Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 4121314
Results 391 to 402 of 402

Thread: Star Trek, Star Wars and cloaking devices

  1. #391
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    692
    Quote Originally Posted by wedgebert
    Actually, there wouldn't be a fireball in space A nuke in space would just be a giant flash of light along with a massive release of non-visible radiation. A starship hull isn't going to help much against the radiation levels a nuke puts out (depending on yield of course). I might absorb a lot of the gamma radiation, but that's going to cause the hull itself to heat up and it can cause it to break apart as well. I'd wager that a kiloton nuke going off 100 meters from your hull is going to cause serious problems to both the hull and the crew inside.
    True; the primary killing system is the sleet of radiation the device produces. There was a lot of work done on the design of space-initiated nuclear devices back in the old days of Nike-Zeus. The designs used a lot of tricks to up the radiation yield at the expense of the blast and thermal effects. One of them was to wrap the device in gold foil. The "explosive" effects of an initiation in space are astonishingly limited; 100 meters probably would protect a reasonably heavily-constructed space ship from damage from a 1 kiloton initiation. Unless the warhead was heavily doped using tricks, I believe the hull would provide enough protection to limit radiation damage to the crew. In Balance of Terror, the nuclear device used was IIRC a scuttling charge. So it was probably a pretty conventional device.

    By the way. most of the radioactive product from an initiation comes from debris being sucked into the fireball. That ain't going to happen much in space. We never really worried much about gamma. If blast and flash are going to reduce a victim to the size and appearance of a McDonalds hamburger, irradiating them as well isn't a productive use of resources. As a friend of mine put it, it isn't the explosion that kills you, its the fall to the bottom of the crater.

  2. #392
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    437
    "Don't forget, Star Trek has Vulcan and Betazoid telepathy."


    Example of Betazoid Empath telepathy:

    Seething alien on screen.

    Empath: "Captain, I sense that he is angry."

    RBG

  3. #393
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,354
    JONAS: Still, I'm usually a lot better at reading people.

    CHEKOV: Major, why wasn't I told about the X-302?

    JONAS: For example, it might not be obvious to some people, but this man is really upset.
    Jonas is clearly Betazoid.


  4. #394
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    14,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart

    snip

    This episode also discounts the claim that's been made here to the effect that a realistic depeiction of sensors and weapons couldn't be done because of the need for "dramatic tension". Balance of Terror with its sensor problems and the threat of the Romulan weapon drips dramatic tension. This shows that the "dramatic tension" argument is really a feeble excuse for lousy scriptwriting and poor direction/production.
    I disagree, this iws a perfect example of where the sensor deficiencies are completely a plot device to raise tension, if the sensors had been better then there goes the entire plot.
    Rules For Posting To This Board
    All Moderation in Purple

  5. #395
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,354
    Let this thread live!

  6. #396
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    14,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Glom
    Let this thread live!

    It's worse than that, It's dead Jim.
    Rules For Posting To This Board
    All Moderation in Purple

  7. #397
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,405
    I remember this therad.. It's like a poltergeist. Good when making noise. :wink: -Colt

  8. #398
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    313
    Quote Originally Posted by captain swoop
    It's worse than that, It's dead Jim.
    Spock: Live long and prosper...

    I didn't read any of the posts in this thread so don't expect anything new or fresh from me.

  9. #399
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    4,519
    Quote Originally Posted by captain swoop
    Quote Originally Posted by Glom
    Let this thread live!

    It's worse than that, It's dead Jim.
    Quick, you get its Tricorder.

    I'll get its Wallet!

  10. #400
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    497
    Hey, this thread just doesn't die, does it? Anyway, I thought I'd point out that

    Quote Originally Posted by Doodler
    the Not-So-Great Machine of Epsilon III
    sounds perfect for The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

  11. #401
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,354
    Getting back to the issue of the TR-116, O'Brien said that a projectile weapon was under research to be used in energy dampened environments (probably like the planet in 'Paradise' [DS9]), but it was abandoned in favour of regenerative phasers.

    First, if you're in an energy dampening field, regenerative or not, the phaser won't work.

    Second, what does it mean for a phaser to be regenerative. We know what regenerative shields mean, but phasers aren't known to loose power. The other explanation I can think of is one that violates the laws of thermodynamics The phaser never runs out of energy. Still, what do you expect?

    But, clearly the TR-116 was under development for combat purposes, but for the reasons demonstrated by Stuart, it's crap! And why do they need to develop a projectile weapon? Just dust of the old records and use an M-16 or something. The arrogance of Starfleet is amazing. They never even think of using projectile weapons when it is shown that they are so much better.

  12. #402
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    313
    What the...? Who brought this thread back up? Besides, there's another thread (or more) discussing projectile weapons vs energy weapons.

    Regenerative phasers means rechargeable phasers; regular phasers use energy cartrige like current weapons.

Similar Threads

  1. Are Star Wars & Star Trek like Elvis & The Beatles?
    By Buttercup in forum Small Media at Large
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 2011-Dec-22, 07:52 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2008-Nov-12, 03:46 AM
  3. Star Trek: The Eugenics Wars
    By Gemini in forum Small Media at Large
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2006-Apr-26, 08:00 PM
  4. The future of Star Trek/Star Wars
    By banquo's_bumble_puppy in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 2005-Apr-27, 01:49 PM
  5. Star Trek, Star Wars, or Stargate
    By darkdev in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 2004-Apr-27, 08:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •