Proof that ST sensors are crap
Talon Karrde
In First Contact, after the Enterprise destroys the Borg Sphere, Riker asks Hawk
for a status on life signs on Earth (Montana Missile complex). Hawk replies
that he doesn't know as long range sensors are still down.
Now considering that the Enterprise was practically in orbit around earth, (It
was certainly nearer than the moon). I came to this conclusion by the visuals in
the film, the Enterprise and Earth appear in the same shot, now I haven't done
the math but I'm sure that by using the size of the Earth and the Enterprise E
(Both of which we know) we can calculate a fairly accurate distance.
Does this mean that ST short range sensors are pretty damn crap. It is also
stated in the film that the Enterprise E is the most advanced ship in the Fleet,
so any other ship must have sensors the same or worse than this.
Karrde
Lord Edam de Fromage
>Does this mean that ST short range sensors are pretty damn crap. It is
also
>stated in the film that the Enterprise E is the most advanced ship in the
Fleet,
>so any other ship must have sensors the same or worse than this.
Hey, you want crap sensors? Try an ISD incapable of spotting the space
slug's hole in ANH from very close range.
Lord Edam de Fromage
Now on AIM as Sorborus
"my friends, be warned: the writing of many posts is endless,
and excessive devotion to posting is wearying to the body"
A. Polinger
> I dunno if this has been discussed before.
>
> In First Contact, after the Enterprise destroys the Borg Sphere, Riker asks Hawk
> for a status on life signs on Earth (Montana Missile complex). Hawk replies
> that he doesn't know as long range sensors are still down.
>
> Now considering that the Enterprise was practically in orbit around earth, (It
> was certainly nearer than the moon). I came to this conclusion by the visuals in
> the film, the Enterprise and Earth appear in the same shot, now I haven't done
> the math but I'm sure that by using the size of the Earth and the Enterprise E
> (Both of which we know) we can calculate a fairly accurate distance.
>
> Does this mean that ST short range sensors are pretty damn crap.
No, it doesn't. It means that the E-E was more damaged than we know.
BTW, did it ever occure to ask what exactly the E-E needed to know? As
in, what it had to focus on? Borg life signs on the planet, for example?
Which would require pinpointing their implants?
Kyle
>
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Talon Karrde wrote:
>
> > I dunno if this has been discussed before.
> >
> > In First Contact, after the Enterprise destroys the Borg Sphere, Riker asks Hawk
> > for a status on life signs on Earth (Montana Missile complex). Hawk replies
> > that he doesn't know as long range sensors are still down.
> >
> > Now considering that the Enterprise was practically in orbit around earth, (It
> > was certainly nearer than the moon). I came to this conclusion by the visuals in
> > the film, the Enterprise and Earth appear in the same shot, now I haven't done
> > the math but I'm sure that by using the size of the Earth and the Enterprise E
> > (Both of which we know) we can calculate a fairly accurate distance.
> >
> > Does this mean that ST short range sensors are pretty damn crap.
>
> No, it doesn't. It means that the E-E was more damaged than we know.
> BTW, did it ever occure to ask what exactly the E-E needed to know? As
> in, what it had to focus on? Borg life signs on the planet, for example?
> Which would require pinpointing their implants?
>
It was loooking for any humans. They needed to see if anyone had
survived, that should be a fairly easy task.
Kyle
Matthew Hyde
> "A. Polinger" wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Talon Karrde wrote:
> >
> > > I dunno if this has been discussed before.
> > >
> > > In First Contact, after the Enterprise destroys the Borg Sphere, Riker asks Hawk
> > > for a status on life signs on Earth (Montana Missile complex). Hawk replies
> > > that he doesn't know as long range sensors are still down.
> > >
> > > Now considering that the Enterprise was practically in orbit around earth, (It
> > > was certainly nearer than the moon). I came to this conclusion by the visuals in
> > > the film, the Enterprise and Earth appear in the same shot, now I haven't done
> > > the math but I'm sure that by using the size of the Earth and the Enterprise E
> > > (Both of which we know) we can calculate a fairly accurate distance.
> > >
> > > Does this mean that ST short range sensors are pretty damn crap.
> >
> > No, it doesn't. It means that the E-E was more damaged than we know.
Then we would hear "the short-range sensors are on the fritz too"
> > BTW, did it ever occure to ask what exactly the E-E needed to know? As
> > in, what it had to focus on?
Life = life = tiny electrical emissions + heat.
Borg life signs on the planet, for example?
> > Which would require pinpointing their implants?
> >
bigger electrical emissions, bigger sensor blips
> It was loooking for any humans. They needed to see if anyone had
> survived, that should be a fairly easy task.
yup. "search for life signs" and he doesn't say "there is a herd of pronghorns heading down the
northeast slope by Malstrom AFB" I think that, since they were concerned with humans and maybe Borg,
we would be expecting an answer related to humans and maybe Borg. Do you think he is going to scan
for one and not the other?
--
It's easy to look dignified when you're doing math.
Matt Hyde, math lab consultant
Michigan Tech math sciences
http://www.mathlab.mtu.edu/~mdoughy
Chuck
Talon Karrde <Kar...@imperial-centre.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:88g6m2$14r$2...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
> I dunno if this has been discussed before.
>
> In First Contact, after the Enterprise destroys the Borg Sphere, Riker
asks Hawk
> for a status on life signs on Earth (Montana Missile complex). Hawk
replies
> that he doesn't know as long range sensors are still down.
>
Perhaps the short-range sensors have trouble penetrating atmosphere?
--
Chuck
"Odds are, if you're completely lost, Brandon Braga's behind you kicking the
map into the river."
hadri...@my-deja.com
"Lord Edam de Fromage" <michael....@spamfree.physics.org> wrote:
> Talon Karrde wrote in message <88g6m2
$14r$2...@neptunium.btinternet.com>...
>
is
> also
> >stated in the film that the Enterprise E is the most advanced ship
in the
> Fleet,
> >so any other ship must have sensors the same or worse than this.
>
> slug's hole in ANH from very close range.
>
You mean find a single roughly 100 meter square hole in a piece of rock
in an asteroid feild that covered how many thousands of cubic
kilometers?
> Lord Edam de Fromage
>
> Now on AIM as Sorborus
>
> "my friends, be warned: the writing of many posts is endless,
> and excessive devotion to posting is wearying to the body"
>
>
--
Yes, I know you would rather have a root canal
performed by Rabid Monekys while waiting in line
at the DMV, you've told me that a number of times.
Shadow Hammer - The 40K RPG
http://www.geocities.com/azazal_666_2000/
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Lord Edam de Fromage
> > Hey, you want crap sensors? Try an ISD incapable of spotting the
space
> > slug's hole in ANH from very close range.
> >
>
> You mean find a single roughly 100 meter square hole in a piece of
rock
> in an asteroid feild that covered how many thousands of cubic
> kilometers?
I mean "The ISD passed close to the asteroid, but its sensors couldn't
see the hole the MF had vanished into"
OK, that is more of a paraphrase than an exact quote, and if I remember
I'l get the exact quote when I get home, but it is quite explicit that
the Avenger's sensors were too crap to spot the thing.
>
> > Lord Edam de Fromage
> >
> > Now on AIM as Sorborus
> >
> > "my friends, be warned: the writing of many posts is endless,
> > and excessive devotion to posting is wearying to the body"
> >
> >
>
> --
> Yes, I know you would rather have a root canal
> performed by Rabid Monekys while waiting in line
> at the DMV, you've told me that a number of times.
> Shadow Hammer - The 40K RPG
> http://www.geocities.com/azazal_666_2000/
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
"My friends, be warned: the writing of many posts is endless,
and excessive devotion to posting is wearying to the body"
hadri...@my-deja.com
Lord Edam de Fromage <sorb...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> hadri...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > > Hey, you want crap sensors? Try an ISD incapable of spotting the
> space
> > > slug's hole in ANH from very close range.
> > >
> >
> > You mean find a single roughly 100 meter square hole in a piece of
> rock
> > in an asteroid feild that covered how many thousands of cubic
> > kilometers?
>
> I mean "The ISD passed close to the asteroid, but its sensors couldn't
> see the hole the MF had vanished into"
>
> OK, that is more of a paraphrase than an exact quote, and if I
remember
> I'l get the exact quote when I get home, but it is quite explicit that
> the Avenger's sensors were too crap to spot the thing.
OK i'll check out the movie over the weekend as well, but I do not
remeber the Avenger as hving pasted directly over the asteraoid the MF
was hiding in.
> "My friends, be warned: the writing of many posts is endless,
> and excessive devotion to posting is wearying to the body"
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
Kynes
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Talon Karrde wrote:
>
> >
> > In First Contact, after the Enterprise destroys the Borg Sphere, Riker asks Hawk
> > for a status on life signs on Earth (Montana Missile complex). Hawk replies
> > that he doesn't know as long range sensors are still down.
> >
> > was certainly nearer than the moon). I came to this conclusion by the visuals in
> > the film, the Enterprise and Earth appear in the same shot, now I haven't done
> > the math but I'm sure that by using the size of the Earth and the Enterprise E
> > (Both of which we know) we can calculate a fairly accurate distance.
> >
>
LOL! This takes the cake of Anton idiocy, which is a hard cake to take. "It can't
possibly mean that. The Enterprise-E must have been even more damaged than the
movie said!" Got any PROOF for this ridiculous assumption, or should we just assume
that you're being an asshole troll again?
--
-LK!
[ ky...@choam.org ] [ ICQ: 795238 ] [ AIM: Kynes23 ]
If life gives you llamas, make llamanade.
Talon Karrde
Chuck <CS...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:88hspi$ae50$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Talon Karrde <Kar...@imperial-centre.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:88g6m2$14r$2...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
> >
> > In First Contact, after the Enterprise destroys the Borg Sphere, Riker
> asks Hawk
> > for a status on life signs on Earth (Montana Missile complex). Hawk
> replies
> > that he doesn't know as long range sensors are still down.
> >
Which would make them crap then.
Karrde
Dalton
>
> Talon Karrde wrote in message <88g6m2$14r$2...@neptunium.btinternet.com>...
>
> >Does this mean that ST short range sensors are pretty damn crap. It is
> also
> >stated in the film that the Enterprise E is the most advanced ship in the
> Fleet,
> >so any other ship must have sensors the same or worse than this.
>
> slug's hole in ANH from very close range.
>
Erm, that's ESB, and to be fair I don't think it was carbon-based.
--
Dalton
AIM: RobPDalton
ICQ: 50342303
"I think I'll spread some joy over this way."
sea...@my-deja.com
"Talon Karrde" <Kar...@imperial-centre.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> I dunno if this has been discussed before.
>
> In First Contact, after the Enterprise destroys the Borg Sphere,
Riker asks Hawk
> for a status on life signs on Earth (Montana Missile complex). Hawk
replies
> that he doesn't know as long range sensors are still down.
>
I understand what you're driving at. However, I don't think this
is the best possible example of Federation sensors, either, since
the E-E wasn't up to snuff after it appeared in orbit of Earth.
Further, these are *very* specific life signs we're looking at
here, a few dozen or hundred at most out of several million.
>
> Does this mean that ST short range sensors are pretty damn crap. It
is also
> stated in the film that the Enterprise E is the most advanced ship in
the Fleet,
> so any other ship must have sensors the same or worse than this.
>
> Karrde
"Most advanced ship in the fleet" does *not* necessarily mean
she's equipped with the best sensor suites, just as it doesn't
necessarily mean the Sovereign class are the best armed, best
shielded, fastest, etc. But I would concede that it is likely
E-E has among the best sensors, given that the Sovereign-class
is probably an Explorer. Thus, your conclusion is cogent,
but only for certain w/in a specific context; i.e., a ship lacking
some major systems.
Just by way of contrast, what is the best example of ST sensor
usage? What's the worst? And same questions applied to the
Wars side of things.
Will
Lord Edam de Fromage
>> I mean "The ISD passed close to the asteroid, but its sensors couldn't
>> see the hole the MF had vanished into"
>>
>> OK, that is more of a paraphrase than an exact quote, and if I remember
>> I'l get the exact quote when I get home, but it is quite explicit that
>> the Avenger's sensors were too crap to spot the thing.
>Well, they had shut down almost everything on board the ship, and given
the
>fact that they were inside the belly of the space slug, it was probably
>assumed that any anomalous readings was the slug.
See a full quote elsewhere in this thread. It isn't about finding the MF
or not - it is about being unable to spot a hole big enough for the MF to
hide in, despite knowing the MF is hiding somewhere in/around that
asteroid, possibly in such a hole.
