 |
 |
||||
|
|
||||
Lim Jyue (lim_jyue@pacific.net.sg)
Fri, 03 Nov 2000 15:36:43 +0800
At 15:09 11/02/2000 -0600, Leslie_R wrote:
>no, i don't think so.. the I-fields used in beam shields work like those
>that are used in beam sabers, not like those used to make
>omni-directional anti Mega-Particle barriers
The principle is still the same. If you can use I-fields to keep in
mega-particles in the beam sabers and beam shields, you can use I-fields to
keep *out* mega particle weapons.
>i'm not talking about the forward pottion containing the core fighter
>catapult, i'm talking about the entire section from the tip of the
>fighter landing pad to just before the large disk that stores one of the
>main gun batteries..
I think you just over-inflated the generator. =)
Let's take a comparative look at the GP03 I-field generator. IIRC,
the whole contraption could fit into the bridge of the Albion. Granted, it's
design to throw an I-field around something as small (!) as the GP03, but
even if we quadruple the generator size for an omni-directional barrier, one
of the front section -- meaning only the fighter launch bay -- should be
more than sufficient to contain the generator.
Now, that's assuming we use only a single generator for the whole
ship. If we break the generator up into multiple small generators each
supposed to cover a specific area of the ship. Assuming each small generator
is about the size of GP03's generator, we can easily mount quite a number of
generators on the Albion -- easily 4 to 6.
What's more, we don't know whether I-fields working in conjuction
with each other will combine to add their field strengths together, or
conflict with each other to reduce their field strengths. So the idea of
multiple I-fields covering a single warship may be feasible -- and this
would solve the problem of shooting out with beam weapons.
>miniaturized yes, smaller and smaller generators for relatively small
>I-fields, we still don't know about generators neded for defensive
>barriers for full-scale.
Correct, but what if we don't aim for a single I-field? Granted, I
don't know how multiple I-fields will react when brought in contact with
each other, but beam saber duels should give us a good idea.
>I-field barriers are invincable agaisnt Mega-particle weapons period..
>look at the Big Zam, it shrugged off the combined firepower of at least
>half of the Federation's space navy, Capital-ship class beam firepower!
Actually, I think when the Gundam first came out with beam weaponry,
the Zeon military repeatedly refer to the beam rifle as cruiser class
weaponry. So any MS with a beam rifle is practically armed with a capital
ship armament. =)
>but it takes a specific configuration and intensity of I-field to make a
>defensive bubble around an MS/MA that will divert any and all mega-particle
>based weapony and useing the same small I-field generator that holds
plasma in
>a sword-blade shape for yor ubeam-saber and expecting it ot maek a full
barrage >of beam-cannon fire from a warship go Around your mobile suit
Well, you seemed to be fixated on the idea that to create a full
I-field (as in the GP03 type) you need a single, big generator. So I'm
asking, why not create multiple small generators to cover the entire ship in
sections?
-------------
Lim Jyue
ICQ: 24737555
I am careful not to confuse excellence with perfection.
Excellence I can reach for; perfection is God's business.
-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri Nov 03 2000 - 16:22:50 JST