Miranda Class Phasers

[Crazy Eddie]

You do know that the above warp formula is not based on any observed data from TOS or the TOS movies?

If you want to make a guess at the "actual speed" of Warp 5 in TOS/TMP movie terms it can range from

Warp 8 = 5c or less ("Operation: Annihilate!", "Tomorrow is Yesterday", "The Voyage Home")
to
Warp 8 = 700,000c ("That Which Survives")
depending on various factors like gravity from nearby large objects (planets, stars, etc), space weather...

Let's also not forget "Elaan of Troyus," where a Klingon battlecruiser traveling at warp speeds is pegged by distance cues as moving at something close to .2C. Later, Kirk orders Sulu to "pivot at warp two" and bring photon torpedoes to bear on the target.

For this and alot of other reasons (notably "Encounter at Farpoint" where "maximum warp" and "maximum acceleration" are used interchangeably), I'm increasingly of the opinion that warp factors are actually units of acceleration and not absolute speed. If you think of it along those terms, then at the moment Reliant intercepted Enterprise they would have BOTH been moving towards Regula-1 at a fairly high velocity. Kirk's order "Best speed to Regula-1" would be interpreted in this case as a shorthand to Sulu "Get us there as fast as you can," but in reality entails at least one midcourse correction and an adjustment to the ship's deceleration profile under the much weaker impulse engines.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

-You have no proof there was a crew issue to account for. You're assuming based on circumstantial evidence.
-You don't know the ships torpedo status, you're assuming from circumstantial evidence.

Circumstantial evidence is still evidence. In this case, it is LITERALLY the only evidence we have to work with.

The flaw is in the design especially the concept that the engines can run all it's power through one weapon that implies a weak source of power.

That or a very powerful weapon.

The Cage/Paradise Syndrome
Or even Balance of Power where the Enterprise is damaged by an old style nuclear warhead. So Enterprise is one episode shows the (supposed ability) to be able to slice a moon in half and the next cannot with stand a primitive atomic Device...

Enterprise DID withstand the nuclear warhead, and this at a detonation range of less than one hundred meters. It is also a fact that we don't actually know the YIELD of that device (for all we know it could have been a 500GT doomsday device used for glassing small planets in a single shot).

On the other hand, the Enterprise never demonstrated the ability to slice a moon in half either. Even after pouring all her phaser power into that fault line the asteroid did not split in two. It appears that having exhausted all other logical alternatives Spock simply resorted to that one last slim chance that the fault in the asteroid was weak enough that phasers might split the entire mass. Clearly it DIDN'T, and in between "How weak was the fault?" and "How powerful was that self-destruct nuke?" lies the Enterprise' standard power output.

A torpedo hit that was supposed to be near zero if you follow the console. But it isn't just black and chared it's decimated. They hull is massively breached in the aft section.

Assuming torpedoes are matter/antimatter warheads as we've all been lead to believe, then a .01% charge in a photon torpedo would still hit pack the explosive energy of several dozen tons of TNT. If you deliver that much energy into a photon torpedo magazine, SOMETHING is going to explode.

No assumption is necessary.
You have to learn the difference between assumption and deduction. Physics is a known varriable. If a explosion occured within and was essentially the SOLE reason of the destruction, given the size and violence of said explosion compression physics says there should be nothing left of the pod like a balloon popping.

Physics tells you nothing of the sort. When you puncture a pressurized vessel--even in an over-pressure situation--the excess pressure simply takes the path of least resistance. The structure does not fail catastrophically (to the point of there being "nothing left") unless it is critically and fundamentally weakened ahead of time.

This is the reason why when you actually pop a balloon, the entire balloon is STILL THERE, and all of the pressure escapes through the aperture you've made in the lining.

We can not deduce the torpedo room wasn't available simply because we have no report of that is was available.
(Status Quo) Available until specifically stated or properly deduced that it was not.

You have that entirely backwards.

Saquist, nothing established "torpedo room available" as the status quo to begin with; you mere ASSUMED that it must have been available and demanded proof to the contrary.

The negative proof fallacy is what happens when you make an assertion based on the lack of a negative proof, which is exactly what you're doing with the torpedo room. There is circumstantial evidence that the torpedoes WEREN'T available, but what--other than you're invoking your idea of the "status quo" is evidence that it WAS?

I've spent many years honing the art of deduction.

I think you need to spend a few dozen more.

We know the movie was cut for length, the director has said so.

We've also seen MOST the scenes that were cut for brevity. You haven't referenced any of them.

I've been over something similar in a Star Wars Trek Debate.
The asteroid mass was said by Illia.

Object is an asteroid, reading
mass point seven...

Assuming a relational mass to Enterprise Yes Reliant's phasers could reduce a Rock 70% Enterprise mass in a sustained burst. But a torpedo was clearly more effective than what we've seen phasers do in TWOK for taking out the asteroid.

But again...that's assuming that the FX crews meant the two scenes to be comparable. But if you're asking me does the phasers in TWOK look like they can blast that asteroid, then yes...however I think the burst (as shown from TWOK) would take a bit longer meaning not as instant as that torpedo hit. And concurrently that torpedo hit from Enterprise doesn't resemble the asteroid strike at all.

This gives you an upper limit for torpedo strength and conclusively demonstrates that the photon torpedoes fired at Reliant where nowhere near full strength; at maximum yield that would have ATOMIZED Reliant and probably blown a chunk out of the Enterprise as well.

You must realize, however, that "mass point seven" being a fraction of the Enterprise' mass is an assumption, and even then it doesn't look all that good for the "Phasers were at full power" theory, since Reliant DID, in fact, have sustained phaser contact on the Enterprise for a period of several seconds without slicing the ship in half. It gets even worse when you consider that the "point seven" of Ilia's asteroid could be just as easily be a fraction of "point seven Ceres masses" or even "gravitational acceleration is .7 meters per second," any of which would depict an asteroid several hundred kilometers in diameter.

 

[blssdwlf]

Did you ask G2K if his models were already beam matched?

Doesn't matter. Enterprise's length is the only required varrible and it's been confirmed from quite some time. Length decides width of a determined shape automatically, that's why it's called scaling.

Length is not the only required variable. If you don't know what G2K's model looked like, you don't know what you're scaling. If G2K had a Reliant with a thinner primary hull or different width than the Enterprise's primary hull to begin with then all you're doing is compounding an error. David Schmidt's drawings could be super accurate, but that doesn't mean they can match to G2K's models for scaling purposes.

Assumption 1. A thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof:

-You have no proof there was a crew issue to account for. You're assuming based on circumstantial evidence.

It's a boat load of trainees. They didn't all react very well to the surprise attack, did they? You cannot be certain that they would have stayed at their stations (we know for a fact many did not.) You cannot be certain that this trainee crew would go to their stations under these conditions.

-You don't know the ships torpedo status, you're assuming from circumstantial evidence.

And so are you. We just assumed differently

The philosophy isn't important.
The more systems that draw off main power thus reduces the power available in a standard Alert Scenario. So instead of 18th max power with shields and torps being charged too that's potentially 1/21 normal phaser power.

I don't see that as a weakness or even a flaw. If there was ship A with 1000 energy points that had 4 emitters that can each handle the full power output of the ship and ship B with 1000 energy points that has 4 emitters but each emitter is weapon-limited to 250 points. Both ships have the same firing arcs, 1 Forward, 1 Aft, 1 Port and 1 Starboard, guess which ship can deliver more damage in 1 on 1 fight? If that allows ship A to kill ship B quickly, then there you go. If ship B's weapons are capable of firing 1000 energy points each, then ship A is already outmatched

The Cage/Paradise Syndrome

What's inconsistent here?

Or even Balance of Power where the Enterprise is damaged by an old style nuclear warhead.

"old-style nuclear warhead" "for self-destruction"

"Nuclear device of some kind, sir. Our phasers detonated it less than one hundred meters away."

Can you tell me what the yield of this nuke was? At <100m it knocked the Enterprise on it's side (and that's a nearly million ton ship.)

Yet in TUC we see Enterprise take 7 torp shots.

I counted twice the hits, but again, can you tell me what the yield of those photons were suppose to be?

A torpedo hit that was supposed to be near zero if you follow the console. But it isn't just black and chared it's decimated. They hull is massively breached in the aft section.

If you mean the back of the torpedo pod, yes. But the rest of the aft section of the Reliant - no. However I would expect the back to be decimated as it looked like Enterprise's torpedo set off anything volatile in the pod.

No assumption is necessary.
You have to learn the difference between assumption and deduction. Physics is a known varriable. If a explosion occured within and was essentially the SOLE reason of the destruction, given the size and violence of said explosion compression physics says there should be nothing left of the pod like a balloon popping.

Physics has equations. With numbers. And variables. All you just said above to me was "it should've blown up because I think it should of and I'll throw the word physics in to sound authoritative." Really.

