Ships of B5

The Ships of Babylon 5 – Folder # 1 – America Online – Babylon 5

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-18 10:18:26 EDT
From: YouhnGonzo
Posted on: America Online

Last Physics Lesson I Promise
You have to have an A-Bomb In order to cause the necessary overpressure and heat to cause Hydrogen to fuse. Hence the Atomic bomb, being the ingiter, has to be developed prior to the Thermonuclear weapon. Thats one of the big technical advances in the B5 Universe. They have controllable fusion. The stations main power plant is a fusion reactor rather than an old fashioned nuclear reactor. All of the fusion reactors built in the real world, Yes several countries have built them, take more energy to contain the reaction than the reactor actually creates. Thats why you don’t see many around. Oh in case your wondering I believe they use high powered lasers converting from all directions to set off the reaction rather than a nuke, but that wouldn’t have been available in 1942 either. The reason they don’t use this method in bombs is that the system is not portable and hence useless in weapons technology. And if you’re dropping an H-Bomb on somebody, why not just drop an A-Bomb as an added bonus
Gonzo
Gonzo

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-18 22:19:40 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

I know this. :) :)

Macker

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-19 19:40:14 EDT
From: TGreen1641
Posted on: America Online

Actually an Imperial Star Destroyer in Star Wars is actually about 30 times the size of a Minbari Cruiser!!!!!!!!
Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-19 20:17:13 EDT
From: TGreen1641
Posted on: America Online

Its quite apparent that you have never heard of Tactical Nuclear weapons, which are not Fusion weapons. We do not have the technology to make fusion weapons as small as a backpack nuc.
All Tactical weapons are quite small, for instance a nuclear artillery shell has been made for weapons as small as the 155mm howitzer. Backpack nucs are, from the information that I have seen, are as small as 28 inches.
Controllable Fusion? I seem to recall that the only uncontrollable fusion is in a fusion weapon!
I have seen the device that you described and I can tell you that it is not an actual Fusion reactor it has been used in research to that purpose but it had other purposes.
One last thing before I go, did everyone forget that we haven’t seen everything about the shadows,
therefore how do you know that the powerful beam that they have been using to date is all the weapons they have in their inventory?Also Everyone seems to constantly forget that the shadows are the oldest of the races(I’ve heard someone mention about a million years ahead of us actually I would have to say at least 100 million years ahead of us) therefore it stands to reason that maybe they have seen most of the tactics that have been mentioned in this forum?

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-19 21:10:03 EDT
From: Yeenorm
Posted on: America Online

Are you referring to the Super Star Destroyer, which is said to be 5 miles long? That’s the same length of a B5 itself. A normal star destroyer, as seen in the beginning of SW was 1-mile long.

norm

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-19 21:32:49 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

I thought Minbari ships were larger than that… The Cortez was 5 miles, and the Agamemnon is pretty big herself (maybe a kilometer or a mile?), so the Minbari ships have to be bigger than 500 meters– how could they have almost defeated us so easily during the EA war with tiny little vessels like that? And don’t forget that the Grey Council lives on one of those ships…

Subj: Alive & Stupid
Date: 96-03-20 21:32:40 EDT
From: BIODOK
Posted on: America Online

Since the Shadowships are alive, couldn’t it be vulnerable to the psych corp. If you can get the corp or other telepaths to “cloak” the allied ships or weapons (i.e. missiles), it would be quite possible to launch a surprise firefight/attack or how about the good old “ram & board” with the rangers?

Subj: Re:Alive & Stupid
Date: 96-03-20 23:16:53 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

>>…or how about the good old “ram & board” with the rangers?<<

The Rangers had better be “prepared” as Delenn put it…or else THEY DIE INSTANTLY! Remember what happened to the guy on Mars? (MFE)

Macker

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-21 15:46:46 EDT
From: Pwloder
Posted on: America Online

I’ve got an Idea to completly eridicate a shadow ship. Just talk to the writers.

Joe

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technologyt
Date: 96-03-21 18:24:56 EDT
From: C237
Posted on: America Online

the shadow ships only need one person. and there certainly seem to be a lot of them. plus, they can subvert just about anybody.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-21 19:27:36 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

Songokuten, what does size have to do with power and technology? If you put the Cortez or Agamemmnon, or maybe both, against a Minbari warship, I promise you the Minbari will carve them up like a roast. EA cruisers are just big targets to it. It’s faster, its beam weapons can aquire targets faster, and its stealth. What’s more, you are forgetting something about the Minbari fleet… the Black Star. Sheridan referred to it as “monsterous” in size. Although it was destroyed, whose to say whether or not they got more.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-21 22:10:05 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>Songokuten, what does size have to do with power and technology?<<

Nothing. I was just trying to determine the size of the ships. (why does this sound like “it’s not the size that counts..”?)

>> If you put the Cortez or Agamemmnon, or maybe both, against a Minbari warship, I promise you the Minbari will carve them up like a roast.<<

Yes, but if the Minbari ship is only one third the size of the Aggamemnon (Or a tenth of the Cortez), then the Aggy could just ram it and let momentum decide. Sure, half the ship might be useless, but the other half wouldn’t be. (the Minbari ship, I assume, would be worse than ‘useless’ after that) Also, the Cortez must have *huge* engines to power it; if it turned on a Minbari ship with full thrust, it would fry the boneheads.
And let’s not forget the nukes. A bigger ship has a better chance of surviving a nuke, unless we’re talking technology on a Shadow level. (The Blackstar was taken out by nukes, so we are not.)

>> EA cruisers are just big targets to it. It’s faster, its beam weapons can aquire targets faster, and its stealth.<<

Yes, it is faster, but that might make it easier to destroy. Remember the “space mines” we were discussing earlier? Minbari ships also use gravitational drives, opposed to fusion reactors. Ten seconds under a constant fusion blast would reduce most ships to slag. Earthforce ships may be bigger, but that’s all space to put more weapons. If the Aggy fires with all the weapons it has on one side (I think either 8, 10, or 16. It depends on if those big cylindrical things on the side are all guns.), it wouldn’t need to aim. Just come close to the target and converge (like the three Narn ships did to ‘Stumpy’).

>> What’s more, you are forgetting something about the Minbari fleet… the Black Star. Sheridan referred to it as “monsterous” in size. Although it was destroyed, whose to say whether or not they got more.<<

That’s the point. If they have more, it makes everyone less anxious to attack. Even you, though you say the size is unimportant.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-21 22:16:54 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

The squirtmines dont have to hang around the jumpgate- they merely use it to get into hyperspace. If the Shadows show up anywhere in the area they will set off the mines.

Subj: Aesthetic value
Date: 96-03-21 22:53:18 EDT
From: GeronimoDG
Posted on: America Online

This is purely a personal view, but in the short time I have been watching B5 (a year) I have been struck by how ugly EA ships are compared to other races. The Centauri vessels are nearly works of art, and although I don’t go much for the organic shaping of Vorlon & Minbari ships, they’re still better then the clunky Agememmon or the Star Furies. Like I said, just a personal opinion.

Subj: Re:Aesthetic value
Date: 96-03-22 17:47:08 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

You’re right, the EA ships are pretty darn nasty looking. But I think the producers tried to make it that way on purpose. The Vorlons have been making ships for millions of years. The Minbari had been doing it for thousands. The Centauri seem obsessed with making their ships look pretty in purple with wings bolted on for no purpose. The Narn warships seem fairly normal from a practical standpoint. That’s what the EA ships are, practical. The Star Furies aren’t aerodynamic at all. What’s more, Earth just got space tech from the Centauri. Space ship manufacture might not have advanced to the point where aesthetics can be considerd a factor in construction
Subj: Re:Aesthetic value
Date: 96-03-22 22:44:23 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>You’re right, the EA ships are pretty darn nasty looking. But I think the producers tried to make it that way on purpose.<<

I like the EA ships; they’re designed to be realistic. With the level of tech Earth has, that’s the most efficient way to build ships. They’re maneuverable, have weapons, and the big ones rotate (although we’ve never seen a big ship accelerate at a full gee– the rotating section would be a deathtrap at more than a gee of acceleration.
Overall, I think the ‘clunky’ realistic ones are some of the coolest. It beats the ‘giant egg’ stereotype for efficient spacecraft.

>>That’s what the EA ships are, practical. The Star Furies aren’t aerodynamic at all.<<

They’re not aerodynamic, but they don’t fly in the atmosphere, either. They’re perfectly suited for high-speed turns and efficient maneuvers in space, though. A narn fighter looks like it wouldn’t be able to turn in vacuum without using hidden thrusters.

 

Subj: REAL Ships!
Date: 96-03-22 23:18:44 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

See, this is how far our conception of space flight has become. Give me a Starfury or that new(?) Thunderbolt and I’ll beat the crap outa any X-wing, TIE, Viper or Cylon Raider any day of the week!

Macker

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-23 00:59:08 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<Yes, but if the Minbari ship is only one third the size of the Aggamemnon (Or a tenth of the Cortez), then the Aggy could just ram it and let momentum decide.>>

First the Aggy has to catch the damn thing. Smaller size and less mass(not to mention Minbari ArtGrav technology) means more manuverability. And even if the Aggy did catch them if the structural build of the Minbari ship was good enough, it might just get “pushed” by the Aggy, suffering little damage, while the great Agamemnon squished itself like a beer can.

<< Sure, half the ship might be useless, but the other half wouldn’t be. (the Minbari ship, I assume, would be worse than ‘useless’ after that)>>

Even if ramming did severly damage the Minbari ship, the Aggy would be dead. The force of the impact(BTW, this is all assuming that the Aggy and the Minbari ship hit a a fairly good relative velocity) would squish the front half of the Agamemnon, and toss the hell out of the interior of the entire ship. Imagine the interior structure of the ship ripping itself away from the outer hull as it face the wicked deceleration such and impact implies.

<< Also, the Cortez must have *huge* engines to power it; if it turned on a Minbari ship with full thrust, it would fry the boneheads.>>

Okay, let’s assume that the Cortez has engines big enough to get it to half a G. Those would be rather big. Firing those things would be rather detremental to what ever was in the way. But aiming the entire ship at a Minbari cruiser(those that we have seen) would be much like trying to aim a modern Tank turret at a model airplane. The Cortez was freakin’ Five Miles Long! turning that thing with any kind of speed would not only reqire large engines aimed towards the sides, but it would also put some nasty forces on the structure of the ship. Turn it two fast, and it snaps like a twig. Most likely turning the Cortez is a nice leisurely process.

Subj: Re:HFMoon
Date: 96-03-23 03:13:02 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

You read my mind! Another thing, if all these tactics being dreamed up against a Minbari cruiser could work… they sure didn’t in the war. Oh, and by the way Songokuten, I didn’t mean to rip on the EA ships. I think the concept of their design is cool and I think the warships are cool as well. The Star Furies are too cool for words… and I can’t wait to see the new Thunderbolt-class Star fury I read about in the Lurkers guide.
Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-23 18:12:21 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>First the Aggy has to catch the damn thing. Smaller size and less mass(not to mention Minbari ArtGrav technology) means more manuverability.<<

True, but with jump engines, it seems like it could be easy to get a good lead on something.

>> And even if the Aggy did catch them if the structural build of the Minbari ship was good enough, it might just get “pushed” by the Aggy, suffering little damage, while the great Agamemnon squished itself like a beer can.<<

The Agamemnon actually looks pretty tough. The two middle support structures would be trashed, but the rotating section has a guard and support beams. The middle ‘bridges’ look like they’re meant to fold up on impact, IMHO, and the fron is just a cargo bay with gun placements. It might be an explosive, yet expendable, section for such an impact. The Minbari ships have thin fins that seem to be important (POD), but they also seem fragile.
And if that’s not enough, the Aggy could use it’s nukes about five seconds before impact, and only contaminate the sections on itself that go bye-bye anyway. No medium to carry the shockwave (except for the radioactive elements and the Minbari ship’s hull…).

>>Even if ramming did severly damage the Minbari ship, the Aggy would be dead. The force of the impact(BTW, this is all assuming that the Aggy and the Minbari ship hit a a fairly good relative velocity)<<

They wouldn’t need much. If the engines are constantly going (even at a measly 100 mphps), it would be enough to cream both of them. The Aggy could ‘hit’ the Minbari ship at 5mph, then accelerate without too many gees being exerted by the actual impact.

>> would squish the front half of the Agamemnon, and toss the hell out of the interior of the entire ship. Imagine the interior structure of the ship ripping itself away from the outer hull as it face the wicked deceleration such and impact implies.<<

Oops, that last sentence applies here, too. And what about acceleration chairs?

<< Also, the Cortez must have *huge* engines to power it; if it turned on a Minbari ship with full thrust, it would fry the boneheads.>>
>>Okay, let’s assume that the Cortez has engines big enough to get it to half a G. Those would be rather big. Firing those things would be rather detremental to what ever was in the way. But aiming the entire ship at a Minbari cruiser(those that we have seen) would be much like trying to aim a modern Tank turret at a model airplane.<<

Still not impossible. Besides, if the Cortez uses a spotter in normal space, it could head ‘toward’ the Minbari ship’s location in hyperspace, turn, and then jump. It would get at least a few seconds before the Minbari can react and dodge completely.

>> The Cortez was freakin’ Five Miles Long! turning that thing with any kind of speed would not only reqire large engines aimed towards the sides, but it would also put some nasty forces on the structure of the ship.<<

Only on the front and back; the inhabited parts were in the middle, I believe. The rest of the ship might be stronger. If the Cortez positions itself in hyperspace, then it wouldn’t need to turn fast at all.

>> Turn it two fast, and it snaps like a twig. Most likely turning the Cortez is a nice leisurely process.<<

Probably. Doesn’t mean you can’t do it if you need to.

Subj: Re:HFMoon
Date: 96-03-23 18:18:15 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>You read my mind! Another thing, if all these tactics being dreamed up against a Minbari cruiser could work… they sure didn’t in the war.<<

Well, war works better for humans in theory than in practice. Besides, that was assuming the Minbari can’t simply nuke us from 1000000 kilometers away in the first place. They probably can, so it’s pointless to try to ram them anyway. I have to admit, I haven’t seen all of ATSFOS, so I don’t know the full potential of the Minbari. And the Aggy is a new ship, we don’t know that it wouldn’t have done better in the war.

>> Oh, and by the way Songokuten, I didn’t mean to rip on the EA ships. I think the concept of their design is cool and I think the warships are cool as well. The Star Furies are too cool for words… and I can’t wait to see the new Thunderbolt-class Star fury I read about in the Lurkers guide.<<

Yeah, I love the realism. As someone else mentioned, x-wings would be a waste of target practice for a Starfury.
Tell me about the Thunderbolts …they sound familiar, but I can’t remember anything about them.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-23 21:52:15 EDT
From: Bosk2420
Posted on: America Online

People, I think we are missing one important point when talking about missils against the Shadows. They dont show up on scanners, so how are we going to lock on to them? What will be the guidence system??

Subj: Re:Aesthetic value
Date: 96-03-23 21:52:56 EDT
From: Drew JFK
Posted on: America Online

The EA ships to me look very realistic, and that is why I consider them to be the best looking ships on B5. From my point of view, the Narn warships also look good. They appear to be somewhat bulky but are still quite functional. I especially enjoyed the Narn vs. Shadow battle in TLTS. It showed the Narn ships at thier best! A few questions for thought: How much power and effort does it take to operate a rotating section such as those on the EA cruisers? There was an EA cruiser in “Gropos” that looked strikingly similar to the Agamemnon in design except for one key difference, it did not have a rotating section! Also, in PoNR, does anyone know what were the types of the 2 companion ships with the Alexander?

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-23 21:59:39 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>The Aggy could ‘hit’ the Minbari ship at 5mph, then accelerate without too many gees being exerted by the actual impact.<< This would be pushing the Minbari ship, not crushing it. It would be the initial impact that would do the damage. Otherwise it’s just acceleration.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-23 22:01:03 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>> Oops, that last sentence applies here, too. And what about acceleration chairs?<<

Okay, if they were set up to take the 20-30+ g deceleration that your impact would put them under. Imagine the crew though…. spagetti sauce comes to mind.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-23 22:02:39 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

Oh, I almost forgot. If one was to use the Cortez as a torch, shouldn’t we really re-name it the “Angel’s Pencil”?

(Sorry, Niven Fan joke……)

Subj: Re:Aesthetic value
Date: 96-03-24 00:19:43 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

The Centauri ships are works of art because they are a decadent race…

Well, no, its probably because they have a bigger budget.

Subj: Re:Aesthetic value
Date: 96-03-24 00:21:12 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

I suppose the difference might be like that between Muhammed Ali and Mike Tyson. Ali is prettier, but they both could beat the crap out of me if I held still.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-24 00:25:47 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Minbari ships sure do show up on TV- so you engage them visually. We already have TV guided missiles- they were used even in Vietnam.

On the other hand, this would require two-person spacecraft so one could fly and the other guide the missile, to minimize the impact of scrambling.

Subj: Re:Point of No Return
Date: 96-03-24 01:13:51 EDT
From: TBrush1090
Posted on: America Online

JMS has stated that the cruisers, other than the Omega class destroyers, that joined Hague, were smaller, older cruisers such as the Hyperion class.

Subj: Thunderbolt-class
Date: 96-03-24 17:04:22 EDT
From: JGinder
Posted on: America Online

Hi, ya’ll, It’s me Rep Newt from another computer. Okay, believe it or not we’ve actually been shown three different Star Furies already. The light fighter assigned to B5, the heavy two man Star Fury from the Hyperion, and the Black Omega. These are extremely modified with faster engines and stealth capabilities. The Black Omega was used to track down the rogue telepath Jason Ironheart in Born to be Purple I think. Unfortunatly the squadron was destroyed when he did dome sort of mind explosion psychic deal. The new Star Fury is the Thunderbolt. I have no idea of the capabilites but if it’s anything like its WWII namesake, it’ll probably have some heavy firepower. It will debut in episode 110, Severed Dreams. I could tell you more about its debut but I was dissappointed when I found out on the internet. Oh, and if your thinking I have no life for finding all this, it was really easy. There is a lot of easy access info on the ships on the web.
Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-24 19:53:27 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>Oh, I almost forgot. If one was to use the Cortez as a torch, shouldn’t we really re-name it the “Angel’s Pencil”?

(Sorry, Niven Fan joke……)<<

Which book is that from? (sorry, I just started reading Niven a while ago..) More Niven jokes (ones that I know):

How many Moties does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

Answer: More and more…

How many moties does it take to man a warship for/in five years?

Answer: Two…… (at first)

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-24 22:02:03 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>> Which book is that from? (sorry, I just started reading Niven a while ago..) More Niven jokes (ones that I know):<<

It’s a joke from the begining of the Man-Kzin Wars.

I started reading Niven&Pournell in Jr. High. My first book of theirs was “The More in God’s Eye”, Your’s to?

And have you read “The Gripping Hand”?

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-25 22:43:10 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>>> Which book is that from? (sorry, I just started reading Niven a while ago..) More Niven jokes (ones that I know):<<
It’s a joke from the begining of the Man-Kzin Wars.<<

Oh… Is that good? I plan to read lots of LN, JP, and Harlan Ellison, this year. I’ve heard “Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is one of the best Niven short stories… Can you confirm it?

>>I started reading Niven&Pournell in Jr. High. My first book of theirs was “The More in God’s Eye”, Your’s to?<<

I started reading Niven and Pournelle two weeks ago (Junior year of high-school). I liked The Mote In God’s Eye (my first Niven/Pournelle novel, yes).

>>And have you read “The Gripping Hand”?<<

Reading it now. (I’m to the part where Renner and His Eccelency Horace Hussein al-Shamlan Bury visit Lord Roderick Blaine of Crucis on Sparta) (try saying that three times fast!)

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-25 23:05:13 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>I’ve heard “Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is one of the best Niven short stories… Can you confirm it?<<

More of a research paper than a short story, but Yes.

 

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-25 23:30:12 EDT
From: DKMTN
Posted on: America Online

The nuke idea could work but think about this … focus all the light energy releasd at the moment of explosion into a beam and WAMO fried spider ship
Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-25 23:38:55 EDT
From: DKMTN
Posted on: America Online

actually b5 is 8.something miles long
Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-26 00:18:25 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

>> actually b5 is 8.something miles long <<

8 kilometers…works out to about 5 miles…

Macker

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-26 17:25:13 EDT
From: TiMorgan
Posted on: America Online

> Oh… Is that good? I plan to read lots of LN, JP, and Harlan
> Ellison, this year. I’ve heard “Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is one
> of the best Niven short stories… Can you confirm it?

“Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is a non-fiction essay. VERY funny, and a little sick at times. Probably a “PG-13″ rating these days. You can find it in the book ALL THE MYRIAD WAYS, 1971, Ballantine Books The collection contains several speculative essays (like “Man of Steel”) and several very good short stories including “Inconstant Moon” and “What Can You Say About Chocolate Covered Manhole Covers?”.

Hope this helps.

Tim
Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-26 17:48:17 EDT
From: TiMorgan
Posted on: America Online

> The nuke idea could work but think about this … focus all the light
> energy releasd at the moment of explosion into a beam and WAMO fried
> spider ship

The US government played with this idea back in the early 1980s when the Star Wars program was big. A “shaped-charge” nuke was used to vaporize a piece of metal (I forget which element). Then the metal plasma was pumped by the remainder of the explosion. The result was a very brief directed x-ray laser burst. The idea works but is woefully power inefficient, less than 1% conversion as I recall. Plus, you blow up your “gun” in the process. Since then, scientists have been successful in creating non-nuke x-ray lasers.

An idea I think might make a good trap would be to set up a _very_ large variable focus solar concentrator, say one hundred thousand kilometers on a side. Given really tame light concentrations of say 1 kilowatt a square meter (what we get on earth as an average) then such a device could dump _ALOT_ of energy into a small volume of space. I don’t think even a Shadow ship could take a 1 second exposure to about 10,000 Gigawatts of power if it were focused tight enough.

Tim

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-26 20:16:22 EDT
From: Helo Wolf
Posted on: America Online

>> Oh… Is that good? I plan to read lots of LN, JP, and Harlan Ellison, this year. I’ve heard “Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” is one of the best Niven short stories… Can you confirm it?<<

That was a very funny essay. “Inconstant Moon” was also really good. Both can be found in “N-space”

 

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-26 20:46:05 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

Thanks, everyone. Now I know what to read after the current B5 book…

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-27 01:06:36 EDT
From: DKMTN
Posted on: America Online

you put it in a missile and put in a targeting comp to aim it

Subj: Re:Aesthetic value
Date: 96-03-28 09:25:59 EDT
From: RRamos2363
Posted on: America Online

Operating a rotating section is not that hard while its in motion , just to start it is the real power expenditure. After you start the rotation there is no friction to stop it so in all actuality it could rotate forever except I would suspect it would need to dock at some station for supplies and refits.

Subj: Star Furies
Date: 96-03-28 19:23:16 EDT
From: MAKagle
Posted on: America Online

Anybody know what those fins on the backs of the Star Fury engines are for?

Subj: Re:Star Furies
Date: 96-03-28 21:00:35 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<Anybody know what those fins on the backs of the Star Fury engines are for?>>

Vectoring the thrust from those four big engines. Can a times be cheaper than engaging another engine to thrust you five degrees left.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-28 22:44:07 EDT
From: Gene3
Posted on: America Online

Sheriden said the Cortez was 5 miles long when he was describing her. Also that the Cortez had the mission of building jumpgates in new locations after it had gotten somewhere useful and could then build the door though which smaller ships could come.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-03-28 22:54:11 EDT
From: Gene3
Posted on: America Online

Ramming things will just ruin your day in the Navy. Icebreakers are DESIGNED to break ice but I would not recommend hitting another ship. Among other things, you can get stuck and both sink. And the structual stress all along your own hull and bulkheads will likely let the water in or the air out. Ever so much safer to blast away from any distance. The ramming you see in movies is at best a desperation move

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-28 22:57:29 EDT
From: Gene3
Posted on: America Online

Have you ever heard of optics? How about hand/eye coordination?
Ever shoot skeet or live birds? In WWII, gunners for bombers used to practice leads and windage by shooting skeet. You can do the same thing electronicly, just ask someone who uses a flight simulator. You know the capabilites of YOUR weapons, then shot them where they are going to be”)

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-29 14:06:27 EDT
From: Airpgh
Posted on: America Online

Your tactics sound great if you assume you will face 1 or 2 Shadow ships. Consider 10, or 20. Envelopement and missile barrages will be of little help. Assuming the Shadow can mass large numbers of ships, there are only three options:
1) Mass a counter force. Problem, it appears that the allies cannot mass a sufficient fleet to meet a large number of Shadow ships. Remeber how quickly the Narn fleet was destroyed by 3 (I believe) Shadow ships. We cannot assume that the Vorlons have enough ships to counter such a fleet.
2) Guerrilla War. If we assume option one is no good this may be a viable option. Clearly we must attack Shadow ships singlely. Divide and conquer. Problem – – planets cannot be moved. Homeworlds will be screwed when a Shadow fleet arrives. Possible solution. We must act proactively. We need good intel (the Rangers). We need to know where the Shadow ships based, where they patrol (assuming they do) and any other movement patterns we can ascertain. Admittedly this is hard to do. But it may allow us to attack and destroy isolated ships in the manner you described. Another problem: such a strategy requires a long term commitment with relitively small victorys separated over year.
3) Our last option is to assemble a stike force (with the White Star in the lead) and go to the Shadow’s home planet and destory (attempt) their command structure. This is the most desperate of our options. It will be a crap shot. We win or loose in one battle. At least this option will best keep the politicians out of the picture.
Well this is the situation as I see it. Feel free to add options.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-29 23:42:56 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Ever shoot skeet or live birds<<

Now try it when the birds(or skeets) are several thousand kilometers away, moving at several hundred meters a second, and now add in the fact that they are shooting at you too.

Subj: Re:Gaming B5
Date: 96-03-30 00:09:47 EDT
From: NeghVar
Posted on: America Online

There is a “Full Thrust” Web page; It has the rules for using B5 ships in that game! It would be a good read for anyone interested in comparing the ships from B5. BTW, there are also counters for use with the game. The address is:

http://www.uwm.edu/~cthulhu/thrust.html

Enjoy!
NeghVar@aol.com

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-30 04:45:31 EDT
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< >>Ever shoot skeet or live birds<<

Now try it when the birds(or skeets) are several thousand kilometers away, moving at several hundred meters a second, and now add in the fact that they are shooting at you too. >>

Skeets that shoot back! As the Great Gonzo would no doubt say, “Cool!”
Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-03-30 09:00:03 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

<< Now try it when the birds(or skeets) are several thousand kilometers away, moving at several hundred meters a second, and now add in the fact that they are shooting at you too. >>

Skeets that shoot back! As the Great Gonzo would no doubt say, “Cool!” >>

So would Beavis and Butthead! Huh-huh-huh-huh…Heh heh heh heh heh…

Macker

Subj: Re:white star
Date: 96-03-30 09:08:03 EDT
From: Jedique
Posted on: America Online

I agree

Subj: Shadow homeworld attack
Date: 96-03-30 19:46:38 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

When Lando asked Morden what he could do to pay Morden back for all the favors, Morden only wanted to know what Lando knew about what was going on out on the Rim. Lando told him a Narn warship was coming and the ship was eventually destroyed by a waiting Shadow battlecruiser. What if, however, Lando hadn’t told Morden? Could the shadows been protecting the secrecy of their world or the vulnerability? Maybe an attack isn’t such a crap shot.

Subj: Re:EPISODE ORDER
Date: 96-03-31 17:23:58 EDT
From: HAPPY BEAU
Posted on: America Online

I HAVE BEEN WATCHING EVERY SHOW SINCE SEPT. 95 BUT THE STORY ARE NOT FOLLOWING ANY ORDER. WE GOT TO THE PRES. AND OVER THROW OF EARTH ALLIANCE. LAST NIGHT WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT SHADOWS. I TELL YOU I’M IN THE DARK IS THERE A SHOW LIST AND WHERE IS IT. IWATCH IT ON CHANNEL 9 IN NYC PTEN{WOR}. HELP , THE SHOW IS GETTING INTERESTING. TELL GARABADI & IOVONNA{THE FIRST OFFICER. TO LOOSEN THEIR SHORTS, THERE TOO UPTIGHT!

Subj: Re:Shadow’s deadly weakness
Date: 96-04-01 17:56:25 EDT
From: PfalzLyle
Posted on: America Online

Absolutely correct, the Shadows are very intemperate when faced with their enemies. This is probably because they usually have the element of surprise and of course incredible firepower, but they are like a bull in a chinashop and simply use brute force. They may have a true tactical plan in battle, but I have yet to see it used. Maybe they are like the Borg and “assimilate” methods of fighting…

Subj: Re:Shadow’s deadly weakness
Date: 96-04-01 23:05:41 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

<< …they usually have the element of surprise and of course incredible firepower…>>

Yeah, but they haven’t gone up against Epsilon III yet. That beam ain’t no sheer slicer…it’s a fraggin’ DISINTEGRATION BEAM!! One taste of THAT and they’ll head back for Z’Ha’Dum to lick their wounds…of whatever they have left!

Macker

Subj: Re:Spees of White Star
Date: 96-04-02 18:04:07 EDT
From: Chris8392
Posted on: America Online

Wrong!
G-force is a problem
It still applies in space and humans tend to black out at about 5-10g
Subj: Re:Spees of White Star
Date: 96-04-02 20:53:28 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>It still applies in space and humans tend to black out at about 5-10g<<

Wouldn’t you crush your own spine at 10 gees?

Subj: re: shadow’s deadly weakness
Date: 96-04-03 02:50:20 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

PfalzLyle, the shadows have a plan, the’ve had over one-thousand years to think on up. As for in-combat plans, I think that they have one too. If you’d think back to the time when Amassador Milari asked Mordern to destroy the Narin colony, I believe that origonally two shadows commenced in attacking the figters, and outpost, then the two shadows surrounded the fighters, and a third de-cloaked at the rear of the group of fighters. KABOOM!

As already stated the shadow’s weakness is overconfidence, and over-aggressiveness. The shadows we’re defeated in the first war because of those weaknesses. The shadows have decreased both of their flaws, but their still there. If Sheridan plays those flaws who knows how much he’ll accomplish.

Subj: ship bio
Date: 96-04-03 18:37:37 EDT
From: RRamos2363
Posted on: America Online

Here is a stab at what I was trying to make, a ship bio. The sources come from the internet, toys , and other sources in the internet that deal with the show.

Starfury
SA-23 A,B,C,D,E

Construction data

Type- single-seat nonatmospheric fighter
Home planet- Earth Alliance
Dimensions-
Height-?
Width-?
Lenght-?
Armament- (c,d,e) 4 20 megawatt pulsecharge disruptors , (a,b) 2 plasma projection and unidentifed beam weapon
Propulsion- 8 Ion engines
Crew- 1
Operational Capability-
cruising range-?
expected lifetime-?
cargo space- none
Computer system- ?
Communication system-?
Velocity-
Max. linear thrust- 1km/s
Maneuverability- 90%
Notes- Unlike classic Terran designs , the pilot sits perfectly vertically in the cockpit, operating the vessel with a combination of hand, foot and voice-activated controls. The pilot wears a pressure suit. There are different versions to the starfury like the light (A), heavy (B), two-seater(C), Black Omega (D), Thunderbolt (E).
This is only the facts that I have so far , I could be wrong if you want to lend some help just let put it in and let me know how this looks to you all, I plan to continue with further ships until we can have a fully ship bio. Laters and thanks.

 

Subj: Re:Spees of White Star
Date: 96-04-03 22:02:45 EDT
From: Helo Wolf
Posted on: America Online

>>It still applies in space and humans tend to black out at about 5-10g<<

>>Wouldn’t you crush your own spine at 10 gees?<<

No, pilots have pulled 10 g’s before. I know of one incident in the Navy training command where a student pulled at least 10 g’s. He got back home OK, but the plane didn’t fly again.

Wolf
Subj: Re:Spees of White Star
Date: 96-04-04 01:09:36 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<>>It still applies in space and humans tend to black out at about 5-10g<<

Wouldn’t you crush your own spine at 10 gees?>>

Only if you’re either still standing up or lying down and just excessively large.

 

Subj: Re:white star
Date: 96-04-04 04:31:20 EDT
From: ROgden7882
Posted on: America Online

The White Star is not a true Vorlon warship. The technology used also in Menbari. What fact it is is a hybrid of Vorlon and Menbari tech.

Subj: Re:white star
Date: 96-04-04 19:26:48 EDT
From: Jdseibert
Posted on: America Online

If the Minbari have artificial gravity, then they should be able to use that same technology to counteract inertia. Given the direction and force of the inertia, automatic counteraction could come into play. This would make minbari ships incredibly nimble. The white star itself was pretty deft at outmaneuvering both shadow ships and EA ships.

Subj: Re:white star
Date: 96-04-05 01:38:07 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

A Vorlon battlecruiser destroyed an Earth shuttle in the episode where that war criminal finds a solution to immortality (it was a long time ago). It is very similar to the Shadow cruisers.

Subj: Re:Ships
Date: 96-04-05 01:39:54 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

Delen said that the White Star used magetic/gravimetric propulsion, meaning that they can bend space-time, and can probably control the time dialation to some extent

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 01:46:21 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

Shadow fighters would provide a screen against such a missile attack. (Mine fields in debris fields are a nother matter) Maybe Epsilon 3, sitting all by its self all this time is making its own fleet. Perhaps with deflector shields (The B5 universe has no such thing) and cloaks. What about black hole generators, biologics, ect.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 01:51:09 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

The energy mines did not stop the shadows at all. However, three Narn cruisers fired their laser cannons at a single point on the shadow cruiser, crippling it.
Perhaps several corvettes equiped with such beam weapons.
Don’t forget about Vorlon, Mimbari weapon systems.

What about counter measures, such at electronic drones, phasma flares, and other stuff bases on actual military equipment?

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 01:53:23 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

Why not simply jam the shadows tracking system. By the way, the shadows seem to trick others into doing the bloody stuff for them.

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technologyt
Date: 96-04-05 01:54:39 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

Perhaps the shadow cruisers are mearly full grown shadow troops?

Subj: Re:Narn Ship Design
Date: 96-04-05 01:56:44 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

The more simple a ship is, the less likely something major will go wrong

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 01:59:29 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

What about something like a B-17 Fortress gunnery system for a heavy fighter.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 02:01:19 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

What about Artifical Intelegent ordinance\ships, and hyperspace interdictors, forcing the enemy to remain in real-space?

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 02:03:34 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

You might take out the homeworld, but with the shadow fleet intact, they could just swipe another planet.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 02:06:43 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

The shadows appear to have one main cannon. It you can’t aim it, it’s worthless.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 02:09:31 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

What about minefields inside hyperspace?

Subj: Re:Earth Force Cruisers
Date: 96-04-05 02:14:59 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

The Hyperion had what looked like partical cannons, or small mass drivers. With a lack of a rotation module, it also has a much smaller surface profile, making it harder to hit. In general, beam weapons are more powerful.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 02:19:01 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

But how are you going to defend against the millions of possibilities at once?

Subj: Re:Aesthetic value
Date: 96-04-05 02:24:01 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

I don’t think the Military really cares about the art form of a ship.

Subj: Re:HFMoon
Date: 96-04-05 02:27:31 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

Thunderbolts are from the Wing Commander 3 game.

Subj: Re:Aesthetic value
Date: 96-04-05 02:29:02 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

And they seem to be rather fragile

Subj: Re:Star Furies
Date: 96-04-05 02:43:47 EDT
From: AHines4883
Posted on: America Online

Perhaps steering flaps for ionic engines?

Subj: Shadow Splinters
Date: 96-04-05 12:39:39 EDT
From: PfalzLyle
Posted on: America Online

During one of the strikes mounted by the Shadows against the Narn, I noticed a large number of smaller ships coming out of a shadow vessel. These looked like splinters, and were attacking. Of course I may need to go see my optometrist, but I wonder if anyone else has any thoughts on this matter.I don’t remember the specific episode, but those of us who saw it know what we saw…

Subj: Artificial Gravity
Date: 96-04-05 13:12:11 EDT
From: JVibber
Posted on: America Online

<< Delenn said that the White Star used magetic/gravimetric propulsion, meaning that they can bend space-time, and can probably control the time dialation to some extent. >>

Interestingly enough, time dilation hasn’t come up in this show yet. In fact, no relativistic effects have been mentioned, as I recall. This is pretty standard for most space-based science fiction programs; but considering how much B5 tries to be scientifically accurate, it’s a little surprising not to get even a throw-away line about it.

On the other hand, they spent about 4 months trying to explain the physics of what happened in Sheridan’s free-fall out of the shuttle, and how he would meet the ground wheeling past at about 60 mph and probably be swatted flat by a tree or the side of a building. So I can see why they might shy away from anything that involves Einsteinian Special Relativity.
Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-05 17:21:37 EDT
From: Helo Wolf
Posted on: America Online

>>What about minefields inside hyperspace?<<

Remember hyperspace has it’s own type of gravity. Ships which become lost or crippled in hyperspace are pulled off course by it, which is why it is extremely hard finding disabled ships in hyper. If you wanted to mine hyperspace, the mines would have to use some form of propulsion, just to stay in place. This would make it easier to find the mines. Also, where would you place the minefield? In a normal shipping lane? This strategy would work better for the shadows than for us. This mines would then interfer with normal shipping thus isolating the worlds. It wouldn’t affect the shadows as much, since they have jump capability & don’t need or use jump gates. And since they don’t use jump gates, when they’re in hyper, they won’t be in the normal lanes, which have a defined start & stop. Mining an asteroid field, as Sheridan did, would be better.

Wolf

Subj: Re:Shadow Splinters
Date: 96-04-05 19:56:00 EDT
From: CPsyop
Posted on: America Online

PfalzLyle

>>During one of the strikes mounted by the Shadows against the Narn, I noticed a large number of smaller ships coming out of a shadow vessel. These looked like splinters, and were attacking. Of course I may need to go see my optometrist, but I wonder if anyone else has any thoughts on this matter.I don’t remember the specific episode, but those of us who saw it know what we saw…<<

I believe that the Shadow ships are able to “grow” a type of drone/fighter.

Morgul
Sine Pari
Airborne All The Way!

Subj: Re:Spees of White Star
Date: 96-04-05 20:14:08 EDT
From: Chris8392
Posted on: America Online

You could survive 10 g in quick bursts.
Subj: Re:HFMoon
Date: 96-04-05 22:49:30 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Thunderbolts are from the Wing Commander 3 game.<<

They are also the name of those big, ugly, heavily-armed Starfury variations seen a great deal in “Shattered Dreams”

Subj: New Starfuries
Date: 96-04-06 03:06:15 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

In the last episode, ‘Severed Dreams’, a new fighter appeared. I think that it was called the thunderbolt, and I was wonder what it can do, that the regular starfuries can’t. I was also wondering if anyone had any guesses as to it’s stats.

Subj: Re:New Starfuries
Date: 96-04-06 19:56:06 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

The new Star Furies have one major rapid fire cannon. Racks for four missles are also provided under the lower wing. They also have the ability of atmospheric flight as was saw in the Mars attack. They have air foils behind the engine nozzles that fold out in atmospheric flight for stability and then fold inward in space, presumably for thrust vectoring. They are larger then the B5 Star Furies so I assume they are less agile and perhaps slower. Each EA destroyer had a compliment of Thunderbolts in “Severed Dreams” so I assume they make up the fighter squadrons of the majority of the destroyers.

Subj: Re:New Starfuries
Date: 96-04-06 23:10:57 EDT
From: JBRocky
Posted on: America Online

The new starfuries were only on the “loyal” if I saw it correctly. So mabey only the Presidents most loyal forces have them.

Subj: Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-07 02:05:49 EDT
From: YouhnGonzo
Posted on: America Online

Now that we have had the chance to see the Earth Force ships in full action a few comments are necessary.

1) The theory that the lack of artificial gravity would reduce the ships combat effectiveness appears to be totally groundless. While a lack of artificial gravity may be an annoyance in peace time it doesn’t effect the ships ability to absorb or dish out punishment. The Earth Force destroyers and whatever those smaller ships were (frigates or possibly older Hyperion classl cruisers?) appeared to have weapons at least as powerful as the Narn and Centarui ships we had seen earlier. In fact it took multiple volleys from B5 and the Alexander to knock out the Earth ship. A single Time on Target broadside from B5 was sufficient to slag that Centauri Battle Cruiser.

