Battlestar Wiki:Official Communiques

This page is one of Battlestar Wiki's many projects. This page serves to coordinate discussion on a particular aspect of this Wiki. The formal recommendations of a project may be treated as policies.

Members of Battlestar Wiki: This page is to coordinate all questions to any official members of the cast or crew of "Battlestar Galactica." Please sign your question after you are done. the "summary" of the question should be be first, if any, and then the questions, in short form, should be placed at the bottom. This is to not confuse people and to keep the quetions distictive.

Cast/Crew: These are questions we are seeking from you. If you have the time, please answer them as best you can. We will move these questions/answers to the correct page once they have been done. You can also check out Category:Seeking Official Information for larger items - particularly pictures.

All questions which have been previouslly answerd can be found on the archive pages. Questions get moved here once items and questions seeming from the issue have stopped.

• Archive 1:

Other concerns about interview text in "Final Cut", 3 Raptor pilot names, Tie-in Material, Helo Rank, Colonial One and One, Hadrian in "Valley of Darkness", Scar, Rebirth Room, Restraints on Galactica-Sharon in "Downloaded", "Radar" gaffe in "The Hand of God"?, Resurrection Ship

Ask a new question by clicking here.

---

Squadron numbers

How many Vipers are in a "squadron" in the terminology used by the Colonial Fleet? I ask because in "Scar" Roslin said they were getting enough metal ore to build "two squadrons" of Vipers. Is a squadron 10? 12? 20? If a squadron is 20, this would be a dramatic increase.

While I'm on the subject, we've speculated that based on this dialogue, Mercury class battlestars have some sort of limited Viper production facilities but the exact nature of such facilities eludes us.--->Another problem has come up regarding information from Battlestar Galactica Magazine: it's information isn't always quite accurate and when I asked Ron (via Mrs.Ron) on the messageboards, he said they aren't directly affiliated with the magazine in any way, so I don't know how this fits--> in issue #3, they say:

"A Battlestar's air wing generally consists of six to eight squadrons (20 ships each)...20 Vipers also form a reserve unit to replace lost or damaged ships on an ad hoc basis. Each squadron is also supported by a single Raptor" (P.59)

Is this magazine information accurate? Are there 20 Vipers to a squadron? How many Vipers is Galactica capable of carrying (that is, during its prime when it was a new ship in the Cylon War, how many Vipers is it meant to support?): How many can a Mercury-class Battlestar like Pegasus hold? --->Based on these magazine numbers, there should only have been 6-8 at most Raptors on Galactica (during it's prime, so by the time of the Cylon attack probably less): In "Lay Down Your Burdens, Part I" we see 20 Raptors jump to Caprica; Pegasus probably had an equal number of Raptors on board, but where did so many Raptors come from? Can Pegasus construct Raptors just like Vipers? Or (my explanation), are there just many refugee Raptors which escaped to Ragnar, because they've got their own FTL drives? I mean Boomer escaped all the way from Caprica to Ragnar, and Crashdown was stated as being a refugee from another ship, so presumably a few other Raptors made it out (well, that's our assumption. I still think its entirely plausible and not a stretch that there were 20 though). --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:53, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

"Skin Jobs"

To ask the most fannish of fan questions (not so much a "question" shouting "wow!"), how was the decision made for Cylons to be referred to as "Skin Jobs" a la Blade Runner in "Downloaded"? What did everyone in the writer's room think?  :) :) :) (My personal wish list includes that one day someone will refer to killing a Cylon as "retiring" them...hey, that might not work on the current series, but on the Caprica prequel when the Cylons worked for humans that kind of makes sense. Plus I hope "Number One" turns out to be Rutger Hauer...or Avery Brooks. Both good actors...)--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:08, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

There was no real "decision" as such. We were writing Downloaded. Barolay and Anders were on the roof and we needed a quick way to categorize. We remembered the term from blade runner and put it in. The drafts went through the usual pathways of approval and nobody shot it down. So now there are skin jobs along with metal jobs, clankers, and bulletheads (that last is credited to Gary Hutzel). Ngarenn 21:24, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

Cylon Homeworld

I've listened to the Writer's room podcasts on Scifi.com so I understand that exact details about the Cylon homeworld are very much a work in progress (For all we know it's just a bunch of Tylium-rich asteroids lashed together), but I've got a question about its location which was brought up in season one: In "The Hand of God", the following exchange takes place between Apollo and Gaeta:

Gaeta: "They'd build a refinery this far from their homeworld?"

