---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 01:05:47 GMT Subject: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: -------- As seen here: http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=601&postdays=0&postorder =asc&start=0 Wong has posted (http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Shields/) an analysis of collision events in Trek and Wars. However, his figures are replete with error. First, he suggests that the bridge tower asteroid was 70 meters and spherical. It is not spherical... it is shaped like a potato. Judging by the 31.5 meter bridge tower globes, the asteroid could not have been more than 60 meters in length, with an approximate width and depth of 42 meters. Then, he uses a density for the asteroid almost twice that of any known asteroid. A better average figure would be about 3,000 kg/m^3. Finally, he estimates the speed to be 1000 meters per second, when photographic analysis shows the speed was approximately half of this. Using the vidcap he makes available, one can see that it takes 15 frames for the asteroid (after becoming fully visible at frame 35) to collide (at frame 50). With the size known (and using the same axis to offset the effect of the asteroid's spin), it is easy to see that the asteroid was moving no faster than about 550 meters per second. In other words, he made it bigger, heavier, and faster, thereby bumping up the kinetic energy to a whopping 625 terajoules, or almost 20 times my calculated figure of 36 terajoules (3.57e13J). Then, he talks about the ramming of the Odyssey (which he misidentifies as a hit to the primary hull). After foolishly assuming that a Stardock Alpha 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 he doesn't mention is that the density he uses for the Jem'Hadar fighter is 50 kg/m^3, 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. However, having neutered the Jem'Hadar ship's mass by a factor of at least 8 (using iron for the hull/equipment density and estimating that 10-15% of the ship is composed of materials with such density, in keeping with Jem'Hadar shipbuilding ethos), he still managed to end up within an order of magnitude of my conservative calculated figure of 4 terajoules. By monkeying with the numbers to the extent he does, it's easy to end up with the ISD taking a hit with 125 times more kinetic energy than the Odyssey ramming. However, such figures are unsupportable. The facts point toward a hit with 9 times more KE. He also doesn't mention other interesting facts ... for instance, a fat potato hitting a ship is going to impart less energy per unit area than a fighter with a small cross-section, suggesting much higher resistance for the Odyssey. Further, the novelisation suggests that the ISD was destroyed, just like Odyssey. Also, the actual collision itself only wiped out a volume of about 430,000m^3 of the Odyssey, whereas a collision with nine times the KE destroyed a volume of approximately 1,839,000 m^3 of the ISD. If we were to assume similar structural and internal design (rather silly if you think about it, given the thick armor claims and "robust design" philosophy of the Empire), that would mean (judging by the volume of the ships eliminated) that the ISD hull strength was only twice the hull strength of the Odyssey (something closer to parity or even a stronger Odyssey would result if you account for the thick armor claims and robust design philosophy). Last, but not least, the Odyssey's main structure held together fairly well under the impact, insofar as the secondary hull wasn't sheared away, either at the interconnecting dorsal or the clamps holding the saucer and stardrive section together. Meanwhile, a hit over 100 meters from the neck of the ISD wiped the neck and everything connected to it out of existence. Sure, both ships were destroyed when it was all said and done, but the Odyssey held together much better than Wong would give her credit for, and t he ISD fared much worse. One might go so far as to say that the Trek figures were deflated and the Wars figures inflated... Well, it would be typical. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 23:39:48 -0400 Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: <3D421604.C99318DB@daltonator.net> -------- I have a *great* idea...why don't you send this to Wong? I'm sure he'd love to correct these "mistakes". -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "It's tasteless, disgusting, and offensive. I love it." --Jeremy Piven, "PCU" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 03:44:26 GMT Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D421604.C99318DB@daltonator.net... > I have a *great* idea...why don't you send this to Wong? I'm sure he'd > love to correct these "mistakes". I see you didn't notice the link I posted. Wong got first dibs, and hasn't done squat except whine about the volume figures derived from his own numbers for a JH ship. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 00:13:35 -0400 Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: <3D421DEF.224374EC@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D421604.C99318DB@daltonator.net... > > I have a *great* idea...why don't you send this to Wong? I'm sure he'd > > love to correct these "mistakes". > > I see you didn't notice the link I posted. Wong got first dibs, and hasn't > done squat except whine about the volume figures derived from his own > numbers for a JH ship. Hmm.... Well, I see one reply to you (not surprising, he's infinitely busier than you are and I assume doesn't have time to deal with every nitpick thrown his way) which seems to be a bit more than "whining." And it seems DasBastard is ripping you apart well enough...so I assume Wong knows his defense rests in competent hands. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "It's tasteless, disgusting, and offensive. I love it." --Jeremy Piven, "PCU" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 08:21:41 GMT Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D421DEF.224374EC@daltonator.net... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > news:3D421604.C99318DB@daltonator.net... > > > I have a *great* idea...why don't you send this to Wong? I'm sure he'd > > > love to correct these "mistakes". > > > > I see you didn't notice the link I posted. Wong got first dibs, and hasn't > > done squat except whine about the volume figures derived from his own > > numbers for a JH ship. > > Hmm.... > > Well, I see one reply to you (not surprising, he's infinitely busier > than you are and I assume doesn't have time to deal with every nitpick > thrown his way) which seems to be a bit more than "whining." And it > seems DasBastard is ripping you apart well enough...so I assume Wong > knows his defense rests in competent hands. I've noticed a disturbing trend. It seems that when an argument comes up that warsies don't like, the non-combatants feel better so long as some other warsie is bitching about it. So, whether or not the bitching has any merit, it is concluded that the argument is ripped apart. Strange. To his credit, DasBastard has put up the strongest defense. Sadly, though, his entire defense rests on an image manipulation to show a lone data point (unsupported and contrary to all other knowledge) on a bad scan-job of a page written by a weirdo. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 15:25:22 -0400 Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: <3D42F3A2.5B2B0352@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D421DEF.224374EC@daltonator.net... > > DarkStar wrote: > > > > > > "Dalton" wrote in message > > > news:3D421604.C99318DB@daltonator.net... > > > > I have a *great* idea...why don't you send this to Wong? I'm sure he'd > > > > love to correct these "mistakes". > > > > > > I see you didn't notice the link I posted. Wong got first dibs, and > hasn't > > > done squat except whine about the volume figures derived from his own > > > numbers for a JH ship. > > > > Hmm.... > > > > Well, I see one reply to you (not surprising, he's infinitely busier > > than you are and I assume doesn't have time to deal with every nitpick > > thrown his way) which seems to be a bit more than "whining." And it > > seems DasBastard is ripping you apart well enough...so I assume Wong > > knows his defense rests in competent hands. > > I've noticed a disturbing trend. It seems that when an argument comes up > that warsies don't like, the non-combatants feel better so long as some > other warsie is bitching about it. So, whether or not the bitching has any > merit, it is concluded that the argument is ripped apart. > > Strange. Mostly because it is. > To his credit, DasBastard has put up the strongest defense. Sadly, though, > his entire defense rests on an image manipulation to show a lone data point > (unsupported and contrary to all other knowledge) on a bad scan-job of a > page written by a weirdo. Ah, so when all else fails, assume that the other debater is a dishonest liar. DarkStar, I don't like you. I consider you a liar and a poor debater, and this is merely the icing on the shit cake. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "It's tasteless, disgusting, and offensive. I love it." --Jeremy Piven, "PCU" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 21:28:01 GMT Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D42F3A2.5B2B0352@daltonator.net... > > To his credit, DasBastard has put up the strongest defense. Sadly, though, > > his entire defense rests on an image manipulation to show a lone data point > > (unsupported and contrary to all other knowledge) on a bad scan-job of a > > page written by a weirdo. > > Ah, so when all else fails, assume that the other debater is a dishonest > liar. Only when there's overwhelming evidence to that effect. > DarkStar, I don't like you. I consider you a liar and a poor debater, > and this is merely the icing on the shit cake. Well, as long as you're revealing your warm, fuzzy feelings, I don't like you either. You call me a liar, because you have no other options. You call me a poor debater, because I don't share your opinions and I'm not swayed by insults. You ignore the fact that you lie... to yourselves, and each other... by continuing to spout bias as fact and sophistries as evidence. You ignore the fact that you're poor debaters, hoping to throw smokescreens around the weak arguments you work from by poisoning the well of discourse. I think most warsie debaters are part of a sad little group, living in the shared delusion of overwhelming superiority. If anyone disagrees or dares to paint Star Wars as less powerful or Star Trek as more powerful, you believe that their arguments are instantly wrong, and consider any counterargument, no matter how stupid, as proof. You're willing to ignore any evidence which doesn't fit within your biases, twisting it to suit theories instead of changing theories to suit facts. You allow your rationality to be clouded with the belief that insults and labels make arguments, and that ten voices, no matter what they say, are always going to be stronger than one voice using evidence and reason. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dalton Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 22:14:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: <3D435393.78AADA41@daltonator.net> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Dalton" wrote in message > news:3D42F3A2.5B2B0352@daltonator.net... > > > > To his credit, DasBastard has put up the strongest defense. Sadly, > though, > > > his entire defense rests on an image manipulation to show a lone data > point > > > (unsupported and contrary to all other knowledge) on a bad scan-job of a > > > page written by a weirdo. > > > > Ah, so when all else fails, assume that the other debater is a dishonest > > liar. > > Only when there's overwhelming evidence to that effect. Like...? > > DarkStar, I don't like you. I consider you a liar and a poor debater, > > and this is merely the icing on the shit cake. > > Well, as long as you're revealing your warm, fuzzy feelings, I don't like > you either. You call me a liar, because you have no other options. Well...it's more like because you are. > You > call me a poor debater, because I don't share your opinions and I'm not > swayed by insults. No...I call you a poor debater because you're full of shit and your arguments are nothing more than nitpicks. You also have an overwhelming sense of superiority and furthermore