That didn't happen so it wasn't a majority internal explosion. The rear view (IN LATER SHOTS) shows that the entire aft section of the pod is disfigured and explosed to space almost all of the top and all of the back while views of the actual model shows the bottom and front remain mostly intact.

My theory is that the Enterprise torpedo detonated the aft torpedoes while in their tubes, resulting in the immediate small explosion to the rear. The subsequent larger explosion (where you also see the forward tubes light up) was from setting off something highly volatile in the middle of the pod. I do not believe that the torpedoes had any antimatter loaded yet.

The evidence just doesn't fit your theory.

If Enterprise's photon torpedo was the primary contributor to the explosion in the torpedo pod, then I'd expect it to be consistent with the nacelle hit. Given the different explosions and reactions and the evidence that you found for them being set to zero power, my theory is that the explosions witnessed are immediate secondary explosions. And as far as I'm concerned, fits the movie pretty well.

The movie says they are 12 hours and 43 minutes away from Regula and the last known speed was warp five....did you forget or are you changing your mind.

The movie also said that the people on Regula 1 died not too long ago, before rigor set in. Khan killed them before going to intercept Enterprise. Did you forget that?

From the interception point to Regula 1 at impulse, it had to be within 11 hours or so before rigor mortis sets in. Since there was intervening activity and plenty of cuts between the 12 hours and 43 minutes at Warp 5 and actual interception, I see nothing wrong with the distance and speeds involved.

Unknown but we can deduce full or 3/4's impulse.

How's that? The Enterprise was going at Warp 5 and Reliant slowed to intercept.

We know the movie was cut for length, the director has said so.

Then did that cut dialogue get put back in for the Director's Cut?

Your reasonings MUST be consistent.
If what isn't in THIS film must be exuded then your entire argument based on TOS speeds, TOS use of phaser and warp power, TMP standard of warp power through the phasers must also be excluded, otherwise the exclusion is arbitrary and illogical.

You'd have a point if I was trying to get cut dialogue from TOS scripts included. But you don't.

Each one of my counters to you is either directly from filmed evidence or derived from it, not something that was cut and decided not to be used. That's a lot more than you can say for your evidence.

Status Quo.
The movie never said it was lost.
Not even the script says it was lost.

JOACHIM: "They've damaged the photon-control and the warp drive."

Here is another question for you Saquist - in TMP, Kirk was about to use the Enterprise's phasers to destroy an asteroid that was sucked into the wormhole they created. As we know, phaser power was cutoff and a torpedo was used instead.

So, do you think Reliant's phasers at the power settings that were used in the initial attack on the Enterprise in TWOK would've been able to destroy the asteroid?
Or would the low powered torpedoes in TWOK (by either side) been able to destroy the asteroid?

I've been over something similar in a Star Wars Trek Debate.
The asteroid mass was said by Illia.

Object is an asteroid, reading
mass point seven...

Assuming a relational mass to Enterprise Yes Reliant's phasers could reduce a Rock 70% Enterprise mass in a sustained burst. But a torpedo was clearly more effective than what we've seen phasers do in TWOK for taking out the asteroid.

The torpedo explosion from TMP was significantly larger than any torpedo hit seen in TWOK. (And Kirk wanted to use phasers instead.)

But again...that's assuming that the FX crews meant the two scenes to be comparable. But if you're asking me does the phasers in TWOK look like they can blast that asteroid, then yes...however I think the burst (as shown from TWOK) would take a bit longer meaning not as instant as that torpedo hit. And concurrently that torpedo hit from Enterprise doesn't resemble the asteroid strike at all.

I like where you're going here though.

I guess we'll just have to work up how big that asteroid was

 

[blssdwlf]

Let's also not forget "Elaan of Troyus," where a Klingon battlecruiser traveling at warp speeds is pegged by distance cues as moving at something close to .2C. Later, Kirk orders Sulu to "pivot at warp two" and bring photon torpedoes to bear on the target.

For episodes like "Elaan of Troyius" I think it can work that way. I've played with different distance and speed scenarios it can go either way and since it happens in-system, the slower actual speeds are still consistent with slow in-system speeds.

For this and alot of other reasons (notably "Encounter at Farpoint" where "maximum warp" and "maximum acceleration" are used interchangeably), I'm increasingly of the opinion that warp factors are actually units of acceleration and not absolute speed. If you think of it along those terms, then at the moment Reliant intercepted Enterprise they would have BOTH been moving towards Regula-1 at a fairly high velocity. Kirk's order "Best speed to Regula-1" would be interpreted in this case as a shorthand to Sulu "Get us there as fast as you can," but in reality entails at least one midcourse correction and an adjustment to the ship's deceleration profile under the much weaker impulse engines.

Which I wonder when Enterprise loses all power whether she dropped out of warp or was still coasting towards Regula 1 still at Warp 5?

When we see Reliant fire her aft torpedo, the stars fx never really changed to much to indicate that Enterprise had completely stopped (or she just dropped to a high sublight speed) ...

And add in the going reverse on impulse to slow down from FTL speed in the wormhole scene in TMP.... Hmmm. I might have to factor that in more.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

When we see Reliant fire her aft torpedo, the stars fx never really changed to much to indicate that Enterprise had completely stopped (or she just dropped to a high sublight speed) ...

And add in the going reverse on impulse to slow down from FTL speed in the wormhole scene in TMP.... Hmmm. I might have to factor that in more.

First of all, the FX for "Enterprise at warp" were stock footage from TMP, and none of the original footage for TWOK is in any way similar--in lighting or style--to the TMP footage. It can go either way here.

Second of all, TMP is full of little nuggets like this. The usage of language is very well thought out when it comes to the way things really work in space; this is why Kirk says things like "hold relative position" or "thrusters at stationkeeping," indicative of real positions and real behavior for a space craft in orbit in inertial flight. Early episodes of TNG are like this too, but not quite as good.

Decker also says in that same scene "Negative control from inertial lag will continue 22.5 seconds before forward velocity slows to sublight speed." So there's some inertia associated with warp drive, in some sense or another (the V'ger flyover all but implies this anyway). This would also explain how the Enterprise-D's saucer managed to get to Farpoint without any warp drive; the braking maneuver from whatever velocity they were at would have been a much longer engine burn and a flatter deceleration curve at the impulse engines', say, 10Gs, compared to the warp-powered drive section that can accelerate at--say--2000m/s^2.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

-You don't know the ships torpedo status,

We kinda DO, actually.

I mean, there is this.

We're not completely sure what this board means, but taken at face value it seems to indicate the loading of reactants on each of the ship's two torpedo tubes. We see here that the lights above one of the reactant containment systems is light while the other is dark. Since these lights respond to the "energy level" sliders, this likely suggests that whatever was in the launchers at that point was missing one of its two necessary components, either matter or antimatter, but probably antimatter.

Which possibly explains the look on Kirk's face when he checks the torpedo load status.

Also interesting, I stumbled across some old TWOK storyboards in a 1980s edition of Cinefax magazine a couple days ago. I scoured the internet looking for copies and it looks like Trekcore has a few. It wasn't necessarily filmed this way, but the FX intent makes one thing very clear:

1. Enterprise' phaser strike was intended hit some of the "delicate machinery" in the trough section on Reliant's starboard side before striking again at the deflection crystal.

2. Reliant passed Enterprise with a slight starboard list, deflected by the phaser blast, indicating partial attitude control and a narrowly-avoided collision.

3. Reliant was meant to skulk away towards a "hiding place," the planetoid Gamma Regula. This basically implies that the phaser exchange took place VERY close to the planetoid and Regula-1 itself.

YMMV.

 

[Saquist]

Length is not the only required variable. If you don't know what G2K's model looked like, you don't know what you're scaling.

Of course you do. That doesn't make any sense.
It looks like Reliant. The proportions would be relativitly the same. What are you trying to say?

If G2K had a Reliant with a thinner primary hull or different width than the Enterprise's primary hull to begin with then all you're doing is compounding an error. David Schmidt's drawings could be super accurate, but that doesn't mean they can match to G2K's models for scaling purposes.

Of course it does. it's scaling.
We're not changing the shape just the size.
I do this for a living I'm pretty sure I would have been fired if I was wrong.

It's a boat load of trainees. They didn't all react very well to the surprise attack, did they? You cannot be certain that they would have stayed at their stations (we know for a fact many did not.) You cannot be certain that this trainee crew would go to their stations under these conditions.

We don't have to be certain about things we didn't see.

And so are you. We just assumed differently

Not according to the definitions which so far has been fairly difficult for you to apply. (no offense) but you're so far haven't applied these definitions even after being given them. You've just relabeled everything an assumption. You can call it what ever you want to but I can only recognize it as the establish standard in science and trial proceedings. There is no judge before us nor a peer review board. It's just us.

I don't see that as a weakness or even a flaw.

It's obvious.
You're only entertaining your own scenario as though it's the only one. But if Enterprise was up against two Reliant's, Enterprise would be destroyed instantly because Enterprise wouldn't be able to defend against one Reliant channeling all power to one phaser.

