Bad science in fiction Hall of Shame

[p1t1o]

How about this, hyperdrives have AI control cores, the AI is considered sentient and has all the same rights and status as a living being. Hyperdrive attack analogous to a kamikaze - rare, last ditch, suicidal, and only occasionally very destructive. We can presume the death star had a big enough power source to have a "hyperdrive shield" hence its reputation for invulnerability.

[kerbiloid]

34 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

hyperdrives have AI control cores, the AI is considered sentient and has all the same rights and status as a living being

"Electoral rights for hyperspace drives!""

***

Btw. Alderaan.
(A planet which was destroyed by Death Star)
According to wiki, it's an Earth-sized planet. After destruction, it formed and asteroid belt.

Iirc, gravitational energy of the planet is ~= 3/5 GM²/R = 3/5 * 6.67*10^-11 * (6*10²⁴)² / (6.4*10⁶). ~= 2.2*10³² J.
This is ~2.2*10³² / (3*10⁸)² ~=2.4*10¹⁵ kg of matter to be annihilated.

If Death Star carries whole asteroids of antimatter in fuel tanks, why was the rebel fleet not atomized after "successful" Luke's hit?

(Though, this could explain how do they see Anakin and o.b.1 's ghosts in the final of classic saga.
The planetoid with ewoks has been evaporized, and all characters have gotten into afterlife. )

Edited July 21, 2018 by kerbiloid

[DAL59]

17 hours ago, p1t1o said:

We can presume the death star had a big enough power source to have a "hyperdrive shield" hence its reputation for invulnerability.

Most fleets had interdictors, which would prevent hyperspace usage.  Of course, its kind of a plot hole why Snoke's ship didn't have one.

[ARS]

I have a concept of "quite realistic" space battle. It accounts the orbital mechanic (one thing that's almost always neglected in space war stories)

-The battle is conducted by ships, assembled in fleet formation and contain minimal human crew, with much of the system being automated. Weapons would be consisted of missiles and lasers. I choose both of them because missiles can correct it's trajectory (making it homing weapon) and lasers because it heats the target, which is hard to dissipate in space (essentially direct line of sight weapon), large caliber projectile based weapon would be rather uneconomical to transport to space in large quantity unless space travel becomes so cheap in the first place, not to mention the heat dissipation required for cooling the barrel every time some gunpowder explodes inside to propel the projectile, and railgun generates a lot of heat. For defense, some point defense turret might be employed to intercept missiles, along with countermeasures and jamming. Against lasers, spaced armor plate can be used (think like a spaced armor in tanks, but it's a poor heat conductor). The battle could only be conducted in orbit of a celestial body. Escape trajectory can be used, but only if it intersects or near enemy trajectory. Basically when attacking a planet, there are 2 phases:

Phase 1: Attacking fleet must account for orbital insertion trajectory to ensure that they achieved stable orbit while the enemy is on the other side. Of course, since there's no stealth in space, defending fleet can unload their firepower while the attacking fleet is still moving in for orbital insertion. But since the distance involved in space is astronomical (pun intended), if the defending fleet fires their missiles too early, the attacking fleet could see it from mar away and react accordingly by preparing point defense or change their maneuver. For an added protection, attacking fleet can set their formation to ensure anti-laser spaced armor is pointed towards the defending fleet during orbital insertion. A limitation also exist in that while the targeting computer might be able to predict enemy trajectory at long range, the projectile trajectory becomes much more predictable for the enemy to react. This creates a scenario where the defending fleet must decide whether to let their orbit carry them to the other side of the planet for phase 2 engagement if their initial defense effort fails in narrow time window or waste their limited Dv to maintain their position and pounding the attacking fleet before they make an orbit and risk much more chaotic battle and major losses when they are finally in range of the attacking fleet

Phase 2: Both fleet are now in stable orbit and it's up to fleet command how to maneuver their fleet. The idea is, predicting enemy's last maneuver according to the intel and previous engagement during orbital insertion, so the fleet's orbit could be adjusted to intersect enemy's orbit, whether by changing inclination, trajectory and apsis points. The battle would be more like "air support attack run". Both fleet met in intersecting trajectory, unleash everything, let the orbit bring them to the other side, adjust orbit for next attack run according to predicted enemy orbit, rinse and repeat until one of the fleet is destroyed. A tactical maneuver such as changing into polar orbit for attacking from unexpected angles, splitting fleet for pincer attack from different trajectories, laying mines on the leftover debris field (space battles are VERY Kessler-ish, so laying some mines in resulting debris field isn't a bad idea, besides, if the mine is passive type, the heat would be concealed in the leftover heat of the debris). And no space fighters, those are rather impractical, especially concerning the life support required for pilots. Drones would be a better choice

What do you guys think?