2) Love those new heavy fighters they used to bomb Mars. Did anybody notice those missile racks? Considering the number of fighters the Earth Force Destroyers could launch and figuring on four missiles per fighter the barrage that would be released should be enough to at least force a Shadow Cruiser to break of the fight in order to evade.

3) Finally there is the fact that the loyalists (Clark’s Forces) lost a decisive battle. Remember most of the loyalist forces are only going along with the president because they believe that they will be killed if they don’t. However if joining the president means meeting death at the hands of the Alexander, being sacrificed in futile attacks on B5, or winding up on the wrong end of a Mimbari cruiser squadron, captains may now think twice before following Clark’s orders.
In contrast the commanders of the Rebel forces know that surrender means death to themselves and the people of the colonies they protect. As the Churchill demonstrated the Rebels are fanatical in their determination. With Mimbari ports providing a source of replenishment and repair they will eventually be able to demoralize the loyalists. Then without the fleet to guard him Clark is doomed.
The only flaw with this plan is if the Shadows intervene directly on Clark’s side. We know that members of the loyalist upper staff has had contact with the Shadows. Obviously if the Shadows show up the loyalist fleet is the least of the Rebels problems. Of course the Shadows will show up, cause after all this is a Soap Opera in Space. The rebels hanging on the verge of defeat makes such a good plot line that I doubt the producers will be able to pass it up.
Gonzo

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-07 02:32:59 EDT
From: DaveShufon
Posted on: America Online

<<The only flaw with this plan is if the Shadows intervene directly on Clark’s side. We know that members of the loyalist upper staff has had contact with the Shadows.>>

That’s IF the Shadows will help out Clark. I have a feeling that they’ll be pi##ed off at Clark if/when they find out that he found one of their ships on Ganemede and tried to keep it for himself, instead of calling them in to retrieve it. Besides, I think they may have alread got what they wanted. Earth Alliance is embroiled in a civil war.

This is along with the over-reaching Centauri, the defeated Narns, the Non-Aligned worlds fighting amongst themselves, and the Minbari Grey Council divided (ok, no proof of Shadow involvement there). It’s just one more thing to soften up resistance for when the Shadows finally make their move.

Dave

Subj: Omega Class Destroyer design
Date: 96-04-07 13:25:37 EDT
From: SirinRohee
Posted on: America Online

Is it just me, or do the omega class destroyers look like the Alevi Leonov from the movie 2010?

Subj: Re:Tactics and weapons
Date: 96-04-07 15:33:42 EDT
From: KeithPrest
Posted on: America Online

Someone pointed out that in the B5 universe shields don’t exist- so far. Anyone who played Traveler might remember Sandcasters. Essentially you just shoot out a load of sand or other particulate matter. Any laser aimed at you has to expend energy to burn through it. A cheap and easy form of shield. Of course then there’s the problem of maneuvering through this floating garbage, maybe a charged field can disperse it enough.
Subj: Re:New Starfuries
Date: 96-04-07 15:53:31 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

I have the episode on tape JBRocky, the Thunderbolt-class Star Furies were based on all the Omega-class destroyers, regardless of loyalty.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-07 17:14:20 EDT
From: DSchofi303
Posted on: America Online

The ”torpedo” mentioned is actually fighter ships. Recall the episode where G-Kar is being chased back to the jump gate by them when he went to check out Za-Ha-Dom. In this episode, shadows collect them in a sphere and” fire” them in the direction of a enemy from their own large star ships to engage like vessels of the enemy, in this case ” the Narn”.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Cruisers
Date: 96-04-07 22:15:42 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

<< The Hyperion had what looked like partical cannons, or small mass drivers. >>

Nope! Mass drivers are outlawed by every civilized government…
You KNOW how Lord Refa (as in REFA MADNESS) replied…

Macker

Subj: Re:New Starfuries
Date: 96-04-07 22:17:53 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

<< The new starfuries were only on the “loyal” if I saw it correctly. So mabey only the Presidents most loyal forces have them. >>

Not anymore! I’d say B5 will get whatever surviving fighters the Churchill had…

Macker

Subj: Re:Omega Class Destroyer des
Date: 96-04-08 10:53:35 EDT
From: BYapes
Posted on: America Online

Yeah, it does.

Any comments? :-)

BYapes
Brian Yaple

Subj: Cap Ship (fighters)
Date: 96-04-08 15:54:14 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

I think that the Hyperion Class Heavy Crusiers have one squadron, and that the Omega Class Destroyers have two squadrons, am I right? Also, I think that there are 9-10 fighters in a squadron, is that right?

Subj: Re:Cap Ship (fighters)
Date: 96-04-08 23:44:26 EDT
From: RRamos2363
Posted on: America Online

You are right about the amount per squadron but I think that the destroyers have more than two squadrons . It looks to me like three or four.

Subj: Re:Omega Class Destroyer des
Date: 96-04-09 01:18:07 EDT
From: SarahACnnr
Posted on: America Online

It’s not just you.

Subj: Re:New Starfuries
Date: 96-04-09 13:41:53 EDT
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

No, the Churchill and Alexander had them too.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-09 13:46:08 EDT
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<However if joining the president means meeting death at the hands of the Alexander, being sacrificed in futile attacks on B5, or winding up on the wrong end of a Mimbari cruiser squadron, captains may now think twice before following Clark’s orders.>

Good point. The two remaining destroyers turned tail in a big hurry. I wonder if a second “Battle of The Line” is brewing. This time the Rangers versus the Shadows.

Subj: Re:Omega Class Destroyer desig
Date: 96-04-09 15:13:06 EDT
From: Yeenorm
Posted on: America Online

Yes, I believe it was intentional. An homage, of sorts, to the movie.

norm

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-09 16:14:31 EDT
From: SJ20
Posted on: America Online

Nuking a shadow ship may be a good way to kill it, but I’d hate to see any mutant varities of that ship. It’s bad enough already!

SJ20
Subj: Re:Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-09 18:59:06 EDT
From: PThayer759
Posted on: America Online

Maybe the mine thing launched alot of fighter craft at the Narns.

Subj: Re:Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-09 19:08:20 EDT
From: PThayer759
Posted on: America Online

Wouldn’t this just give the Shadows an ides. They seam to be clever aliens so this idea might be bad.
Subj: Vorlons
Date: 96-04-09 19:17:37 EDT
From: PThayer759
Posted on: America Online

Why don’t the Vorlons get more involved in the coming war?

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-09 22:25:08 EDT
From: Drew JFK
Posted on: America Online

The EA Omega Class Destroyers seem to be the most powerful earth ships yet, but are not a match for the other races. While the cannons and laser weapons on the ships did indeed pack a punch, you must note that their firing range was extremely limited. The Centauri Battlecruiser that attacked B5 in “The Fall of Night” was able to fire on and hit B5 with great force from a great distance. The EA destroyers, on the other hand needed to come fairly close to the enemy to strike. The EA ships also appear to be slower than ships of the other races. By the time the earth ships could be within firing range, they would have already sustained considerable damage.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-09 23:05:54 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

You are right, EA forces have a very limited main weapon range, and targeting, but it seems that one major shot with that weapon, and an enemy ship is put out of action, mabye for good. The Omega Class Destroyer’s major gun doesn’t seem to be a turrent though, unlike the Centari, so it would be hard for fighters to take out it’s weapon systems. I think that if an EA strike force had enough fighter cover, they’d hard to destroy. It seems to me that the Omega Class Destroyer is an anti-capital ship vessal, while the Centari’s main weapon’s systems seem better for taking out fighters. The Narn’s, or what’s left of them, Heavy Crusier seemed the least advanced of all the major races. The Mimbari, on the other hand, could probably destroy the entire fleet of EA Destroyers if they wanted to.

Subj: Re:Vorlons
Date: 96-04-09 23:06:58 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

Very good question. The only answer that I can think of is that they really don’t have the power they want us to believe they do.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-10 00:29:41 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

We’ve seen the EA Destroyers in battle four know. (I’m excluding the little White Star chase) The first was the Aggammemnon aginst the Strieb vessel. The Aggy dropped out of hyperspace and with the support of fighters, toasted the Streib. You’ll recall the Aggy destroyed the Strieb ship after Ivonova ordered it, implying it was so wasy they were toying with the ship. The second battle was a hazy view from a bar TV. The destroyers were sorrounded and attacked by other destroyers. The third was the battle between the Clarkestown and the Alexander. You’ll recall the Alexander destroyed the Clarkestown again in one shot. The commanding officer was reluctant to kill EA officers and crew. The fourth was the huge battle by B5. This battle, i think was tacticaly a bit odd. The first enemy destroyer was rammed by the Churchill. There was no defensive fire from the portside laser cannons (six on turrets) and there was no effort to move out of the way. The Roanoke was attacked much the same way with little or no defensive fire.

We’re not seeing the Destroyers at full potential. The Strieb did no damage to the Aggy and was kept alive so the prisoners could be rescued. The rebel destroyers were reluctant to destroy fellow humans, and in the B5 battle, the enemy destroyers seemed to be concentrating more on the fighters and the station then paying attention to the rebel destroyers. The Alexander could have closed to firing range most damaging to the other ship, not necesarily the maximum firing range. When we see the Omega-class ships open up with all 18, yes 18 laser batteries, it just might do a little more damage.

Subj: Re:They’re alive…they can di
Date: 96-04-10 01:14:53 EDT
From: DvdCnrd
Posted on: America Online

Continuing this thought. The Shadow ships that were found on Mars and Io (Was it Io?) weren’t damaged. The way to defeat the Shadows is to defeat the Shadows, not their ships. It will, I suspect, take every trick we have to win, but using high doses of radiation to kill the pilot should do the job quite nicely.

Subj: Re:Vorlons
Date: 96-04-10 02:48:00 EDT
From: KFinn69
Posted on: America Online

The Vorlons will surprise you my friend! ;^) #3*1*5#@$!

Subj: Re:TV 38 in Boston????
Date: 96-04-10 10:24:10 EDT
From: J E BOMAN
Posted on: America Online

It is still on at 10:30 on Sunday nights. You can also find it on the Fox network at 7 pm on Saturday nights (new episodes). J E Boman

Subj: Narn Heavy Cruiser is cool
Date: 96-04-10 10:24:27 EDT
From: EPSILON 3
Posted on: America Online

Out of all the “Younger races” ships I loved the Narn cruisers. They were a neat shape and heavely armed.

Epsilon 3

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-10 13:35:57 EDT
From: BHSTUDENTS
Posted on: America Online

The shadow ship that split up was the main battle cruiser and the parts that flew off were sepate combat ships.

Subj: Earth Ships
Date: 96-04-10 20:06:11 EDT
From: JOSEPOTY
Posted on: America Online

Have you noticed that Earth Alliance ships are so rough looking. All other allien reacews have ships that flow with colors. EA ship really look sort of like a tin can.

Subj: Re:Spees of White Star
Date: 96-04-10 21:34:57 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

At the Space Center, Alamogordo, New Mexico, is the rocket sled that was regularly used to test the limits of human endurance. Maj. Stapp endured g-forces over 60gs on a fairly regular basis. The Guiness Book of World Records shows that a person who fell out of an airplane without a parachute suffered a momentary g force over 200 gs when hitting the ground and survived.

The human body is fairly durable, but we can’t generally be useful at over 9 gs.

Subj: Re:Narn Heavy Cruiser is coo
Date: 96-04-10 21:42:38 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

The Narn Heavy Crusier dosen’t have that many weapons batteries but it does have at least one major, and strong gun.

Subj: Re:TV 38 in Boston???
Date: 96-04-10 22:32:20 EDT
From: Xrayzulu0
Posted on: America Online

the times that you need are as follows: sunday @ 0200, and between 1900 and 2230.
it is on tv 50 @ 1700
Subj: EA ships
Date: 96-04-11 00:17:12 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Because after the Earth/Minbari war, Earth was more interested in creating functional ships than pretty ones.

Besides, I think they are beautiful. What an elegant solution to the problem. An engineering triumph. And instead of the enemy saying “ooohhh….. ahhhh…” at the design, it says “don’t screw with me”.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-11 00:31:07 EDT
From: Airpgh
Posted on: America Online

But the leadership is on the homeworld. Kill it and the others are aimless for centuries

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-11 16:18:04 EDT
From: RAVENSPK
Posted on: America Online

Have only seen two weapons used by the shadows. #1 a partical beam, and #2 some kind of missile they used to destroy the jump gates, preventing the Narn’s escape. I agree with Archer C1 that what the shadow ship let loose was a cluster of small fighters. I suspect that the partical beam that was used by the machine on eplson 3 to destroy the outcasts will or should become part of the white stars arsenal.

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-04-11 21:15:10 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

<< #1 a partical beam, and #2 some kind of missile they used to destroy the jump gates, preventing the Narn’s escape. I agree with Archer C1 that what the shadow ship let loose was a cluster of small fighters. I suspect that the partical beam that was used by the machine on eplson 3 to destroy the outcasts will or should become part of the white stars arsenal. >>

#1 is a slicer beam.
#2 is not a missile. It’s an energy weapon which destabilizes jump points.
And Epsilon III’s beam weapon ain’t no slicer…it’s a fraggin’ DISINTEGRATION BEAM!! Read my previous post on this..

Macker

Subj: Re:EA Ships
Date: 96-04-12 00:00:00 EDT
From: Luke Bucci
Posted on: America Online

The EA ships reflect US airplanes and ships from WWII and beyond. While Japanese and German ships were more aesthetically pleasing to the eye, USN ships looked more functional (and since we won, were more functional). B5 simply carries the pragmatic to outer space and more extreme, portraying a very realistic picture of what EA ships would look like, given the relative newness of space travel for EA. Either someone did their homework, or is an avid WWII fan.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-12 03:52:21 EDT
From: APEXFTMYER
Posted on: America Online

I believe that the Centarie ships will end up in the arsonal of the Narns by being defeted by the shadows.

Subj: Re:Narn Cruisers
Date: 96-04-12 15:07:42 EDT
From: Yeenorm
Posted on: America Online

In the novel, “Blood Oath”, there is a small description of what a Narn war cruiser looks like on the inside. Basically, all major areas are located on the same level, each with thier own separate power supplies. The Narn perceive them to be extremely effiecient and I would agree. On the show, the crew are always strapped down which suggests there is no or little gravity (but don’t worry, the Narn are so rugged, they feel no ill effects).

Norm
Subj: Tactics, Weapons, Shadows
Date: 96-04-12 19:04:33 EDT
From: BouncEagle
Posted on: America Online

Hiya!
The shadows have much more than the slicer beam. Remember the narn attack on the centauri colony, the shadow ships fired the little ball things that split apart and turned into a lot of ships? Those were neat. The EA ships are functional looking, but why wouldn’t they be designed for more agility and speed like the White Star?
What is the white star capability as compared to a normal Mimbari Cruiser? I know it is faster, but other than that, (i.e. weapons, shields, etc.) I don’t know much about it.
The battle between the EA ships and Babylon 5 with the warship and the destroyer was awesome. And Delenn’s line was good too: “Be somewhere else!”

Subj: EF heavy crusiers
Date: 96-04-12 19:33:36 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

What ever happened to those old Earth Force Heavy Crusiers? Were they scrapped? I thought I saw one is ‘Severed Dreams’, but I’m not sure.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-12 23:48:38 EDT
From: Rick9719
Posted on: America Online

<<You’ll recall the Alexander destroyed the Clarkestown again in one shot. >>

Not really. That was after they “took the gloves off.” Look at that sceen again. They mention the battle has been going on for a while.

Also in the battle of b5. The Loyalists jumped in with 4 ships two Destroyers and two cruisers. We never saw the fate of the two cruisers, but they must have fled or been destroyed as when the second loyalist destroyer was destroyed, B5 proclaimed the space battle over (at least till the reinforcements arrived). Presumably the Churhill exchanged fire with the two Cruisers off camera. We never really saw how the Churchill was damaged and I believe JMS has stated that some of the battle was off camera.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-13 08:48:38 EDT
From: Solarmech
Posted on: America Online

A lot of the battle was off camera. Try and watch a real battle and you can get real confused, as The Fog Of War effect takes over. In a few navel battles some ships fired on ships of the same side. By the way the Omaga Class Cruiser is closer to a carrier than a full out battleship. Its weapons most likely do have as long a range as the Cent. Look at the range the Agy. hit the Strieb ship. (and she was not useing full fire power until the end)

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technology
Date: 96-04-13 13:59:11 EDT
From: ZippyFrog
Posted on: America Online

I think that maybe the Vorlons broke away from the shadows and fought them, thereby having the smae technology, assuming what you say is true. Or, they might have gotten their technology in the same time period, kind of like how Earth Dome, the Narn Regime, the Centaurit Alliance, and the Membari have similar technology.
Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-13 14:34:09 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

I agree that the Omega Class Destroyers might be close to a carrier, but they do have a VERY powerful main weapon. The destroyers have 3 to 4 squadrons of fighters I believe. Most of the other ships that I’ve seen, besides the Narn, and the shadows, have a lot of little turrent weapons, the Omega Destroyers must have a few of them, but their major weapon looks VERY powerful. Their main weapon has little, or no aiming abilty, but it makes up for that with it’s power. It could probably hold it’s own pretty well agianst any enemy battle ship.

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technology
Date: 96-04-13 14:34:48 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

Very good point. Although, does anyone know if the Shadows are older than the Vorlons????

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technology
Date: 96-04-13 17:19:47 EDT
From: Wrassilon
Posted on: America Online

I forget the particular episode, but in describing the shadows to sheriden, Delenn once said “the shadows were old when even the first ones were young” or something to that effect. Of course, her source for that info was probably a vorlon, so in the context of this question, I guess that is less than trustworthy info.
Just tossing in my $.02,
–>Wrassilon

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technology
Date: 96-04-13 23:04:05 EDT
From: BouncEagle
Posted on: America Online

With such a powerful main weapon, couldn’t the EA omega class cruisers be at a bad disadvantage if the main weapon was destroyed?

Subj: EA destroyers
Date: 96-04-14 01:32:36 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

They would be at a great disadvantage. It seems to me that their main weapon is more of an interior weapon. It is shot out of a hole in the front starboard side of the ship (I think). I think that it would be hard to destroy it. Your right though, if it was destroyed they would be a definite disadvantage.

Subj: EA Destroyer weapons
Date: 96-04-14 15:48:36 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

Ladies and gentlemen, the destroyers have 18 particle beam weapons (also can be used as interceptors). If you have a tape of Severed Dreams you can see. There are four aft guns, two facing forward, and 12 along the hull. The hull mounted cannons are the same as the forward guns but are mounted on turrets and usually appear at a 45 degree angle to the base of the turret. They have only been fired twice. While the Aggamemnon was chasing the White Star, it fired with one of its lower hull canons. In the first firefight between EA ships, you could see them firing all over the place.

 

Subj: Re: EA ships
Date: 96-04-14 16:56:40 EDT
From: Ckekjk
Posted on: America Online

One of the things that I admire most about the EA ships on B5 is that they look like something that humans would ACTUALLY build, as opposed to the human ships on “the other show” which bear no particular relation to their funciton per se, or tho the physical needs of human spaceflight. I also wish to agree with an earlier posting that the Narns clearly must be immune to the effects of prolonged 0-g as they employ no rotating sections, lucky Narns!

Subj: Re:EA destroyers
Date: 96-04-15 02:31:33 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

If the main weapon were merely shot out of a hole, you wouldnt have to destroy it. Destroying any part of its path would be sufficient. This happened with the Giotto probe to Halley’s Comet- right before closest approach something smacked the video baffle tube- the perfectly working camera could no longer see because its protective tube had been smashed.

A laser that merely fired along the ship’s axis would be almost useless, considering how relatively small the targets are. Some sort of aiming mechanism would be necessary at the point the beam departed the ship- break that and you’ve broken the beam.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Destroyers
Date: 96-04-15 02:34:08 EDT
From: Xebecian
Posted on: America Online

Did anyone else see the twin capitol ship guns(Like B-5s capitol ship gun, you know the big oval one) on the front of the destroyers, which they used for long range attacks. B-5’s destroyed the centauri ship at medium to long range.
Subj: Ship Sizes
Date: 96-04-15 16:50:20 EDT
From: Samtheurge
Posted on: America Online

Since this shows start, I have had a problem with size of ships in B5. Just how big are they? After rewatching all the space battles that I have on tape, Severed Dreams in particullar, I would like to know just how big B5 is and all the Ships and Fighters of all the races, not to mention the planet below B5. In the Season 2 opening credits, Sheridan announces that B5 is five miles long. Somehow, I don’t see it. In SD, when the Minbari arrive, Their ships appear huge when compared next to B5… So just how big are they? I really wish someone could help me out?