Yes...flaw...is an understatement...

What's inconsistent here?

Max power of the main canon does not match.

"old-style nuclear warhead" "for self-destruction"

"Nuclear device of some kind, sir. Our phasers detonated it less than one hundred meters away."

Can you tell me what the yield of this nuke was? At <100m it knocked the Enterprise on it's side (and that's a nearly million ton ship.)

Doesn't matter the yield is of an Old Style nuke war head denotated 100 meters away. Nukes don't create physical force in a vacuum and Enterprise was damaged by it. You're dealing with RADs not a blast. You need a direct hit or within meters of the hull to even burn or melt normal metal let alone a metal protected by a supposed energy shield. Un-focused or without a surface detonation a nuke is completely useless.

Torpedoes show much greater than a few RADs of radiation. They often display a sub kiloton range of TNT in a vacuum.

I counted twice the hits,

You counted 14 hull scars?
This should be good, how you figured this one out...

but again, can you tell me what the yield of those photons were suppose to be?

No way to really know for certain.
But my guess would be may 20-30 tons of TNT.
(that's what we see in the TUC hull breach)
(generously 20-30 times 10)


A One ton bomb looks like this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAYVMXYYAp4
Imagine that in the dining room where the torpedo flew through...

If you mean the back of the torpedo pod, yes.

But of course...

However I would expect the back to be decimated as it looked like Enterprise's torpedo set off anything volatile in the pod.

This isn't about your expectations it about what should be seen. And we know what that is.

Physics has equations. With numbers. And variables. All you just said above to me was "it should've blown up because I think it should of and I'll throw the word physics in to sound authoritative." Really.

It's true. Physics is equations.
But it can be related properly by explanation.
And even BETTER by demonstration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcn-nzmK634

Just because it kills your theory doesn't mean it's wrong. You have fires all over the world with hazardous chemcals that show the effects of (what you call) volatile products and detonation of a contained explosion leaves the container demolished. Sorry...

My theory is that the Enterprise torpedo detonated the aft torpedoes while in their tubes, resulting in the immediate small explosion to the rear. The subsequent larger explosion (where you also see the forward tubes light up) was from setting off something highly volatile in the middle of the pod. I do not believe that the torpedoes had any antimatter loaded yet.

You're basically saying the true explosion came from the inside because you don't want to accept that the torpedo did an appreciable damage. I know there was an secondary explosion but it's minor as the image shows compared to flash on the out side. AND it comes before the internal explosion. And the internal explosion didn't do much from that angle. I assume the hull was already opened up.

The movie also said that the people on Regula 1 died not too long ago, before rigor set in. Khan killed them before going to intercept Enterprise. Did you forget that?

It's not a lack of recall.
I remember saying it's a contradition.
It's stating the facts. 12 hours away against less than 3 hours to rigor. The return trip from 12 hours away isn't possible.

From the interception point to Regula 1 at impulse, it had to be within 11 hours or so before rigor mortis sets in. Since there was intervening activity and plenty of cuts between the 12 hours and 43 minutes at Warp 5 and actual interception, I see nothing wrong with the distance and speeds involved.

If there is on thing I've failed at it's relating it's the difference between proper speculation and assumptions. It really doesn't surprise me that you see nothing wrong. Speculation comes very naturally to you. Interpreting the cut scenes as an elapses of hours is the very definition rampant speculation. There is no structure to the deduction here...

If you can speculate, you will.
And you can always speculate...
That's the danger in the thinking.

How's that? The Enterprise was going at Warp 5 and Reliant slowed to intercept.

Enterprises speed is irrelevant to Reliant.
We don't see Reliant at warp...ever.

Then did that cut dialogue get put back in for the Director's Cut?

I wouldn't know.
In any case cuts for time don't just occur after editing.
It's an on going process.

You'd have a point if I was trying to get cut dialogue from TOS scripts included. But you don't.

This point avoids the use of external elements that you decided were inadmissable in your last post. This is known as "Moving the Goal Post" It's a Logical Fallacy (informal I believe) where by a standard is proposed and when that standard is achieved or when ones own progress fails to meet that standard the standard is moved.

Each one of my counters to you is either directly from filmed evidence or derived from it, not something that was cut and decided not to be used. That's a lot more than you can say for your evidence.

That's fine. But at no point in the discussion did you say that we were confined to canon. I brought a source. So far all you're telling me by "blah blah" is that you don't like the source. But you haven't found a way to properly invalidate the source.

It's inconvenient now because it directly contradicts your theory. Theres nothing I can do about that. But I've told you if you can find a contradiction in purpose or result to rule out the source I would drop it as irreconcilable. You just haven't bothered to do it.

JOACHIM: "They've damaged the photon-control and the warp drive."

Where does this say they lost MAIN POWER?

The torpedo explosion from TMP was significantly larger than any torpedo hit seen in TWOK. (And Kirk wanted to use phasers instead.)

Indeed.
But not instead...He wanted to use phasers first.
Decker wanted to use torpedoes "instead."

I guess we'll just have to work up how big that asteroid was

Depends on the mass of Enterprise...

 

[Saquist]

-You don't know the ships torpedo status,

We kinda DO, actually.

I mean, there is this.

We're not completely sure what this board means, but taken at face value it seems to indicate the loading of reactants on each of the ship's two torpedo tubes. We see here that the lights above one of the reactant containment systems is light while the other is dark. Since these lights respond to the "energy level" sliders, this likely suggests that whatever was in the launchers at that point was missing one of its two necessary components, either matter or antimatter, but probably antimatter.

Which possibly explains the look on Kirk's face when he checks the torpedo load status.

Also interesting, I stumbled across some old TWOK storyboards in a 1980s edition of Cinefax magazine a couple days ago. I scoured the internet looking for copies and it looks like Trekcore has a few. It wasn't necessarily filmed this way, but the FX intent makes one thing very clear:

1. Enterprise' phaser strike was intended hit some of the "delicate machinery" in the trough section on Reliant's starboard side before striking again at the deflection crystal.

2. Reliant passed Enterprise with a slight starboard list, deflected by the phaser blast, indicating partial attitude control and a narrowly-avoided collision.

3. Reliant was meant to skulk away towards a "hiding place," the planetoid Gamma Regula. This basically implies that the phaser exchange took place VERY close to the planetoid and Regula-1 itself.

YMMV.

Good stuff but unfortunately doesn't resolve our time issue.

 

[blssdwlf]

If G2K had a Reliant with a thinner primary hull or different width than the Enterprise's primary hull to begin with then all you're doing is compounding an error. David Schmidt's drawings could be super accurate, but that doesn't mean they can match to G2K's models for scaling purposes.

Of course it does. it's scaling.
We're not changing the shape just the size.

If G2K's Reliant didn't have the same beam as his Enterprise then his Reliant is already inaccurate. Applying a corrective scaling to it without knowing which way to correct is just going to make it worse. Do you know anything about G2K's Reliant other than it's length?

We don't have to be certain about things we didn't see.

And that's why we have a disagreement on what happened in the movie

You're only entertaining your own scenario as though it's the only one.

Kinda like your Reliant is firing at Full Phasers scenario, huh?

But if Enterprise was up against two Reliant's, Enterprise would be destroyed instantly because Enterprise wouldn't be able to defend against one Reliant channeling all power to one phaser.

What, you expect something else to happen? 2 vs 1 so odds are for numerical superiority.

Max power of the main canon does not match.

The cannon took off the top of the rock structure. The rest of the beam went out into space. As newtype_alpha already pointed out the Talosians prevented anyone from seeing what was really going on.

Doesn't matter the yield is of an Old Style nuke war head denotated 100 meters away. Nukes don't create physical force in a vacuum and Enterprise was damaged by it. You're dealing with RADs not a blast. You need a direct hit or within meters of the hull to even burn or melt normal metal let alone a metal protected by a supposed energy shield. Un-focused or without a surface detonation a nuke is completely useless.

How does the Sun work then?

You counted 14 hull scars?
This should be good, how you figured this one out...

Watch the movie. Count the hits (that includes the interior shots of the ship shaking) not just the scars.

No way to really know for certain.
But my guess would be may 20-30 tons of TNT.
(that's what we see in the TUC hull breach)
(generously 20-30 times 10)

And a shaped charge looks like this:

http://youtu.be/q6j9wEF1sf8

This isn't about your expectations it about what should be seen. And we know what that is.

LOL. I don't think you know what we should see

It's true. Physics is equations.
But it can be related properly by explanation.

You got nothing. Be honest about that and move on. You don't know how much the structure can take before being obliterated or react to such an explosion. You don't know what the explosive forces would have been.

Didn't you ever wonder why tanks are not vaporized but much of the armor is still left over when their ammo blows up?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catastrophic_kill

As newtype_alpha points out, explosions tend to go out through paths of least resistance. Why didn't the torpedo hit instantly vaporize the pod like the back third of the nacelle if it is all supposedly caused by the torpedo explosion?