Edited July 28, 2018 by ARS

[kerbiloid]

2 hours ago, ARS said:

assembled in fleet formation

 

2 hours ago, ARS said:

The battle could only be conducted in orbit of a celestial body. Escape trajectory can be used, but only if it intersects or near enemy trajectory.

So, either hyperbolic orbits, as a formation could hardly survive one elliptic turn, or permanently working engines to hold them in places.
In both cases delta-V at least tens km/s and high thrust are required.
This means they should be able to easily change the distances avoiding a close contact.

What does a formation give in the space, where distances between friendly ships are much greater that in an ocean, and hostile weapons are much faster?
.

2 hours ago, ARS said:

of missiles and lasers

Lasers distances arre limited with diffraction. (d_spot ~ 1.22 * wavelength * distance/d_mirror).
So, for meters-sized mirrors typical distance limits is ~thousands km.
With such delta-V they probably could easily avoid the lasers.
You should deliver the lasers with missiles right to the target, otherwise it will just warm it.

2 hours ago, ARS said:

missiles can correct it's trajectory (making it homing weapon)

Where to get delta-V for real homing in a small missile?
Unlikely it can have a thermonuke, unless it's Expanse.

So probably, the only real option is  missile with a laser.
Missile gets into 1000 km sphere around the target and ignites the laser.

As chemical lasers are heavy, bulky, and ugly, and in this scenario its lifespan is very limited, there is only option: a nuke-powered single-shot Xray/gamma laser. 
As most part of its energy would be lost, so it would be a nuke surrounded with several individually targeted turrets with beam directors. To shoot several targets with a single shot.
Like in old SDI commercials.

2 hours ago, ARS said:

Against lasers, spaced armor plate can be used (think like a spaced armor in tanks, but it's a poor heat conductor).

Carbon plastic, like on warheads since late 1970s. It has enormous heat capacity and negligible conductivity,

2 hours ago, ARS said:

Attacking fleet must account for orbital insertion trajectory to ensure that they achieved stable orbit while the enemy is on the other side. Of course, since there's no stealth in space, defending fleet can unload their firepower while the attacking fleet is still moving in for orbital insertion. But since the distance involved in space is astronomical

If they insert an orbit, distances are just tens thousand kilometers, not so astronomical.
And the invading fleet approaches from a well-known direction without maneuvering. Ideal conditions to be shot down.

2 hours ago, ARS said:

if the defending fleet fires their missiles too early, the attacking fleet could see it from mar away and react accordingly by preparing point defense or change their maneuver.

If they can evade from a cloud of approaching missiles, they even don't think about such a word "orbit".
Especially when the long-range missile carry gamma-lasers rather than contact warheads.

2 hours ago, ARS said:

This creates a scenario where the defending fleet must decide whether to let their orbit carry them to the other side of the planet

They will shoot their missiles several days before the enemy fleet approaching, and make hundreds turns around the planet while all of them are flying.
Also this means that it's hardly predictable on which side of planet the defending fleet will be when the show begins.

2 hours ago, ARS said:

Both fleet are now in stable orbit

Cosplaying a target for each other, as any predictable trajectory is predictable for a missile or a gunshot.

2 hours ago, ARS said:

Both fleet met in intersecting trajectory,

Which turn the battle into a mass suicide, as both of them will launch clouds of projectiles on each other's way.

***

My vision is: two waves of high-thrust thermonuke-powered heavy carrier drones carrying limitedly homing and probably chemical missiles with nuke-powered single-shot turreted multi-beam gamma-lasers.
From each side, on collision course.

The first wave approaches and launches the self-propelled gamma-lasers which take off most part of the enemy fleet.
The second wave targets at surviving enemy heavy carrier drones, taking them out.
The attacker's empty carrier drones redirect themselves to the rest of surface targets.

No humans onboard, no maneuvering except limited homing. Every craft is single-use.

Edited July 28, 2018 by kerbiloid

[Cheif Operations Director]

On 1/30/2018 at 1:18 PM, Canopus said:

SpaceX and their Magical BFR belong to your first category then i guess.

Tell me about it

I would argue the the fireballs in Star Wars are possible. You have all that escaping gas from the "laser" as it escapes it's lit on fire causing a bigger hole causing more gas to escape and catch on fire etc etc.

[kerbiloid]

Both Clark in The 100 and Talon in Outpost have black blood.

Can Clark summon demons (luku'iri or how did they call this plushy), or can Talon interact with Bekka Pramheda?

If the second, then Outpost appears to be a sci-fi, too.

As Talon can get 3 wounds in stomach and still survive (it's just the 4th episode of 10), I would presume Outpost is a sci-fi, as probably only healing nanites could do that.

[magnemoe]

On 7/21/2018 at 11:24 PM, DAL59 said:

Most fleets had interdictors, which would prevent hyperspace usage.  Of course, its kind of a plot hole why Snoke's ship didn't have one.

Yes, interdictors however is an specialized star destroyer. They look like an star destroyer mated with an LNG carrier. 
On the other hand why build an giant ship? Yes warship size has grown over time to add more features and firepower, Snoke's ship could easy hold them without reducing the size of the dance floor and cinema much. 

[Gargamel]

On 8/3/2018 at 4:46 PM, magnemoe said:

On the other hand why build an giant ship?

Because the franchise is secretly being run by Micheal Bay, with none of the good and all of the bad. 

Edited August 6, 2018 by Gargamel

[XB-70A]

13 hours ago, Gargamel said:

Because the franchise is secretly being run by Micheal Bay, with none of the good and all of the bad. 

It needs space-bikers riding rocketed Harley Fat Boys and "jumping" out of an exploding spacecraft.

[DAL59]

If you fall 5,000 feet in a metal suit, you die.

[cfds]

41 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

If you fall 5,000 feet in a metal suit, you die.

Only if you hit the ground (or another suitable means of sudden deceleration)...

[Hummingbird Aerospace]

 

My complaints (Star Wars):

1: Why can you hear noises such as engines, lasers, and explosions?

2: Why do starships have to constantly keep their engines running, and why do they just automatically stop when they turn of their engines, like there is the presence of drag?

3: If the engines in Star Wars are really ion engines, then why are they so powerful? Especially in the atmosphere!

4: Why are all the space cruisers made to be relatively aerodynamic while they are not designed to fly inside of atmospheres?

5: Why does every single planet have the same gravitational force and the same oxygenated atmosphere? 

 

Edited August 20, 2018 by Hummingbird Aerospace

[Bill Phil]

Well, in Star Wars, lots of the ships can fly in atmospheres. Star Destroyers can, I think. Some types, at least.

Also, the presence of habitable planets may be a result of terraforming by ancient civilizations, and that isn't necessarily unbelievable, considering the artificial Star Systems that those ancients built...

[ARS]

1. Because the silence of space doesn't make a great action movie and instead of making audience getting pumped, it turns them into yawnfest

2. Because early sci-fi writer thinks that space is just like air, like our atmosphere extending infinitely into space, so they think that fighting in space would be like WW2 dogfight (turns out they're wrong once sputnik launch revealed the orbital mechanic)

3. Real life Ion engine doesn't have a thrust sufficient for one man space fighters (hell, the concept of space fighter itself is impractical in the first place), but since it sounds high tech, and early prototypes has awesome blue glow, storywriters thought that it would be a powerful uber-drive of the future (turns out it's very weak)

4. Seeing a sleek cruiser bristling with gun turrets is much more appealing than guns strapped on giant propellant tanks

5. Goldilocks zone requirement for habitable planet is very very strict. We have scanned literally thousands of planets in our galaxy and no one ever come close in earth-like size, gravity and climate, so I guess... It's just for making a cool scenery more varied

Also, isn't there a thread about this stuff already? Check this out:

 

[Vanamonde]

Hey, @Hummingbird Aerospace, this is a great idea for a thread! So good an idea that we already have one for it, and your thread has been merged into it.

[Hummingbird Aerospace]

@Vanamonde Thanks, I will edit it to fit this thread. Didn’t see it. Sorry.

[Hummingbird Aerospace]

On 8/20/2018 at 12:25 PM, Bill Phil said:

Well, in Star Wars, lots of the ships can fly in atmospheres. Star Destroyers can, I think. Some types, at least.

I used to be a Star Wars expert before I turned to real science. Apparently Imperial Star Destroyers are not capable of atmospheric flight. The only type of star destroyer with this ability is supposed to be the Victory-class. So then Disney makes rogue one and the first mistake I realized was that that was an IMPERIAL star destroyer capable of atmospheric flight. So Disney definitely doesn’t care about the finer details in Star Wars. Anyway, i’m getting off topic.  Lightsabers and holograms? Don’t get me started on those. A lightsaber is supposed to be like a laser - right? So then how is there such a concentration of energy on the blade and then it just abruptly stops? Also, I find a lot of their military vehicles disgracefully under-armed. Take the AT-AT. It is really big, really tall, and has big ****ing legs. But, it only has like 4 little lasers and some sucky little snow-storm-troopers and maybe 2 puny little bikes that can float with lasers strapped on. I wish there was a sci-fi movie about space combat that was a little more... realistic. Like instead of sleek cruisers bristling with guns, instead just have guns strapped on propellant tanks with a nose cone or two and an engine. 