Samtheurge

Subj: Re:Ship Sizes
Date: 96-04-15 17:05:31 EDT
From: BouncEagle
Posted on: America Online

The ships are huge, but that generally means they are very powerful. Unlike star trek, however, the ships rely heavily on fighters and other small ships to help defend them. In the battle between a Narn and a Centauri ship right outside of Babylon 5, when neither had deployed any fighters, the ships couldn’t do that much damage to each other without the other ships having time to fire back. It seems that much of the stratedgy is distraction and having more firepower.

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technology
Date: 96-04-15 19:24:34 EDT
From: TGreen1641
Posted on: America Online

The information that delenn has on the shadows would have come from other sources as well, not just the vorlons!

Subj: DESTROYERS AND HEAVY CRUISERS
Date: 96-04-15 20:26:22 EDT
From: EPSILON 3
Posted on: America Online

How many weapons are on EA destroyers and heavy cruisers (AGAMEMNON, HYPERION).

Epsilon 3

Subj: Re:EA destroyers
Date: 96-04-15 21:22:43 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

I was guess I was wrong about the fact that EA destroyers only have one main weapon, but even if they only had one, I don’t see a major problem. Fighters are to take out the small targets (mostly other fighters, and breaching pods), and the other cap ships wouldn’t be manuverable enough to evade the fire of the main weapon.

Subj: Re:DESTROYERS AND HEAVY CRUI
Date: 96-04-15 21:33:33 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

It seems that the ships have the following: (this is put together from what some people posted here, and from what I’ve found on the net)

DESTROYER:
fore: 2
both sides: 12 (turrents with 45 degree angle shots)
aft: 4
squadrons: 3-4 (probably)

total guns: 18

Heavy Crusier:
fore: 4 heavy gun enplacements
both sides: 2 turrents (two cannons on each)
dorsal surface: 3 turrents (two cannons on each
ventral surface: 3 turrents (one cannon on each)
squadrons: 1

total guns: 12

Subj: Fighters
Date: 96-04-15 21:43:29 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

1. Is the new EA fighter, the Thunderbolt, more manuverable then they starfury?

2. How good are our Thunderbolt, and Starfury, agiants the Narn Heavy ‘Frazi’ class Fighter, the Centari fighter, and the Mimbari fighter?

Subj: Re:Fighters
Date: 96-04-15 23:53:13 EDT
From: Xebecian
Posted on: America Online

I don’t think the Minbari have fighter, I know they have flyers, the thing Delenn uses, but I have never seen a fighter.

Subj: Re:Fighters
Date: 96-04-16 00:32:27 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

I pretty sure that the Mimbari used fighters in the first episode of this season, and I’m also pretty sure they used them before that also.

Subj: EF Destroyers
Date: 96-04-16 00:35:10 EDT
From: YouhnGonzo
Posted on: America Online

Some idea as to the construction of the Earth Force Destroyers can be gained by studying navel warship design during the inter war period 1918-1938. The various arms treaties as well as economic constraints, meant that Japan could not match the United States (their most likely enemy) on a battleship for battleship basis. So they developed new weapons, (the long lance torpedo and the armor piercing areal bomb) tactics, (night combat where they could close in to deliver their torpedoes and independent carrier strike groups) and the ships (cruisers carrying vast numbers of torpedoes in addition to cannon). Their mastery of these tactics was demonstrated at Pearl Harbor and Savo Island where inferior Japanese forces wiped out numerically superior if poorly trained American forces.
The same could be said of the Earth Force after the Mimbari Conflict. Earth Force could not hope to stand up to the Mimbari in a typical space battle. So they developed new weapons, such as those superior hole punching weapons that wiped out the Clarkston as well as the ability to launch large numbers of fighters. The disadvantage of the Earth Force heavy weapons is the fact that you have to aim the whole ship. This means that you have to close in to point blank range before firing all four forward tubes. Then do a quick turn and fire the rear tubes.
Tactics of this sort would account for the robustness of the EARTH FORCE Destroyers. They need to be tough in order to survive long enough to bring their heavy weapons into killing range. The large numbers of fighters exist to harass and distract the enemy while the Destroyers close in for the kill.
The killing power of the Earth Force weapons is not to be doubted. A single shot getting through the interceptors is capable of killing a cruiser. Compare this the Centari and Narn who pounded on each other with multiple vollies in order to achieve a kill. The maneuverability of the Earth Force ships, if not the courage of their captains, was demonstrated when the Destroyers withdrew upon the arrival of the Mimbari Cruiser Squadron.
~Gonzo~

Subj: B 5 SHip to Ship Combat Game
Date: 96-04-16 06:56:10 EDT
From: Kaildian
Posted on: America Online

Hello,

Is anyone else out there interested in a tactical combat game, something for the table-top like battletech, but dealing with B 5 starships? The folks who do “Full Thrust” have a very good starship combat system that could easily be adapted. Hey, they might even be interested in working with JMS and company to develop a B 5 rules supplement for “Full Thrust,” or even a stand alone game… Further, maybe we could get really lucky and they would make miniature starships too!

That done, we could all get together and pound the tar out of each other using the vessels of our favorite race.

Chris R

Subj: Re:Fighters
Date: 96-04-16 12:05:36 EDT
From: Archer C1
Posted on: America Online

<I don’t think the Minbari have fighter, I know they have flyers, the thing Delenn uses, but I have never seen a fighter.>

First season episode “The Sky Full Of Stars,” flashback to the Battle Of The Line. They are a triangular ship, a lot like the Defender-class TIE fighter in the game TIE FIGHTER.

Subj: A quick observation
Date: 96-04-16 16:48:57 EDT
From: SLV80
Posted on: America Online

Minbari ships look like big blue angelfish, and Vorlon ships look like sqid. Just my two cents. :)

Subj: Re:A quick observation
Date: 96-04-16 18:50:25 EDT
From: BouncEagle
Posted on: America Online

If everybody else has fighters, why don’t the Mimbari? Didn’t in one of the early episodes where sinclair was being tortured, it showed lots of little mimbari ships and a few big ones. He tried to ram his starfury into the big one?
As for where Delenn got her information, she could also have it from the Mimbari. They were in the last shadow-other races war, and even the Narns have some information about the shadows, as you recall G’kar telling to the captain when they got the video tape from the starfury lost in hyperspace.

Subj: Re:B 5 SHip to Ship Combat Gam
Date: 96-04-16 21:19:22 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

<< Is anyone else out there interested in a tactical combat game, something for the table-top like battletech, but dealing with B 5 starships?>>

Sure! I volunteer! I worked on both SFB (creator of the ISC) and FASA’s Star Trek system (playtester)…

Macker

Subj: Ron Canada
Date: 96-04-16 21:21:04 EDT
From: MacManJWS
Posted on: America Online

JMS:
Just saw Ron Canada play a Klingon attorney (what *was* the Narn word for them!?) on the DS9 episode “Rules of Engagement.”

Hmmm…I hope he didn’t pull a Foxworth…did he?

Macker

Subj: B5 Combat Simulator?
Date: 96-04-16 21:55:59 EDT
From: GTolwyn
Posted on: America Online

Does anyone know if there will be a combat simulator comming out? I think it’d be cool to launch in a Star/Thunderbolt Fury and take out a swarm of enemy fighters.

Subj: Re:B 5 SHip to Ship Combat G
Date: 96-04-16 23:16:13 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

Thats a great idea!!!!!!!

Subj: b5 ships
Date: 96-04-16 23:23:41 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

To everyone: these are my best guesses for the stats of B5 ships, if anyone disagrees, or has some other info, please just post here.

 

SHIPS:

Humans:
Destroyer:
size: medium
type: capitol ship
fore: 2 particle beam guns
sides: 12 particle beam turrets (1 per turret, 45 degree angle)
aft: 4 particle beam guns
squadrons: 4
Hull: Medium

Heavy Crusier:
size: small
type: capitol ship
fore: 4 heavy laser cannons
sides: 2 laser cannon turrets (2 per turret)
top: 3 laser cannon turrets (2 per turret)
bottom: 3 laser cannon turrets (1 per turret)
squadrons: 1
Hull: Weak

Starfury:
size: fighter size
type: non-atmospheric space fighter
fore: 8 light laser cannon
speed: fast
maneuverability: fast
hull: fighter sized (medium)

Thunderbolt
sized: fighter size
type: atmospheric space fighter
fore: 1 rapid fire light laser cannon
speed: fast
maneuverability: medium
hull: fighter sized (medium)

Narn:
Light Crusier:
size: very large
type: capitol ship
all else unknown

Heavy Crusier:
size: medium
type: capitol ship
fore: 1
all else unknown

Frazi:
size: fighter sized
type: heavy atmospheric space fighter
fore: 1
speed: medium
maneuverability: medium

Shadow:
War Ship:
fore: 1
1 fighter projectile
1 jump point destablilzer
all else is unknown

Fighter:
size: fighter
all else is unknown

Mimbari:
War Crusier:
type: capitol ship
all else is unknown

Fighter:
sized: fighter sized
all else is unknown

White Star Class:
size: small
type: small capital ship

Centari:
Battle Crusier:
size: very large
type: capitol ship
all else unknown

War Ship:
size: medium
type: capital ship
fore: at least one targetable cannon.
all else is unknown
Fighter
size: fighter sized
speed: fast
maneuverability: fast
all else is unknown

Subj: Re:B5 Combat Simulator?
Date: 96-04-16 23:24:49 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

I agree with you, I think that a B5 fighter combat simulator would be very cool. I don’t think that they’re coming out with one soon though :(

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-04-17 00:09:20 EDT
From: ACaldw9911
Posted on: America Online

>>Oh, I almost forgot. If one was to use the Cortez as a torch, shouldn’t we really re-name it the “Angel’s Pencil”?

(Sorry, Niven Fan joke……)

(fellow Niven fan)
Tell me has anyone one read the Man-Kzin wars series, if not look there are some very interesting Sub-Luminal tactics hidden in there such as the age old “Angels- Pencil” trick and the toss some garbage in the path of a ship going at .7c… at that speed even with AG it takes a helluvalot of energy to turn the sucker, not too mention the momentum that would carry a ship into the dust cloud anyway.

Subj: Re:B 5 SHip to Ship Combat G
Date: 96-04-17 10:41:24 EDT
From: CBSCT
Posted on: America Online

Sure, I would be interested too… It’s been quite a while but I still have a large collection of desktop military simulation games… I’ve sort of moved onto to the PC to play them now… the AI of a PC(while not the greatest challenge) allows a solitaire game…

Subj: Re:B5 Combat Simulator?
Date: 96-04-17 10:42:51 EDT
From: CBSCT
Posted on: America Online

I too would be interested…!!! Sort of a Wing Commander 4, but with the ships of Babylon 5…

Subj: Re:B5 Combat Simulator?
Date: 96-04-17 16:57:09 EDT
From: BouncEagle
Posted on: America Online

If they did make a combat simulator, I would hope it would have the same great graphic effects that the show has. Imagine being one of the fighters from that episode when the EA cruisers attacked the EA ships and B5 as one of the starfuries!
Other than that, there’s been a lot of talk about the Narns not having rotating sections. The mimbari don’t either, but they have artificial gravity, and neither do the Centauri. I don’t remember if the Vorlon ships do, but I would assume they have artificial gravity. The shadow ships also don’t spin. It appears to me, that the only ships that do spin for gravity are the EA destroyers and cruisers, Do the other races have artificial gravity, or do their ships spin and I just can’t see it?

Subj: gravity
Date: 96-04-17 19:05:30 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

The Centari do have artifical gravity, without rotary sections, but I don’t know if their War Ship is equiped with artifical gravity. The Narn don’t have artifical gravity, as far as I know, but they aren’t affected by long term effects of micro-gravity.

Subj: Re:A quick observation
Date: 96-04-17 20:03:55 EDT
From: LDuarte127
Posted on: America Online

Remember the Episode where the renegade mimbari ship tries to pick a fight with B5… they deployed mimbari fighters first. Therefore, the answer is Mimbari do have fighters but they do not like to use them often or not all ships have them.
Subj: Re:B5 Combat Simulator?
Date: 96-04-17 21:18:46 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Do the other races have artificial gravity, or do their ships spin and I just can’t see it?<<

The Narns do not have Artificial Gravity, they just work in microgravity conditions when the ship is not under thrust.

Subj: Re:B5 Combat Simulator?
Date: 96-04-18 22:23:54 EDT
From: JOHN DANT
Posted on: America Online

>>Do the other races have artificial gravity, or do their ships spin and I just can’t see it?<<

>>The Narns do not have Artificial Gravity, they just work in microgravity conditions when the ship is not under thrust.<<

Some alien ships could have shielded rotating sections similar to Discovery (right name?) in 2001 ASO

Subj: Ships
Date: 96-04-20 14:42:51 EDT
From: JFTReed
Posted on: America Online

It seems to me that each race expresses its culture and attitude in the design of their ships. The Mimbari ships are fast, manuverable,pardon the spelling, and mysterious. They seem to sacrifice brute force for agility. The Narn and Centauri are more of a balance between agility and firepower. The Shadow ship immediately says ‘I’m a bad guy and I’m going to eat you for lunch’. The Vorlons are just coolness to the tenth degree. Earth’s ships are lean on the side of naked force. They wouldn’t win a beauty prize, but they do the job.

Subj: Re:b5 ships
Date: 96-04-21 09:36:44 EDT
From: TyroneB2
Posted on: America Online

Do you also have an idea about the stats on the EA Explorer class vessels?

Subj: Re: Ships
Date: 96-04-21 14:48:27 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

All I know about the Explorer Class Star Ship is that it’s the largest EA ship we’ve seen. It has rotation gravity. It’s main goals are exploration, and the construction of Jump Gates, so I would presume that it could make it’s own jump points. It can live off of it’s own resources for years at a time. Also, it is almost the size of B5, mabye three, four miles long.

Subj: Re:b5 ships
Date: 96-04-21 16:05:53 EDT
From: Frogzila
Posted on: America Online

Don’t forget that the thunderbolt also has missles.

The thing that is confusing to me is that as far as I can tell the Heavy Crusiers are weaker than the Destroyers. This would seem to be backwards.

When I see destroyers I get the impression that they are a cross between a Crusier/battleship and a Carrier.

Subj: Re:b5 ships/ship design
Date: 96-04-21 17:16:52 EDT
From: Dickeyj
Posted on: America Online

Is it just me, or do the EA ships resemble the Sulaco and even the Nostromo?

Subj: Re:b5 ships
Date: 96-04-21 18:06:16 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

I believe you are right in your assumtion, the Omega class Destroyer is at least a Crusier\Carrier. The Omega Class Destroyer might have been made after the Earth\Mimbari war, thus the EA had a better idea of how to bulid their ships, and what to equip them with. But, your right the Destroyer is definetly better thant the Heavy Crusier.

Subj: Re:b5 ships
Date: 96-04-21 18:08:20 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

The Thunderbolt did have four missile racks, I think, but we don’t know if those missiles could be used in space. The missiles might just have been for bombing. Which I admit would be strange. But, I didn’t see any Thunderbolts using missiles on each other is ‘Severed Dreams’.

Subj: Re:b5 ships
Date: 96-04-21 18:18:35 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

For a missile to be useful in space, it would have to accelerate faster than the ship that fired it, and explode very messily (lot o’ shrapnel). I would assume that those on the Thunderbolts were too cheap and small to be much use in space (unless they’re h-bombs or squirtbombs (is that right?)).

Also, I’ve finally read the Man-Kzin Wars, so I get the Angel’s Pencil joke now.

Subj: RE:re:b5 ships/ship design
Date: 96-04-22 00:33:23 EDT
From: SPLEENEX
Posted on: America Online

The Sulaco,maybe.They look more like the Russian ship in 2010 “Oddessy Two” (a movie definately worth renting if you havn’t seen it!).

Subj: Re:b5 ships
Date: 96-04-23 07:33:58 EDT
From: RRamos2363
Posted on: America Online

I liked the way it was put and please keep looking for some more info.

Subj: Re:b5 ships
Date: 96-04-23 14:42:41 EDT
From: Keytov
Posted on: America Online

My best ships in B5 in terms of looks are the narns. They look like a ship any captain would be proud of. My best ship ever would be the Star Destroyers in Star Wars and the Super Star Destroyers, they look like what a real space craft would probly look like of that size. I never liked the (trek) ships because there so unrelistic and even worse the command structure stinks. A doctor is aloud to fly the ship? Moronic.

Subj: Mixed up classes
Date: 96-04-23 15:38:26 EDT
From: Rep Newt
Posted on: America Online

In todays navy, a destroyer is a small, relativly lightly armed escort vessel. A Heavy Cruiser is a class of vessel just uder a battleship. Why then is the EA Destroyer-class starship several times larger then the EA Heavy cruiser?

Subj: Re:Mixed up classes
Date: 96-04-23 18:26:57 EDT
From: SPLEENEX
Posted on: America Online

“Destroyer” sounds more menacing than “heavy cruiser”.

Subj: Re:Mixed up classes
Date: 96-04-23 18:34:14 EDT
From: BouncEagle
Posted on: America Online

I don ‘t know, I think I like the look of the Centauri Heavy Cruisers the best. The one episode where it fired at both the narn and b5 at the same time, incredible!

Subj: Re:b5 ships
Date: 96-04-23 19:01:10 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

you know, I kinda like the Mimbari Cruiser. If you look at it right it looks like a pirannah (spelling?).

Subj: WHAT
Date: 96-04-24 00:47:49 EDT
From: JohnK7000
Posted on: America Online

What is the differience betwen B4 and B5
B1.

Subj: B5 Ships, stats, games
Date: 96-04-24 01:04:42 EDT
From: HARDLEC
Posted on: America Online

The best way to have some fun with B5 ships in a war game would be to take FULL THRUST and design your own ships. Full Thrust is designed to be adaptable and to fit the fiction. It is not likely that B5 productions will licience a game until the show has run it’s course. The sourse book and stats would be too revealing.

EA took a pounding in the Earth Minbari war. Few big ships survived. Those that did were obsolete. The Omega class was a post war design. So were the frigates (i.e. churchill) that have shown up. The new designs are the result of lessons hard learned.

In History the HMS Dreadnaught (1909), the first modern battleship, was 17,000 tons and could do 20 knots. The US Des Moines (1945) class heavy cruisers were 17,000 tons, and could do 32 knots. A cruiser carries less armor than a battleship, but in combat the old battleship would have had a hard time dealing with the cruiser. Des Moines had radar and could fire over the horizon, making Dreadnaught a dead duck.

Battleship, cruiser, and destroyer were terms codified in the Washingto treaty of 1920. After WWII navies were free to call ships whatever they wanted to. A Ticonderoga class cruiser is built in the hull of a Spruance class destroyer. Some frigates are bigger than cruisers. The “through deck cruiser” is a small aircraft carrier, but parliment would fund cruisers, not carriers. The Omega class destroyer may indeed be a larger, more capable ship than a Hyperion class Heavy Cruiser.
Subj: DS9 VS. B5!
Date: 96-04-24 02:50:21 EDT
From: Kenpohi5
Posted on: America Online

While scanning the internet, I found one of thecoolest sites… Tigreclaw’s Sci-Fi Pages!!! There’s like ten of them, and one is a place where people vote on topics. Often these subjects pit DS9 and Babylon 5 against eachother.
This week (4-24-96) the topic is: The Defiant vs. Whitestar! Unfortunatly the Whitestar is looseing. COME ON PEOPLE! We need to lend some B5 fan support here!!! I’ve allready voted and can’t vote again so it’s up to you guys! Support the Whitestar!

Subj: DS9 VS B5+++
Date: 96-04-24 02:54:21 EDT
From: Kenpohi5
Posted on: America Online

While scanning the internet, I found one of thecoolest sites… Tigreclaw’s Sci-Fi Pages!!! There’s like ten of them, and one is a place where people vote on topics. Often these subjects pit DS9 and Babylon 5 against eachother.
This week (4-24-96) the topic is: The Defiant vs. Whitestar! Unfortunatly the Whitestar is looseing. COME ON PEOPLE! We need to lend some B5 fan support here!!! I’ve allready voted and can’t vote again so it’s up to you guys! Support the Whitestar!
“http.//www.sisna.com/users/tigreclaws/sci_fi3.htm”

Subj: Re:WHAT
Date: 96-04-24 17:21:31 EDT
From: RPillow
Posted on: America Online

JohnK7000,

The difference between B4 and B5 is that B4 is larger (or rather wider), has more capabilities, more powerful weapons (and a lot more of them), and better equipment/sensors.

RPillow

Subj: Re:WHAT
Date: 96-04-24 18:39:35 EDT
From: BouncEagle
Posted on: America Online

Why would B4 be more powerful?

Subj: Re:WHAT
Date: 96-04-24 19:00:08 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

The make B5 we needed support from other nations (money). With less money I bet EA chose not to put as many expensive weapons, and such on it.

Subj: Ships
Date: 96-04-24 20:56:16 EDT
From: Xebecian
Posted on: America Online

First I hate to say it but the Defiant would destroy the White Star, the reason is because the physics of the two different universes. Second my favroit looking ship is the “Galactica” because of its logical put together. On a Star Destroyer I never saw how or where the fighters launched from. The Vipers were unrelistic though, the same with the X-Wing and Tie Fighter.The most realistic fighter in Star Wars is the Y-Wing, noithing yet has beat the Star Fury though.

Subj: Re:B5 Ships, stats, games
Date: 96-04-24 21:03:34 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

B5 has already licensed a game to Chameleon Eclectic Entertainment. It’s supposed to be available this fall.

Subj: Other Ships
Date: 96-05-14 23:11:59 EDT
From: AlPosius
Posted on: America Online

Was the White Star the only ship the Forces of Light built? If not where are they. JMS mentioned that we’ll see the last surviving battlestar…..sorry wrong decade……Narn cruiser again so what other ships will we see. Will there be a Grand Fleet made up of rogue EA ships, Mimbari, Vorlon, FOL, etc??????

Subj: Re:Red Vorlon
Date: 96-05-17 00:24:05 EDT
From: JASONS5007
Posted on: America Online

I gatherd info about this on the internet on JMS speaks and JMS just said that it was just a different color nothing special, for variety.

Subj: Re:What is the Marie Celeste
Date: 96-05-18 05:06:19 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>I was wondering if anyone could answer me on what it is because Micro-Machines is making a model of the Marie Celeste.<<
It’s a spaceliner, a luxury or cruise ship that transports large amounts of people from one planet, outpost, or base to another.

Hard to find the exact correlation. Sort of a combination between a Boeing 747 and a cruise ship.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:Interludes&Examinations
Date: 96-05-18 05:12:44 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>> In this episode there is a short battle between a Shadow and a Vorlon fleet which is very interesting. When the Vorlons first come out of hyperspace, one of the regular sized cruisers fires a burst at one of the Shadow cruisers.<<

Notice that Vorlons use conventional jump points.

>> The Shadow ship is surrounded by some kind of energy field and starts to weaken.<<

I don’t really think that was a specific field, just a cool aftereffect of the weapon.

>> The Vorlon ship goes to full speed and rams right through the Shadow, tearing it into peices! Also later another Shadow cruiser fires a slicing shot at the one large Vorlon cruiser. An energy field forms around the front of the ship and the shot is deflected.<<
Seemed to me to be a burst-like directional field. It also looks like it can only protect the front of the ship, as another shot coming from the rear succeeds in penetrating the mothership’s defences.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:Interludes&Examinations
Date: 96-05-18 05:13:27 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>Agreed, I saw that too. It seems that the Vorlons shouldn’t have much trouble with the shadows, but I think that there’s something we don’t know.<<

I think the answer might lie a lot in numbers. The Shadows have them. The Vorlons don’t.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:Red Vorlon
Date: 96-05-18 05:18:15 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>Yeah, I noticed it was red, I also noticed there was a green one of the same class (you can see it just as the Vorlons are preparing to go to hyperspace, its above the red one). Waht I also thought was interesting was that the red one that rammed through the shadow vessel was about twenty times smaller than the largest class and it still kicked the shadow vessels butt<<

From what we here, there are different sized Shadow vessels. Delenn points that fact out. The same could very well apply to Vorlon vessels. The small fighter ships have noticable differences between each other.

>> (you can see the proportions I mentioned again when the Vorlons are about to go to hyperspace because the red ship passes under the Flagship).<<

Point: Vorlon motherships are *huge*. Much larger then Shadow vessels.

>> My question is, since each ship is made specifically for each Vorlon like Kosh’s transport, is there only one pilot (maybe pilot isn’t the word) for each ship. That’d be kind of strange if only one person piloted those huge ships.<<
Delenn never said *each* ship was made for a specific owner, just Kosh’s. However, taking into consideration what we know of the Shadows, there could be correlations with the Vorlons. The ship itself could make many of the operative desisions

 

Pumukl

Subj: New White Star
Date: 96-05-18 17:31:17 EDT
From: EINSTAIN
Posted on: America Online

Sheridan and others should create a fleet of ships like White Star and overun Shadows.
Destroy all their ship and kill them all.

Subj: Re:New White Star
Date: 96-05-18 17:37:30 EDT
From: JBRocky
Posted on: America Online

I disagree. It was Sheriden who destroyed the shadows not the White Star. Yes the ship made a diffrence but the Captain made far more. The oter White Stars would be destroyed without Sheriden. Even he has to use unorthadox tactics to win and he would eventuly loose.

Subj: Re:New White Star
Date: 96-05-19 17:32:31 EDT
From: JOKERr808
Posted on: America Online

Building a whole fleet of white star class ships is much easier said than done.

Subj: White Star Shields
Date: 96-05-19 18:08:57 EDT
From: Kessel5
Posted on: America Online

In War Without End Part 1 we learn that the White Star has the organic learning capability of Vorlon ships and has learned to create an energy field to dissipate energy weapons. We also learn that it has a forward battery that is a beam weapon and that it has two or three other types of pulse cannons. I wonder if there aren’t any other types of capablities we haven’t seen it use. So far the White star keeps impressing me, It’s turning out to be much more capable than I originally thought. The only flaw I see in the design is that it doesn’t seem to have any rear batteries, though I could be wrong.

Subj: Re:White Star Shields
Date: 96-05-20 00:20:27 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>In War Without End Part 1 we learn that the White Star has the organic learning capability of Vorlon ships and has learned to create an energy field to dissipate energy weapons. We also learn that it has a forward battery that is a beam weapon and that it has two or three other types of pulse cannons. I wonder if there aren’t any other types of capablities we haven’t seen it use. So far the White star keeps impressing me, It’s turning out to be much more capable than I originally thought. The only flaw I see in the design is that it doesn’t seem to have any rear batteries, though I could be wrong.<<
Much of this info was seen in the first part of the Severed Dreams trilogy of episodes, where we see the White Star firing both it’s main cannon and secondary guns on a Shadow vessel. It appears to have six secondary cannons that are used for rapid fire short range attacks, and a long range beam gun which is much more devastating (managed to sever the spine of a shadowship, something that took the Narns two or three heavy cruisers to accomplish), but either has has a long recharge time or a short range (why wasn’t it used to take out the fusion bomb? note that it was used to attack the shadowfighters at close range. In the first episode of the Severed Dreams trilogy we see something similar. The ‘Star attacks first with its gun emplacements, then with the main gun after it’s closer)
Pumukl

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-05-20 20:53:08 EDT
From: Alanva 01
Posted on: America Online

I have not seen missiles used in B5 other than star furies.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-05-20 20:56:38 EDT
From: Alanva 01
Posted on: America Online

If there is a ship that is about to kill you and you can’t stop it of course you will see it as a monstrous ship.

Subj: Flying Saucer
Date: 96-05-21 01:11:19 EDT
From: PacifComrc
Posted on: America Online

My wife & I noticed a flying saucer parked alongside B5 in several scenes. Does anyone know which race it belongs to? (Or maybe Gort stopped by the drive-up window for a In N Out Burger?). I’m glad someone decided to bring back the flying saucer for those of us with fond memories of the b&w late-nite sci-fi’s.
PS Great Show!

Subj: Re:Tactics & Weapons
Date: 96-05-21 03:56:52 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

Has anyone considered the fact that each large Shadow “cruiser” has the capability to spawn numerous small fighters which can then engage said missiles and leave the parent ship free to do some major stomping?

LoudonB

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technology
Date: 96-05-21 04:00:16 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

Many sci-fi stories seem to suggest that bio-technology is the ultimate in technological acheivement (look at a few good bits of anime, like Robotech or the Guyver). The Vorlons and the Shadows are members of the ancients, and their tech surpasses us mundane races many times over.

LoudonB

Subj: Re:They’re alive…they can
Date: 96-05-21 04:03:44 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

The ships are not alive, the beings that are fused into the structure of the ships are. Bacteria and the like have been around since far before sentient life. I beleive that the Shadows, have lived for a few millions of years, have long since devised a way of destroying such superficial attacks.

LoudonB

Subj: Re:Flying Saucer
Date: 96-05-21 04:08:33 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

Long ago in that one episode when the races were attempting to try and convict the Warworlder (I think that was her name), many of the Nonaligned worlds attempted to hold B5 hostage by sending a couple of their ships. One of those races sent saucers. Now that many races are helping to defend B5, the saucers are back.

LoudonB

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-05-21 18:11:18 EDT
From: SPLEENEX
Posted on: America Online

Exactly how big ARE the Minbari battle-cruisers (the ones that look like angel fish)?If you watch them as they float past the station, you will notice that even when they are well in the back-ground they look absolutely HUGE. This is a VERY rough estimate, but they’ve got to be at least .8 kilometers (.5 miles) long by about 1 kilometer tall (.6 miles), AT LEAST! Does anyone have any more concrete info on this?

Subj: Re:Flying Saucer
Date: 96-05-21 18:26:55 EDT
From: Xebecian
Posted on: America Online

Maybe Drassi?

Subj: Re:Flying Saucer
Date: 96-05-21 22:58:59 EDT
From: GeronimoDG
Posted on: America Online

They belong to the Vree, whoever the hell THEY are

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-05-22 13:31:32 EDT
From: RRamos2363
Posted on: America Online

they are not that big as length but they are big in height . they are 500meters in lenght and maybe 2000 or more for height as what I can see.

Subj: vorlon transport/destroyer
Date: 96-05-23 13:03:32 EDT
From: Daniel75
Posted on: America Online

Hey did anyone notice how those Vorlon destroyers (the red one too) are just like Kosh’s ship, but Kosh’s ship has always been described as a transport. Could Kosh’s ship have done what that Red one did?
Also…speaking of Kosh and his ship, why didn’t he go to his ship if he knew the shadows were going to attack him as soon as the Vorlons got involved? I mean a couple of those tentacle-gun thingys could’ve evened the odds against those 3 shadows. Why not get in the ship and split? Did he need to be a martyr (even though his death is being kept secret)? Is the replacement Vorlon gonna have some bodyguards?

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-23 19:10:52 EDT
From: NecRon 01
Posted on: America Online

Speaking of bodyguards, my only complaint about this great series is the lack of security surrounding the “main players”, ie, Sheridan, Delenn and Kosh. All three have been attacked/kidnapped/killed in the last 5 eps. And what about security for the other ambassadors? I know G’kar supposedly has a bodyguard, but i havent seen him in ages and Londo, Vir, etc. are always wandering the station enescorted. There are a couple of wars going on!!!! This is pretty inexcusable…

Subj: Stats Book for B5
Date: 96-05-23 19:51:27 EDT
From: Yado M
Posted on: America Online

What we need is a stats book for the ships of B5. It’d help us keep them straight.
Subj: Re:Stats Book for B5
Date: 96-05-23 21:39:24 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

Why didn’t Kosh run from the Shadows?

Because then he wouldn’t have been able to dramatically scream “FREEEEEEEEEDOM!”

Subj: Just comment
Date: 96-05-24 00:36:30 EDT
From: Joe2m
Posted on: America Online

earth forces are desgned alittle like the modern Navy in the U.S. Traditionally, while cruisers and battleships have more armor they had more fire power, destroyers had manueverabilty. Now destroyers are being built and combine stealth, speed and firepower into one package. Powered by computers, they control enormous missle firepwer. Of course this conjecture, but EA forces seem to be designed by this philosophy. Of course notheing wrong with seeing a battleship appear with every weapon that humans have showup. It would be kinda fun.
As far as armor, it seems that while force fields are not used (so far), the hull of every craft on the show has the ability to dissapate (spelling?) the energy applied to them when a hit occurs (much like todays’s crafts). The difference being the technology of the alloys or other materials that the hulls are made of. In the Vorlons case and probably other advanced races is that either intelligence or artificial intelligence tells the hull how best to compensate further hits on the hull.

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-24 01:32:34 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

B5 is a neutral station to resolve differences between different factions, waring or otherwise. To walk around with bodyguards is to let others know that you expect trouble, and that very well may mean trouble for you. With Kosh, he may not have known that the Shadows would come straight for him (Kosh not omniscient? How could it be?). We found out that Kosh was lashing out at Sheriden in fear, not punishment. Suddenly we see that the Vorlons have some very human qualities to them. They may be near gods, but they are still weak and do fear for the future.

LoudonB

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-26 05:11:35 EDT
From: Daniel75 2
Posted on: America Online

i didn’t say Kosh should run. I think he could’ve and should’ve put up a better fight…

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-26 15:14:59 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>I think he could’ve and should’ve put up a better fight…<<

How do you know what kind of fight he put up? How do you know that his ship would have help him in the slightest?

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-26 16:55:14 EDT
From: Daniel75 2
Posted on: America Online

his ship is a vorlon ship! i’d think that those tentacle thingy’s could’ve more than evened the odds or at leasted helped Kosh fight. At the very least it could’ve probably drawn at least one Shadow’s attention or made them duck for cover. 1 on 3? i think we’d all pretty much agree that even a vorlon can’t take 3 shadows. but kosh, with his ships help. i just might bet vorlon on that fight…

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-27 00:39:57 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Pretty darn confused!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-27 08:01:25 EDT
From: Solarmech
Posted on: America Online

Was Kosh going to live on the transport? That’s the only way it sould be able to help him. He diceded not to run and face death bravely. Besides the Shadows would have gotten to him before he would have gotten to his ship.

Subj: Tactics & Weapons Redux
Date: 96-05-27 10:05:35 EDT
From: Wuerthele
Posted on: America Online

Does anybody have any files gleaned off the internet talking about all this? If so, I’d really like to see them. There’s a lot of catching up to do…

-Wuerthele

Subj: to Wuerth
Date: 96-05-27 12:43:07 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

This is the jist of the technology area,
1. Shadows and Vorlons are most advanced as they are the old ones, they have organic based technology.
2. Somehow the Minbari are in a transition, they starting to get the hang of organic technology, (the White Star). They are second only to shadows and Vorlons.
3. The young races, human, centuri, on and on etc. have the basic technology you think of when you think of star wars or Space odyssey, humans and Centuris are supposedly the most advanced of the young races.

Personally I feel that this whole babylon five universe is based on time, each race marks a step in human revolution, eventually, the souls split into two, dark and light, shadows versus vorlons, the vorlons went back in time to get help from their ancestors, at that point the Minbari. (First great War) In turn the minbari looked even further back and got the very first of the humanoids in space, us. The only proof of this was that in the earth minbari war the minbari could have destroyed earth, they didn’t because they would be destroying their own home and their ancestors, the humans that did die in the war were direct ancestors of the vorlons which is why vorlons are so rare. (JUST A NOTHER OF MY THEORYS)
Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-27 16:15:02 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>his ship is a vorlon ship! i’d think that those tentacle thingy’s could’ve more than evened the odds or at leasted helped Kosh fight<<

Pure speculation. Besides, it might not have been within the “rules” they seem to be following.

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-28 13:33:19 EDT
From: DFields663
Posted on: America Online

The Vorlon new that the end was coming and accepted it. He could have done somethimg to stop it, but that was a part of what was needed to win this war. If you watch it, has a lot of biblical
parallels. If this is true he had to accept his fate.

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-28 18:18:28 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Ya, But I wish he would have wasted a few shadows first, it would have been fun.

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-28 19:41:15 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

You guys are all thinking about a human mindset. Kosh isn’t human. He might have had totally alien reasons for not running like heck. Honor? Who knows?
One thing nobody’s thought of (that I can see) is that maybe Kosh pulled a Puppeteer (sp?). He *knew* he would die, he knew he couldn’t escape, so he just let them finish him so it wouldn’t hurt nearly as much. Maybe he doesn’t like painful, lingering torture, and prefers the quick kind of death. Who knows?
Subj: HFMoon
Date: 96-05-28 19:43:07 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

Recently I posted in the Trek Captains area about the Gem’Haddar using a Neutronium Summer home. Do you read that board? Can you double-check my statements? Maybe you have more to add.. I am here to learn, oh master of cosmic knowledge.

Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-05-28 20:37:15 EDT
From: Dannyboy20
Posted on: America Online

noone said anythign about running! i said (with another name) that Kosh couldve fought better. True, it might not have been in the “rules” but i think the Vorlons done threw the rules away when they got into it. These rules always seemed to me like an unofficial aggreement. kinda like a “u leave me alone, i leave u alone” but doesn’t include the younger races (xcept maybe the humans…”they are not for u. leave this place”
as for the ship helping kosh fight being speculation?! speculation? looked like a working tentacle-gun thingy to me…maybe it’s a fake, but i dunno. and if it’s real, then i’ll bet it can burn a shadow down….
Maybe he needed to sacrifice himself, but it would seem more inspirational to me for Kosh to kick Morden and his “associates” all over the station…

Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-05-29 11:26:08 EDT
From: SSmith9644
Posted on: America Online

How do we know how well a fight Kosh put up, we never saw the actual fight. He could have killed a shadow or two, maybe there were just to many to fight. From what I saw in the reflection in Mordon’s mask (all the energy being exchanged) it looked like a pretty good fight to me.

Subj: Re:HFMoon
Date: 96-05-29 16:09:22 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Recently I posted in the Trek Captains area about the Gem’Haddar using a Neutronium Summer home.<<

I try to stay out of it, but I’ll check it out.

Subj: Re:HFMoon
Date: 96-05-29 18:02:51 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

SongEtc. thatnk you for giving that guy/girl what he neecs, for some reason I just don’t say anything that isn’t wrong when he/she is around.

Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-05-29 18:05:47 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Boy we sure need a lot of rules for a war, if they already threw out rules, who cares why he died, if he died at all. I did not see any trace of that angel, except a SUIT. How much do we know about Kosh to know for sure he is dead.

Subj: Re:HFMoon
Date: 96-05-29 18:22:39 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Oh, sorry, I thought you were talking about something else. Nevermind me.

Subj: Re:Vorlon/Shadow Technology
Date: 96-05-30 02:09:45 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>Many sci-fi stories seem to suggest that bio-technology is the ultimate in technological acheivement (look at a few good bits of anime, like Robotech or the Guyver). The Vorlons and the Shadows are members of the ancients, and their tech surpasses us mundane races many times over.<<

Actually, in robotech bio-technology only has to do with the power source and, to some extent, cloning. All protoculture is, is a better fusion power source. Anti-matter would still outdo it.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:They’re alive…they can
Date: 96-05-30 02:10:51 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>The ships are not alive, the beings that are fused into the structure of the ships are. Bacteria and the like have been around since far before sentient life. I beleive that the Shadows, have lived for a few millions of years, have long since devised a way of destroying such superficial attacks.<<

Indeed, the ships *are* alive. That is the point of organtic technology: technology that is *living*.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:Minbari stats on ships
Date: 96-05-30 02:15:59 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>> Exactly how big ARE the Minbari battle-cruisers (the ones that look like angel fish)?If you watch them as they float past the station, you will notice that even when they are well in the back-ground they look absolutely HUGE. This is a VERY rough estimate, but they’ve got to be at least .8 kilometers (.5 miles) long by about 1 kilometer tall (.6 miles), AT LEAST! Does anyone have any more concrete info on this?<<
Hmm… JMS seems to have indicated that the sizes vary depending on their class. I’d say tho that these were definate heavyships, close to, probably bigger then, a mile in height.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 02:19:06 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>Hey did anyone notice how those Vorlon destroyers (the red one too) are just like Kosh’s ship, >but Kosh’s ship has always been described as a transport. Could Kosh’s ship have done what >that Red one did?