It's not a lack of recall.
I remember saying it's a contradition.
It's stating the facts. 12 hours away against less than 3 hours to rigor. The return trip from 12 hours away isn't possible.

The facts again:

Time away from Regula 1: 12 hours and 43 minutes away at Warp 5.
Then intervening action.
Interception Point. New time away from Regula 1? The time before rigor can set in at impulse power, or about 11 hours.

There is no distance or time given after the intervening action.

I wouldn't know.

Yeah! It's a start.

That's fine. But at no point in the discussion did you say that we were confined to canon. I brought a source.

I didn't say canon. I said filmed product. What we actually are shown. Not something that was removed or never implemented in the final product. That can be worked with and argued over because it was shown and we have a common reference point. Stuff that was cut out or never filmed we don't.

Where does this say they lost MAIN POWER?

Warp drive = Main power. It's rather interchangeable.

"Elaan of Troyius"
KIRK: No chance of restoring warp drive?
...
SCOTT: Our shields will hold for a few passes, but without the matter-antimatter reactor, we've no chance. Captain, can you not call Starfleet on this emergency?
KIRK: And let the Klingons know they succeeded in wiping out our warp engines?

The torpedo explosion from TMP was significantly larger than any torpedo hit seen in TWOK. (And Kirk wanted to use phasers instead.)

Indeed.
But not instead...He wanted to use phasers first.
Decker wanted to use torpedoes "instead."

Fair enough.

I guess we'll just have to work up how big that asteroid was

Depends on the mass of Enterprise...

That mass could be anything and even newtype_alpha came up with logical alternatives. "Mass point seven" to what? That's pretty open ended and wouldn't necessarily mean the mass of Enterprise.

 

[Saquist]

If G2K's Reliant didn't have the same beam as his Enterprise then his Reliant is already inaccurate. Applying a corrective scaling to it without knowing which way to correct is just going to make it worse.

You're absolutely wrong.
You only need ONE dimension to scale anything.
This is not redesigning it's size proportion.
It's just like using a mathematical proportion. The difference should be less than 4% even on a sloppy 3D model.

Do you know anything about G2K's Reliant other than it's length?

Negative, and I don't need it.

And that's why we have a disagreement on what happened in the movie

Happened?
It's more like a disagreement on what ...didn't happen but we never see it but you are fairly certain that it did. Which is faith.

Kinda like your Reliant is firing at Full Phasers scenario, huh?

Unfortunately, no. You had already decided that Reliant was firing low powered beams as evidenced by the images you posted, I considered the evidence and I still couldn't conclude absolutely at the beginning that Reliant was firing full but merely the likely scenario due Status Quo.

What, you expect something else to happen?

Don't be dense. Numbers alone don't decide all outcomes.
You should know that. (I shouldn't have to tell you that) History is replete with examples upon example. But that's the flaw in your argument. You won't see any other alternative but he one you've already decided.

Sam Houston had only 900 men to Santa Anna' 1300 and won the Battle of San Jacinto only losing 9 people.

The cannon took off the top of the rock structure. The rest of the beam went out into space. As newtype_alpha already pointed out the Talosians prevented anyone from seeing what was really going on.

LOL
Newtype doesn't know what he's talking about.
The explosion of that rock face alone should have blown them all away if that canon had just 1/4 of the "power" the Enterprise had in Paradise Syndrome. The fact they attempted it at any considerable power means that was not a possibility.

How does the Sun work then?

How does a black hole work?
Dude the sun isn't a old style nuke.
1,392,000 km wide with a continuous thermonuclear reaction insulated by circulating layers of gas and magnetic fields. The physical force it creates in the solar wind is only enough to push a small probe with a solar sail the size of a foot ball field and very slowly. That's perhaps the worse example ever.

The continuous Nuclear reaction in it's core isn't even enough to over come it's own mass.
And you're sitting here proposing that some nuke for self destruct is going to move a ship many times it's mass from 100 meters away...not eve in a dense field of liquid Hydrogen but in vacuum?

On the sun the atmosphere is far hotter than the surface (photosphere). Because the particle density of the corona is so low and radiating through a vacuum is the least effective way to transfer heat to objects, rocks and asteroids as close as 50,000 kilometers don't melt (depending on size and composition.) But the Roche Limit would assure that anything of considerable size would break up before reaching the surface and the smaller it is the easier it is to transfer heat through the total volume and melt the object and not just the surface.

Watch the movie. Count the hits (that includes the interior shots of the ship shaking) not just the scars.

No, I can't do that. The torpedoes always made physical scars. If there is more shakes than physical scars then we were seeing a replay of the hit from the inside. But if there are more shakes than scars at the time of full battle it's Possible. But I can't just trust that you took that into account.
I can only count the scars.

(I counted the shakes directly connected with a torpedo and it came out to 6)

And a shaped charge looks like this:

http://youtu.be/q6j9wEF1sf8

That's pretty kewl. But we don't know if torpedoes are shaped charges. You're assuming it sounds like.

LOL. I don't think you know what we should see

Regardless I couldn't convince you either way. You've decided from the very beginning what you wanted the out come to be and haven't budged a nanometer.

You got nothing. Be honest about that and move on. You don't know how much the structure can take before being obliterated or react to such an explosion. You don't know what the explosive forces would have been.

I'm sorry...we're talking about weapons that breach the outside of a pressure hull which is designed to absorb impact. That reinforcing strength for the out side will work in favor of an internal explosion and obliterate the container. That's automatic if the weapon is designed to breach the outer hull. It's silly to assume a stronger design intent for the interor than the exterior for a scenario that would likely never happened. And we haven't even gotten into how silly it is to assume that the torpedo was So weak and to also assume by default a proportional weakness for the outer hull of Reliant just to fit your argument....

Didn't you ever wonder why tanks are not vaporized but much of the armor is still left over when their ammo blows up?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catastrophic_kill

As newtype_alpha points out, explosions tend to go out through paths of least resistance. Why didn't the torpedo hit instantly vaporize the pod like the back third of the nacelle if it is all supposedly caused by the torpedo explosion?

I don't know...but one things for sure...the nacelle was already damaged and it's possible the nacelles aren't heavily armored but it's all just speculation anyway. The fact is that it took out a considerable portion of the pod just like the nacelle.

The facts again:

Time away from Regula 1: 12 hours and 43 minutes away at Warp 5.
Then intervening action.
Interception Point. New time away from Regula 1? The time before rigor can set in at impulse power, or about 11 hours.

There is no distance or time given after the intervening action.

The facts aren't in dispute, it's your interpretations that are. Which I will steadfastly defy.

Yeah! It's a start.

I will always say "I don't know" if I don't know.
I don't like endlessly speculating because it's a pretense to know what is best which can only be interpreting like you interpreting all the cut scenes just before the battle as an elapse of hours instead of minutes or that Reliant was some how at warp even though never shown. So for the record, unless I actually know, "unknown" is where I always start.

I didn't say canon. I said filmed product.

And I said arbitrary.

What we actually are shown. Not something that was removed or never implemented in the final product. That can be worked with and argued over because it was shown and we have a common reference point. Stuff that was cut out or never filmed we don't.

You're saying the same thing you just don't know it. And it's still arbitrary, you still think that discreditation of the source is the same as a source contradiction...it's not. What does being on screen and filmed have anything do with the validity of a source. That's about canon. So Deadlock.

Warp drive = Main power. It's rather interchangeable.

More assumption
I need proof.(from the film which you don't have)

"Elaan of Troyius"
KIRK: No chance of restoring warp drive?
...
SCOTT: Our shields will hold for a few passes, but without the matter-antimatter reactor, we've no chance. Captain, can you not call Starfleet on this emergency?
KIRK: And let the Klingons know they succeeded in wiping out our warp engines?

No.
Not even close.

That mass could be anything and even newtype_alpha came up with logical alternatives.

I would be shocked if _alpha knew what logical is.

"Mass point seven" to what? That's pretty open ended and wouldn't necessarily mean the mass of Enterprise.

OH now you can recognize what's "necessary".
But only when it fits your argument. But with warp drive and main power you make all kinds of assumption? But you don't have to be brilliantly intelligent to have figured out that it's not "necessarily" a relative mass of Enterprise since I SAID "ASSUMING". But you would have had to pay attention to the very first word instead of getting stuck in your own interpretation of what I said.

Alpha thinks that Mass equals acceleration. I wouldn't be counting on him for a course in logic.. Seriously. He may be your ally but he has already failed at logic just by using 3 DIFFERENT STRAW-MEN for his defense. He has made it clear that winning is more important than logic when he decided to THRICE mutilate my statements just to make it easier for himself to fight back. That's not even cheating. That's cowardice.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

If G2K's Reliant didn't have the same beam as his Enterprise then his Reliant is already inaccurate. Applying a corrective scaling to it without knowing which way to correct is just going to make it worse.

You're absolutely wrong.
You only need ONE dimension to scale anything.