Also, which buffoons designed the first order dreadnought? They have AA guns all on top, for little ships, and a giant laser for capital ships. What if the rebel fleet came on top of the dreadnought, and all the numbers just bombed the heck outta the underside. And why is there a big obvious hole that says “COME ON, BOMB ME ALREADY”?  And I’m gonna bring up the fact that the escorts were BEHIND the ship they were escorting! That’s just bad strategy, mate.

[wumpus]

On 8/8/2018 at 8:29 AM, DAL59 said:

If you fall 5,000 feet in a metal suit, you die.

 

On 8/8/2018 at 9:11 AM, cfds said:

Only if you hit the ground (or another suitable means of sudden deceleration)...

There's also the possibility of the metal suit being an excellent heat conductor and the dangers of hypothermia.  In this case it would be more of a danger of falling from 15,000 to 10,000 feet.  Mountains at 5,000 feet aren't so bad, I don't know about open cockpit planes, but I doubt that hypothermia from a <1 minute fall would kill you.

[DAL59]

6 hours ago, wumpus said:

here's also the possibility of the metal suit being an excellent heat conductor and the dangers of hypothermia.

With the amount of electricity and motors in an Iron Man suit, you would probably overheat.

[kerbiloid]

24 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

With the amount of electricity and motors in an Iron Man suit, you would probably overheat.

A real Iron Man suit.

Spoiler

 

Edited August 20, 2018 by kerbiloid

[ARS]

Lightsaber is, essentially a blowtorch on steroid

[Gargamel]

7 minutes ago, ARS said:

Lightsaber is, essentially a blowtorch on steroid

No No No......

A blow torch uses gas and combustion to create heat.  A light saber passes energy through a specific crystal to create a laser of limited length.  (Just remember what thread we're in, k?).   Some of the star wars gurus will explain it better, but I believe the planet of origin for each crystal determines the saber's color.   As they claimed to be one just a few posts above, maybe @Hummingbird Aerospace can chime in here?

 

9 hours ago, wumpus said:

 

There's also the possibility of the metal suit being an excellent heat conductor and the dangers of hypothermia.  In this case it would be more of a danger of falling from 15,000 to 10,000 feet.  Mountains at 5,000 feet aren't so bad, I don't know about open cockpit planes, but I doubt that hypothermia from a <1 minute fall would kill you. 

Even the exposure to cold for about 5 minutes wouldn't hurt.    It takes roughly 5-10 minutes for hypothermia to set in when submerged in arctic temp waters, and water conducts heat away from the body about 25 times faster than air.    So it might not be pleasant, but temperature wise, you could probably make a jump from 100,00 feet naked and be ok.   It's the lack of O2 that will get you. 

9 hours ago, wumpus said:

Mountains at 5,000 feet aren't so bad

There are quite a few major cities at high elevations. And considering people do 14,000 ft Mountains as simple dayhikes, you might want to shift your paradigm a bit.  I've been up that high on a mountain, and it's quite pleasant, weather dependent, if not a little hard to breathe, but only slightly. 

 

[TeslaPenguin1]

The film The Core.

The lasers were fine, the unobtanium would work (technically, if it existed) but how could they survive inside that giant geode? Wouldn't the air be boiling in there?

Also, the nuke part was kinda stupid.

[ARS]

1 hour ago, Gargamel said:

A light saber passes energy through a specific crystal to create a laser of limited length

A laser that's strong enough to be seen by naked eye would ionize the surrounding air so much that it would be  as dangerous for the user as for the enemy

Viewed from real life physics about how laser works, having a laser so powerful to cut metal doors and strong enough to be seen with naked eye but only projected with limited length is kinda absurd. This is also my pet peeve whenever there's a laser blade weapon (not just star wars), it's explicitly named laser, but laser do not work that way, having only one emitter that projects steel-melting beam on such a short distance (except when there's some kind of containment field, but that would be way out of context.

Also, regarding laser beams as projectile weapons, laser beams are light. Visible light. Anything that stops visible light will stop them – anything visible light can pass through, they can pass through. So how on Earth do they get knocked aside by invisible deflector shields?

3 minutes ago, TeslaPenguin1 said:

The film The Core.

The lasers were fine, the unobtanium would work (technically, if it existed) but how could they survive inside that giant geode? Wouldn't the air be boiling in there?

Also, the nuke part was kinda stupid.

Unobtainium is engineering jargon for, "a material that would be perfect for our purposes, if we could get it, which we can't." Sometimes an object that actually exists, or existed at one time, becomes unobtainium because it's unavailable now. When used in the realm of fiction, Unobtainium is usually the exotic material that is needed to advance the plot of a given story. Without it, all your nifty machines and plot device quit functioning.

We always know the common sense of Hollywood about dealing with planetwide natural disasters: Nuke it, because nukes solves everything