Apollo: "Why not? They need fuel out here just as much as we do"

Judging from this dialogue, do the Colonials actually know where the Cylon Homeworld is? Roughly speaking at least? I mean they may have never set foot on it or seen it, but do they have a general idea of where it is? If Galactica has fled into deep space, far from the Twelve Colonies, and while in this same deep space location Gaeta said that they were also very far away from the Cylon Homeworld, does this mean the Cylon Homeworld is relatively close to the Twelve Colonies? I would assume so; that when they left the Twelve Colonies at the end of the Cylon War they didn't travel half way across the galaxy, but went somewhere relatively near.

We assume Armistice Station was built near a border that we promised not to cross as part of the cease-fire terms. Space is BIG. The Cylons vanished beyond these borders. Gaeta and Apollo are probably using Armistice Station as a house number for where that home world might be -- and that's a long way from where they are at the time of Hand of God. So either the Cylons have to truck their fuel all the way out, or they live off local resources they've found in this section of space they've guessed the resource-poor Colonials may try to exploit. Ngarenn 19:32, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

While I'm on the subject, they said that in the region of deep space Galactica and Pegasus had fled to by "Pegasus (episode)", they were out of "downloading" range from the Cylon Homeworld. In "Downloaded" they say that Cylons killed in the cafe will be reborn, and we also see that during the events of the Miniseries 9 months before, Caprica-Six was also reborn.--->Is the Cylon Homeworld close to the Twelve Colonies, and thus the Twelve Colonies are within downloading-range from it? That is, downloading worked fine on them and they didn't need the support of the Resurrection Ship to download while on Caprica?--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:41, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

The Cylons either built a downloading facility on Caprica or detailed one of their few Resurrection Ships to Colonial occupation duties. By "Pegasus," Galactica's a long way from both. Downloading is very touchy (and highly classified technology). Ngarenn 19:32, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Galactica Chain of Command

in "Scattered", Commander Adama is shot so his XO Colonel Tigh takes command, while Captain Aaron Kelly then becomes his acting XO. Is Captain Kelly normally third-in-command of Galactica (well, before the many promotions and shifting assignments in Season 2.5 post-"Pegasus")? Or is Apollo normally third in command, but because he was arrested for mutiny, he was removed from the normal succession?--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:11, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

Captain Kelly would undoubtadely be the "third in command", or more correctly, the "Second Officer". Captain Adama is the Commander of the Air Group- if, as much of the rest of the show suggests, the Colonial Fleet closely follws the US military's organization, then Apollo would not be directly involved in the day-to-day running of Galactica herself, merely the air group stationed aboard her. --Madbrood 14:48, 12 July 2006 (CDT)

"Caprica-Six"

In "Downloaded", the Number Six that seduced Baltar is in-story referred to as "Caprica-Six" (as the Cylons didn't really have "celebrity" individuals before and simply no need to destinguish individuals before her, they say it's sort of an ad hoc name).---->There's an online fan convention which sort of developed over time for differentiating Cylon copies: Galactica-Sharon, Caprica-Sharon, Caprica-Six, Pegasus-Six, etc. (I've searched around and this is a true gestalt: no one person or website created this, but it simultaneously aggregated on many sites at the same time, to the point that by Season 2 it had simply become the common way to tell them apart: i.e. on the official messageboards we routinely call them "Galactica-Sharon" and "Caprica-Sharon"). --->Was naming the Caprica-based copy of Number Six "Caprica-Six" a referrence to this fan naming convention which developed? I thought it might be because that joke is included where Number Three points this out and says "They call you "Caprica-Six"...as if your the only Six on the planet!"....which I thought might be a little jest at the fans, because to be honest we'd seen in "Colonial Day" etc. that there were many other copies of Number Eight/Sharon Valerri on Caprica, but still called the one with Helo "Caprica-Sharon"...when she was only one of many on the planet. (As you can see on this section we were already discussing the "Location-Name" identification nomenclature when I (using my old screename, Ricimer) made up this hi-larious send up of the whole thing, in which I already refer to her as "Caprica-Six" in November of last year). --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:41, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

Caprica Six was named by the writers, either in the room, on the page, or in rewrites. I'm not sure when that appeared , but my best guess is that it was Ron. I doubt that it was because of the boards. We certainly weren't conversant with them when we wrote the show. Ngarenn 21:31, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

Tom Zarek / Ellen Tigh involvement

"Colonial Day" made it very clear that Ellen Tigh furnished Zarek with the information he needed to have Valance killed, and later intended her husband to meet with his agents afterward. Why was this plot thread dropped, after making such a big deal of it in the episode? --Peter Farago 00:09, 18 June 2006 (CDT)

Zarek also stated that he had no connection with the death of Valance. And though we're not privvy to all of Tigh's bedroom conversations, we might assume that Ellen's machinations failed to gain her husband's co-operation. After all, she couldn't even get him to shake hands with the ex-terrorist. Ngarenn 19:40, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

There are many plausible in-continuity explanations for why this wasn't followed up - I was more interested in what was going on in the writer's room, and if you all had plans to pursue this thread before the course of season 2 was settled upon. --Peter Farago 15:14, 20 June 2006 (CDT)

Peter - There were many arguments pro and con as to where this would go. But events passed us by and we haven't returned to it. Sometimes we plant seeds without knowing whether they'll sprout. Like Boxey - who was written into several early episodes, then left on the cutting room floor because of time constraints. Giving Baltar a nuke was one of those seeds, and throughout the first two seasons we constantly wondered what he'd do with the thing. There were some pretty whacky ideas. But having it in our back pocket was really useful when "Lay Your Burdens Down" came up. It's part of the fun of writing the show - Ngarenn 21:01, 20 June 2006 (CDT)

Thanks. Your clarification will be helpful for closing out that line of speculation on Ellen's article. --Peter Farago 03:57, 21 June 2006 (CDT)

That isn't to say that WE have closed it out.  :) - Ngarenn 16:50, 21 June 2006 (CDT)

Resources

To what extent does the writing staff keep track of the fleet's limited resources? Ronald Moore has identified the disregard that Star Trek: Voyager showed to resource issues to be one of his pet peeves with the series, and I'm curious to what extent the BSG staff try to address this. Notably,

• Although survivor count figures throughout both seasons are broadly consistant, the off-screen casualties sustained in several second-season combat situations seems suspiciously small. The opening credit survivor count reveals that 11 people are killed offscreen during the boarding action in "Valley of Darkness", 4 in the Battle of the Resurrection Ship, and none during "The Captain's Hand".

Two ways to look at this: 1) The casualties aren't updated on Laura's board in as timely a fashion as she'd like (so they were factored in later). OR 2) We screwed up. The staff (post, writing, and art) took a hard look at that question at the end of season 2 and then again at the beginning of season 3 to come up with a reasonable number... Ngarenn 19:59, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

• The size of the Fleet changes from 40 FTL capable ships in the miniseries to (apparently) around 75 during the second season.

My best information is that there were 57 ships listed on the board for the election that Laura tried to steal. Ngarenn 19:59, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

• Galactica is able to deploy six Raptors simultaneously in "Kobol's Last Gleaming, Part II", during which only two are destroyed. Oddly, in "Fragged", which seems to take place late in the same day, Lee Adama orders a raptor scrapped for parts to make up a two-ship rescue party, then a few days later in "Resistance", Tigh is able to have five raptors standing by to board ships protesting his policies.

As is usual in Fleet Air operations, the availability of operational aircraft is affected by scheduled maintenance, exceeded TBO's (Time Between Overhauls), pilot squawks, parts on hand (or due to be fabricated), glitches, etc. These headaches are why Tyrol looks frazzled a lot of the time. Ngarenn 19:59, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Do you keep informal track of statistics such as crew totals and raptors/vipers on hand? Is there a list of pilot and ship names to avoid verbally identifying more people or craft than are supposed to exist? --Peter Farago 00:39, 18 June 2006 (CDT)

The list does exist, but it reflects only one moment in the history of Galactica. With so few people and so much to do in a fleet under seige, accountants and future historians get the short end of the priority stick. It's been one of the President's complaints for over a year. Ngarenn 19:59, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Timeline

The season two timeline discontinuity left us all a bit baffled. Can you help clarify matters? --Peter Farago 00:40, 18 June 2006 (CDT)

This one gives me a headache. We were advised by post-production that we may have goofed in the timeline. There were large pow-wows between writers and post trying to sort this out. If memory serves (and it is highly suspect), the issue was a chyron that was subsequently changed -- or not changed -- for the DVD release of Season 2.5. But don't hold me to that. These discussions went on for days and I'm not anxious to revisit them. I do know that what we came up with made sense at the time. Ngarenn 20:05, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Those are actually two separate things: yes, there was a mistake in post for "Downloaded": the card at the beginning says "10 weeks ago", which would have been impossible. The messageboards were in an uproar, and apparently, Joe (owner of BattlestarWiki) e-mailed the post production office and showed them our Timeline article, showing how it was a clear mix up in post: They sent us an e-mail back saying that it would be fixed in the Season 2.5 DVD and all subsequent international airings: Fans in the UK have confirmed to us that when "Downloaded" premiered in the UK, the sign was changed to "10 weeks later".----->However, what we've dubbed the "season 2.5 timeline discontinuity" is different from that, but I think it's more something we're waiting for Ron to explain in his Scifi.com blog. --->Basically, there was a jump in time of about 2-3 months between "Pegasus" and "Res Ship I", which we've been trying to explain but can't: All dates within season 2.5 are consistent with each other, but not with the earlier half of season 2. That is, we worked out that "Pegasus" must take place around three months post-attack, but then in "Res Ship I" Admiral Cain said "Six month" had passed since the attack: at first we thought it was a random dialogue error, at first, but then the rest of Season 2.5 consistently used this, i.e. in "Downloaded" Hera is born 9 months after the Cylon attack (one month premature, as she was conceived on Day 24). The reason we encountered the "season 2 timeline discontinuity" is that there are a few things that are not really reconcilable, which are:

A) Caprica-Sharon is not visibly pregnant in "Pegasus" while wearing a tight tank top, but by "Epiphanies" (at most, two weeks later) she is visibly into her second trimester. Her "Pegasus" appearance fits our initial "three months" dating, while her "Epiphanies" appearance appears to have fast fowarded three months.

B) The Presidential elections are stated to take place Nine months after the Cylon attack, however in "Bastille Day" Apollo said they'd take place in Seven months, and one month later in "Colonial Day" they said they would take place in Six month (so season 1 consistently says they're 7 months post-attack). ***Ron himself actually says in the LDYB I podcast, "we said in "Bastille Day" that elections were due in Nine months", so we think not even Ron noticed this.

C) The last point is a bit complicated, but follows our detailed Timeline: the last firm date we got from the Helo-on-Caprica ticker was that season 2 begins Two months after the attack. Scattered through Fragged span a day or two, then Resistance (ground team wasn't on Kobol very long). In "Resistance", Cally killed Galactica-Sharon and was sent to the brig for 30 days as a result. Cally gets out in "Flight of the Phoenix". --->Colonel Tigh was in command of Galatica for less than two weeks, more probably one, a command which ended in "Resistance" when Adama returned. Anyway, in FotP Roslin is told she has one month at the most to live. That means at most one month passes between this scene and "Epiphanies", when she's dying. --->It is stated that "weeks" pass during FotP while Tyrol builds the Blackbird, and this is actually the episode which includes the longest amount of time from beginning to end; we assumed it took maybe 2, but it could have taken many weeks. In any event, we figured out that Flight of the Phoenix starts about two and a half months after the attack, a lot of time passes during the episode, and by the end, Roslin has one month to live. "Epiphanies" states it took place Six months post-attack, subtracting one month for Roslin life expectancy, the end of Flight of the Phoenix would have to be at Five months poast attack....which would mean that during the episode, 2 months pass while Tyrol builds the Blackbird (which would be a lot given that all of season 1 lasted just two months).