Lord Edam de Fromage
>> Maybe they weren't scanning it. Maybe they were detecting the escape
pod's
>> telemetry. it owul dmake sense for an emergency escape pod to have some
>> form of telemetry to let rescuers know where it is and who/what is on
>> board.
>
>Well how is the pod going to know unless the occupants tell it?
Easy. Is the life support equipment in this here emergency escape pod
being taxed in a way it would be if there were life forms on board? No?
then there aint. No need to transmit the fact that there are lifeforms
that need rescuing then.
>> >2) they would probably use the pod for target practice regardless.
>
>> What, those gunners are so crap they need all the practice they an get?
>
>Well I won't comment on the gunner's abilities since they aren't on my
>crew :) but it is common practice for warships to practice on anything
and
>everything that's feasible (i.e., "No, Weps, we may NOT target the
Italian
>frigate just because of world war 2!") A sci-fi warship should not be so
>different from a real warship that they won't practice on stuff.
They had targetted it, they just didn't shoot at it.
There was
>an officer there that obviously had go-no-go authority over the gunners.
>Were he a real ensign in charge of a gunnery division, he would most
>likely have said "yes, go ahead and peg that fucker."
Why bother? They undoubtedly already had it targeted, they had no reason
to think it needed destroying. Might as well let it go. I don't think the
US Navy actually *shot* at all those things they practiced targetting did
they? (mind you, this is the US military we are talking about. They shoot
their own people and don't know what a lighthouse looks like)
>> >that reminds me of something ELSE:
>> >In the pod, C3PO looks out the window and sees the ISD and comments,
"The
>> >damage doesn't look as bad from out here." He mistook an ISD for a
>> >TANTIVE? He can't remember what ship he got on? What a dumbass!
>
>> Why would he care what ship he was on? Why would he care what
differences
>> ships ahve? He's a protocol droid.
>
>Well I figure, you know, he had to get on it and some point and would at
>least have seen what it looked like from the outside.
Like all those people getting on airplanes in the airport know what their
plane looks like? Like all those people getting in taxis, buses etc.
around the world note who the company is, what colour they are, what make
the car is?
C3P0 is a protocol droid, and starships in SW are as commona s cars and
coaches here on earth. He has no reason to care what the ship looked like.
All he'd care about is whether or not his boss has told him to get on it.
>I could understand R2 being interested,
>> but not C3P0. How many UN Transloators do you think can tell the
>> difference between, say, a US aircraft carrier and the far far smaller
UK
>> aircraft carriers without having the two side-by-side to compare?
>
>Well, if they had ridden on one, and saw the other during their ride,
they
>should be able to remember little things like relative size.
Even when they are leaving it after it being attacked and they can only
see one ship?
>Are the size disparities between the CVs that great? I saw a French CV
>once but I can't remember its size. :) I know they are smaller, but "far
>far?"
Of fthe top of my head I wouldn't have a clue, but I think the difference
is getting on for four or five times.
Lord Edam de Fromage
Now on AIM as Sorborus
"my friends, be warned: the writing of many posts is endless,
Lord Edam de Fromage
>> >Kind of like that guy who blows up Voyager in ST:4.
>>
>> Voyager? In the one with the whales that I try to avoid because
otherwise
>> I start thinking of Spock as Kato?
>HeHe. It was... 3?
No point asking me. the only voyager I remember from the films was V'Ger
in 1. And that didn't get blown up. Or did it?
Chuck
Lord Edam de Fromage <michael....@spamfree.physics.org> wrote in
message news:88kkvm$g4b$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >Kind of like that guy who blows up Voyager in ST:4.
>
> Voyager? In the one with the whales that I try to avoid because otherwise
> I start thinking of Spock as Kato?
HeHe. It was... 3?
--
Chuck
Sci-Fi Debris: http://pages.prodigy.net/csonn/debris.html
Join the Star Wars vs. Star Trek Webring!
http://pages.prodigy.net/csonn/asvs.html
Chuck
Lord Edam de Fromage <michael....@spamfree.physics.org> wrote in
message news:88kljj$ghq$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Chuck wrote in message <88klam$28nq$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com>...
>
> >> >Kind of like that guy who blows up Voyager in ST:4.
> >>
> >> Voyager? In the one with the whales that I try to avoid because
> otherwise
> >> I start thinking of Spock as Kato?
>
> >HeHe. It was... 3?
