Gateworld Virtual Fleet 4.0 - Discussion thread

[Experiment 442]

That's the thing. 136gt is too uber. I'm with Killman on this.
(we need to sort out the specs for the 304 when voting comes around)

[Davidtourniquet]

No it isn't that is the correct value given in SG for the Mark IX. It's based on the blast radius they say in the SG1 episode "Beachhead" and using this equation:

R=c(Et^2/*rho*)^1/5
R is the blast radius
c is the speed of light
E is the energy
t is the time of the explosion after detenation and
rho is the density of the air.
The result is 136GT for a 100 mile blast radius.

[thekillman]

AH well that explains a lot. i opened the file on my parent's computer and now it shows up correctly.


also Davidt carter only says multi-Gt. we don't know what she meant by the vapourising range. however if it's naquahdah, for a 100 GT nuke you'd need 10 tonnes of naquahdah. the Mark IX is too small. i think it's a case of we're better off retconning.

i think we should keep the figures realistic according to real life, not stargate. some things are just crazy and are better off ignored. like 200MT ha'tak cannons, nukes being completely ineffective due to missiles impacting in stead of detonating, etc.


the hulls are OTT. when human ships take hits, it takes out entire decks and does tremendous spread damage. also per second? no way.


as to goauld stuff: i think going by my idea is better. "generations" of technology is better because upgrades would happen even when the stuff is installed, or at least some revisions, updates, patching, fixing, etc.


the reason i don't want too uber figures is because we're gonna end up with a battle where energy figures are just crazy and we get planet destroyers

[Davidtourniquet]

You will never get planet destroyers. You need at least 10^31 Joules of energy, what we are discussing here is 10^20 at the most. When Mitchell says "everything in a hundred mile radius is vapourised, he is talking about the blast radius. So that is a real life calculation. Also, everything I've heard with regards to the Mk IX is that it's naquadria tipped not naquada. The SG wiki has it down as this. We know from the gaould buster (which I've labelled a Mk VI), that naquada can cause the explosion to increase 3000 fold.
I noticed the Kt/s bit, that was a mistake on my behalf, should read Kt/m^2. I might drop those numbers by 100.

[Experiment 442]

The problem I think is this:

100 miles does not = 136gt. 100 miles = 250mt. The tsar bomb is the largest thermonuclear weapon ever created. its test yeild was 50mt. The resulting blast radius would have caused third degree burns on anyone within a 100 miles of it. The blast radius was 35km. A 136gt bomb, would destroy an entire planet.

[guppy338]

im with killman as well GT are simply to powerful very early on in this thred i mentiond thet multi MT or GT is just to much KT range is more to were the weapons would be

[thekillman]

nukes allow violation of weapons power because, quite simply, they unleash a lot of energy at once. an energy weapon needs constant powering.


however GT is too much. the tsar bomba was 50 MT and it was utterly devastating.

why do we need a weapon thousands of times stronger? at some point the energy is just a waste. nukes have a 50% efficiency at BEST. if the nuke were to hit the front of a 304's shield, the efficiency would be, what, 35%? an energy weapon has an efficiency of 80-90 percent.

also if 1 ship has a 500 MT shield and a 1MT/s weapon, then it takes 500 minutes to defeat the shield. however, if it's 2 VS 1, the time reduces to 250 minutes. in a massive battle, the dynamics are different and mere figures do not suffice.

You will never get planet destroyers. You need at least 10^31 Joules of energy, what we are discussing here is 10^20 at the most.

which is a terribly large amount of energy regardless.

[Davidtourniquet]

The problem I think is this:

100 miles does not = 136gt. 100 miles = 250mt. The tsar bomb is the largest thermonuclear weapon ever created. its test yeild was 50mt. The resulting blast radius would have caused third degree burns on anyone within a 100 miles of it. The blast radius was 35km. A 136gt bomb, would destroy an entire planet.

Where do you get 250 MT from? bearing in mind they even say in the show it's multi-GT. Sorry but a 136GT bomb wouldn't destroy the planet, it needs a lot more than that. 10 Magnitudes at least, so 10 billion Mk IXs. The equation I used is on the internet, so look up nuclear yield calculation if you don't believe me. You can't just change the scale of a nuke just because it doesn't suit your needs.

[thekillman]

You can't just change the scale of a nuke just because it doesn't suit your needs.

yes in SG they're very strict with energy figures.

yes we can. we already changed canon. we can do what we want in the name of believability

[Davidtourniquet]

Even 5x10^17 joules is huge, that's the numbers we are up at now. You put naquada into a tsar bomba you're looking at 150GT and the Mk IX uses Naquadria. We haven't changed canon, we've set ourselves in a universe where unending hasn't happened, that's the only difference. There's nothing unbelievable about the yield of those weapons as the original warheads (before naquada enhanced) lie within the yields of warheads currently on Earth.

[guppy338]

You will never get planet destroyers. You need at least 10^31 Joules of energy, what we are discussing here is 10^20 at the most.
Which is a terribly large amount of energy regardless.

a GT weapon would destroy a planet but not by the explosion the amount of radiation and dust it would kick given also the EMP and to other things it could do it would devastate a planetary eco system and it would turn the a high proportion of the area into a superheated nightmare and that would just be the start it would problem produce some very bad acid rain.
I’m not a experts but a muliti GT explosion would begin a nuclear winter?

[Davidtourniquet]

a GT weapon would destroy a planet but not by the explosion the amount of radiation and dust it would kick given also the EMP and to other things it could do it would devastate a planetary eco system and it would turn the a high proportion of the area into a superheated nightmare and that would just be the start it would problem produce some very bad acid rain.
I’m not a experts but a muliti GT explosion would begin a nuclear winter?

That's not destroying the planet, that's destroying life, two different things. You could do that with multi-megaton explosions. A 136GT explosion is equivilent to a 3.3km asteroid. The asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was 40km in size. That's 13 times larger!! That asteroid churned out approximately 245 TTs of energy and life wasn't wiped out, there was a long winter, sure, but life survived.

[Lt. Col. Mcoy]

Just for the record, I'm with davidtourniquet on this one.

[thekillman]

A 136GT explosion is equivilent to a 3.3km asteroid. The asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was 40km in size. That's 13 times larger!!

or a small one at massive speeds. also, this is us talking a nuke that's, what, 2 meters long?

the tsara bomba was 50 MT, that makes the Mark IX according to you 2720x stronger and even a bit smaller than the Tsara Bomba. i'm sorry but that's insane. if the Mark IX was the size of a house, well, maybe, but it fits in my car.

[Crazy Tom]

^That is rather heavily dependent on the beaming technology. Doesn't the power consumption of the beaming technology itself make many of those applications unfeasible. Using it for sewage for instance seems rather opulent.

Also, in terms of the equipment/shopping list Davidtourniquet put together, can allowance be made for highly specialized devices that can only be deployed on a very limited number of specialized platforms? (I'm asking specifically in relation to the plasma cannon variant I described a few pages back)

That's what I said, disregard the stuff to do with beaming. Is everything else OK?

But on a tangent: beaming for all that would work, because the single, expensive piece of equipment could do everything that a whole load of less expensive things could do, and it could do it right toff the bat. So costs would be lower overall.

I agree with David T and Mckoy, leave it, it doesn't make a big difference, the ridiculous energy levels are already part of the universe on every level.