Either way, it speaks well of the lifting capacity of the Gozanti, not to mention sets up a neat future mechanic for a land battle-based game, maybe?
I'm not sure how much of an issue "lifting capacity" is when you have antigravity technology.
I'm just so happy that the AT-AT barge is probably no longer a thing...
I miss the AT-AT barge, it was like the LST of star wars. The Gozanti, using it for AT-ATs reminds me of a LCAC for some reason.
I'd be more surprised if starships didn't have a very large backblast. Newton's Third Law would seem to indicate that to move something that massive would require a fair amount of backblast.
I'm pretty sure that ships with antigravity tech don't care about Newton's Third Law.
Either way, it speaks well of the lifting capacity of the Gozanti, not to mention sets up a neat future mechanic for a land battle-based game, maybe?
I'm not sure how much of an issue "lifting capacity" is when you have antigravity technology.
I'm just so happy that the AT-AT barge is probably no longer a thing...
I miss the AT-AT barge, it was like the LST of star wars. The Gozanti, using it for AT-ATs reminds me of a LCAC for some reason.
TBH the AT-AT barge makes more sense than the Gozanti carrying AT-ATs. I mean what with atmospheric re-entry, resistance and so on. Not the kind of thing The Gozanti can really project its cargo from that. Though I guess Shields are a thing when the plot wants them to exist, so- no biggie.
It is more efficient at least.
The AT-AT Barge looks like dog doo and I will not miss it. The Gozanti is 100% cooler.
Well I'll agree with you there, The Gozanti seriously is one cool ship.
Well I'll agree with you there, The Gozanti seriously is one cool ship.
And you know why?
...because it's triangular...
Well I'll agree with you there, The Gozanti seriously is one cool ship.
And you know why?
...because it's triangular...
But it's not- it's literally a rectangle without those winged bits.
That's just what mathematicians call a "fancy triangle".
So I finally got to watch the episode.
AT-AT gunners need to seriously work on target acqusition, and I have no idea how that prior governor
didn't get blown to pieces
at that range.
Just a little something to get you excited for next episode...
A trail that every new age force user must undertake is the destruction of an AT-AT. How you do it speaks highly to your level of skill and problem solving prowess.
I miss the AT-AT barge, it was like the LST of star wars. The Gozanti, using it for AT-ATs reminds me of a LCAC for some reason.I'm not sure how much of an issue "lifting capacity" is when you have antigravity technology.Either way, it speaks well of the lifting capacity of the Gozanti, not to mention sets up a neat future mechanic for a land battle-based game, maybe?
I'm just so happy that the AT-AT barge is probably no longer a thing...
The Barge is still canon, it's in Star Wars Commander.
I'd be more surprised if starships didn't have a very large backblast. Newton's Third Law would seem to indicate that to move something that massive would require a fair amount of backblast.
I'm pretty sure that ships with antigravity tech don't care about Newton's Third Law.
Since ships need thrusters, they're clearly working based on Newton's Third Law, or else why would they need thrusters in the first place? Newton's Third Law is why they even work! The anti-gravity tech also seems to only lift them up. Moving forward still requires thrusters of some sort. Finally, the "anti-gravity" tech has generally been called "repulsors" which imply something that pushes the vehicle up, and those repulsors are generally considered to only work while on a planet. Space travel doesn't use them. Still, that final part is EU, and thus, not necessarily canon. The mere existence of thrusters, however, would imply that Newton's Third Law still applies. The fact that even landspeeders need thrusters seem to indicate that whatever the anti-gravity tech is, it just lifts, and doesn't push forward.
Of course, all that said, everything in Star Wars is fantasy. It works however the writers want it to work in the end. Obviously, they wanted the Hammerhead thrusters to exert a large force in this case
I'd be more surprised if starships didn't have a very large backblast. Newton's Third Law would seem to indicate that to move something that massive would require a fair amount of backblast.
I'm pretty sure that ships with antigravity tech don't care about Newton's Third Law.
Since ships need thrusters, they're clearly working based on Newton's Third Law, or else why would they need thrusters in the first place? Newton's Third Law is why they even work! The anti-gravity tech also seems to only lift them up. Moving forward still requires thrusters of some sort. Finally, the "anti-gravity" tech has generally been called "repulsors" which imply something that pushes the vehicle up, and those repulsors are generally considered to only work while on a planet. Space travel doesn't use them. Still, that final part is EU, and thus, not necessarily canon. The mere existence of thrusters, however, would imply that Newton's Third Law still applies. The fact that even landspeeders need thrusters seem to indicate that whatever the anti-gravity tech is, it just lifts, and doesn't push forward.
Of course, all that said, everything in Star Wars is fantasy. It works however the writers want it to work in the end. Obviously, they wanted the Hammerhead thrusters to exert a large force in this case
Star Wars takes place a long time ago in a galaxy far far away. They've never heard of Newton as he wasn't even born yet to create his law. Star Wars is the lawless wild west of thrust and repulsion.
Since ships need thrusters, they're clearly working based on Newton's Third Law, or else why would they need thrusters in the first place? Newton's Third Law is why they even work! The anti-gravity tech also seems to only lift them up. Moving forward still requires thrusters of some sort.
It's like those crates they have where they turn on the antigrav on them and they float. But they still have to push them around with their hands.
It's the same with a ship. Antigravity negates the gravity, so ships don't have to concern themselves with things like escape velocity. But you still need thrusters to go fast.
Edited by DarthEnderXAaaand I've gone from Wanting to play more space engineers to REALLY WANT TO PLAY SPACE ENGINEERS AND MAKE AN ATAT.
Thanks guys.
Granted, but the point of antigravity is that it simply negates the gravity. You still need thrusters to move around.
Since ships need thrusters, they're clearly working based on Newton's Third Law, or else why would they need thrusters in the first place? Newton's Third Law is why they even work! The anti-gravity tech also seems to only lift them up. Moving forward still requires thrusters of some sort.
It's like those crates they have where they turn on the antigrav on them and they float. But they still have to push them around with their hands.
It's the same with a ship. Antigravity negates the gravity, so ships don't have to concern themselves with things like escape velocity. But you still need thrusters to go fast.
If the point of antigravity is that it simply negates gravity, then all you've done is negate the downward force. The object still has mass, and thus, still requires force to start moving forward. From there, the force needed is calculated by F=ma. (Force = mass times acceleration). If you want to accelerate at any kind of reasonable rate with a large mass, you'll need a large force. Thrusters work on the principle of Newton's Third Law: for every reaction, there is an equal but opposite reaction. The force used to eject some sort of mass out the back of a thruster results in the reaction of the thruster feeling a forward force. That mass being ejected out the back is the "backblast" referred to earlier in the conversation. In order to move the ship forward, it has to exert the same amount of force backward.
The AT-AT has less mass than the ship, so it's going to get pushed pretty hard. Lucky for it that the thrust was a bit more spread out rather than focused entirely on the AT-AT, or else that walker probably would have had to learn how to fly really quickly...
If the point of antigravity is that it simply negates gravity, then all you've done is negate the downward force. The object still has mass, and thus, still requires force to start moving forward.
Star Wars has always and will always be about rule of cool.
What was cool in the 70s (laser swords) and 90s (spacekatanasthatcutrhougheverything, ninja acrobatics). and 2010's (tone down that space ninja stuff eh?) tends to differ a little.
Star Wars is the lawless wild west of thrust and repulsion.
Either way, it speaks well of the lifting capacity of the Gozanti, not to mention sets up a neat future mechanic for a land battle-based game, maybe?
I'm not sure how much of an issue "lifting capacity" is when you have antigravity technology.
Well, unless it's purely magic there has to be an energy-expended to lift ratio. Since Star Destroyers and other things that shouldn't be able to can fly within planetary gravity, those repulsorlift things must be ridiculously great.
Of course, SW is science-fantasy, so....
The AT-AT Barge looks like dog doo and I will not miss it. The Gozanti is 100% cooler.
LOL no arguments there, but slab-sided lump that it is, at least the AT-AT Barge isn't shaped like an enormous dong.....
Re: the physics of AT-AT tipping
First off, Correllians are the worst tippers, and they always try to ditch you with the check.
Anyway, repulsors seems to operate on a very effecient mechanism because we see Landspeeders and speeder bikes just "parked" in mid air when not operating. Also droids float about on extended missions without recharging or appearantly shutting down to conserve power like walking, rolling or crawling droids. There may be an equivelant of superconductors that 'repel' gravity like superconductors being repeled by magnets requiring little to no energy expenditure to maintain altitude.
In the original Novelization it is said the upper limit where repulsors become more effecient than thrusters is 6 planetary radii for worlds like Alderaan. This implies that ships can achieve orbit with repulsors alone if there is enough energy to provide the lift. Most repulsor craft don't appear to have this much energy but capital ships might.
Just a little something to get you excited for next episode...
So its double confirmed that the psycho is a psycho. If these Proto Alliance Rebs still allow her to stick around if they find out she is Death Watch I will have to confirm that the SW universe is just as bad as the 40k universe in that not one faction is good. Although there alot of good Imperials and Rebs for now.
A trail that every new age force user must undertake is the destruction of an AT-AT. How you do it speaks highly to your level of skill and problem solving prowess.
I don't see that as being that great of a feat. Anyone with a Lightsaber can chop down a AT-AT.
Who cares if her family was Death Watch? She also came from the Empire lol.