>
> No point asking me. the only voyager I remember from the films was V'Ger
> in 1. And that didn't get blown up. Or did it?
Then I'm gonna say 3. Anyway, the scene is this shot of what looks like one
of the Voyager probes floating through space, and suddenly it's blown to
bits by some Klingons. The gunner bitches because he's bored, I think.
--
Chuck
"We're NOT going to do this! We're not going to go bouncing off the walls
for ten minutes and wind up right back here with the same problem!" (Apollo
13)
Lord Edam de Fromage
><snip>
>
>> >2) they would probably use the pod for target practice regardless.
>>
>> What, those gunners are so crap they need all the practice they an get?
>
Matthew Hyde
Lord Edam de Fromage <michael....@spamfree.physics.org> wrote:
> Matthew Hyde wrote in message <88kdv6$gq1$1...@campus3.mtu.edu>...
> >> Maybe they weren't scanning it. Maybe they were detecting the escape
> pod's
> >> telemetry. it owul dmake sense for an emergency escape pod to have some
> >> form of telemetry to let rescuers know where it is and who/what is on
> >> board.
> >
> >Well how is the pod going to know unless the occupants tell it?
> Easy. Is the life support equipment in this here emergency escape pod
> being taxed in a way it would be if there were life forms on board? No?
> then there aint. No need to transmit the fact that there are lifeforms
> that need rescuing then.
that's a lot more than I think even the writers were going for. Yes I know,
banned by the FAQ, but that line of reasoning is just way out there when
you compare it to merely scanning.
> >> >2) they would probably use the pod for target practice regardless.
> >
> >> What, those gunners are so crap they need all the practice they an get?
> >
> >Well I won't comment on the gunner's abilities since they aren't on my
> >crew :) but it is common practice for warships to practice on anything
> and
> >everything that's feasible (i.e., "No, Weps, we may NOT target the
> Italian
> >frigate just because of world war 2!") A sci-fi warship should not be so
> >different from a real warship that they won't practice on stuff.
> They had targetted it, they just didn't shoot at it.
Yah you're right.
> There was
> >an officer there that obviously had go-no-go authority over the gunners.
> >Were he a real ensign in charge of a gunnery division, he would most
> >likely have said "yes, go ahead and peg that fucker."
> Why bother? They undoubtedly already had it targeted, they had no reason
> to think it needed destroying. Might as well let it go.
you could just as well say "might as well shoot it." this is the
trigger-happy Empire and not the fluffy clouds Empire, right? Heh.
I don't think the
> US Navy actually *shot* at all those things they practiced targetting did
> they?
Well actually if they have a live fire they just try to put up a group, but
with garbage like empty AFFF canisters, they would try to sink it. I am not
sure if I am spouting jargon here, so I'll just define "AFFF canister."
AFFF is aqueous film-forming foam, AKA light water when you mix it with
the firefighting water, for fighting Class B fires.It comes in bright blue
5-gallon plastic cans that make great targets for small-arms fire (marines
with rifles). The actual ship weaponry they use a target sled, "killer
tomato," or airborne drone, and they don't actually try to destroy it (even
though the ship I was on did turn an expensive drone into roughly a million
pieces of garbage with the 20mm once :)
I was thinking that, since this is the empire, they just captured an enemy
ship, and since the pod was empty as far as they were concerned, they
would just blow it up.
(mind you, this is the US military we are talking about. They shoot
> their own people and don't know what a lighthouse looks like)
If that is a reference to the Nimitz telling a lighthouse to get out of the
way, that didn't happen. It was the Wisconsin. No it was the Enterprise.
No, the Constitution! Nevermind, it's a myth and it's a billion years old.
the Phoenicians probably told it up and down the Med.
> >> >that reminds me of something ELSE:
> >> >In the pod, C3PO looks out the window and sees the ISD and comments,
> "The
> >> >damage doesn't look as bad from out here." He mistook an ISD for a
> >> >TANTIVE? He can't remember what ship he got on? What a dumbass!
> >
> >> Why would he care what ship he was on? Why would he care what
> differences
> >> ships ahve? He's a protocol droid.
> >
> >Well I figure, you know, he had to get on it and some point and would at
> >least have seen what it looked like from the outside.
> Like all those people getting on airplanes in the airport know what their
> plane looks like? Like all those people getting in taxis, buses etc.