you're an arrogant prick. > You ignore the fact that you lie... to yourselves, and > each other... by continuing to spout bias as fact and sophistries as > evidence. ...which describes you to a tee. How many attacks against you did you scour to build this diatribe? BTW, keep up with the mindless generalizations and Unknown Warsie attacks. Only makes you more of a twerp. > You ignore the fact that you're poor debaters, hoping to throw > smokescreens around the weak arguments you work from by poisoning the well > of discourse. How we debate is usually a reflection of how you debate. If you're going to spout bullshit and flaccid arguments at us, we really can't do much but redirect the crap right back at you. > I think most warsie debaters are part of a sad little group, living in the > shared delusion of overwhelming superiority. Well, that just goes to show your overwhelming bigotry. And as for "overwhelming superiority"...I rather think that's because we've chosen the winning side. I mean, when you're backed by people with degrees in physics and engineering, it's hard to feel that you're not on the right side. > If anyone disagrees or dares > to paint Star Wars as less powerful or Star Trek as more powerful, you > believe that their arguments are instantly wrong, and consider any > counterargument, no matter how stupid, as proof. Nah. We only do that to delusional Trekkies who seem to think they're the lone point of reason. Case in point: we've had several others before you. Guardian 2000 comes instantly to mind. Guess how badly he got shot down? And not only by the Wars side. > You're willing to ignore > any evidence which doesn't fit within your biases, twisting it to suit > theories instead of changing theories to suit facts. An apt description of yourself. > You allow your > rationality to be clouded with the belief that insults and labels make > arguments, and that ten voices, no matter what they say, are always going to > be stronger than one voice using evidence and reason. Wow. You're completely deluded. You think you use evidence and reason? You think you're the Last Bastion of Trek or something? You're a fucking tool, you know that? You are ruthlessly mocked by both the Wars and Trek sides here, because you're full of shit. The fact of the matter is that you are not a debater, you're just another Retardo-Trekkie spreading your fecal matter around here because you don't like the fact that the evidence backs us up. By the way, I absolutely love how you wrote the post in such a way that it can apply to both myself and the rest of the Wars contingent here. Rather than form opinions on people on a one-by-one basis, meeting and talking to people and seeing how they tick, you'd rather lump everyone together into one big generalized group labeled PRO-SW POOPIE HEDDS. I'm so sorry your stay here as disillusioned you, nameless coward. Please excuse me while we make ready the S.S. Boo Fucking Hoo, recently arrived from it's maiden voyage to Crybaby land. -- Rob "Roby" Dalton http://daltonator.net "...we never burned and tortured and ripped one another apart and called it morality." --Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 23:16:01 GMT Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: -------- "Dalton" wrote in message news:3D435393.78AADA41@daltonator.net... > No...I call you a poor debater because you're full of shit and your > arguments are nothing more than nitpicks. You also have an overwhelming > sense of superiority and furthermore you're an arrogant prick. ... > > How we debate is usually a reflection of how you debate. Funny. I'm an arrogant prick with an overwhelming sense of superiority, but none of you are? How about (naming names, since you think people who are kind enough to not do so are just making things up) Wong, "His Divine Shadow", Poe, Graeme Dice, Sir Nitram, Strowbridge, et al.? Or is it that you simply ignore their behavior because they are on your side? :) > And as for "overwhelming superiority"...I rather think that's because > we've chosen the winning side. I mean, when you're backed by people with > degrees in physics and engineering, it's hard to feel that you're not on > the right side. An appeal to authority means nothing if those authorities don't back up their claims with fact. Wong's propaganda site is a case in point. > > You allow your > > rationality to be clouded with the belief that insults and labels make > > arguments, and that ten voices, no matter what they say, are always going to > > be stronger than one voice using evidence and reason. > > Wow. You're completely deluded. You think you use evidence and reason? > You think you're the Last Bastion of Trek or something? You're a fucking > tool, you know that? You are ruthlessly mocked by both the Wars and Trek > sides here, because you're full of shit. The fact of the matter is that > you are not a debater, you're just another Retardo-Trekkie spreading > your fecal matter around here because you don't like the fact that the > evidence backs us up. Thanks for proving my point. > By the way, I absolutely love how you wrote the post in such a way that > it can apply to both myself and the rest of the Wars contingent here. > Rather than form opinions on people on a one-by-one basis, meeting and > talking to people and seeing how they tick, you'd rather lump everyone > together into one big generalized group labeled PRO-SW POOPIE HEDDS. No, I didn't lump everyone. I said "most", because that is what my observations have shown. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bazquux" Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 01:33:53 +0100 Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: -------- > Ah, so when all else fails, assume that the other debater is a dishonest > liar. > > DarkStar, I don't like you. I consider you a liar and a poor debater, > and this is merely the icing on the shit cake. You tell him, Dalton. You're a big boy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 29 Jul 2002 07:17:37 GMT Subject: Re: Odyssey and ISD collision events Message-ID: <20020729031737.03250.00001543@mb-cp.aol.com> -------- Thanks Darkstar this is your best comedy yet. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun."