Re: Ship of the Week: Colonial Battlestar
Posted: Wed May 25, 2011 1:41 am
Fair enough.
So would we dare design our own BSG Battlestars for oBSG and nBSG?
So would we dare design our own BSG Battlestars for oBSG and nBSG?
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
https://mail.ditl.org/forum/
Deepcrush wrote:Fair enough.
So would we dare design our own BSG Battlestars for oBSG and nBSG?
Well, it was your idea... which, then? (so long as it's not BSG '80 - in that case, I'm out.)Deepcrush wrote:Guess that depends on if we're talking oBSG or nBSG.
Well they got what they deserved then eh?Mikey wrote:What's worse... people asked for it.
Exactly - so why would it be any different with a single Basestar against a single Battlestar, when the odds would be much more heavily in the Cylons favour?Deepcrush wrote:Yes, a thousand Cylon fighters ambushed the Battlestars. But we've pointed out already the weak AA ability of the Battlestars.
The internal arrangement of the Eastern Alliance destroyer in "Greetings from Earth" means that it's wingspan can't be much less than 50 metres. When it leaves the Galactica's landing bay in Baltar's Escape, its wingspan can be seen to be about half the width of the bay. From there it's a simple matter to calculate that the Galactica is about a kilometre wide and two and a half kilometres long.Can't say I've ever seen them shown to be so large. Though I also haven't ever look to measure them.
Half-and-half. People started a letter campaign (rarely heard-of at the time) to ask ABC for more BSG; what they got was a gutted, cut-rate version which was designed to be produced cheaply enough to make ABC not have reservations about doing it.Sonic Glitch wrote:Well they got what they deserved then eh?Mikey wrote:What's worse... people asked for it.
Don't forget that fighters were still trickling back to the Colonies from the fleet when that report was made. It was an update, not a final tally.Mark wrote:So, according to this dialoge, Galactica was WAY undermanned.Adama asks if any of the other ships could launch their Vipers, to which he receives a report that they didn't. Yet Rigel reports that out of the 67 Vipers returning to Galactica, 25 fighters belonged to Galactica. Obviously, the other battlestars launched some of their Vipers, but in few numbers and not in time. Additionally, there might have been patrols from other battlestars that were deployed at the time, but returned to the main fight.
My point is that Battlestars appear to have a standard flight group of two squadrons, and a squadron has a standard strength of 75 ships. Tigh couldn't have known what the exact strength of the Basestar's fighter group was at that exact time, so his statement must have been based on a standard group at full strength.The addition of two damaged squadrons from Pegasus COULD have brought that number up to about 150. I concede my arguement....but we still don't know what the STANDARD capacity of fighters are.
Deepcrush wrote:Hmm... 610m... I'm not seeing that fitting 20 Nimitz in each pod...
I've seen that site before, and I'm not impressed. He's shows very little working, mixes canon with his own stuff, decides solium is hydrogen based on nothing remotely resembling evidence, assumes that the Basestars' weapons are the equal of the Ravishol pulsar, and has this little gem on sidearms:Mark wrote:Wait....I just remembered this site, which seems to have pretty good info
http://www.tecr.com/galactica/index.html
Same effects...almost five times the firepower. Really?a Colonial Blaster would have a power output of approximately 315 kilowatts...Cylon Blaster Rifles were able to vaporize a similar mass as the Colonial hand gun, and probably had an output of roughly 1.5 megawatts.
Because Vipers and their pilots have been shown to be far superior to Cylons. Even when outnumbered two to one.Captain Seafort wrote:Exactly - so why would it be any different with a single Basestar against a single Battlestar, when the odds would be much more heavily in the Cylons favour?
Again, I can't say I've measured either the destroyer or landing bay.The internal arrangement of the Eastern Alliance destroyer in "Greetings from Earth" means that it's wingspan can't be much less than 50 metres. When it leaves the Galactica's landing bay in Baltar's Escape, its wingspan can be seen to be about half the width of the bay. From there it's a simple matter to calculate that the Galactica is about a kilometre wide and two and a half kilometres long.
And yet when they outnumber the Cylons three to two they're shit? There would have been 400-odd Vipers deployed at Cimtar, even assuming the numbers Athena reported were proportional to those deployed. In practice they were probably weighted in favour of Galactica's own fighters, as they launched first and would therefore need to return to refuel first, and they would have been more predisposed to break of the action to return home, while the others would have naturally fallen back to defend their own home Battlestars rather than taking off across the stars to Galactica.Deepcrush wrote:Because Vipers and their pilots have been shown to be far superior to Cylons. Even when outnumbered two to one.