Actually, Tyrol could conceivably have spent that long building the Blackbird, Caprica-Sharon's gestation could have just been really fast because she's a Cylon, and some Canadian viewers have pointed out to us that when an election "is called" in a Parliamentary system isn't the same as when the actual voting is held, and that in like Canada and the UK 2 months can pass after an eleciton "starts" and the voting, which could explain all of this (although Ron states in the podcast that as he remembers it, Bastille Day actually just said "Nine").------->We actually don't want to split hairs and be the Comic Book Guy pointing out how in a Xena episode, in one frame she's riding a winged Andalusian horse, while in the next shot she's riding a winged Arabian, and surely we must demand explanation: (this is from a Simpsons episode guest starring Lucy Lawless in which she appears as herself at a convention, and her answer is: "Every time something like that happens, a wizard did it. Wizard!" We've had a hard time keeping track of things ourselves and we appreciate everything the production team is doing on BSG....we take hours upon hours away from friends and family to update this dang encyclopedia (nay, we are compelled)! --->We just want to know what to do in our Timeline. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:17, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Unfortunately, you're going to be forced to the conclusion that wizards did it. At least for now. - Ngarenn 21:05, 20 June 2006 (CDT)

Centurion armor

In "Valley of Darkness", the boarding-party Centurions can only be destroyed with exploding rounds, but in every episode before or after that (like Home, Part I) we've seen them destroyed with regular bullets--->Do different Centurions have heavier armor than others? I mean it would be logical that a boarding-party Centurion would be expected to see heavy combat, and would thus have more armor. (If you check the "Home, Part I" podcast, Ron and Dave seem to mention that there was a lot of discussion about this point in the writers room). --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:21, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

The Centurion in "Downloaded" was also immune to normal ammunition, Anders shot it for a long time, but only the bomb seems to have worked on it. It's probable that the Centurions we've otherwise seen (the ones harassing Helo) were given weaker armor for the purpose of the experiment, while the typical armor is the strong variety. --Sauron18 22:09, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

Centurions are constantly being upgraded - new ones come out with better armor, quieter servos, better battle software. Some are designed for different uses (the ones designed for submarine use have REALLY heavy armor but are exceptionally slow, and have reduced ammunition carrying capacity.) Not to mention that the Colonials have remarkably bright backyard engineers -- they've been hot-loading our small-arms rounds, coming up with better armor-piercing projectiles -- it's the constant ebb-and-flow of wartime technology. - Ngarenn 21:13, 20 June 2006 (CDT)

Guns nomenclature

(BTW, thank you for taking the time to read all of these.): A matter which has come up is what to refer to the guns in BSG as. That is, on Star Trek we'd have an article title "Phasers", and have subsectios talking about ship-mounted phasers and various models of hand phasers. On BSG, are the ship-mounted guns railguns, officially? Do Cylon Basestars have gun batteries like Battlestars? In our own analysis, we thought they didn't (except for missiles) and that while both Battlestars and Basestars are Carrier/Battleship hybrids, a Battlestar is more battleship than a basestar and a basestar leans more towards carrier: that they rely on sheer weight of numbers and hundreds upon hundreds of Raiders, at the expense of having no room left over for railgun batteries (so if you lure the hundreds of Raiders away, they're at a disadvantage to Battlestars, as in the Battle of the Resurrection Ship). ---->Meanwhile, like I said in Trek we'd have an article for "hand phasers", but on BSG we've just got "guns". And for Vipers, what do Vipers have? ---->My point is, we've been using the term "Kinetic Energy Weapons" for the name of an article on all of this, but we're not sure if this is in anyway what the show itself uses. This many seem like a minor point, I know, but after we started using "KEW", simply as a term of convenience on the Viper articles and such...other fansites and messageboards I've seen read BattlestarWiki and I think they assume it's an official term. So if this is not what people in the BSGverse refer to their guns as, I think I should add a disclaimer or something (just like "Note: KEW is not an official term"). --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:35, 21 June 2006 (CDT)

In short, is "KEW" a correct termology of the "guns" of Battlestar(s)? --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 21:39, 21 June 2006 (CDT)

[Spock]I believe that is what I said, Mr. Shane [/Spock]--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:52, 21 June 2006 (CDT)

Just a simple explain. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 22:17, 21 June 2006 (CDT)

During rewrites of Epiphanes, we ran into this same question, at least in terms of Viper ordnance. The writing staff originally proposed chemically propelled projectiles (easier to sabotage) but Gary Hutzel protested. He preferred rail guns, and that's what we adopted, but nobody's said it on screen. Which means there is no canon on our cannons yet ;) Ngarenn 18:23, 22 June 2006 (CDT)

The plot thinkens. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 18:25, 22 June 2006 (CDT)

The visual evidence on Epiphanies seems to suggest chemically propelled projectiles. However, since railguns are still a form of KEW, do the production staff ever refer to them as KEW? We are trying to verify if the term Kinetic Energy Weapon is an "official" term. --FrankieG 18:50, 22 June 2006 (CDT)

I'm pretty sure it's just something one of us came up with. It's been proposed that we go to a more generic "Weapons" over on the talk page of that article. It's not like we have an article for each different "kind" of weapon at this point.--Steelviper 07:46, 23 June 2006 (CDT)

The broken cartridge (with what appeared to be gunpowder spilling out) did seem to point to chemical propulsion. And not even caseless (as had been proposed during the miniseries). Oh well. As long as something comes out whenever they pull the trigger, I suppose. The (rail gun/Gary Hutzel discussion) is an awesome piece of trivia! --Steelviper 07:50, 23 June 2006 (CDT)

"Kinetic Energy Weapon" and "KEW" are terms I first saw used by the US Air Force in a book called MILITARY SPACE FORCES commissioned by the US Congress and published in 1989. As to its "official" nature on Galactica, I'm sure they'd use the term where appropriate, just as they use the terms "nuclear weapon" or "noodle." The Rail guns aboard the Vipers fire a mix of tracer/incendiary, armor piercing and explosive rounds, in various ratios depending upon mission requirements, so not all their projectiles are strictly kinetic. - And the powder in the degraded projectile might have been chemical explosive used in the HE rounds. - Ngarenn 16:14, 28 June 2006 (CDT)

Can I ask, then, why chemically-propelled ordnance was rejected? --Madbrood 14:57, 12 July 2006 (CDT)

Human sacrifice

I've been wondering about this for some time: in "Valley of Darkness", Number Six shows Baltar a pile of old human skulls on the surface of Kobol, and tells him that human sacrifices used to be performed on Kobol, and the Sacred Scrolls are really just a bunch of lies to cover up the brutality of humanity's past. --->Should this scene be taken at face value? That is, did this entire scene "actually" happen, were there actually skulls there, or did all of this occurr as a Number Six induced manipulation inside of Baltar's head, to manipulate him and turn him more and more against humanity? --->Or (of course), is this one of those "we intentionally wanted the audience to be confused as to whether that scene was "real" or not, and it's still an open question with no answer" things? ---->Or, another possibility, were the skulls themselves there, but Number Six was just lying about them? I mean just by looking at them (assuming they were actually real) Baltar couldn't confirm Number Six's statements that they were the result of human sacrifice rituals: they could have been just bones lying around from some old war or cataclysm. (We don't need a definative answer given away, we just need to know if this was intentionally open to interpretation)...was what Number Six saying meant to be actually true, or is there the *possibilty* that she was lying about the skeletons Baltar found and it's open to audience interpretation?--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:50, 21 June 2006 (CDT)

The question at the bottom of this is: "Who is Six?" In such cases, I'm not going to embellish what Ron & David have put on the screen. - Ngarenn 18:39, 22 June 2006 (CDT)

No HUD's in Vipers?

I've noticed that the Colonial Vipers don't seem to be equipped with any type of Heads-Up Display (HUD) or any such device. I was wondering if this was a design feature of the Vipers or if it was born simply as a way to reduce the number of VFX elements in a cockpit shot. Also, without a HUD, is there some other form of gunsight in the pilot's line of sight? --Thetruthseeker 15:55, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

Actually, if you look really hard at screenshots from "The Hand of God", etc., they do seem to have HUD's, although they haven't been prominently displayed on the show.--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:02, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

What appears to be a HUD in screencaps of "The Hand of God" seems to actually be reflection of the Viper's central display on the cockpit window. It's most evident in the first pov cockpit shot on this page, where there are several upside down DRADIS screens.[1] --Thetruthseeker 13:34, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

No HUDS in the Vipers. We haven't put gunsights in them, either. I'm not sure what the design reasons were for these decisions, but I'm guessing that it came down to VFX money that was better spent elsewhere. Our pilots simply have to be that much better. - Ngarenn 16:01, 28 June 2006 (CDT)

Perhaps because a HUD would require several systems linked together via a computer, and this would be vulnerable to manipulation by the Cylons? The MkII was, after all, designed NOT to be vulnerable to this sort of attack.

