Talk:DRADIS/Archive 1

It is stated that DRADIS stands for 'Direction RAnge and DIStance'.

Should it not be 'Direction RAnge Detection and Identification System' This still has the acronym DRADIS?

I'd be happy to see a source for this term; I'd rather not make it up if RDM has the acronym down. He's normally not into this inane level of techno-fanboy detail, so we'll have to see. Better to keep this one to what we know. Spencerian 15:54, 23 Aug 2005 (EDT)0

Agreed, FWIW. --Peter Farago 17:43, 23 Aug 2005 (EDT):

We need a definite and official source for what this term means. Personally, I don't believe that it is well defined, if at all. -- Joe Beaudoin 20:30, 23 Aug 2005 (EDT)

"Range" and "Distance" are indeed redundant in their most common sense, but in space, a system like this would be pretty much pointless if it didn't provide directional information in two axes, as well as the distance. Even without a useful expansion of the acronym, it should be abundantly clear that these would be the three values present in the reading for a single DRADIS contact. -- Cmr

Indeed, Gaeta has given three-value coordinates when it's been relevant — in Act of Contrition and Resistance.

Just an interesting note - Bearing and Carom are clearly not measured in degrees. We've seen bearings up to 881 (Tigh Me Up, Tigh Me Down) and caroms up 552 (Flight of the Phoenix). --Peter Farago 14:38, 5 January 2006 (EST)

Another interesting note - The Army in its land navigation uses a method of measurement called the mil [[1]] which breaks a circle up into 6400 parts rather than 360. That may explain the higher numbers quoted. Joemc72 15:01, 19 January 2006 (EST)

"Range" and "distance" are still synonyms in 3 dimensions. Yes, there are 3 numbers for spherical coordinates, but 2 of them are direction; the other one is range (and distance, since they're the same thing). --CalculatinAvatar 23:29, 5 January 2006 (EST)

I understood your point the first time, and wasn't trying to contradict it. --Peter Farago 23:39, 5 January 2006 (EST)

If you're addressing me, I'm somewhat confused. I don't recall saying that before, and I was responding to Cmr. --CalculatinAvatar 00:07, 6 January 2006 (EST)

my point is just that this article can describe what DRADIS measures, and how, without expanding the acronym. is the early teleplay manuscript the only source for Direction, RAnge, and DIStance? if so, it seems like this is, at best, something less than canonical. Cmr 17:35, 15 January 2006 (EST)

Radar

Spencerian, why did you revert Wingsandsword's note about the "radar" reference in "The Hand of God"? The dialogue in question goes like this:

Thrace: The decoy ships will jump into the enemy star system at extreme radar range from the Cylon asteroid. Galactica will jump here, close enough to launch its Vipers at the base.

--Peter Farago 12:07, 10 January 2006 (EST)

There has been some healthy discussion of this point on my talk page, and for the record it is at 11:53 into the episode, and her exact line is what Peter Farago said it was. It's also on the closed captioning. It's likely to be a goof, but it could be interpreted that "radar" is a slang or mostly-disused term for the more technically accurate Dradis. --Wingsandsword 14:37, 10 January 2006 (EST)

Her "exact line" is still subject to debate: DVD subtitles aren't always reliable, and when I saw it again on my DVD it sounded like she said "Raider", not radar. "Radar" probably isn't a slang term because I think they're more careful about these things and that it is not, indeed a goof. Others please rewatch this scene. I'm not exact on how all DVD subtitles are made, but on many I've had in the past they were really just made by people that watched the episode writing down dialog, rather than on a script of some form. They aren't really reliable. --Ricimer 21:06, 10 January 2006 (EST)

What if RADAR is one component of DRADIS? Suppose that DRADIS comprises a host of detection systems (RADAR, IR, UV, MAD, etc.) all linked into one system and accessed from one console?--Axeman

As I have stated numerous times, in context, she could have been saying "Raider range". There's a burden of proof there, a shaodw of a doubt if you will, and she kind of slurrs it; doesn't sound quite like she's saying "Radar". I think our current thing is fine: making a note that we think she said Radar, but that she could have said "Raider". This is, of course, distinct from the horrible "Black Market" in which amongst other failures they call fumarellos "cigars". --Ricimer 14:19, 29 January 2006 (EST)

Name?

Should the name of this article be all caps, or is there a naming convention in place that restrits all caps in an article title? Joemc72 16:41, 20 January 2006 (EST)

Possible, but generally it looks a bit garrish and we don't know the acronym fully. Besides, do you always write out radio as "RADIO"? It's a portmaneau, not a full acronym. --Ricimer 16:49, 20 January 2006 (EST)

I agree, but throughout the article and other articles, DRADIS is capitalized. I was only suggesting it in order to make it more uniform. I'll defer to the majority though. Joemc72 16:52, 20 January 2006 (EST)

The capitalization is because DRADIS is an acronym, like RADAR or LASER or NASA. Usage for these terms have dropped the capitalization down to where the acronym becomes a word except for NASA. DRADIS isn't there yet in my mind. On the other hand, if I see it without capitalization, I don't change it unless it looks aesthetically wrong. Acronyms should be capitalized unless there is a wiki convention that says otherwise. For wiki's sake, keeping it not capitalized (particularly as the article name) prevents weirdness. --Spencerian 17:34, 20 January 2006 (EST)