It’s always been *called* a transport because the characters didn’t know what else it did. All they saw it do was transport Kosh. This is an importand distinction as it could be capable of much more.

> Also…speaking of Kosh and his ship, why didn’t he go to his ship if he knew the shadows >were going to attack him as soon as the Vorlons got involved? I mean a couple of those >tentacle-gun thingys could’ve evened the odds against those 3 shadows. Why not get in the >ship and split? Did he need to be a martyr (even though his death is being kept secret)? Is the >replacement Vorlon gonna have some bodyguards?

Because he knew that if he ran someone or something else would pay the price instead of him. Someone or something important.

The time for hiding has ended.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 02:21:05 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>Speaking of bodyguards, my only complaint about this great series is the lack of security surrounding the “main players”, ie, Sheridan, Delenn and Kosh. All three have been attacked/kidnapped/killed in the last 5 eps. And what about security for the other ambassadors? I know G’kar supposedly has a bodyguard, but i havent seen him in ages and Londo, Vir, etc. are always wandering the station enescorted. There are a couple of wars going on!!!! This is pretty inexcusable…<<

Because manpower is too tight to afford huge amounts of security around these people. Plus they’re all stubborn enough to keep from admitting they *need* security. In one episode (Confessions, I believe) Garabaldi complains about Sheriden refusing security precautions.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:Stats Book for B5
Date: 96-05-30 02:22:00 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>What we need is a stats book for the ships of B5. It’d help us keep them straight.<<

There’s supposed to be a Babylon 5 CD ROM encyclopedia in the works. It’s been delayed tho.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:Stats Book for B5
Date: 96-05-30 02:22:41 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

> Why didn’t Kosh run from the Shadows?
>
> Because then he wouldn’t have been able to dramatically scream “FREEEEEEEEEDOM!”

Oh Songo… that was just too low…
>8)}
Pum

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 02:25:45 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>B5 is a neutral station to resolve differences between different factions, waring or otherwise. To walk around with bodyguards is to let others know that you expect trouble, and that very well may mean trouble for you.<<

Actually, B5’s not neutral anymore. They’ve taken a *definate* side.

>>With Kosh, he may not have known that the Shadows would come straight for him (Kosh not omniscient? How could it be?). We found out that Kosh was lashing out at Sheriden in fear, not punishment. Suddenly we see that the Vorlons have some very human qualities to them. They may be near gods, but they are still weak and do fear for the future.<<

No. He knew they would come, just as he knew he could not avoid the fait that awaited him.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 02:26:44 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>i didn’t say Kosh should run. I think he could’ve and should’ve put up a better fight…<<

He did put up a good fight. A regular war of the gods. He hurt them, and he hurt them bad.

But 3 against 1.
You do the math.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 02:28:13 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>his ship is a vorlon ship! i’d think that those tentacle thingy’s could’ve more than evened the odds or at leasted helped Kosh fight. At the very least it could’ve probably drawn at least one Shadow’s attention or made them duck for cover. 1 on 3? i think we’d all pretty much agree that even a vorlon can’t take 3 shadows. but kosh, with his ships help. i just might bet vorlon on that fight…<<

Had he retreated to his ship the shadows would have attacked the station from the inside.

Sheriden would probably have been killed.

As would the newly formed alliance be shattered.

Kosh knew he could not avoid his fate.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 02:31:25 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>> You guys are all thinking about a human mindset. Kosh isn’t human. He might have had totally alien reasons for not running like heck. Honor? Who knows?
One thing nobody’s thought of (that I can see) is that maybe Kosh pulled a Puppeteer (sp?). He *knew* he would die, he knew he couldn’t escape, so he just let them finish him so it wouldn’t hurt nearly as much. Maybe he doesn’t like painful, lingering torture, and prefers the quick kind of death. Who knows?<<
Bah. Kosh may not have been human in body, but he was human in soul. His last moments with Sheriden most unequivacably show that.
Pumukl

Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-05-30 02:33:30 EDT
From: PUMUKL
Posted on: America Online

>>Boy we sure need a lot of rules for a war, if they already threw out rules, who cares why he died, if he died at all. I did not see any trace of that angel, except a SUIT. How much do we know about Kosh to know for sure he is dead.<<

Kosh.

Is.

Dead.
Anyone who believes otherwise better start looking for Elvis.
Pumukl

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 06:16:09 EDT
From: DFields663
Posted on: America Online

Vorlon ships are alive, so as they age do they grow? Are the more powrful or bigger ships
ones that have been around longer?Do they belong to the older Vorlons? And if they are connected
to the one who pilots it ,then what about the smaller ships? Are they parts of the bigger ships?

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 13:12:25 EDT
From: Dannyboy20
Posted on: America Online

let’s see i have done the math. 3 to 1 don’t sound good. that’s why i brought up the durned ship! he doesn’t even have to get inside. If Kosh was just kicking it outside the ship as soon as Morden and his “associates” show up a couple tentacles pop out and even the odds.

Subj: Re:Earth Force Cruisers
Date: 96-05-30 18:12:30 EDT
From: Alanva 01
Posted on: America Online

EA Omega class destroyers are much better than the Hyperion.

Subj: Re:white star
Date: 96-05-30 18:17:42 EDT
From: Alanva 01
Posted on: America Online

The white star is nimble, the minbari war Cruisere are not nimble. they are slow and don’t maneuver very well.

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-30 18:43:54 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

In my personsal oponion Dfields, I would say yes, and hopefully to all of the above. It would be a great NEW idea for Sci-fi.

Subj: Re:white star
Date: 96-05-30 18:46:48 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

That is why I like the White Star. So far I have not seen a ship larger than the fighters do anything like the Whitestar. Plus with all that Vorlon type Technology, how could we say that the White Star isn’t one of the best ships in B5.

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-31 01:35:28 EDT
From: Wuerthele
Posted on: America Online

> Also…speaking of Kosh and his ship, why didn’t he go to his ship if he knew the shadows >were going to attack him as soon as the Vorlons got involved? I mean a couple of those >tentacle-gun thingys could’ve evened the odds against those 3 shadows. Why not get in the >ship and split? Did he need to be a martyr (even though his death is being kept secret)? Is the >replacement Vorlon gonna have some bodyguards?

Just thinking. Seems to me that a lot of Koch’s statements throughout the series have been using the Emperical “We”. How about this- so what if Koch died… if the Vorlons have a hive mind.

Just my $.02

-Wuerthele

Subj: Re:white star
Date: 96-05-31 07:14:31 EDT
From: DFields663
Posted on: America Online

On B5 you see so many different ships around the station, but I have no idea who operates them or what they are capable of. How advanced are they ,what is their technology.If nothing else they look sharp.

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-31 17:38:10 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Perhaps Kosh was referring to he and Sheridan when he said WE, but I like your idea better.

Subj: Re:white star
Date: 96-05-31 17:39:12 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

I think a lot of them are just transports, except for the extra protection B5 has now, but those things rule.

Subj: Re:vorlon transport/destroye
Date: 96-05-31 17:40:27 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

I forgot to ad that if Kosh were referring to himself and Sheridan when he said WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN HERE, that would fit perfectly into the time loop stuff.

Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-06-02 00:22:14 EDT
From: Kessel5
Posted on: America Online

>>Kosh.

Is.

Dead.
Anyone who believes otherwise better start looking for Elvis.<<

 
Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-06-02 00:25:32 EDT
From: Kessel5
Posted on: America Online

>>Kosh.

Is.

Dead.
Anyone who believes otherwise better start looking for Elvis.<<

How do you know Kosh isn’t going to pull and Obi-Wan Kenobi. He said something about always being with Sheridan, didn’t he?

(P.S. Sorry about the last message, hit POST LETTER before I finished writing the entry.)

Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-06-03 07:05:22 EDT
From: DFields663
Posted on: America Online

Maybe Koch doesn’t see time like we do. We see time in a line beginning to end. Maybe he can see it all beginning ,middle and end. Then he would know all that was and will happen even if he was not ,to be around for all of it. That would give it all a different twist.

Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-06-03 18:21:49 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

I hope that JMS brings him back so you have a heart attack or something. That’d teach ya. Just kiddin. But I already found Elvis.

Subj: Re: running/fighting
Date: 96-06-03 18:23:33 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Since I psted that one with out looking at the next on. Seriously, I would agree that somehow he is there, and You may be right about the time thingy.

Subj: EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-03 19:37:10 EDT
From: Kessel5
Posted on: America Online

I was watching the re-run of “Severed Dreams” and I noticed that the two forward main guns are both those big, red, particle beams, pulse cannons and pulse cannon interceptors. I wonder if any of the other 16 guns have multiple capabilities and it there is a limit to the amount of big, red, particle beams you can fire. (Otherwsie those ships would kick butt with 18 particle beams firing at once). I also noticed two loading bays between all four engines that look like they could launch fighters as well, I sure wish there was an official source on this stuff, it would probably answer a lot of q’s.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-04 16:07:32 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

The question I have is more of what those particle beams could do to a Shadow. I am not one to complain but why don’t the Cruisers beat the hell out of those Minbari cruisers, I don’t even know what kind of weapons they have got. Oh ya, and do you suppose that Clark has a keeper, or has been brainwashed by shadows, or just another crazy guy, and has anyone seen him?

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-04 18:44:12 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

Actually, I believe thos e”Big, red, particle beams” are suppose to be large(very large) lasers. Though you really shouldn’t be able to see the beam….(but I have yet to see any show sacrifice that much viewer comprehension for the sake of science)

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-04 23:48:29 EDT
From: RNGRRIK
Posted on: America Online

Moon, so strange to see you far afield. I wonder if JMS, who seems to be a bit more concerned with realism than other TV SF types, would go to the trouble of using some kind of weapon which WOULD be visible in a vacuum. Had in mind some kind of rail gun that used an energy pulse at the end of the muzzle to turn a say, aluminum skirt around the main projectile into a plasma to burn through hulls.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-05 13:27:34 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Heh heh, well when I find one half moon I will let you know. But I have never seen the weapons that the MInbari have on their ships. How tough could they be, they don’t have the same weapons as the Whitestar do they?

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-05 13:28:46 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Woa, Looks like you get a fellow Physics major around her Hfmoon!

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-05 14:19:01 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Heh heh, well when I find one half moon I will let you know.<<

Thanks, but it’s not Half Moon(good guess, though)

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-05 14:26:29 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Moon, so strange to see you far afield. I wonder if JMS, who seems to be a bit more concerned with realism than other TV SF types, would go to the trouble of using some kind of weapon which WOULD be visible in a vacuum.<<

Well, the only problem I could see with that is that, well, why would you ever *want* any of your beam weapons to be visible? Think about it.
The visible light is energy that is being thrown off lateraly from the direction of travel, therefor it’s energy that’s not hitting the target. With today’s lasers, you can only see the beam when you spray some mist or smoke into it, which get’s in the way of the photons and throws them in all different directions.
Even with some sort of “particle beam”, you would want most if not all of the energy to hit the target, so you wouldn’t see it from the side. “Phasers” are the same way. Think of how much energy is being lost! But since portraying this in a show would confuse the hell out of alot of people, it’s not done. That’s okay.

>>Had in mind some kind of rail gun that used an energy pulse at the end of the muzzle to turn a say, aluminum skirt around the main projectile into a plasma to burn through hulls.<<

Sounds like a nasty weapon. But would it look like a beam of light, or a series of fast projectiles, similar to that which the Thunderbolt Starfuries spit out of their noses?

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-06 15:12:22 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

What!!!!!!!!! You mean I was wrong again, dangit well what exactly does HFMOON mean any way, or is it a secret. HE HE HE. Your girl I bet. Aw that is cute. Just kiddin.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-06 15:14:16 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

damn you guys are good, I think I’ll just sit back and suck this all in.

Subj: Re:call for some immaginatio
Date: 96-06-06 20:12:18 EDT
From: CChap94677
Posted on: America Online

Like uhhh… how many cans of beans do they hafta eat to get enuff gas to the engines?

Like uhhhh…they rule! uhuhuhhuhuhuhuhhhuhuhuhuh!
Subj: Re:Narn Ship DesignI
Date: 96-06-06 20:13:41 EDT
From: CChap94677
Posted on: America Online

How the heck do you know all this crap!
Subj: Re:Narn Ship DesignI
Date: 96-06-06 21:58:20 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>How the heck do you know all this crap!<<

Too which crap are you refering to?

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-06 21:59:47 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

The HF is a tribute to my father, who opened this account. I am pretty much the only one who uses it, but by the time I thought about changing it, everybody knew me as HFMoon, so it stuck…

And I am a GUY.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-06 23:15:26 EDT
From: RNGRRIK
Posted on: America Online

I see your point about not seeing the beam. Actually, I did have something more like the pulse cannons in mind.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-06 23:18:50 EDT
From: RNGRRIK
Posted on: America Online

Moon—I knew that. Just cause you’re smart doesn’t mean you’re a girl. (But it helps.) Cool about you naming yourself after your father. In my novels, getting back to visible and invisible weapons in space, I get around the constraints of a vacuum by having the main characters see the ships’ targetting computers simulate the beams for tactical convenience.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 08:45:49 EDT
From: Solarmech
Posted on: America Online

Hopefull the Babylon project rollplaying game will have the information everyone is looking for. And put a rest to a lot of questions.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 11:58:50 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Hey hey, I never said you were’nt……………….did I, oops if I did, what the hell if I didn’t.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 12:00:05 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Oh I see, I meant it is probably your girlfriends initials, sorry I should have explained. But now I know so oh well.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 12:02:50 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

YES, tell me where I can get the game solar, I want now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Yes11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

YES, OH YES YES YES, I love this show, give me the game and my life is complete. “almost”

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 19:42:36 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>Actually, I believe thos e”Big, red, particle beams” are suppose to be large(very large) lasers. Though you really shouldn’t be able to see the beam….<<

Perhaps they are so focused that light bounces off the laser itself? Or maybe the hydrogen hit by the laser gets *really* excited. Maybe the guns are so hot that they dump some coolant with each shot, and the coolant is what glows.

>>(but I have yet to see any show sacrifice that much viewer comprehension for the sake of science)<<

I have seen one do that. They said it was beyond the visible light spectrum, though. Kind of like the old X-ray laser trick. Whenever someone fires an invisible beam, it’s referred to as an X-ray laser so people won’t ask “Why didn’t we see the focused stream of light?” Of course, firing a laser in an atmosphere is different…

Subj: Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-07 19:51:00 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

I was just thinking this over, and I’ll put it here so you can tell me if it would work.

First of all, Lasers would only be the best choice over very long range. (Kinetic energy weapons and nukes would probably be best in missile range.) So why would they use lasers in that battle at all? Maybe we’ve never seen a laser used by Earthforce (or anyone else for that matter)…

Second, if you know what color your own side fires, such as red, then wouldn’t painting all of your ships in many layers of ‘red’ reduce the damage? After all, material absorbs every color *except* the one it looks like.

Third, why not cover the important parts with mirrors? If lasers are that widely used, then a mirrored battleship would have the day of its life!

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 19:58:24 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>Even with some sort of “particle beam”, you would want most if not all of the energy to hit the target, so you wouldn’t see it from the side. “Phasers” are the same way. Think of how much energy is being lost! But since portraying this in a show would confuse the hell out of alot of people, it’s not done. That’s okay.<<

Most TV sf is written for the type of person who’d say things like “Why’s that darn Discovery so quiet in the first movie?”, “What’s vaccum got to do with space?”, “My, those X-wings fly really well! Why can’t Starfuries bank and roll? Even the ST ships do Yeagher loops!”

>>Had in mind some kind of rail gun that used an energy pulse at the end of the muzzle to turn a say, aluminum skirt around the main projectile into a plasma to burn through hulls.<<
Sounds like a nasty weapon. But would it look like a beam of light, or a series of fast projectiles, similar to that which the Thunderbolt Starfuries spit out of their noses?<<

Heck, fire it dark and just ring it with sand. It would be much more difficult to see coming, especially far from a star or bright light source. The enemy could even move right into it.

Subj: Re:Narn Ship DesignI
Date: 96-06-07 20:01:58 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>How the heck do you know all this crap!<<

Don’t tell anyone, but we all work for a secret society of physics scientists who plan to rule the world. We send out the info very carefully but accessibly. Just watch through the first 2 and 1/2 acts of Hawaii 5-O, then turn on your close-captioning. We figured that no one would ever discover our plans this way! Buwahahahahahah!

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 20:02:52 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>The HF is a tribute to my father, who opened this account. I am pretty much the only one who uses it, but by the time I thought about changing it, everybody knew me as HFMoon, so it stuck…

And I am a GUY. <<

That’s cool. How old are you? Or is it impolite to ask?

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 20:05:09 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>Moon—I knew that. Just cause you’re smart doesn’t mean you’re a girl. (But it helps.) Cool about you naming yourself after your father. In my novels, getting back to visible and invisible weapons in space, I get around the constraints of a vacuum by having the main characters see the ships’ targetting computers simulate the beams for tactical convenience.<<

You write? Do we know any of your books? (What have you written, in other words?) If you try to say that you’re Ann McCaffery or A.C. Crispin…

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 20:42:25 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>In my novels, getting back to visible and invisible weapons in space, I get around the constraints of a vacuum by having the main characters see the ships’ targetting computers simulate the beams for tactical convenience.<<

Sounds good to me!! What novels have you written? I might want to rea them(I’m a chain reader, and I have to keep feeding my addiction…)

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 20:46:34 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Perhaps they are so focused that light bounces off the laser itself? <<

They’re so focused that they are unfocused?

>>Or maybe the hydrogen hit by the laser gets *really* excited. <<

That is a freakin’ hell of alot of hydrogen for such a small area of space(hate to fly my ‘furie through that soup)

>>Maybe the guns are so hot that they dump some coolant with each shot, and the coolant is what glows.<<

Okay, sure. Whatevr you say, Songo.

(he,he, just having some fun with you there, Brian. ;-))

 
Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 20:48:18 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<< Whenever someone fires an invisible beam, it’s referred to as an X-ray laser so people won’t ask “Why didn’t we see the focused stream of light?” Of course, firing a laser in an atmosphere is different…>>

X-ray lasers are more fun anyway. Lot easier to get a hotter beam.
And yes, if your laser was hot enough it would possibly fry the air between the emitter and the target, giving you a nice, bright beam(and a small thunder clap when it’s turned off)

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-07 20:52:59 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>> First of all, Lasers would only be the best choice over very long range. (Kinetic energy weapons and nukes would probably be best in missile range.) So why would they use lasers in that battle at all? Maybe we’ve never seen a laser used by Earthforce (or anyone else for that matter)…<<

Probably for the same reason you’d still use the tank’s main gun when the enemy is within a hundred feet. It still kills.

>> Second, if you know what color your own side fires, such as red, then wouldn’t painting all of your ships in many layers of ‘red’ reduce the damage? After all, material absorbs every color *except* the one it looks like. <<

My thoughts exactly, but then all it take is a little tuning and you’ve got an oragne laser, and all your paint is suddenly half as effective. Or more tuning(and power)and you might get to a blue or green laser, and then all you paint is worse than useless…

>>Third, why not cover the important parts with mirrors? If lasers are that widely used, then a mirrored battleship would have the day of its life!<<

Again, one of the failings of “laser guns”. Of course, if your beam is hot enough, you might be able to melt that mirroring before your own beam fries the hell out of you(or whoever it ends up hitting).
Isn’t this Fun!!!!

 
Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-07 20:54:15 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

21. And after my last couple of exams, brain-fried….

Subj: Re:Vorlons
Date: 96-06-08 12:06:39 EDT
From: JudyDH
Posted on: America Online

The answer:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Yeeeeesss…

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-08 14:49:16 EDT
From: RNGRRIK
Posted on: America Online

Why not mirrors? Because you couldn’t put a big enough or thick enough mirror on a small spacecraft to do any good. Weapons-quality laser reflecting mirrors are HUGE.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-08 14:51:35 EDT
From: RNGRRIK
Posted on: America Online

I only WISH you’d read one of my novels. I’m not yet published, though my agent is working on getting my first one published. I’m keeping my fingers crossed…

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-08 14:54:33 EDT
From: RNGRRIK
Posted on: America Online

Moon, I hope you get the chance to read them. The first of my attempts at commercial success is called Birthright—it’s a political/espionage thriller set in the early 23rd century. That’s the one my agent is pushing, finally, after over a year of rewriting with three different editors. The second one, which I’m about to wrap up, is called Rituals, and it’s an invasion novel set in the late 21st century.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-08 19:47:11 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Weapons-quality laser reflecting mirrors are HUGE.<<

And you really would want to have a first-surface mirror, and the thought of all the fingerprints from the mounting just gives me the willies!!