FTL and the cylons

What is the range of Galactica's FTL engines? I have read some were that it is 30 light years. If this si true then it means that the fleet would have jumped around 7500 light years due to all the jumps they made in '33'. So were in the galaxy are they?

Also in the show the Cylons are divided into two types. Skin jobs and Centurions. The thing is that the Cylons say that they are better than humans but they are making the same mistake the colonies made made. I say this because Ron Moore has said that the Centurions are not sentient and so are treated as expanderble, like the first cylons were treated by the Colonies. So will we ever see the Centurions rise up against there flesh and blood counter parts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Viper1982 (talk • contribs).

• I have always speculated (pure speculation) that there is NO "range" on FTL engines in theory...but there is an "effective" range of practicality: That is, based on Admiral Cain's order for a blind jump and the way they talk more about "plotting coordinates at such a distance" (as Ragnar) than engine range, I always assumed that an FTL Jump can take you anywhere in the universe, but "it ain't like dusting crops", and if you just go without safe coordinates, you could easily wind up in a star or planet, so it's too unsafe to use. The Cylons have better computers than the Colonials, and thus are able to plot safe jumps along longer distances in their Nav computers, that's why they can jump back to Caprica relatively easily compared to the Colonials. Theoretically (This is my longstanding *assumption*, is it correct?) Galactica could Jump across the entire galaxy...it's just so unsafe without good coordinates and the odds of winding up in a star or something so big that it's deemed not worth it. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:07, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

• I agree, there's also the question of how much fuel is invested in each FTL jump, which would also prove as a limiting factor. And if Tylium is as rare as they said it was, then they must have some form of calculating how to spend it best. --Sauron18 22:05 24 June 2006 (CDT)

Sleeper Agents

I have been updating an article on the Miniseries novelization. The novelization gives a lot of extra info about Aaron Doral, making a big point that he is a sleeper agent. Was this from official sources or artistic license by the author? The main point is that his realization (unlike Boomer's) that he was a Cylon was easy. Also, if true, might imply that Brother Cavil from Galactica might be a sleeper agent? Thanks. --FrankieG 11:56, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

Writing a novelization involves fleshing out much of what the original presentation only hints at. To my knowledge, the extra information was not gleaned from any of the documentation/bibles used on the series. How "official" that makes it is an open question. If we don't address it in the show, then everyone's entitled to their own theory. - Ngarenn 15:55, 28 June 2006 (CDT)

Was Galactica's Brother Cavil a sleeper agent, or was it never considered or discussed? Thanks, --FrankieG 17:05, 28 June 2006 (CDT)

We discuss a lot of stuff, but if it doesn't show up on screen, it's as if it never happened. That philosophy leaves us open to more possibilities. Was Cavil a sleeper? Until we find a story where that matters, we won't define it -- and leave you wondering. Ngarenn 15:27, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

Red Line

What is the definition of the "Red Line"? As you can see on the discussion page for Red Line, there has been some confusion over if it means "the maximum safe distance a Colonial ship can Jump" or "the imaginary line separating explored for unexplored space". --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:31, 27 June 2006 (CDT)

As originally defined, the Red Line is the distance beyond which Jump calculations have an unacceptable uncertaintly factor. I'm sure Kevin Grazier (our Tech guy at JPL) could put it more accurately, but the calculations involved at that distance involve so many variables that we're not always sure where we'll end up -- such as in the center of a star, for example. We've been using five light years as a rule of thumb, but the actual capabilities of Colonial jump calculation computers are classified. The Cylons, however, are considerably better at making those calculations - Ngarenn 15:47, 28 June 2006 (CDT)

Galactica's Armor Skin

Just to clarify more than anything - and mainly so that people can stop arguing about it. Did the Galactica always have such a patchy armour skin, or before the days of decommissioning, was it more like Pegasus in terms of looks? Here's an image as an example, just in case ;) [2] --Fordsierra4x4 18:56, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

I asked Eric Chu about this on the MediaBlvd messageboards, and he said the ribs were supposed to be there, so only a missle coming from a perfect 90 degree angle would connect. Of course, I think that might have just been his opinion. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:06, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