Assuming the proportions of the original model you're scaling were correct in the first place. That's really the issue we're having here: you're comparing two completely different models and apparently didn't bother to figure out whether their proportions are equivalent for an appropriate comparison. This is like taking a two-year-old (three feet tall) and then rescaling his volume to figure out his height and weight at six feet. Since adult humans do not have the same proportions as toddlers, your projections would be GROSSLY inaccurate.

We don't even know whether this is or isn't happening in your case, because you didn't bother to show your work and just threw out a quick and easy "back of a napkin" estimate for no purpose whatsoever except to be argumentative. Let's just concede the point here: Reliant is large enough to be considered a cruiser in some arbitrary "tonnage" category that has never been established on screen. For lack of better information, we put her in the lower end of the same weight class as Enterprise.

Resolved. Moving on.

Unfortunately, no. You had already decided that Reliant was firing low powered beams as evidenced by the images you posted, I considered the evidence and I still couldn't conclude absolutely at the beginning that Reliant was firing full but merely the likely scenario due Status Quo.

"Status quo" is not a starting assumption produced out of thin air. If there's no evidence establishing "full phasers" as the status quo--and you have yet to provide any--then it is fallacious to insist on contravening evidence; that's the negative proof fallacy all over again.

Don't be dense. Numbers alone don't decide all outcomes.

Neither does phaser power.

Newtype doesn't know what he's talking about.
The explosion of that rock face alone should have blown them all away...

More supposition from you. What, prey tell, is THIS based on?

Back it up with numbers, this time. How powerful would the blast have been, and how did you derive at that calculation?

Dude the sun isn't a old style nuke.

Neither are MODERN nukes in the terms the Romulans are talking about. "Old style" in this case refers to nuclear devices used prior to the 23rd century, presumably leftover from the Earth-Romulan War of a century earlier. Those weapons would be
1) Two hundred years more advanced than weapons currently in use by human militaries and
2) Specifically designed for use in space, in deployments by and against warp-powered spacecraft

In which case, simply wrapping a conventional nuclear warhead with a silicon carbide tamper a few feet thick would produce a fireball of appreciable size and temperature. A 22nd century nuke would be even more sophisticated... but not by THEIR standards.

And you're sitting here proposing that some nuke for self destruct is going to move a ship many times it's mass from 100 meters away...not eve in a dense field of liquid Hydrogen but in vacuum?

Phaser beams have similar kinetic effects, especially when they hit forcefields. Why would a nuclear blast be any different?

No, I can't do that. The torpedoes always made physical scars.

This has not been true in the entire history of Star Trek. Why do you assume it to be true in TWOK?

I'm sorry...we're talking about weapons that breach the outside of a pressure hull which is designed to absorb impact. That reinforcing strength for the out side will work in favor of an internal explosion and obliterate the container.

Not if the container has already been punctured or naturally contains apertures for, say, the deployment of weapons and/or equipment. This is exactly what happens to main battle tanks when they are hit by armor piercing rounds. The explosive reaction inside the compartment will blow out the weakest part of the vessel and all of the pressure will escape through that opening; thus, on an armored battlefield, you will never find tanks that have been "blown apart" unless they were hit by telephone-sized bunker busters that MECHANICALLY shattered them on impact; explosive reactions simply do not work that way.

A similar thing happened to the USS Arizona on December 7, 1941. A Japanese bomb penetrated the deck and exploded in the ammo magazine deep below decks. You can see in the video that the explosion of several dozen tons of gunpowder essentially gutted the inside of the ship, bur rather than SHATTER THE HULL, most of the force of the explosion erupted out of the rear funnel and through a SINGLE structural weakness in the hull, portside. To this day, USS Arizona's hull remains more or less intact at the bottom of Pearl Harbor, so much so that it continues to leak fuel oil from its tanks even seventy years later.

FYI, this is precisely the reason why rocket engines work. even at chamber pressures of tens of thousands of pounds per square inch, the combustion chamber of the rocket does not blow itself apart UNLESS there is a major structural defect in the chamber. The full force of the rocket thrust is squeezed through a convergent/divergent nozzle and exits through the back of the engine. The explosive forces harnessed in rocket engines--especially solid rocket motors like those used on the space shuttle and the Ariane 5 rocket--are hundreds of times greater than those of conventional explosive munitions; if you packed all the explosives of a shuttle SRB into a single ball and set it off in an open space, the resulting explosion would flatten several city blocks.

The facts aren't in dispute, it's your interpretations that are. Which I will steadfastly defy.

Blanket denial is not a rebuttal unless it is based on contravening evidence. This is your third post in a row without making even an ATTEMPT to present any.

More assumption
I need proof.(from the film which you don't have)
...
No.
Not even close.

That is the evidence you were presented. If you cannot show how it is flawed, then simply saying "No, I don't believe it" doesn't constitute a rebuttal.

That mass could be anything and even newtype_alpha came up with logical alternatives.

I would be shocked if _alpha knew what logical is.

Which also isn't a rebuttal, and doesn't change the fact that the phrase "reading mass point seven" does not identify the reference mass Ilia is measuring against.

Alpha thinks that Mass equals acceleration.

"Alpha" said nothing of the kind.

 

[blssdwlf]

If G2K's Reliant didn't have the same beam as his Enterprise then his Reliant is already inaccurate. Applying a corrective scaling to it without knowing which way to correct is just going to make it worse.

You're absolutely wrong.
You only need ONE dimension to scale anything.
This is not redesigning it's size proportion.
It's just like using a mathematical proportion. The difference should be less than 4% even on a sloppy 3D model.

That's the question. What do you know about the model used? Let's just argue for a moment it's all about an inaccurate length.

What if the nacelles on that model might be 6m further back than David Schmidts? A correction then would have been to just slide them forward 6m and there would be no change in volume.

Instead, you just made assumptions about the model without checking it out and started resizing it without knowing why it was longer than David's blueprint.

Unfortunately, no. You had already decided that Reliant was firing low powered beams as evidenced by the images you posted, I considered the evidence and I still couldn't conclude absolutely at the beginning that Reliant was firing full but merely the likely scenario due Status Quo.

This is what you wrote and it didn't sound like you were calling it a "merely the likely scenario".

Saquist wrote, "Miranda's Roll Bar Phaser did CONSIDERABLE damage to Enterprise. The bolts were twice as large as Enterprise. And Reliant was firing at full power. But we know Enterprise was not because they lost main power. Even the Diagram shows Relaint hit a lot of locations and did considerable penetration. That's to be expected because physically those roll bar phaser are 2 or 3 times larger than the banks both ship use as standard armament."

And here we are today

LOL
Newtype doesn't know what he's talking about.
The explosion of that rock face alone should have blown them all away if that canon had just 1/4 of the "power" the Enterprise had in Paradise Syndrome. The fact they attempted it at any considerable power means that was not a possibility.

We've seen ground targets destroyed and they do not always explode - examples are Apollo's building in "Who Mourns for Adonais" and Lazarus' ship in "The Alternative Factor" where they just disappear.

And although I have disagreements with Newtype_Alpha, I do agree with him about the Talosians hiding the effects.

And you're sitting here proposing that some nuke for self destruct is going to move a ship many times it's mass from 100 meters away...not eve in a dense field of liquid Hydrogen but in vacuum?

No. I'm telling you the facts of the episode. An old style nuke, built by the Romulans, was able to knock over the Enterprise at <100m. It isn't a question of it being possible in Real Life(TM) since we're discussing Star Trek. If you can't accept things that happened in TOS (and apparently TWOK too ) then why bother arguing about phasers?

No, I can't do that. The torpedoes always made physical scars.

"Always"? What happened with ST3 and the Enterprise/BOP exchange? Or the lack of scarring on the Excelsior in ST6?

If there is more shakes than physical scars then we were seeing a replay of the hit from the inside. But if there are more shakes than scars at the time of full battle it's Possible. But I can't just trust that you took that into account.
I can only count the scars.

(I counted the shakes directly connected with a torpedo and it came out to 6)

Well, counting the scars, that's a total of 11 hits (3 off from from 14, my mistake.) I counted 5 torpedoes connected to immediate scene of interior shaking and 3 interior shake scenes that did not have a exterior shot of a torpedo strike preceding it.

That's pretty kewl. But we don't know if torpedoes are shaped charges. You're assuming it sounds like.

Regardless I couldn't convince you either way. You've decided from the very beginning what you wanted the out come to be and haven't budged a nanometer.

You haven't budged me because you have not presented any evidence to support Reliant firing at full phasers in the beginning. It's that simple.

I'm sorry...we're talking about weapons that breach the outside of a pressure hull which is designed to absorb impact. That reinforcing strength for the out side will work in favor of an internal explosion and obliterate the container. It's silly to assume a stronger design intent for the interor than the exterior for a scenario that would likely never happened.

It's a torpedo pod that has torpedoes in it. Behind the bridge. If it was designed to direct an accidental torpedo magazine explosion away from the bridge it would not be a silly idea.