> around the world note who the company is, what colour they are, what make
> the car is?
Actually, most people have their eyes open when they board a plane, don't
you? :p If you have a layover and you get into a different-sized plane, you
WOULD be able to tell, wouldn't you?
> C3P0 is a protocol droid, and starships in SW are as commona s cars and
> coaches here on earth. He has no reason to care what the ship looked like.
> All he'd care about is whether or not his boss has told him to get on it.
He might not care, but the visual imprint would be there in his memory
bank, and it just wouldn't match up with an ISD profile. Plus, how old is
3PO? He is old enough to see, if they were so common, both ISDs and
Tantives and know the difference between a battleship and a frigate. And,
as you say, starships are as common as cars are to us, so the analogy would
be not being able to tell a Morris Minor from a 57 Chevy. Right! And the
difference between an ISD and a tantive is as great as a
modern Camry to an Amish horsebuggy. We are not comparing Lexuses to
Inifinitis here!
> >I could understand R2 being interested,
> >> but not C3P0. How many UN Transloators do you think can tell the
> >> difference between, say, a US aircraft carrier and the far far smaller
> UK
> >> aircraft carriers without having the two side-by-side to compare?
> >
> >Well, if they had ridden on one, and saw the other during their ride,
> they
> >should be able to remember little things like relative size.
> Even when they are leaving it after it being attacked and they can only
> see one ship?
He saw the ship when he got on, unless they carried him in a crate, which
they may well have done but I doubt it. We didn't see him in a crate so it
doesn't exist. The profiles are different. Even now I can tell a Knox from
a Perry, or a Kiev from a Vinson.
> >Are the size disparities between the CVs that great? I saw a French CV
> >once but I can't remember its size. :) I know they are smaller, but "far
> >far?"
> Of fthe top of my head I wouldn't have a clue, but I think the difference
> is getting on for four or five times.
Damn. And look what you made me do! I didn't mean to rattle on and on abt
this, I mean my original post was just a little nitpick, I mean, really, I
don't care that much! I don't I tell you! lol.
Eric
<Lusankya...@Aol.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> < snip >
>
>>
>>>Are the size disparities between the CVs that great? I saw a
>French CV
>>>once but I can't remember its size. :) I know they are
>smaller, but "far
>>>far?"
>>
>>Of fthe top of my head I wouldn't have a clue, but I think the
>difference
>>is getting on for four or five times.
>>
>
> A Charles De Gaulle class nuclear powered Aircraft Carrier is
>858 feet long. A Nimitz class nuclear powered Aircraft carrier
>is 1,089 feet long. An Invincible class STOVL carrier is 686
>feet long. It would be easy to mix up the Charles De Gaulle and
>the Nimitz from a distance of more than one or two miles, but
>the Invincibles are quite distinctive, even to laypersons.. They
>have two funnels, while the nuclear powered Charles De Gaulle
>and Nimitz have none.
>
> Marina O'Leary
>
>
>* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
>The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
STOVL carriers are far more distinctive than that...they're quite a
bit shorter, a lot narrower, have a much smaller flight deck, and the
front of the flight deck is sloped upwards.
Is the Invincible the American (USMC) carrier, or is it the British
version?
Eric
remove NO.SPAM.DAMMIT to mail
"Sufficiently advanced technology is often indistinguishable
from magic." - Clarke's Third Law
"My ethicator machine must've had a built-in moral compromise
spectral release phantasmatron! I'm a genuis!"
A. Polinger
> > > bigger electrical emissions, bigger sensor blips
> >
> > Among all sorts of crap, radiation in the atomosphere, with animals and
> > people around, possibly covered up underground, etc.
>
> that doesn't seem to be a consideration whenever the captain orders such a
> thing. If that was such a concern, why would they bother?
The ship's systems are not that damaged whenever a captain orders this.
A. Polinger
> > > Life = life = tiny electrical emissions + heat.
> >
> > What kind of life, how many, etc.?
>
> The kind with brains and blood and moving parts and internal furnaces. The
> organic kind. The kind with which they would be concerned.
Which includes just about everything on the planet. I suspect that the
captain was not worried that the Borg sphere wiped out all life on the
surface with a few small blasts.
> Which reminds me, there is something in ANH that bugs me:
>
> "Sir, an escape pod has been jettisoned from the ship"
> "Hold your fire. There are no life forms aboard."
