they would logically be heavy. That mass can be a result of a heavier casing. A heavy casing means that the nuclear device will produce its own momentum. Nukes can hit hulls at speeds of high several hundreds of meters per second (video of a nuke hitting Pegasus), which means that there will already be a significant momentum upon impact. Then, the casing itself that surrounds the nuke will most likely be built as to produce a blast of vaporized metal in the hole.
Although I can't find the reference there, there was an US nuclear test around a few megatons which produced a massive crater on some atoll I think, after a ground detonation. It was said that the crater was so vast because the nuke casing turned the EM energy into a kinetic one.
Perhaps it was Ivy, Mike or a Castle Bravo.
And, of course, there's also the power. Fractions of microseconds being far better than chemical reactions and even superior to say, in a vs, super long laser bolts which still completely get into their target in only a 25th of a second.

remember, we have no evidence that they are shaped charge,...

Indeed, but they don't really need to be. The sheer fraction that will go into the hull at the point of impact will always be greater than anything that could be produced by a chemical reaction.

Is there any way to calculate energy required to melt 1m3 of Galactica's hull?

You can go with the idea that it's plain iron.
It's very hard to know what is the real thickness of your average armour plate.
I could look at Galactica and estimate the thickness of the plates that cover the ridges. I have pictures which allow me to make precise measurements of the ridges' width for one. I'd go with half a meter.


It is probably stronger than their transparent materials. In one episode, there were two people including Caly who got stuck in some storage room. There was an observation booth isolated from the room by windows. Admiral Adama was in that booth while something suggested to place charges, but he or someone else said that the glass is so tough that the charges needed to blast them would also kill the two persons on the other side, and the room in question wasn't exactly small to begin with and contained many crates and other things.

In terms of thermal capacity, we have the beaten up Galactica's free fall through low atmosphere for 40 seconds. Without factoring the friction, at the end the ship would have been falling at a speed of nearly 400 m/s. With that mass, I guess we could safely claim a speed of 300 m/s, based on the loss of speed observed in the results from this excellent impact calculator. I use values for an atmospheric entry of a loose piece of ice at 300 m/s, 90°.
It's interesting to see what we get with an object already 100 meters wide and dense like ice entering at a speed of 300 m/s (result).

Your Inputs:
Distance from Impact: 1.00 meters ( = 3.28 feet )
Projectile diameter: 100.00 meters ( = 328.00 feet )
Projectile Density: 1000 kg/m^3
Impact Velocity: 300.00 meters per second ( = 984.00 feet per second )
Impact Angle: 90 degrees
Target Density: 2500 kg/m^3
Target Type: Sedimentary Rock

Energy:
Energy before atmospheric entry: 2.36 x 10^13 Joules = 0.56 x 10^-2 MegaTons TNT
The average interval between impacts of this size somewhere on Earth during the last 4 billion years is 2.2 x 10^3years

Major Global Changes:
The Earth is not strongly disturbed by the impact and loses negligible mass.
The impact does not make a noticeable change in the tilt of Earth's axis (< 5 hundreths of a degree).
The impact does not shift the Earth's orbit noticeably.

Atmospheric Entry:
The projectile begins to breakup at an altitude of 15900 meters = 52300 ft
The projectile reaches the ground in a broken condition. The mass of projectile strikes the surface at velocity 0.112 km/s = 0.0695 miles/s
The impact energy is 3.28 x 10^12 Joules = 0.78 x 10^-3MegaTons.
The broken projectile fragments strike the ground in an ellipse of dimension 0.462 km by 0.462 km

sonofccn wrote:

Mike DiCenso wrote:This is a trend I've been noticing is increasing in frequency over the years, but most especially in the post airing of SW:TCW as that series has largely discredited SW firepower and technology. It seems that the new wanking is now focused almost exclusively on WH40K as the poster child for uber firepower, and much of the same fanatical mentality that we saw in much of the Warsie camp has transfered itself to the WH40K franchise.
-Mike

Well it does make a sort of sense sir. 40K is a less mainstream 'verse than Star Wars making its more insular and easier to maintain concenses than one more absorbed into popular gestalt with all the descrepencies that may bring. Be it the importance of fighters or lowly asteriods claiming an ISD a random poster might baulk at the ICS figures but would have less reason, with evidence less available, to dispute those same figures from 40K. It also has a very low chance of getting a "kiddie" cartoon show so there's that. ;)

Useless trivia: the wiki page gives an age rating of 12+.

Regarding the popularity of Warhammer 40000, considering that it's the crown's jewel, their prime franchise, the company's results can conservatively estimated to be provided up to 50% by Warhammer 40000. The company went through rough times in the past, but it works wonderfully these days, as we see with their revenues between 100 and 200 M quids.
40k is probably missing some high quality movie to take off.

If you want, you can always compare those numbers to those of Star Wars.