I don't know...but one things for sure...the nacelle was already damaged and it's possible the nacelles aren't heavily armored but it's all just speculation anyway. The fact is that it took out a considerable portion of the pod just like the nacelle.

Before the torpedo hit on the nacelle, the grilles blew out from the 1s phaser hit and you can clearly see the back half intact. After the torpedo hit, there is nothing left of the rear 1/3 section of the nacelle that the torpedo hit. There is still the shell of the torpedo pod still attached to the rollbar and rollbar is still intact.

I will always say "I don't know" if I don't know.
I don't like endlessly speculating because it's a pretense to know what is best which can only be interpreting like you interpreting all the cut scenes just before the battle as an elapse of hours instead of minutes or that Reliant was some how at warp even though never shown. So for the record, unless I actually know, "unknown" is where I always start.

Then why did you reply, "Depends on the mass of Enterprise... " when you didn't know if that was what the dialogue was referring to in TMP?

You're saying the same thing you just don't know it. And it's still arbitrary, you still think that discreditation of the source is the same as a source contradiction...it's not. What does being on screen and filmed have anything do with the validity of a source. That's about canon. So Deadlock.

LOL.

If you don't get it then that's fine by me. Like I said, if you're going to use material that wasn't filmed or cut from the movie then more power to you.

since I SAID "ASSUMING

You said "assuming" in the post before the last one I replied to. When I replied to the last post, you were no longer stating it as an assumption.

Blssdwlf wrote, "I guess we'll just have to work up how big that asteroid was "

Saquist replied, "Depends on the mass of Enterprise... "

 

[Saquist]

That's the question. What do you know about the model used? Let's just argue for a moment it's all about an inaccurate length.

What if the nacelles on that model might be 6m further back than David Schmidts? A correction then would have been to just slide them forward 6m and there would be no change in volume.

Instead, you just made assumptions about the model without checking it out and started resizing it without knowing why it was longer than David's blueprint.

Sorry dude. The reason why I chose G2K is because he shoots for a reasonable amount of accuracy and the same with David Schmidt. All you had to do was the math to find out the truth of the Sketchup models he used.


The Difference between Consitution Refit and Miranda is 43,820 cubic meters which means it's 16.76% less than Constitution Refit. (I told you so) My estimate was 18%. The results of 2% margin of error is negligible for total volume. And I also told you your estimates were extremely wrong since you decided to strangely cut off the ship engines and other sections for no reason in a total displacement discussion. I already had you on this one...

This is what you wrote and it didn't sound like you were calling it a "merely the likely scenario".

Saquist wrote, "Miranda's Roll Bar Phaser did CONSIDERABLE damage to Enterprise. The bolts were twice as large as Enterprise. And Reliant was firing at full power. But we know Enterprise was not because they lost main power. Even the Diagram shows Relaint hit a lot of locations and did considerable penetration. That's to be expected because physically those roll bar phaser are 2 or 3 times larger than the banks both ship use as standard armament."

And here we are today

Tsk, Tsk, you're being evasive. I call you on a prejudice conclusion, you never having back down from that prejudice and you attempt to point the finger back.

Not only are my statements here still based on a ship at battle stations being at battle readiness for a full power charge. (status quo) But statements after (not currently) confirm that I was considering other possibilities...EVEN my CONCLUSION stated as much. "While it's not conclusive logic has brought me this far."~SaQ

You have no case here. And came in with fore made conclusion and you're going to leave with the same conclusion no matter what...

And although I have disagreements with Newtype_Alpha, I do agree with him about the Talosians hiding the effects.

Unless they had powers over reality no illusion would have stopped everyone in the area from being blown away. Nor is it logical to presume the characters would account for this illusion and fire the gun anyway. Your logic here is senseless. Don't depend on Alpha for reasoning.

No. I'm telling you the facts of the episode. An old style nuke, built by the Romulans, was able to knock over the Enterprise at <100m. It isn't a question of it being possible in Real Life(TM) since we're discussing Star Trek. If you can't accept things that happened in TOS then why bother arguing about phasers?

Because it's about shield power vs. phaser power.
Trek does senseless stuff all the time. Especially TOS and using it to justify what you think happened in TWOK can only lead to a senseless conclusion too. Roddenberry did pretty good back then but he was no physicist. If he was he'd know that the power from being able to harness 100% of the energy from a antimatter matter reaction would be mankind's greatest weapon ever because if you could actually channel a continuous reaction as Enterprise pretended to do in Paradise Syndrome to the point of overload then you just might actually saw through a moon. But the reality is that it was plot relevant, and not thought out. The size of the Asteroid was simply ridiculously big.

"Always"? What happened with ST3 and the Enterprise/BOP exchange?

Focus...star Trek Six....

Or the lack of scarring on the Excelsior in ST6?

I wasn't talking about Excelsior either. But at least you got the right movie this time.

Well, counting the scars, that's a total of 11 hits (3 off from from 14, my mistake.) I counted 5 torpedoes connected to immediate scene of interior shaking and 3 interior shake scenes that did not have a exterior shot of a torpedo strike preceding it.

Very Good I'll accept 11.
However I saw that scar marked "6 entry" and it can't be the entry hole. The hole occurred at the 45 degree mark for the port thrusters and that mark is well inside of it. Looks like they messed up.

You haven't budged me because you have not presented any evidence to support Reliant firing at full phasers in the beginning. It's that simple.

Correction:
You don't accept status quo.
In reality you have only circumstantial evidence to conclude the phasers were at low power. While Status Quo isn't conclusive (as I said in my conclusion) it's far superior to circumstanial evidence. Innocent until proven guilty. It's still an assumption but it is the most likely condition of the phasers unless ordered otherwise.

It's a torpedo pod that has torpedoes in it. Behind the bridge. If it was designed to direct an accidental torpedo magazine explosion away from the bridge it would not be a silly idea.

It's silly that you're going back to pure conjecture to combat physics. The evidence has been given to you...you just don't like what it says so you conjure an idea to make it possible..."the torpedo pod is internally and externally structurally reinforced against torpedoes", and then you say there is no evidence when you're working hard to theorize your way out of what ever "no evidence" you don't wanna see. The sad thing is that you and Alpha have actually WON a few but when he runs into a brick wall he becomes a tornado of trifling semantics and fallacies and you think every assumption you make is a valid assumption. When you were pointing out my assumptions, I almost had you thinking logically but you retreated immediately once you realized that you'd be forced to say "I don't know" rather than lean on your out-the-gate conclusions.

Before the torpedo hit on the nacelle, the grilles blew out from the 1s phaser hit and you can clearly see the back half intact. After the torpedo hit, there is nothing left of the rear 1/3 section of the nacelle that the torpedo hit. There is still the shell of the torpedo pod still attached to the rollbar and rollbar is still intact.

Like I said..I don't know.
Speculating on why the effects are different aren't going to lead us anywhere. All I can tell you is that massive portion of the top of the pod is incinerated and it's not because some extremely low powered weapon penetrated the hull and detonated inside. I know because the pod s still there. I know because of the massive flash behind the pod at impact isn't remotely the same as the shaped charged video you showed. I know because there was no subsequent massive explosion out the back to relate the damage that is shown later. The physics is just not working with you here at all.

Then why did you reply, "Depends on the mass of Enterprise... " when you didn't know if that was what the dialogue was referring to in TMP?

Because it's the most obvious and available relational mass to compare to. Anything else would be pure conjecture unless it's a current or known standard. It doesn't mean it has to be Enterprise but to assume anything else would weaken the argument.

If you don't get it then that's fine by me. Like I said, if you're going to use material that wasn't filmed or cut from the movie then more power to you.

It's not about "getting" anything. Your arguement is fairly straight forward. But it's not a contradiction so yes, I will add the script as a supplemental source since you have no effective objections to force me to exclude it.
]

You said "assuming" in the post before the last one I replied to. When I replied to the last post, you were no longer stating it as an assumption.

....
It still stands as a working assumption.
I'm not going to repeat the obvious like Alpha would force me to do. It's a waste of time. I don't mind that you misunderstood but I've told you my position on facts vs assumption before...do I need to continually repeat that in every post?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Not only are my statements here still based on a ship at battle stations being at battle readiness for a full power charge. (status quo)

But Reliant was not at battle stations, and neither was Enterprise. Again, you haven't ESTABLISHED the status quo, so you don't get to invoke your out-of-thin-air assumptions as such until you've established them factually.

Unless they had powers over reality no illusion would have stopped everyone in the area from being blown away.

Again, you've provided NO evidence or supportive reasoning of any kind that they would have been "blown away" even under the most destructive output of those weapons. You seem to be assuming that the phaser beam would have instantly detonated the entire rock face into a huge expanding fireball instead of simply tearing through it like a giant chain saw... what is that assumption based on?

Roddenberry did pretty good back then but he was no physicist. If he was he'd know that the power from being able to harness 100% of the energy from a antimatter matter reaction would be mankind's greatest weapon ever because if you could actually channel a continuous reaction as Enterprise pretended to do in Paradise Syndrome to the point of overload then you just might actually saw through a moon.