>
> There are 2 things wrong with that. 1) If they were scanning it for life
> forms, what form would those forms take? Electricity and heat, right? How
> are the droids operating without giving off emissions?
> 2) they would probably use the pod for target practice regardless. They
> just needed to get the story rolling.
Mmm. You are right of course. But I would like to point out that if I
was Strowbridge or somebody like that, I would have already started a
flame war by now. Just because of this. ;)
> that reminds me of something ELSE:
> In the pod, C3PO looks out the window and sees the ISD and comments, "The
> damage doesn't look as bad from out here." He mistook an ISD for a
> TANTIVE? He can't remember what ship he got on? What a dumbass!
Umm. I wonder how large the actual brains of the android used in the
movie were. Probably a few transistors at best. What do you think? :)
A. Polinger
> > > Then we would hear "the short-range sensors are on the fritz too"
>
> > Federation officers don't say "fritz"!!! But you are right, it is
> > strange.
>
> OK. "Captain! The short-ranges are fucked up too!"
"Shit!!! Data, did your cat wizz on the universal translator matrix
again?"
Paul Cassidy
Dalton <dalto...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:38ACD9A9...@erols.com...
> Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
> >
> > Talon Karrde wrote in message <88g6m2$14r$2...@neptunium.btinternet.com>...
> >
> > also
> > >stated in the film that the Enterprise E is the most advanced ship in
the
> > Fleet,
> > >so any other ship must have sensors the same or worse than this.
> >
> > slug's hole in ANH from very close range.
> >
>
> Erm, that's ESB, and to be fair I don't think it was carbon-based.
>
But it was very big! :)
Chuck
Paul Cassidy <paul.c...@wxs.nl> wrote in message
news:88lq8u$3ei17$1...@reader3.wxs.nl...
> > Erm, that's ESB, and to be fair I don't think it was carbon-based.
> >
>
> But it was very big! :)
I sense the beginnings of the Imperial version of an Austin Powers gag.
"Commander! The Falcon may have gone into that opening there."
"Any sign of the ship?"
"Negative. From these readings it looks like a huge....."
Lord Edam de Fromage
>> OK, that is more of a paraphrase than an exact quote, and if I remember
>> I'l get the exact quote when I get home, but it is quite explicit that
>> the Avenger's sensors were too crap to spot the thing.
>
confirm that
>the ISD did detect the hole and also the space slug. But seeing as the
hole
>contains the space slug, it is possible they thought the MF could not
have gone
>in it.
>
>Like I said there is nothing to confirm any of this, but as an
explanation it is
>just as plausible as yours.
See a fuller quote elsewhere in this thread.
Lord Edam de Fromage
>> >> >Kind of like that guy who blows up Voyager in ST:4.
>> >>
>> >> Voyager? In the one with the whales that I try to avoid because
>> otherwise
>> >> I start thinking of Spock as Kato?
>>
>> >HeHe. It was... 3?
>>
>> No point asking me. the only voyager I remember from the films was
V'Ger
>> in 1. And that didn't get blown up. Or did it?
>Then I'm gonna say 3. Anyway, the scene is this shot of what looks like
one
>of the Voyager probes floating through space, and suddenly it's blown to
>bits by some Klingons. The gunner bitches because he's bored, I think.
Ah yes. But those were the Klingons. They need all the prectice they can
get.
Lord Edam de Fromage
>> > > Hey, you want crap sensors? Try an ISD incapable of spotting the
>> space
>> > > slug's hole in ANH from very close range.
>> > >
>> >
>> > You mean find a single roughly 100 meter square hole in a piece of
>> rock
>> > in an asteroid feild that covered how many thousands of cubic
>> > kilometers?
>>
>> I mean "The ISD passed close to the asteroid, but its sensors couldn't
>> see the hole the MF had vanished into"
>>
>> OK, that is more of a paraphrase than an exact quote, and if I remember
>> I'l get the exact quote when I get home, but it is quite explicit that
>> the Avenger's sensors were too crap to spot the thing.
>
>I don't know, Edam. It went pretty far inside of the hole (and into the
>slug) and the sensors might not have been able to scan past the metallic
>ore; additionally, I don't think the Avenger was anywhere near it, as
>they used TIE Bombers to try and flush them out rather than blowing it
>apart with turbolasers.