(and interplanetary dust is, quite simply, a bitch)

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-08 20:08:29 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>>>Perhaps they are so focused that light bounces off the laser itself? <<
They’re so focused that they are unfocused?<<

Maybe light just bounces off because the waves are polarized right for red light (is that even possible to do?)

>>Or maybe the hydrogen hit by the laser gets *really* excited. <<
That is a freakin’ hell of alot of hydrogen for such a small area of space(hate to fly my ‘furie through that soup)<<

Well I didn’t tell them to build B5 there! Maybe we should hire some real scientists before we get this far along in the next station…

>>Maybe the guns are so hot that they dump some coolant with each shot, and the coolant is what glows.<<
Okay, sure. Whatevr you say, Songo.<<

Work with me here! There’s got to be a tanj reason! (oops)

>>(he,he, just having some fun with you there, Brian. ;-))<<

Brian knows. Brian used to being entertainment for elders. ‘Have had sad childhood; will probably have sad adulthood, but at least there is symmetry.. Go, go, have your fun makings; Brian will sit and wait until no one suspects….

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-08 20:30:13 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>>> First of all, Lasers would only be the best choice over very long range. (Kinetic energy weapons and nukes would probably be best in missile range.) So why would they use lasers in that battle at all? Maybe we’ve never seen a laser used by Earthforce (or anyone else for that matter)…<<Probably for the same reason you’d still use the tank’s main gun when the enemy is within a hundred feet. It still kills.<<

Well, why not use the machine gun when you can to save shells? (BTW, have we just moved into metaphor? Are we creating some twisted form of Poetry?? “O Captain My Captain, enemy off to port, 10 o’clock a shrap’ing like some vengeful demon rapping, rapping at the airlock doors!
And their mirror armor, their glistening, shiny sheets a gleaming, do have all the seeming of an ADD kid’s dreaming, a troubled kid to wish our hull to steaming! If their kinetic weapons near ever more, make our ship a running never more, then I think that I shall never see anything strike them at 1/4 C, and while art is unique to each, Let’s give them a large hull breach…” Sorry, I got carried away..)

>> Second, if you know what color your own side fires, such as red, then wouldn’t painting all of your ships in many layers of ‘red’ reduce the damage? After all, material absorbs every color *except* the one it looks like. <<
My thoughts exactly, but then all it take is a little tuning and you’ve got an oragne laser, and all your paint is suddenly half as effective. Or more tuning(and power)and you might get to a blue or green laser, and then all you paint is worse than useless…<<

But it would buy you time, and you’d probably have already changed yours to blue.

>>Third, why not cover the important parts with mirrors? If lasers are that widely used, then a mirrored battleship would have the day of its life!<<
Again, one of the failings of “laser guns”. Of course, if your beam is hot enough, you might be able to melt that mirroring before your own beam fries the hell out of you(or whoever it ends up hitting).<<

But then what would it do to you (or whoever gets the reflection)?
Isn’t this Fun!!!!<<

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-08 20:31:28 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>21. And after my last couple of exams, brain-fried….<<

I can believe it. I’m knee deep in SATs, SATIIs and ACTs right now.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-08 20:40:55 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>I only WISH you’d read one of my novels. I’m not yet published, though my agent is working on getting my first one published. I’m keeping my fingers crossed…<<

Let me know when/if you do. If you can give us your agent’s Email address, we’ll tell him that we can speak for a great many SF fans when we say that you’ve done better than half the market (you know something about science). Then we can offer to send good endorsements for the cover if you send us a publicity copy to read… (how’s “A nonstop reader adventure… The space battles were hours of reallistic fun… RNGRRIK left nothing out!” Brian J. Sinclair _The Sellout WiseGuy Post[er]_ ?)

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-08 20:47:47 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>And you really would want to have a first-surface mirror, and the thought of all the fingerprints from the mounting just gives me the willies!!

(and interplanetary dust is, quite simply, a bitch)<<

First-surface? Why not fly with a thin plasic-baggy-like coating over many of the mirrors (But not attached, just tied tightly so nothing excitible can get in the way), then release them during some pre-conflict maneuvers? If you’re rotating, then you might even be able to ‘drop’ them at an enemy.. Could you use a somewhat-reflective material like tin foil for your disposable shroud?

Subj: Re:New White Star
Date: 96-06-08 21:14:36 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Sure- make a whole fleet of White Stars.

Ah, but who is going to pay for them? If a whole fleet of White Stars COULD be built, don’t you think they would be?

Subj: Re:Narn Ship DesignI
Date: 96-06-08 21:22:28 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Probably the crap from the beans used to produce the gas that powers the StarFuries…

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-08 21:26:57 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

It would take very little to sufficiently damage the mirrors so as to make them useless. If an enemy laser hits a dust particle on the mirror, it will vaporize that dust speck, which will deform the mirror, making it useless to deflect the beam. The mirrored surface will pick up enough dust and/or micrometeoroid damage within a few days so as to virtually eliminate its effectiveness.

Not to mention it would be a WHOLE lot easier to track!

BTW- this is also why painting the ship the same color as the enemy laser won’t work. Heck, radiation damage would alter the color of the paint. Not to mention that at least some of the enemy lasers would be out of spec, and as such could be slightly off-frequency.

Subj: Re:Narn Ship DesignI
Date: 96-06-08 21:28:05 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Yeesh.. someone else old enough to remember Hawaii 5-0

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-09 00:10:21 EDT
From: RNGRRIK
Posted on: America Online

Thanx—I’ll see if my agent has an e-mail adress.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-09 09:08:59 EDT
From: Solarmech
Posted on: America Online

It seems most B5 warships have several different wapons systems. (for EA) The big red laser, and partical beam weapons that ignore mirrors. As for the RolePlaying game its not supposed to be out until the fall (arrggh I can’t wait!!)

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-09 17:05:30 EDT
From: JudyDH
Posted on: America Online

There’s gonna be a role-playing game for B5? Cool! Can’t wait either.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-09 17:13:18 EDT
From: JudyDH
Posted on: America Online

“X-ray lasers are more fun anyway. Lot easier to get a hotter beam”

Think about a Gamma ray Laser! (The actuall term is Graser)A few dozen gigawatts of juice out of that puppy and you have a veritable Death Star an your hands. I’m pretty sure it is a possible technology, but at this time we lack enough juice to pump one.
On the other hand, B5’s fusion reactor(73 GOOGLEwatts!!!) has more than amble power.

That number(73 google) was from the Micro Machines package so don’t yell at me if it don’t sound realistic.

Subj: Re:Narn Ship DesignI
Date: 96-06-09 22:23:35 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Jee, thanks songboy, I really enjoyed that.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-09 22:27:46 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

I want it NOW solar, oh ya, reality flash again.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-10 02:26:41 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>> First of all, Lasers would only be the best choice over very long range. (Kinetic energy weapons and nukes would probably be best in missile range.)<<

I thought a bit more about this recently, and I came to the conclusion that it’s not quite right.
A laser is more effective at short ranges than at long ranges. At a certain point, they’re about as usefull as a flashlight.

inverse-square law. The power of the beam decreases by the inverse squar of the distance it’s traveled)

Notice that Marshal’s X-O(in “Severed Dreams”) said, “We’re in range” before they fired their big laser at the Agrippa. That range could possibly be the distance at which the laser becomes truely effective, rather than just a light radiation bath.
Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-10 02:30:14 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<Maybe light just bounces off because the waves are polarized right for red light (is that even possible to do?)>>

Still don’t buy it. Polarization simply filters through EM waves oriented in a certain direction, not wavelenghts.

I don’t know exactly why the “light bouncing off light” idea doesn’t work, but I am pretty sure it does(at least, no matter how many lights I have shinning on my HeNe Laser, I still can’t see the beam without mist.)

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-10 02:33:25 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<>>Okay, sure. Whatevr you say, Songo.<<

Work with me here! There’s got to be a tanj reason! (oops)>>

I know a reason. Because it’s a TV show that doesn’t want to confuse the massive amounts of un-informed people out there who would be thoroughly confused by an “invisible beam” weapon.
Actually, the old Star Trek occasionally did the right thing on this count. Every so often, the hand phasers wouldn’t produce a visible beam, just a flash at the mussle and *poof* the bad guy was gone. Ah well, can’t forget about that lowest common denominator…

Subj: Drama of Beams
Date: 96-06-10 16:02:51 EDT
From: I am Bob
Posted on: America Online

Im enjoying the techy talky on the visible beams…but lets face it when an actor takes a sword thru the gut he thrathes and hollers. Its rather dull to watch a scene where the dude dies silently. so of course we see beams even hear them in vacume. But don’t lay all the blame on the lowest common denominator.

When a ship “dies” I want to hear and see it suffer ;>

Bob

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-10 21:16:01 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>”X-ray lasers are more fun anyway. Lot easier to get a hotter beam”
Think about a Gamma ray Laser! (The actuall term is Graser)A few dozen gigawatts of juice out of that puppy and you have a veritable Death Star an your hands. <<

I think Gamma rays are basically a subset (or a type) of Xrays. I just looked that up in my science book, so if it’s wrong, let me know. (I just saw that ultra-violet light is on the same side of the visible spectrum line as X-rays… I always thought they were before the v spectrum, but I was probably mixed up with infra red. That explains why UV and Xrays are harmful and IR isn’t. I think. Is it because the low number of cycles per second gives them more penetrating power?)

>> I’m pretty sure it is a possible technology, but at this time we lack enough juice to pump one.
On the other hand, B5’s fusion reactor(73 GOOGLEwatts!!!) has more than amble power.
That number(73 google) was from the Micro Machines package so don’t yell at me if it don’t sound realistic. <<

Yeah, I thought it was odd, too. When I first read it, my first thought was “What do they line the reactor with?” then “…and why don’t they make their ships out of the stuff??”

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-10 21:24:05 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>
I thought a bit more about this recently, and I came to the conclusion that it’s not quite right.
A laser is more effective at short ranges than at long ranges. At a certain point, they’re about as usefull as a flashlight.

inverse-square law. The power of the beam decreases by the inverse squar of the distance it’s traveled)<<

Well, wouldn’t it be more efficient at 100+ kilometers than a slow (by comparison) projectile? Sure lasers get weaker and more diffused(or is it difracted? I forgot the term), but at least the enemy won’t see them coming (and in really long-range disputes they won’t be able to dodge, sip some coffee, raise grandkids, etc. before the shot hits them).

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-10 21:45:50 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>I think Gamma rays are basically a subset (or a type) of Xrays.<<

Soory, bud, but I cannot let this one through. Gamma rays are the high end of the electromagnetic spectrum. Theyt are EM waves, just like radio, microwaves, milimeter waves, infrared, visible, and ultraviolet light, and X-rays. I’ll look up the frequency ranges for you if you like, but Gamma rays are simply the next higher level of EM waves.
And yes, a graser would be a nasty weapon.

Subj: Re:EA Destroyers
Date: 96-06-10 21:47:25 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>”What do they line the reactor with?” then “…and why don’t they make their ships out of the stuff??”<<

Probably the same reason we don’t make our fighters out of Lead and pure titanium. It’s damn massive stuff.

(Gotta love the titanium bathtub in the A-10’s, though)

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-10 21:49:35 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Well, wouldn’t it be more efficient at 100+ kilometers than a slow (by comparison) projectile?<<

Well, sure. Comparitively. But why stop using them?
They just get more powerful the closer you get.

 

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-10 23:45:49 EDT
From: Kessel5
Posted on: America Online

You guys are arguing about those large red “lasers” on the EA Destroyers. What you’re not taking into account is that those couldn’t be lasers, they travel too slowly. Thats why I think they’re some sort of particle weapon (said it a while back). What is kind of interesting is what fires those particle beams also fires some sort of pulse charge as well. I wonder if all the other guns have that kind of capability.

Subj: Re:Drama of Beams
Date: 96-06-11 01:23:50 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

Yes, I too love the slow kills, like when a massive EA warship catches fire in various areas and begins to slowly spin out of control. I don’t want it to completely detonate to fragments, however, because a decaying hulk is a great tribute to a hard days battle.

LoudonB

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-11 01:28:02 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

Just a note about something I noticed from Severed Dreams:

When the renegade EA destroyer with the dead captain gets into the battle, the subordinate guy had to say they were in range before they could fire the big red gun. Now the area they were fighting in was a bit to small to worry about inaccuracy, so the big gun must have a fairly limited effective range, meaning that a EA ship has to get personal with its foe to make use of it.

LoudonB

Subj: Minbari stats settled
Date: 96-06-11 03:22:33 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

Here is a rundown of the Minbari War Cruiser stats as taken from one of the screen saver images from the B5 Utilities CDROM:

Length: 300 meters (or 984 ft) a height was not given, but looking at the pictures I’d say it isn’t more that 1.5 times the length or 1476 ft. This is obviously less than a mile (5280 ft).
Weight: 200 metric tons
Speed: 0.2c
Maneuverability: B
Jump Gate: A
Cargo: 2000 metric tons
Crew: 600
Command Staff: 4
Ground Troops: 150
Weapons:
12 fusion lasers
6 neutron cannons
6 missiles – 20 metric tons (those are some massive missiles!)

Hope that satisfies y’all.

LoudonB

Subj: Re:Minbari stats settled
Date: 96-06-11 14:07:38 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Ya, but what are fusion lasers, if lasers are light wouldn’t that mean all they could do is burn a hole, not that that’s bad but fusion?

Subj: Re:B5 Combat Simulator?
Date: 96-06-11 15:50:55 EDT
From: HAL MMI
Posted on: America Online

Something along the kines of the Star Wars combat simulators owuld be good. Especialy if you get to use different fighters(or other ships)from different races. I would enjoy taking out the white star to kick the crap out of some shadows.
Subj: Re:Minbari stats settled
Date: 96-06-11 17:17:27 EDT
From: RNGRRIK
Posted on: America Online

Possibly a fusion laser draws the photons off of a fusion reaction and focusses them into a very powerful laser beam.

Subj: Re:Drama of Beams
Date: 96-06-11 21:41:23 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Those big red beams sure are lasers. First, they were called lasers. Second, they act like lasers. Now, there are other weapons, too, that don’t act like lasers. But the big red beams do.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-11 22:34:35 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>What you’re not taking into account is that those couldn’t be lasers, they travel too slowly. <<

I would disagree with this. Showing near-instantaneous shots is difficult for a show, and we have never seen a dodge, just misses.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats settled
Date: 96-06-11 22:36:11 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

Fusion lasers are probably lasers pumped(that is powered) by fusion devices.

Subj: Lasers?
Date: 96-06-12 14:41:36 EDT
From: Wuerthele
Posted on: America Online

Those red beams are probably some sort of Particle beam or something to that effect. B5 says they follow science more religiously than Star Trek (I believe it- 500 rem per second to Paris is a recent Voyager episode. Please.). You wouldn’t see a laser in space. Electrons on the other hand collimated and shot out at a good fraction of the speed of light on the other hand…
Subj: Core lining
Date: 96-06-12 16:27:16 EDT
From: JudyDH
Posted on: America Online

If you lined the core with lithium would’nt that would absorb the free neutrons and form tritium. Which could be directly pumped into the core to keep the reaction going. This would be an answer to the problem of constantly making Tritium by slamming neutrons at it in a manufacturing plant. The ships themselves could make half of their own fuel provided that they have a good scource of lithium.

Now if there was only a way to got Deuterium easier…
Only 1 in 6700 hydrogen atoms is a deuterium isotope.

Subj: Re:Lasers?
Date: 96-06-12 21:47:38 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>You wouldn’t see a laser in space. Electrons on the other hand collimated and shot out at a good fraction of the speed of light on the other hand…<<

You still wouldn’t see. Especially if they were efficiently collumated. Nor would you see a “proton beam”, a “Meson beam”, nor any other type of beam weapon. Seeing them from the side would imply that much of the energy is being lost laterally, that is, in some other direction other than the one you fired it in.

But, as I said, this would confuse people. Whether it’s a laser or some esoteric particle beam(just for clarification, a laser is most definitely a “particle beam”) is a moot point. The point is that seeing it from the side is an artifact of Television.

Subj: Re:Minbari stats settled
Date: 96-06-13 13:16:06 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Oh, ya, I guess that would make sense. Thanks.

Subj: EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-16 14:16:20 EDT
From: FreqSh0w
Posted on: America Online

It seems to me that on the EA ships, the rotating sections would have quite high gravity at the ends (farther from axis of rotation) and that a more effective way would be to have the rotating section rather thin, only 2 or 3 decks. It would be more like B5 but instead of the whole unit rotating only this rounded section would. Thought?

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-17 01:37:59 EDT
From: KDow2056
Posted on: America Online

Actually the outer most sections probably are around one gravity… but theres no need to waste the space further in.

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-18 17:08:00 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

My only question is if B5 is close enough to epsilon could it use the planets gravity, and have the decks in perfect alignment, that should work if B5 was an immoble craft shouldn’t it?

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-18 17:09:42 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Also since the decks have to be circular or whatever, wouldn’t that mean that the core is hollow anyway?

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-18 23:56:31 EDT
From: KDow2056
Posted on: America Online

<<My only question is if B5 is close enough to epsilon could it use the planets gravity, and have the decks in perfect alignment, that should work if B5 was an immoble craft shouldn’t it?>>

No it wouldn’t work. For what you discribe, b5 wouldnt be in orbit around epsilon. You would need to continually supply thrust to keep b5 from crashing into the planet. Considering the station ‘s mass is around 5 million tons… thats a lot of thrust just keep it stable.

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-19 18:23:46 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Good point, that would be a pain, well, just a thought anyway.

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-20 16:45:20 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

In orbit, the station is in freefall, hence it rotates for the illusion of gravity.

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-20 22:08:37 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

The Station is not in orbit(where, technically, it wouldn’t be in free-fall, but that’s just picking at nits). It’s in a Libration point between Epsilon 3(is that Euphrates or Tigris? I can never remember) and it’s forever unseen moon(ah well), where the gravity of Epsilon 3 and it’s moon cancel each other out.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-22 17:12:22 EDT
From: Mtg02
Posted on: America Online

>>>
I thought a bit more about this recently, and I came to the conclusion that it’s not quite right.
A laser is more effective at short ranges than at long ranges. At a certain point, they’re about as usefull as a flashlight.

inverse-square law. The power of the beam decreases by the inverse squar of the distance it’s traveled)<<

Well, wouldn’t it be more efficient at 100+ kilometers than a slow (by comparison) projectile? Sure lasers get weaker and more diffused(or is it difracted? I forgot the term), but at least the enemy won’t see them coming (and in really long-range disputes they won’t be able to dodge, sip some coffee, raise grandkids, etc. before the shot hits them).>

Try looking at it from the point of view of targeting. Your sensors are working at the speed of light, but no faster. (not unless your working through hyperspace, which might be something the shadows are doing) So, if you shoot at a ship, it will be moving relative to your beam. At close range, that won’t matter, but at farther distances, like the Narns firing at the Shadows before the fall of their Homeworld, predicting the target location is a real trick. Don’t forget the active electronic countermeasrures trying to spoof your target solution.
A missile has its own sensors with it, so even though its much slower, it can recalculate its target solution based on more current data. Add in no loss of strength to those pesky physics types, and missiles look pretty good, for some situations.
Also, if you look at how the Centauri weapons behave, and some of the human systems, they must be missiles. Try shooting down a particle beam, much less a laser with an interceptor.

mtg02

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-23 15:10:56 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

>>Well, wouldn’t it be more efficient at 100+ kilometers than a slow (by comparison) projectile? Sure lasers get weaker and more diffused(or is it difracted? I forgot the term), but at least the enemy won’t see them coming (and in really long-range disputes they won’t be able to dodge, sip some coffee, raise grandkids, etc. before the shot hits them).><<

Efficiency is an odd word. Sure, at, say ten light-minutes, a Laser would reach your enemy before, say a missle or a high-speed slug of depleted Uranium. And they wouldn’t see it coming(though your aim has to be freakin’ superb). But, as they laser goes longer and becomes more diffuse, it also does less damage.