Clearly YOU are no physicist either, since you've overlooked the fact that channeling 100% of the input power into output energy is thermodynamically impossible. There's also the fact that we don't know Enterprise' actual power output or the magnitude of the matter/antimatter reaction, so it's meaningless to assume you have any idea how much power is actually being fed to the phasers, much less do you know their transfer efficiency, much less do you know the power density of a phaser beam over a distance.

You don't accept status quo.

Because you haven't ESTABLISHED this as the status quo. Again, you can't just pull an assumption out of your ass, label it "status quo" and then demand that everyone else prove you wrong. That's the Negative Proof Fallacy to the extreme.

It's silly that you're going back to pure conjecture to combat physics.

You've already been proven wrong on the physics, so this is a non-issue.

Because it's the most obvious and available relational mass to compare to.

No it isn't. It's an arbitrary guess with no factual support of any kind.

Anything else would be pure conjecture

Anything AT ALL would be pure conjecture. There's nothing in the entire film or background materials to shed light on that reference. It was meant to be intentionally vague so we wouldn't really know how big that asteroid was.

 

[Saquist]

"

I love these images.
I've looked at the front view ventral a number of times....It's hard to see entry 6 as matched for the exit hole we see.

But the quality of these images is so high this is exactly the type of scaring I would expect to see when nuclear weapons strike against the hull with no shields...

 

[blssdwlf]

That's the question. What do you know about the model used? Let's just argue for a moment it's all about an inaccurate length.

What if the nacelles on that model might be 6m further back than David Schmidts? A correction then would have been to just slide them forward 6m and there would be no change in volume.

Instead, you just made assumptions about the model without checking it out and started resizing it without knowing why it was longer than David's blueprint.

Sorry dude. The reason why I chose G2K is because he shoots for a reasonable amount of accuracy and the same with David Schmidt. All you had to do was the math to find out the truth of the Sketchup models he used.

Well dude, perhaps next time you should find out more about G2K's model. It's not his model. He got it second-hand from Masao as numbers from another modeler named Nob Akimoto who posted his measurements back around 2002-2003. If you took some time to read G2K's site, you'd realize those asterisks meant something

So now, you don't really know what the model that had the volume measured from looks like and you just up and re-scaled it from 243m to 237m based on someone else's measurements without doing some more research into the model.

Did it occur to you that 243m might be close to the right length? Afterall, the studio models are listed as 63"x37" and 17"x10". Work a beam of 141.7m x 1.7027 ratio = 241.3m length. Certainly not shortening it even more to 237m

In finishing the volume buildouts, it would appear that Reliant comes in with more volume at 254,000 m3 and Enterprise at 238,000 m3. Reliant has about 6% more volume than Enterprise.

The Difference between Consitution Refit and Miranda is 43,820 cubic meters which means it's 16.76% less than Constitution Refit. (I told you so) My estimate was 18%. The results of 2% margin of error is negligible for total volume. And I also told you your estimates were extremely wrong since you decided to strangely cut off the ship engines and other sections for no reason in a total displacement discussion. I already had you on this one...

If you did your homework better, you might have had me on this one... but you don't.

This is what you wrote and it didn't sound like you were calling it a "merely the likely scenario".

Saquist wrote, "Miranda's Roll Bar Phaser did CONSIDERABLE damage to Enterprise. The bolts were twice as large as Enterprise. And Reliant was firing at full power. But we know Enterprise was not because they lost main power. Even the Diagram shows Relaint hit a lot of locations and did considerable penetration. That's to be expected because physically those roll bar phaser are 2 or 3 times larger than the banks both ship use as standard armament."

And here we are today

Tsk, Tsk, you're being evasive. I call you on a prejudice conclusion, you never having back down from that prejudice and you attempt to point the finger back.

You don't like to take responsibility for your own words, eh?

Unless they had powers over reality no illusion would have stopped everyone in the area from being blown away. Nor is it logical to presume the characters would account for this illusion and fire the gun anyway. Your logic here is senseless. Don't depend on Alpha for reasoning.

There have been instances of a orbit to ground strike where the target simply vanished without blasting everybody nearby into dust or significant collateral damage ("Who Mourns for Adonais?" and "The Alternative Factor" come to mind.) As I've said before, if you don't "get" TOS tech, you're not going to understand TWOK.

Because it's about shield power vs. phaser power.
Trek does senseless stuff all the time. Especially TOS and using it to justify what you think happened in TWOK can only lead to a senseless conclusion too.

And this is why you think they're firing at full power. Not because you look at any precedent for support but simply because that is your opinion, damn the evidence before it. We ought to just stop and agree to disagree then as we're not even arguing on the same page.

Roddenberry did pretty good back then but he was no physicist. If he was he'd know that the power from being able to harness 100% of the energy from a antimatter matter reaction would be mankind's greatest weapon ever because if you could actually channel a continuous reaction as Enterprise pretended to do in Paradise Syndrome to the point of overload then you just might actually saw through a moon. But the reality is that it was plot relevant, and not thought out. The size of the Asteroid was simply ridiculously big.

You missed the point here. The point is that phaser power output is dependent on ship's power output. Could they have sawed through the asteroid? Perhaps if Spock hadn't already strained the engines before, who knows? The point again is that the phasers channel the full power output of the ship.

Focus...star Trek Six....

I wasn't talking about Excelsior either. But at least you got the right movie this time.

Yeah, and I can count better than you too. Your point?

Very Good I'll accept 11.
However I saw that scar marked "6 entry" and it can't be the entry hole. The hole occurred at the 45 degree mark for the port thrusters and that mark is well inside of it. Looks like they messed up.

I look forward to your graphic diagram showing where the entry point should be

Like I said..I don't know.
Speculating on why the effects are different aren't going to lead us anywhere. All I can tell you is that massive portion of the top of the pod is incinerated and it's not because some extremely low powered weapon penetrated the hull and detonated inside. I know because the pod s still there. I know because of the massive flash behind the pod at impact isn't remotely the same as the shaped charged video you showed. I know because there was no subsequent massive explosion out the back to relate the damage that is shown later. The physics is just not working with you here at all.

So you don't know why the top of the torpedo pod is incinerated but still intact and still attached to an intact rollbar while the rear 1/3 of the nacelle is completely vaporized off resulting in the nacelle getting completely sheared off? You have two photon torpedoes causing very different outcomes. You cannot say the torpedoes are the main destructive force since the outcomes are different from each other. The explosions can only come from what the torpedoes hit and set off, IMO.

BTW, the shaped charge is in reference to TUC. Let's not get too confused about what we're debating over

Because it's the most obvious and available relational mass to compare to. Anything else would be pure conjecture unless it's a current or known standard. It doesn't mean it has to be Enterprise but to assume anything else would weaken the argument.

If you don't get it then that's fine by me. Like I said, if you're going to use material that wasn't filmed or cut from the movie then more power to you.

It's not about "getting" anything. Your arguement is fairly straight forward. But it's not a contradiction so yes, I will add the script as a supplemental source since you have no effective objections to force me to exclude it.

LOL, I've already stated my objections. You're now in script territory and any further debate with the script it'll be all you.

Say, when you argue in the future, are you going to include the baby in the script? And in the script, Kirk goes to the bridge to take command of the Enterprise first before consulting with Spock. In the movie, he consults with Spock first and Spock insists that Kirk take command which then we see him on the bridge taking command. What version are you going to argue for?

You said "assuming" in the post before the last one I replied to. When I replied to the last post, you were no longer stating it as an assumption.

....
It still stands as a working assumption.
I'm not going to repeat the obvious like Alpha would force me to do. It's a waste of time. I don't mind that you misunderstood but I've told you my position on facts vs assumption before...do I need to continually repeat that in every post?

Actually, depending on how you write your response, yes.

But really, if you're going to use a script that isn't even accurate to the movie and you have no love for TOS then we really should agree to disagree and move on.

 

[Saquist]

Well dude, perhaps next time you should find out more about G2K's model. It's not his model. He got it second-hand from Masao as numbers from another modeler named Nob Akimoto who posted his measurements back around 2002-2003. If you took some time to read G2K's site, you'd realize those asterisks meant something

I've read his entire site....
I know they are sketchup models that he uses (some lighwave) and I know he didn't make them but as he said he's using the closest thing precise.

Did it occur to you that 243m might be close to the right length? Afterall, the studio models are listed as 63"x37" and 17"x10". Work a beam of 141.7m x 1.7027 ratio = 241.3m length. Certainly not shortening it even more to 237m

It doesn't really matter. 18% 16% You were still wrong, sir.

In finishing the volume buildouts, it would appear that Reliant comes in with more volume at 254,000 m3 and Enterprise at 238,000 m3. Reliant has about 6% more volume than Enterprise.

