|
|
| (15 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| I think the "fan estimate" of 6-8 Viper squads is off. According to http://galactica.tv/colonials/galacticatv.shtml, the Galactica had only 2 Viper squadrons. Since it was a museum ship, it's possible this is less than the usual complement. | | ==Change Disambig to Redirect== |
| | I was working the [[Special:Disambiguations|Disambiguations Pages]], and I noticed that there are over 100 Battlestar links that go to the disambig page. I'd estimate over 95 percent of them intend to go to Original battlestar (RDM). Since there's already a disambig line at the top of that article, I propose that we change this page to a redirect to that one (after we redirect any pages that are intended to go to the TOS or video game spots). If there was equal amounts of content being added to all namespaces, I would argue for equality (and the disambig page), but since most of the new content being written will be about RDM (especially with how much progress has been made on the TOS pages) I think the average user would benefit from a redirect. I'll go ahead and try to identify and fix the TOS and video game links, but hold off on a Viper-like disambig purge until it is determined whether or not we'll redirect. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 09:40, 18 January 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| -- John Reese | | :Sounds good to me. Same is true for "Galactica", which has a similar redirect with disambig line at the top of the RDM page for those lost. We know that the wiki is weighted to the new show, so it makes logical since to get to the current info first. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 15:20, 18 January 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| ------- | | ::Cool. I think I got all the video game and TOS references rounded up, so I think we'd be ok to switch it over. I'll wait until tomorrow morning before doing it, in case the anybody on the night shift has any objections. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 16:01, 18 January 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| Hi John,
| | ==Battlestar Universa and Eos== |
| | I spotted two more battlestars in my copy of Season Zero volume 2 that could be added to this section, Battlestar's Universa and Eos. I think Universa is a misspelling of Universal (as its only mentioend once) but Eos is definately spelled that way. I've added them to the list although if any one could find a picture of them I'd be happy to write out a page for them. |
|
| |
|
| Thanks for contributing! It's nice to see that the site's picking up now!
| | Universa looks to be a Mercury Class but Eos is of an unknown class. {{unsigned|These}} |
|
| |
|
| Actually, there are bits of information on the Galactica.tv (or Galactica2003.tv) website that are suspect, such as Tigh's first name being "Paul", as opposed to the canonized "Saul". We mainly use the episodes for canonical information; the Zoic, as the Colonial Archivist (Ernestborg9) can tell you, is mainly conjecture unless canonical info shows up to disprove it.
| | : Cool. Actually, I think it's time for a category on just battlestars in general... -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 20:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC) |
| | | ::Agreed, actually I wonder if we could expand that and merge all of the current named, unnamed and Comic Book Battlestar page's into a single page. |
| However, [[Battlestar|Battlestars]] in general carry 6-8 sqads; [[Galactica]] does carry two. (Or did, as I'm sure that the <i>Galactica</i> is now left with, at most, one full squadron of Mark IIs from the [[Mini-Series]], over the course of the series.)
| | --[[User:These|These]] 16:14, 17 March 2019 (EST) |
| | | :::A list of battlestars would be good. That way we get rid of all the short articles, like we did that resulted in the modifications to [[The Fleet (RDM)]] article. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 16:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC) |
| - Joe
| |
| | |
| == Other Battlestars ==
| |
| | |
| Since the encounter of the Pegasus we have learned of another type of Battlestar,
| |
| will this page be edited in regard of this?
| |
| | |
| Another point is the appearence of the Galactica before the ship has been refitted
| |
| after the war. Is it clear that it had the appearance of the orginal show or is this
| |
| unclear?
| |
| | |
| Hardwing
| |
| | |
| : I've updated the page to reflect that this page deals primarily with the original battlestar class, of which ''Galactica'' is a member. I added a note on ''Pegasus'' and her class. There is a page for the [[Mercury-class]] battlestar, which could be edited and updated as this one as we get more technical information on that ship class. Note that only battlestars mentioned in an episode are canon; the rest technically may be made-up until then. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 19:00, 26 September 2005 (EDT) | |
| | |
| ==Armament Details==
| |
| | |
| * ''With 512 Point-Defense Turrets, thats 1024 PD Guns, and from onscreen evidence, the Rounds Per Minute is atleast 90 or more. (fan estimation.)''
| |
| ** ''Assuming a firing rate of 2 rounds per second, thats 120 rounds per minute, and from all turrets equates to 122,880 rounds per minute. 2048 rounds per second. Thats alot. (fan estimation.)''
| |
| ** ''Considering a raider has been shown to be destroyed with around 4-10 direct hits, this means that should raiders enter the firing solution, would take only a few seconds to get blown up. If targetted by the PD turrets, less then a second. It would take a single turret 1 second to destroy a raider. That isn't accounting for maneuverability of the raider however. (fan estimation.)''
| |
| * ''Also, with 24 Rail gun turrets, thats, 48 rail gun , Barrels, if you will. Atleast 960 Rounds per minute (1 round per 3 seconds)''
| |
| ** ''Onscreen evidence shows around 1 round firing per 2-3 seconds (please correct if wrong). Going with the 1 round-2 seconds, you get a single turret firing in a minute, 60 rounds. times that by 24 and you come to 1,440 rounds per minute.''
| |
| ** ''Due the turrets being "rail guns", the rounds go much faster then the rounds fired from the PD turrets. This means that a single hit to a raider should destroy it due to the kenetic energy imparted to the raider. If this is true, then a battlestar, with accurate aiming, could take out 1,440 raiders in a minute. Thats like, double the estimated capacity of a basestar! Thats if every shot is a direct hit.''