It makes sense for there to be SOME ribs, but the ventral plating (there i go, using trek terms again...) looks....oddly laid out. As though half of it has been stripped off. Look at an image of Pegasus for comparison. I know they're different classes and all, but it just seems....wrong...somethow, for the galactica to be so oddly patchy. --Fordsierra4x4 19:09, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

To be annoyingly particular, "ventral plating" is just a phrase composed of two normal words in their normal meanings, so it is not peculiar to Star Trek. --CalculatinAvatar^(C-T) 19:37, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

Troo dat, but it sounds like it's lifted straight out of an episode of DS9 :D --Fordsierra4x4 19:45, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

(You mean dorsal plating (top); ventral plating means on the bottom). --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:11, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

It's 2:38am - not work brain! --Fordsierra4x4 20:33, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

SkyOne Biography Canonicity

We've been debating the status of some information from SkyOne for some time now: Around the Miniseries, biographies for several main characters were posted on SkyOne's website. You can wee one at the bottom of the William Adama article, as well as for Kara Thrace, Galactica-Sharon, etc. ----->This information was taken down from SkyOne's website over a year ago. To our knowledge, BattlestarWiki is actually the only site keeping this info posted. We didn't know if it reflected Series bible things, or even if it did, if these still "counted" any more. You see I've made little notes on the bottom of each pointing out that they're not consistent with how the show turned out. For example, Galactica-Sharon's bio says she was on Galactica a different period of time, that Troy blew up recently not years ago, etc. Bits and pieces of other things are also kind of weird, and the only source for some things, i.e. Starbuck's mother's name, which honestly I don't think is official anymore. The SkyOne bios even say that Starbuck a Picon and Baltar a Sagitarron, while we had assumed both were from Caprica. --->Long story short we're debating whether to delete these from BattlestarWiki entirely, and base nothing we have on information from them, because A) The information was taken down, probably because it wasn't "right" anymore, B) It actually contradicts things from aired episodes, throwing dubious light onto their status. So we wanted to know if this information from SkyOne's website, no longer extant, is invalidated. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 16:48, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

Your definition of the series bible is accurate. Ron came up with it before the series went into production and we use it as a reference, a starting point. It isn't carved in stone. Sky One may have had access to pieces of it, but what happens on screen supercedes anything that doesn't. - Ngarenn 13:09, 7 July 2006 (CDT)

For my part, I'm just curious as to what role the writing staff had in the creation of those bios in the first place. --Peter Farago 20:54, 5 July 2006 (CDT)

In the beginning was the bible. Then came the staff. - Ngarenn 13:09, 7 July 2006 (CDT)

Basestar losses in Res Ship II

In "Resurrection Ship, Part II", were both Basestars destroyed (which is what I think) or was one destroyed, and the other escaped? Some say that because we didn't see the second one explode on-screen, it might have escaped...though I thought it was implied that it was, and it was taking a pounding from not one but two battlestars focused on it. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:56, 11 July 2006 (CDT)

Re-imagined Series definition: the process of using the FTL engines to make an near-instantaneous apparent faster-than-light transport of a ship from one point in space to another

Re-imagined Series definition: technology enabling travel across distances faster than the speed of light would permit, see: FTL

Re-imagined Series definition: Executive Officer, e.g. Saul Tigh

Galactica 1980 definition: Dillon is called both a terrorist and a chauvinist by Jamie Hamilton during their phone call from the police station; he asks Troy "what's a terrorist chauvinist?" ^{(1980: "Galactica Discovers Earth, Part I")}

These are terms directly relating to Galactica 1980, some of which are based from the Original Series. For terms from that series, please refer to List of terms (TOS).

Re-imagined Series definition: Battlestar Group ^{(TRS: "Water")}. It also doubles as an acronym for the television series itself.

Galactica 1980 definition: When John Steadman asks if the Warriors know anything about these creatures, Dillon looks this up ^{(1980: "Space Croppers")}

Re-imagined Series definition: "Direction, Range, and Distance", Colonial equivalent of radar or lidar

Re-imagined Series definition: a point in space behind which an accumulative error creeps into FTL jump calculations ^{(TRS: "Miniseries", "Pegasus")}