PunkMaister wrote:My last post was only to prove that the asteroids in question were considerably bigger than the jumpers while is true that they did not turned out to be kilometers wide...
Nowhere in this supposed proof is the destruction of a 5km asteroid mentioned unless you have another example, your comparisons to the Star Trek remain irrelevant.
Your 'biggest' asteroid turns out to be 24.75m wide which is so far off being even a km wide it isnt funny, hence your claim that drones are equal to an ISD laser or Jango's charge based on the size of the asteroids is false.
PunkMaister wrote:So here is the limey and what we do know of this things called drones.
1. They can bore thru 150~200 meters of thick antarctic ice shelf which can be stronger than steel.
Are you referring to the scene Necron has already addressed or something like the scene with the helicopter avoiding the rogue drone ?
The former is just silly and you have provided a number of 150 ~ 200 metres compared to Necron's 'half a mile'.
Given your wild stab at a scaling of asteroids compared to the actual scene, I am going to ask you verfiy the scene that has a drone 'bore' through 150 ~ 200 metres of ice.
I wont bother pointing out you have stated a scale and yet again provided no actual calculations or quantifiable numbers on 'thick antarctic ice shelf which can be stronger than steel'
PunkMaister wrote:2. They can smash with ease a 24.75 meters wide asteroid leaving the window panes of that tower undamaged. which means the explosion must have been on the surface of the asteroid's other side in a shaped charge style preventing either the explosion or the resulting debris from damaging the building that means at least a 100 GJ per drone per Mr Oraghan's calculations are concerned.
It took 2 drones to achieve this result.
Who was it that claimed a single drone could equal a ISD shot or a Seismic Charge based on this scene ?
Dont even dare backpedal that you meant 'City sized drones' because you specifically claimed JUMPER drones were equal to the above and that 'city sized drones' would be even more powerful.
I will quote just to make sure you get the message:
In the episode kilometers wide asteroids were reduced to clouds of space dust each by a single drone and I mean the small ones fired from Puddle Jumpers not the big ones fired from capital ships or city ships etc...
Kilometres wide - Disproven
By a single drone - Disproven
Example of a city sized drone being used against an asteroid so we can compare the difference in firepower ?
Evidence that the area of effect A drone has is large enough to damage the tower in this scene ?
Evidence that the 'resulting debris' would have damaged the 'windows' when it did not do the same to the Puddle Jumper flying right through it ?
You have said 100 GigaJoules as a figure for each drone.
According to the Turbolaser firepower commentary:
Physicists usually measure energy in joules rather than calories. Power is generally measured in watts. A watt is defined as 1 joule per second. This means that 1 joule expended in a full second equals 1 watt. If it were expended over 2 seconds, it would be 1/2 watt; if 1 joule is expended over 1/3 seconds, then it is 3 watts, etc.
Further down on the same page the commentary states:
Michael Wong has presented possible power levels for fighter weapons. He states that in A New Hope, when Luke fired on the Death Star's surface, and superheated matter engulfed his ship, we gained a means to establish a possible lower limit on the firepower of those weapons. Since armor is not flammable and Luke's X-wing was nearly "cooked" by the heat, he states that the weapons must have been vaporising sections of the Death Star hull, causing the flash of expanding gases.
He states that, to cause flashes that large, the weapons must have vaporised at least one cubic meter of armor. If so, and we assume that the Death Star is made of iron; the four X-Wing cannons output approximately 60 GJ of energy. The Death Star is surely made from more heat-resistant materials than iron, so the calculations are conservative.
If we assume that the bolt strikes a target for 1/10 second, each cannon directs 600 GW to a target. Since this estimate is conservative, an X-Wing's blaster cannons easily release more energy in 10 seconds than the entire United States produces in electrical power. This is especially impressive when one considers the number of nuclear power plants in operation in the United States
From the clip linked on youtube found here
The 24.75m asteroid is shown at 1:14 with two drones already in flight.
At the picture you posted of this asteroid in comparison to the tower is taken during 1:15 and the drones hit at the very tip of 1:16 then we have a delay before an explosion shown until 1:18 through two perspectives.
1:16) Drones explode at 1:16
1:17) Camera shifts to inside the cockpit at Mckay flinching with visible fire effects and debris outside the viewport
1:18) Mckay plays with the controls
1:19) Pull up sequence
If we assume all the energy of the drone was released in one second that results in 100 GW, two drones = 200 GW, the Turbolaser commentary classifies an X-wing's cannon as being 600 GW which they have 4 equaling 2400 GW.
Hence, a single cannon from a X-wing is 6 times more powerful than a drone.
If we lower this to half a second this results in 200 GW, two drones = 400 GW, which still has an X-wing's cannon 3 times more powerful than a single drone.
The weapons of the Slave I are stated HERE
Main guns: 64000 GW (2 kilotons per shot, 480 rpm firing rate onscreen in AOTC for time-averaged power output rather than peak output)
Unless I have fucked up my math or analysis, a drone is not going to compete in fighter combat let alone take on anything bigger.