| |
| | |
| This is interesting. Do you have a source for: the number of point-defense turrets, the number of rail guns, and the ''existance'' of rail guns (on-screen evidence indicates a three-rail design, which is inconsistant with the physics of a rail gun)? I don't think any of those things have been shown or mentioned on screen yet.
| |
| | |
| This line of inquiry might enable us to speculate on the Battlestar's total ammo store, if we can derive our estimates from good data. However, the concept of a Basestar sending two raider wings directly into Galactica's firing solution is a little silly. ''Galactica's'' firing solution has been used to provide cover for vipers and screen the ship from nukes, not to target enemy fightercraft directly. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 11:55, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| ::''Aramaments - Defensive''
| |
| ::* ''24 x primary railgun turrets (mounting 2 guns apiece)
| |
| ::* ''512 x point-defense turrets (mounting 2 guns apiece)''
| |
| | |
| :according to the wiki entry.
| |
| :also pictures on there show the existance of the rail guns. 8 ontop. 8 on the under side of the 'crocodile head', and 8 on the underbelly.
| |
| | |
| :the Rate of Fire is all my doing however.
| |
| | |
| :can someone get me a short video of when the ship actually fires? cuz im actualy needing this much detail for something im doing (and using this wiki as a reference for).
| |
| | |
| :its guessing though i counted erm, 498 turrets myself.
| |
| :and worked out for that too , ive got those calculations somewhere.
| |
| | |
| :keeping in mind some of the personnel guns they have, that fire ate more-then-1-round-per-second (in some cases. for instance a gattling gun, while not seen onscreen they likely have one, what with theyre parralels with earth tech)..
| |
| :its more then realistic RoF for each turret no?
| |
| | |
| :asfor the rail gun RoF
| |
| :on second thought,
| |
| :ill need to re-examine the footage of the rail guns firing.
| |
| :theyre not said to be rail guns but theres a shot somewhere of 4 turrets , that resemble the rail guns, firing.
| |
| :ok ill stop now.
| |
| | |
| :thx for the, well, not going mad :)
| |
| | |
| :edit - oh sos forget this: --[[User:Alex mcpherson|Alex mcpherson]] 12:26, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| ::Be careful when citing unsourced fan-estimates in your calculations. I don't think those stats on turret count should even be there without a source. This article needs some serious cleanup in that regard. As for rate of fire, that can probably be estimated by frame-stepping through the relevant effects scenes in the miniseries. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 12:39, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| :::Shall I upload my modified pics of the underbelly, top and side somewhere and link them in here for others to count? i can link to both the unmodified and the modified versions so people can compare each individual one. and asfor the frame-stepping, is there a scene of the galactica firing, upclose in the first 5 episodes? --[[User:Alex mcpherson|Alex mcpherson]] 14:04, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| ::::I think it would be better for you to upload it to your own web space if possible and then post links here, if that's possible. It would be interesting to see. Close-ups on Galactica's guns firing can be found in the mini-series, and I believe the footage was reused in "33". --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 16:57, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| :::::I just wanted to point out that the Galactica has 20 heavy turrets, not 24. There are eight on each of the dorsal and ventral sides and four under the nose of the fore-section. You can see these on the Zoic high-res pictures of the Big G. --[[User:Talos|Talos]] 19:53, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| ::::::I uploaded a picture to show what I mean. --[[User:Talos|Talos]] 20:09, 28 September 2005 (EDT) [[Image:BSG_Ortho_Bottom.jpg|thumb]]
| |
| :::::::Excellent. Can the smaller guns also be seen on the elevations? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 20:29, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| ::::::::Yes, especially on the flight pod. There are other batteries along the top and bottom of the fore-section split, the top of the central hull, below the flight pods, and along both upper and lower engine pods. These are just the ones I've found though. I'll upload the other ortho views now. --[[User:Talos|Talos]] 22:35, 28 September 2005 (EDT) | |
| :::::::::Actualy i can show you where the extra 4 come from!!! they are partially hidden . 2 on either side on the crocidile head. the hull plating left on either side of the underbelly, look there and youll see the other 4. *smiles like a know-it-all. --[[User:Alex mcpherson|Alex mcpherson]] 01:19, 29 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| ::::::::::If you mean the ones visible in the ventral elevation, I think Talos was including those in his count. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 01:35, 29 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| :::::::::::those are fully visible. theres 4 at the very front and 2 either side of the underbelly partially visible. ill upload the pic when i get the change. | |
| | |
| ==This Article Needs Work==
| |
| | |
| Who will join me in stripping this article of non-canon information and clearly labelling sources? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 19:07, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| : A challenge, but I like that. Perhaps we can move the Zoic information to a new page, as it is close to canon as we've got since they are part of the production process, although little of their info can be collaborated yet. We probably need to have this page moved to "Original Battlestar" or "Battlestar (RDM)" or somehow disamb it. Or, just offload the TOS info to another page. In a way I'm also big on placing the tech stats with the other technology pages to keep it easy to edit and read for both pages. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 22:28, 28 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| ::We should definitely namespace it into Battlestar (TOS), Battlestar (VG), Battlestar (RDM). Also, we could split the RDM article into "Battlestar" as a general concept, and the unnamed Galactica-class battlestar specifically - think [[Wikipedia:Aircraft carrier|Aircraft carrier]], [[Wikipedia:Yorktown class aircraft carrier|Yorktown class aircraft carrier]], [[Wikipedia:Nimitz class aircraft carrier|Nimitz class aircraft carrier]].
| |
| | |
| ::Lastly, we must find an actual link to the Zoic source on all these details if we're going to keep them. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 00:22, 29 September 2005 (EDT)
| |