See a more detailed quote elsewhere in this thread.
And I NEVER SAID they failed to scan the MF. Why have each and every one
of you responded with reasons they might have missed the MF when that
isn't what I said?
Also, I think the key phrase is FLUSH THEM OUT, rather than BLOW THEM TO
SMITHEREENS.
Lord Edam de Fromage
>> >Erm, that's ESB, and to be fair I don't think it was carbon-based.
>>
>> Oh, right. I thought we were just talking sensors in general, so
thought
>> "As it drifted above the asteroid one of the ISDs cast an eclipsing
shadow
>> across the tunnel entrance. Yet the ship's scanners failed to note the
>> curious hole in the bowl-like wall". Considering they were trying to
find
>> a ship that could easily hide in said hole I thought this was
important.
>> from a very short range the ISD can't pick up a hole a couple of times
>> larger than the MF.
>>
>> Didn't realise we were only talking about being able to pick up life
signs
>> at long range using only the short range scanners.
>>
>
>Wow, that's the single most sarcastic reply I've ever got out of you.
>
>You could have just politely corrected me.
I did think about that, but then thought Nah. Be sarcastic for a change.
Matthew Hyde
Talon Karrde <Kar...@imperial-centre.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > There are 2 things wrong with that. 1) If they were scanning it for life
> > forms, what form would those forms take? Electricity and heat, right? How
> > are the droids operating without giving off emissions?
> > 2) they would probably use the pod for target practice regardless. They
> > just needed to get the story rolling.
> Maybe the sensors a set to detect organic life forms.
> > that reminds me of something ELSE:
> > In the pod, C3PO looks out the window and sees the ISD and comments, "The
> > damage doesn't look as bad from out here." He mistook an ISD for a
> > TANTIVE? He can't remember what ship he got on? What a dumbass!
> But the corvette was in the bay and visible, 3PO has electronic vision, so he
> could have magnified the image and seen the damage done to the Tantive IV.
> What's dumb about that?
Absolutely nothing, in fact it was the only real alternative I could see
myself :) ...It's far more sensible than another poster's
suggestion that C3PO can't tell the ships apart and didn't know what ship
he was on.
Matthew Hyde
Talon Karrde <Kar...@imperial-centre.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Maybe the sensors a set to detect organic life forms.
How? heat, brainwaves=electricity, the presence of carbon, etc?
Matthew Hyde
> From da buke
Doesn't the movie override the canon book?
Lord Edam de Fromage
>> ""As it drifted above the asteroid one of the ISDs cast an eclipsing
>> shadow
>> across the tunnel entrance. Yet the ship's scanners failed to note the
>> curious hole in the bowl-like wall. Within that hole, in a winding
tunnel
>> not detected by the minions of the powerfull empire sat the freighter".
>
>[Lord Edam mode on]
>
>Notice the phrasing: the scanners failed to NOTE the curious hole. That's
>because the Falcon is equipped for stealth, powered down, and inside a
>slug.
How would the status or abilities of the MF change the fact that they
couldn't spot the hole ("within that hole, in a winding tunnel *not
detected* by the empire's minions")?
The scanner "failed to note" (i.e. paint) that hole because it
>didn't fit the criteria of the search. Otherwise the hundreds of
thousands
>of craters on hundreds of thousands of asteroids would be pinging the
>sensors relentlessly like an alarm clock.
Red Herring.
"Two imperial cruisers slowly moved across the surface of the great
asteroid. The Millenium Falcon had to be hidden somewhere within - but
where?
As the ships skimmed the surface of the asteroid, they dropped bombs on
its pocked marked terrain, trying to scare out the freighter. The shock
waves from the explosives violently shoock the spheroid, but still there
was no sign of the Falcon"
So they knew the falcon had to be *inside* the asteroid somewhere, and
they didn't consider it might be inside a hole several times larger than
the MF?
Talon Karrde
Lord Edam de Fromage <michael....@spamfree.physics.org> wrote in message
news:88p47l$d87$6...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
But the hole was populated by the space slug, so they would have no need to
investigate. Would you look for a rabbit in a bear cave?
Karrde
Lord Edam de Fromage
Any evidence they knew the hole was populated by a space slug? And in
anycase, they DID NOT DETECT IT. It doesn't say detected the hole and
ignored it because it had a space slug in it, it says didn't detect the
tunnel at all.