Which is more efficient? A weapon that takes a few minutes to get to your enemy but then does nothing moer than raise their hull temperature a few tenths of a degree, or a missle that takes two hours to get to your enemy but reduces them to expanding shells high-energy gas?

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-23 15:11:47 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<< Try shooting down a particle beam, much less a laser with an interceptor.>>

Just spread a thick cloud of dust in it’s path.

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-23 17:24:23 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>The Station is not in orbit(where, technically, it wouldn’t be in free-fall, but that’s just picking at nits).<<

I thought that if you were in orbit, you would be moving and falling the same sppeed as your ship, and the ‘centrifugal force’ would balance the pull of the planet, producing a state of microgravity. Is free-fall not the same as microgravity?

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-23 17:28:33 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>Which is more efficient? A weapon that takes a few minutes to get to your enemy but then does nothing moer than raise their hull temperature a few tenths of a degree, or a missle that takes two hours to get to your enemy but reduces them to expanding shells high-energy gas?<<

My point is that the enemy could Jump, shoot, or simply outrun the missile making it totally worthless. I’d rather make their grunts have to repaint the hull than have their crew laugh at me and/or get some target practice at the same time.

Subj: Re:EarthForce ship gravity
Date: 96-06-24 18:22:09 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<Is free-fall not the same as microgravity?>>

Like I said, it’s all just nit picking.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-24 18:24:36 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<< My point is that the enemy could Jump, shoot, or simply outrun the missile making it totally worthless. >>

So you end up getting your choice of a useless missle, a useless projectile, or a useless beam of light. Take your pick. This is why you’d have things like Minimum Range.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-24 23:48:50 EDT
From: SPLEENEX
Posted on: America Online

There was all this talk earlier about the visibility (or lack thereof) of the various esoteric weapon systems used on the various warships seen in the series with one major exception; plasma. Much of the energy radiated by plasma (aside from heat of course!) is light somewhere in the red,yellow or orange frequecies (usually). A plasma beam (pulse,burst,blast,stream,ray whatever’s yer pleasure) would indeed be very visible even without something to react with between the gun and the target,i.e. an atmosphere. There are some very fundamental problems with plasma “guns”, primary among wich is the very thing that imbues them with such terrific power; its thermal energy. Plasma is the fourth state of matter, a gas heated to such intense temperatures that its electrons tend to fly off ionizing it and consequently giving it an electric chargeeither positive or negative. It is possible to create a plasma with no charge,this usually done bycreating theplasma out of a compound, air, for instance would be a neutral plasma.With these basic terms defined we can delve into some of the problems inherent with this type of weapon.Firstly there is the nescessity to actually contain the plasma prior to discharge, if the plasma has a charge, this can be accomplished by screening the holding chamber and barrel with an electro-magnetic field of a charge opposite to that of the plasma itself.This prevents the superheated gas from actually contacting the barrel and holding itself and melting through! So this is all very well and good untill the charged plasma actually leaves the barrel, at which point it promptly spreads out in all directions and becomes less than useless. This unfortunate side-effect is caused by the individual atoms repelling each other for after all, like charges repell eachother. This of course doesn’t happen with a neutral plasma, but if it is neutral, thereis no way to contain it without melting your gun. One solution to this problem would be to have your gun accellerate a fuel pellet made up of some easily sublimated materiel that yields a neutral plasma, such as a silver alloy. Once the pellet has left the barrel travelling several kps, a high power laser pulse is fired along the path of the pellet and strikes a shrouded block of ice at the rear of the projectile. The laser causes the ice to expand explosively into a VERY high temperature steam which is directed by the shroud, this will boost the the velocity of the projectile by several kps. Once the laser pulse has burnt through the ice propellant it will strike the fuel pellet and sublimate it into a a neutral plasma. This plasma will retain its cohesiveness much better than a charged plasma. Ooops, did I ramble?

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-06-25 16:17:43 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

Same old problem. You fire off a plasma beam(BTW, how do you get the plasma to be coherent and collumated? Wouldn’t it be more of a plasma stream, like a hydro-laser?), and all the light-energy that flies off sideways from the beam(stream?) is not reaching the target. As plasma is still matter, however, and not quite yet energy, I don’t think this matters.

Subj: IMHO the Vorlons rule
Date: 96-06-26 19:30:21 EDT
From: I Vorlon I
Posted on: America Online

‘Nuff said

Subj: Lasers
Date: 96-06-28 00:49:46 EDT
From: JGinder
Posted on: America Online

Maybe the beams that appear to be lasers could be some sort of directed plasma, like the plasma of a solar flare. This would render the beam visible in space unlike a laser beam. The less sophisticated races like Earth and Narn appear to have more crude, red beams while the Vorlons, Minbari, and Shadows appear to have much more refined beams of green, and purple.

Subj: Re:Lasers
Date: 96-06-28 23:56:01 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

The crude red beams act like lasers. There is no reason to believe otherwise. They cross the screen within a frame or three. Admittedly, a laser would be instantaneous, but I think it’s a good compromise for dramatic flair.

The StarFuries are obviously not firing lasers. Any beam you can easily follow is obviously not a laser. The interceptors are clearly NOT lasers- a laser can’t block another laser. The beam interceptors can’t be plasma, because plasma doesn’t act like that. Plasma is electrically charged, and as soon as it leaves the confines of the magnetic field holding it together it would tend to dissipate. There isn’t a special kind of plasma that overcomes this- by definition, if it is plasma it is electrically charged, with the same charge throughout; as like charges repel like, a ball of plasma MUST dissipate as soon as it is released.

Subj: Re:Lasers
Date: 96-06-29 00:02:50 EDT
From: LoudonB
Posted on: America Online

<<The StarFuries are obviously not firing lasers. Any beam you can easily follow is obviously not a laser.>>

No, they can’t be lasers. If you look closely you will see that each gun is firing a series of three or four “energy spheres”. Its a lot easier to see in the still images (like those in the B5 CDROM)

LoudonB

Subj: Just one ?
Date: 96-06-29 17:33:28 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

You guys seem to be the ones to ask. What chemicals could you place on the tip of the warhead would become hot enough to burn a hole, or isn’t there any.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-06-30 01:51:33 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<You guys seem to be the ones to ask. What chemicals could you place on the tip of the warhead would become hot enough to burn a hole, or isn’t there any.>>

Eh? Why not just make it armor-piercing?

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-06-30 13:52:21 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

That would depend on what you wanted to burn a hole in. How much heat can the material absorb? Is there a coolant system, and how efficient is it? How long will the warhead remain in contact, and how good is that contact?

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-01 21:33:56 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Mm hmm, but we may not have the strongest alloys in the Galaxie, I’m just wondering, if you couldn’t get a hold of something to pierce a strong alloy. So is there a chemical combo that can do that or not?

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-01 21:46:53 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

<<That would depend on what you wanted to burn a hole in. How much heat can the material absorb? Is there a coolant system, and how efficient is it? How long will the warhead remain in contact, and how good is that contact?>>

Thanks. Well, say any of the modern, and what will be modern, probably any titanium alloy, steel, Cast Iron, I am just assuming that a steel, titanium alloy if some kind would be one of the strongest. I have no idea how much heat it could absorb. Coolant systems, even in the future I would suspect cant be so efficient that it could pinpoint a location on a spaceship. Well, the warhead wouldn’t have to be in contact once the chemicals are Either injected or, probably even stick. I was thinking that the contact could be sloppy as long as the chemicals reach their target. Well how about acid, any acid out there that can take on our strongest alloys?

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-02 03:28:44 EDT
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<< Well how about acid, any acid out there that can take on our strongest alloys?>>

I don’t know why you would use acid. A shaped charge war-head, or a slug of depleated uranium work much better.
–AcDec

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-02 19:46:45 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

<<I don’t know why you would use acid. A shaped charge war-head, or a slug of depleated uranium work much better.>>
AcDec,
how is it that on one board you can disagree with me by being really rude and foolish, and then on this board answering a simple yes or no question by pretending to know what is going on and then acting as my Science teacher, but thanks any way.

 

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-02 21:53:49 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Few chemical reactions like you are describing would react fast enough to bother with. You’d be much better off with an explosion.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-03 02:47:41 EDT
From: Solarmech
Posted on: America Online

Some current weapons use a directed jet to pierce armor ( heat rounds) By the time of B5 I would suspect that there is a way to beat these kinds of warheads (heck even now the round is loosing effectivness). Personaly I think there are a number of weapons being used in the B5 universe. 1 the good old Laser (big red beam) 2 Plasma weapons (heck the got those down to hand held size )( Suggestion- for a Plasma weapon put a smale device that makes a magnetic field to keep the palsma from scattering to much, workable??) 3 Unknown these are the kind of weapons the Vorlons, shadows ect use. they appear to be a BIG cutting bream.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-03 19:31:32 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

CRC2001, calm down. The problem is that you’re asking a really, really general yes or no question. Acid is a very broad term, and after a few chem classes you’ll understand why our answers are the way they are.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-03 20:14:58 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Hfmoon- I know it was a general question but that’s because my chemistry knowledge is general.

Shedr- Thanks, a good general answer to a general question helps. What kind of explosion, is there a way to make a nuclear explosion small enough not to effect the wrong target. How about Proton accelerators, any of them around in this show, didn’t see any if so.

Solar- Your right, I like the thought of a good laser or plasma based arsenal, but I was just seeing if other technologies could go to work. By the way, do you suppose them weapons the shadows and vorlons have could also be a laser or maybe a partical beam?

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-03 21:15:43 EDT
From: SPLEENEX
Posted on: America Online

My bet is that the Shadow “cutting beam” is probably a high-energy neutron beam. Neutrons are extremely “heavy” and thus have a greate deal of a.p. potential when moving at relativistic velocities.

To answer CRC2001’s Q, the type of explosion you would probably want is a fragmentation charge. In reality, space battles would be fought with relative velocities of tens if not dozens or hundreds of kilometers per second. A cloud of jagged tungsten shards or flechettes impacting a ship with a total impact velocity of 100+ kps would be very capable of shredding a ship.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-07-03 22:28:02 EDT
From: Mtg02
Posted on: America Online

<<< Try shooting down a particle beam, much less a laser with an interceptor.>>

Just spread a thick cloud of dust in it’s path.>

If you’d included the preceding line, it would be obvious that I was discussing why I thought some of the weapons already used in the show were missiles, not planning on how to react to them. On the other hand, you might want to react a little differently to the lasers, as moving all of that inert dust is going to raise h**l with your delta v. It may be better to put a fraction of that mass into ECM.

mtg02

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-07-04 14:45:21 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<If you’d included the preceding line, it would be obvious that I was discussing why I thought some of the weapons already used in the show were missiles, not planning on how to react to them.>>

I was being facetious, that’s all. I agree with you, BTW.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-04 19:04:07 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

>>You guys seem to be the ones to ask. What chemicals could you place on the tip of the warhead would become hot enough to burn a hole, or isn’t there any.<<

Pottassium or Flourine, I think. But why not just use a nuke anyway?

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-04 19:08:44 EDT
From: Songokuten
Posted on: America Online

Most coolant systems will probably use an inert gas, but Flourine is so powerful(electronegative or something like that) that, with luck, it will react with any coolant they might use.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-04 20:59:57 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Thanks Spleenex!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think I get it. You mean if you get a war head that uses an explosion that has multiplied it’s velocity due to the esplosion itself and the velocity of the approaching enemy ship and thus tearing the enemy to ribbons right? Couldn’t the enemy ship maneuver, around the cloud though, and what about friendly ships passing through unaware of the cloud? Anyway that would be something like throwing a baseball at a car going 100 miles an hour, or a wall in the middle of the road for that matter right?
Songo, I was thinking you eat through the hull, and unload your small insertion team.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-07 01:34:51 EDT
From: SPLEENEX
Posted on: America Online

crc2000, almost, the velocity of the warhead isn’t increased, but in a head-on collision the total impact velocity of the crash between the ship and the frag cloud is the velocity of the ship PLUS the velocity of the projectiles. Say a ship moving at ohhhh, say 12 KPS meets a cloud of tungsten penetrators moving at 25 KPS, this yields a impact velocity of 37 KPS! First of all, a PAINT CHIP moving at a velocity of 37 KPS would punch through several centimeters of steel, that’s to say nothing of a 2 kilogram tungsten dart. To answer your other question, the missile carrying the frag charge would be SOMEWHAT easy to detect and therefore dodge, but the cloud itself would be practically invisible to almost all sensors, and therefore very dificult to dodge. To stop friendly ships from getting hit, the darts could all have tiny radio transmitters that broadcast on a frequency only your ships know of, this frequency could of course be changed in an instant. Hope this helps some. If you have any other q’s you can e-mail at SPLEENEX@aol.com.
-SPLEENEX

 
Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-07 14:40:31 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

Ya I got ya, velocity can be a pretty deadly weapon.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-07 19:02:05 EDT
From: AcDec
Posted on: America Online

<<Ya I got ya, velocity can be a pretty deadly weapon.>>

How true, you should see the damage a fleck of paint did to the space shuttle’s window. Those boys got guts.
–AcDec

Subj: Sensors
Date: 96-07-08 01:03:54 EDT
From: Stickk
Posted on: America Online

I’ve always had an interest in space combat. Babylon 5 has presented the most realistic view of space combat that I have seen, and I’ve seen, played, and read alot. I find this realism much more enjoyable then the weirdness seen on Star Trek. So far, the discussions in this area have been centered on weapons, mainly lasers. I’ve found these discussions interesting, even if they are somewhat beyond me and beyond the point, which is okay because I want to know about this stuff. One topic I’ve found to be lacking in these messages is the topic of sensor technolgy, the way one ship can find, and target, another ship in the vastness of space. I beleive sensor technolgy plays a part, I’m not sure how large, in the tactics and abilities of the ships of Babylon 5. The main reason the Mimbari were kicking the humies butts was because they had some sort of “stealth technolgy” that made them invisible to Earth Force sensors. Thats the Mimbari edge. The shadows however tend to rely more on surprise, fear, and real powerful weaponry. Sensors play a large, if not primary, role in space combat. You can’t hit what you can’t see.

It seems to me that radar is out of the question as a candidate for space sensors. Radar is already becomming obsolete today with the invention of radar absorbing materials and so on that are used in the B-2 Spirit, F-117 Nighthawk, and F-22 Lightning. It would be quite easy and logical to make spacecraft invisible to the most primitive of sensors. The next most obvious answer and the one the makes the most sense is infared. Ships would put out alot of heat that can be seen real easily against the absolute zero of space. Infared sensors are already used on missles and satelites. Also there is visible detection, simply looking out the window to spot the bad guy. This is obviously too simple, its dark enough in space, and if you had to you could just paint all your ships black. This is the extent of my knowlege of physics, but I know that there is so much beyond my understanding that there could be other types of sensors, stuff that could pick up electo-magnetic distortions made by ships, and so on. I would like to hear from our resident astrophysicists on this subject.

 

Subj: Re:Sensors
Date: 96-07-08 21:49:30 EDT
From: SPLEENEX
Posted on: America Online

One sensor often used in sci-fi, which is actually not far from becomming reality is Lidar. Lidar is similar to radar except instead of radio pulses it emits laser pulses several hundred times a second in as many directions as possible. When the laser beam hits an object it reflects back to the emitting ship where it is interpereted. The sensor operators can then not only get a fix on the bogie’s position, size and range but it can also get a rough silhouette of it.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-07-10 19:10:55 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Why DON’T we see more missiles? I should think that at least one race would prefer them, or at least spreqad them liberally.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-10 19:12:37 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

I should think that flinging a bunch of drums filled with sand at the enemy, then having them erupt, would be a reasonably effective means of protecting yourself from long and mid-range lasers and particle beams.

Subj: Re:Sensors
Date: 96-07-10 19:14:15 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

momentum = mass times velocity SQUARED- so making the missile go a little faster provides a much greater increase in damage potential than making the warhead a little bigger.

Subj: Re:Sensors
Date: 96-07-10 19:16:41 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Radar is just fine. Lidar is becoming more common. If you painted your ships black, you would absorb a LOT of heat and become very visible in the infrared.

The Apollo spacecraft was visible for several hundred miles. A Vorlon ship would be a visible target for a few thousand. Using optically guided weapons would have helped a great deal.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-07-10 20:18:58 EDT
From: SPLEENEX
Posted on: America Online

Missiles are EXPENSIVE, that’s why they aren’t used that much.

Subj: re: laser thoughts
Date: 96-07-11 23:20:32 EDT
From: KScott4674
Posted on: America Online

Throwing sand out would be not an effective counter measure. It would dispearse quickly. Also the ship also use plasma bolts. Sand can’t stop that.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-14 20:50:37 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<I should think that flinging a bunch of drums filled with sand at the enemy, then having them erupt, would be a reasonably effective means of protecting yourself from long and mid-range lasers and particle beams.>>

Only for one shot of the lasers. After the sand had been vaporized and pushed out of the way, no more shield.

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-07-14 20:51:59 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<Why DON’T we see more missiles? I should think that at least one race would prefer them, or at least spreqad them liberally.>>

Ammunition problems. When you’re throwing superhot plasma at your enemy, you don’t have to worry about running out of missle casings.

Subj: Re:Sensors
Date: 96-07-14 20:53:16 EDT
From: HFMoon
Posted on: America Online

<<If you painted your ships black, you would absorb a LOT of heat and become very visible in the infrared.>>

Only if you radiated that heat back out again.(of course, if you don’t some how, your crew gets cooked).

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-15 00:25:36 EDT
From: CRC2001
Posted on: America Online

<<Only for one shot of the lasers. After the sand had been vaporized and pushed out of the way, no more shield.>>

Well more then one drum ofcourse.

Subj: Re:Just one ?
Date: 96-07-15 13:00:44 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Just wait until they run into the sand then. Enough of that will cause enough sensor erosion and ionization to seriously degrade an attack.

The problem, of course, it in carrying enough sand to make it useful…

Subj: Re:Laser thoughts..
Date: 96-07-15 13:08:40 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

Plasma is overrated. It is a short range weapon, which is BADLY affected by magnetic fields.

Missiles, on the other hand, are long range weapons. Furthermore, swarms of missiles will soak up the enemy defenses, and would be particularly useful against fighters. Also, unlike plasma, missiles could be fired from the non-bearing racks and move into position.

Missiles would be a supplement, not a subsitute, for plasma. They would be used for long-range standoff weapons. To screen out fighters, for example, you would launch several missiles, which would separate into multiple warheads, and shortly before engaging the fighter group explode into thousands of fragments. You could possibly dodge a plasma beam- but you can’t dodge a dozen pea-sized objects you can’t even see.

Subj: Re:Sensors
Date: 96-07-15 13:12:32 EDT
From: SHedr24734
Posted on: America Online

There’s no way to avoid radiating that heat out. Heat travels from warm to cool. Once your heat sinks become saturated, you WILL begin radiating heat at the same rate you produce or absorb it . This is one of the fundamental laws of thermodynamics. The heat MUST go somewhere. There ain’t no free lunch. Even in a heat pump, which popular belief claims pumps heat from cold to warm, there is waste energy which is radiated out.

This is how we can see through dust clouds. We can’t see through them in the visual range, but we can see through them in the infra red range- the cloud is radiating as much energy as it’s absorbing.

Subj: Re:Sensors
Date: 96-07-15 15:09:54 EDT
From: Stickk
Posted on: America Online

Lidar seems to pose a few problems to me. First of all, its an active sensor. In other words, if you can see someone on the lidar, then they know that you’re looking at them. An enemy ship can pick up the laser beems being shot at it just as easily as the scanning ship can see the reflected beams. Lidar would probably be more useful as a tracking device on a weapon, such as a missle\torpedo, or in close range combat to control your line of sight weapons such as lasers. Lidar is most useful when your not trying to play “I see you but you don’t see me”.

Infared tracking on the other hand is a passive scanner. Instead of shooting out stuff and waiting for the return, you’re looking for something that the bad guy is already radiating out of his ship. It seems to me from reading the postings that finding waste heat radiated by a ship would be quite easy, and acomplishable at long ranges. The question is if certain weapons have the range to exploit the range of the scanners. Lets say you can pick up an enemy ship on your infared scanner at 200 miles. What is the maximum range of your lasers, can you toast the bad guy without him\her even seeing you. It sounds like a good plan to me.

 

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>