Hmmm....That's a great declaration and I commend you work but I have to take G2k at trust. I've verified many things on this page and he's short on discrepancies. He's not perfect but he's not that far off. You'll have to better than providing your interpretation of Reliant, You'll have to actually show where he went wrong. Otherwise we're dealing with just another interpretation.

If you did your homework better, you might have had me on this one... but you don't.

You haven't proved anything yet.
1- I've placed information on the board and it hasn't been dis-proven.

2-Offering up your own interpretaion is nice and all but how can I possibly confirm your findings?

You don't like to take responsibility for your own words, eh?

Not in reply to your own error, that's a red herring.
It's diversionary. It would be acceptable to point out in its own context but not in the context of your defense. Sorry.

There have been instances of a orbit to ground strike where the target simply vanished without blasting everybody nearby into dust or significant collateral damage ("Who Mourns for Adonais?" and "The Alternative Factor" come to mind.) As I've said before, if you don't "get" TOS tech, you're not going to understand TWOK.

I'm not trying to 'get' TOS. I don't make a habit of assuming continuity where there is none. That's a fan attitude that the medium is seamless and well thought out that the same thoughts were in play in TOS and TWOK. That's for writers to mediate and maybe even to retcon. In other words ....speculation. Speculation plays as little part in my search as possible.

And this is why you think they're firing at full power.

We haven't been on the same page since the first page. You jumped to a bunch of conclusions, no agreement on the rules of debate, no agreement to align yourself with the proper definitions. While you've been much shorter on logical fallacies than Alpha you don't understand the art of deduction but rather assumption. Nor have you be able to negotiate isolation logic as was made famous by the character of Sherlock Holmes and most Trek notable Spock with the simple adage "Eliminate the impossible, the remainder, however improbable, must be the answer". A similar process takes place in Law and Legalities. It's not complicated but you resist it.

But you've already jumped to the conclusion before you went through those steps. I was attempting to do that with you together. Regardless you've been most useful. Sometimes a sounding board is needed. I needed someone to object to my initial findings, you helped me find several errors in my assumptions on the facts and that has been invaluable.

You missed the point here. The point is that phaser power output is dependent on ship's power output. Could they have sawed through the asteroid? Perhaps if Spock hadn't already strained the engines before, who knows? The point again is that the phasers channel the full power output of the ship.

I didn't miss the point. I assure you I knew exactly where you were going but it's the logic I have a problem with, it's the consistency or the lack of it through out the series. That's why I brought up The Cage and if I was well versed in TOS I'd probably have other examples but you know I work by contradictions and as long as that contradiction remains between The Cage and Paradise Syndrome (your example) then I'm justified by ignoring TOS as a proper precedent for TWOK for phaser power out put and engines.

Yeah, and I can count better than you too. Your point?

Welcome back to you too.

I look forward to your graphic diagram showing where the entry point should be

Won't be happening any time soon.
My big machine is in the shop. All my projects are on hold.

So you don't know why the top of the torpedo pod is incinerated but still intact and still attached to an intact rollbar while the rear 1/3 of the nacelle is completely vaporized off resulting in the nacelle getting completely sheared off? You have two photon torpedoes causing very different outcomes. You cannot say the torpedoes are the main destructive force since the outcomes are different from each other. The explosions can only come from what the torpedoes hit and set off, IMO.

I don't look at them as very different but moderately different especially since the nacelle was already compromised. That's a known factor to the differences we see and more than allowable in my opinion.

BTW, the shaped charge is in reference to TUC. Let's not get too confused about what we're debating over

That maybe unavoidable. It's difficult sparing with two opponents with similar reasoning.

Say, when you argue in the future, are you going to include the baby in the script? And in the script, Kirk goes to the bridge to take command of the Enterprise first before consulting with Spock. In the movie, he consults with Spock first and Spock insists that Kirk take command which then we see him on the bridge taking command. What version are you going to argue for?

Well at least you're making an attempt at a contradiction.
I don't foresee a debate on those issues in any future. But your stroke is too broad. Just as I narrowed the contradiction to a specific discontinuity against your specific claim of phaser power/engines and the effect so must you in terms of power systems. But as I've read these are merely omission edits.

Actually, depending on how you write your response, yes.

Not in this case.
The post were back to back.
You could have easily have asked for clarification instead of assuming an obvious error.

But really, if you're going to use a script that isn't even accurate to the movie and you have no love for TOS then we really should agree to disagree and move on.

Very well. I'll put this to bed.
You may have the last post if you so desire.

 

[blssdwlf]

Well dude, perhaps next time you should find out more about G2K's model. It's not his model. He got it second-hand from Masao as numbers from another modeler named Nob Akimoto who posted his measurements back around 2002-2003. If you took some time to read G2K's site, you'd realize those asterisks meant something

I've read his entire site....
I know they are sketchup models that he uses (some lighwave) and I know he didn't make them but as he said he's using the closest thing precise.

The Miranda is from Akimoto's numbers.

Did it occur to you that 243m might be close to the right length? Afterall, the studio models are listed as 63"x37" and 17"x10". Work a beam of 141.7m x 1.7027 ratio = 241.3m length. Certainly not shortening it even more to 237m

It doesn't really matter. 18% 16% You were still wrong, sir.

Confused again? I wrote within 7-9%. You're the one out there with 18%.

Hmmm....That's a great declaration and I commend you work but I have to take G2k at trust. I've verified many things on this page and he's short on discrepancies. He's not perfect but he's not that far off. You'll have to better than providing your interpretation of Reliant, You'll have to actually show where he went wrong. Otherwise we're dealing with just another interpretation.

Have you talked to G2K? I've at least emailed him and he did confirm that he got the numbers from Masao. He does not have Akimoto's models and you would not either unless you were Akimoto or somehow got a hold of his Miranda model. You have no idea of the accuracy of that model and rescaling it blind was just a bad idea. You should of left the volume as-is or made your own volume comparison, IMO.

But really, if you're going to use a script that isn't even accurate to the movie and you have no love for TOS then we really should agree to disagree and move on.

Very well. I'll put this to bed.
You may have the last post if you so desire.

Very well indeed.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Several things jump to mind after watching TWOK with my son last night.

1) Chekov and Terrel were both still on board Reliant when Khan moves to intercept Enterprise. This would seem to suggest that Khan beat Enterprise back to Regula-1 on thruster power or at least had enough of a head start to get there close to or before Enterprise did, beam the two aboard Regula-1, and then slink off to a hiding spot to finish repairing their battle damage.

2) When Enterprise goes to yellow alert, all four warp power transfers are shown activated for the phaser banks, defense fields are energized, etc. Reliant never goes to yellow or even red alert at any time, so even if its phasers are set to maximum output, at no time in the attack are they set to draw full warp power from the ship. That means that even if they were more powerful than Enterprise' phasers in that attack--and nothing indicates they were--they COULD have been four times as powerful under normal battlefield circumstances.

3) Reliant fires on Enterprise at least five times during the first attack. Three are verifiable and seen on screen, the fourth is inferred from a renewed shaking in the hull while the trainees are on the run. This fourth strike appears to be somewhere OTHER than engineering; based on the storyboard images this could very well have been a torpedo strike from one of Reliant's aft tubes just seconds after the phaser hit (there is a visible scar on the saucer below and to port of the impulse deck), although it also could have been another phaser strike. The torpedo hit we see on the bridge would be number 5, apparently impacting somewhere on the upper side of the saucer section but without leaving a visible scar.

4) The torpedo pod scene: there are definitely TWO explosive events here. The first is the bright flash at the back of the pod, the second is an explosive eruption of gasses that blows out of both torpedo tubes and a pair of rectangular panels on the bottom port and starboard in front of the rollbar. This means the photon torpedo exploded on contact with the hull, and then a secondary reaction occurred INSIDE the hull that resulted in the gutting of the pod.

5) Before entering the nebula Scotty remarks "The energizer's bypassed like a Christmas tree so don't give me too many bumps." In the novelization and in the script, Scotty actually says something to the effect of "The energizer's bypassed in so many places the caution and warning board is lit up like a Christmas tree so don't give me too many bumps." Technically it's the same explanation, but in the latter case it's made clear that the electrical grid Scotty's rigged from the energizer (as much of it is still working, at least) involves a lot of fancy jury rigging that probably won't stand up to much strain. This is demonstrated by Enterprise's entry into the nebula which shorts out half their systems and forces them to switch to emergency lights; Reliant's entry is a lot less chaotic.

YMMV.

BTW, not that blssdwlf should be surprised by this, but the volume measurements for the Reliant vs. Enterprise are consistent with the numbers from the "Starship Volumetrics" web page, a favorite reference of mine that I have always found amazingly insightful. According to this information, in terms of TONNAGE, Reliant comes in at 243,600 tons while the Enterprise weighs in at 262,700 tons. This is a weight difference of less than 8%, sufficient to consider Reliant and Enterprise in the same general class of starship, only with the former having a larger (proportional) engineering section.

 

[Saquist]

The tonnage estimates mean little if nothing.
There is no way to really take that at truth.