OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

TV shows with really cool space battles: which are best?

POSTED BY: CHRISISALL
UPDATED: Sunday, October 24, 2010 16:36
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 14417
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, October 22, 2010 1:20 PM

CHRISISALL


We got the original BSG, the new BSG, Babylon 5, Space: Above & Beyond, Deep Space 9, etc...

Which one(s) rock your home theatre???


The spaced Chrisisall



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 1:35 PM

WHOZIT


STAR TREK the TV series, the "Doomsday Machine".



Those arn't boobs, they're lies! - Stewie Griffin

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 1:37 PM

CHRISISALL


Good call!!


The Decker Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 1:38 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


When it comes to space battles, I really got nothin.

The 5th Element ?

Chronicles of Riddick ?

( I discount any of the SW 'prequels', because they all suck so bad,and I've only got like 1 of them....somewhere. )

To be honest, save for RotJ and Wrath of Khan, the only 'cool' battles I can even think of are from BSG. The maneuver they pulled off w/ the Pegasus.... that was top notch, tactically speaking.

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal."


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 1:41 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
the only 'cool' battles I can even think of are from BSG.

That would be from the new series, I'm assumin'?


The zero-G Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 1:52 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
the only 'cool' battles I can even think of are from BSG.

That would be from the new series, I'm assumin'?


The zero-G Chrisisall




Roger that.

When I was a kid, I loved the Doomsday ep from TOS . Also, from TOS , The Ultimate Computer, which kinda has been done a few times over, was pretty cool. The idea of those majestic Constellation class star ships, going at it, against each other... was intriguing, to say the least.

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal."


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 1:57 PM

LWAVES


Can't remember specific battles from DS9 but I do recall they had some good ones.

You mentioned what would have to be my fave with the new BSG. The fast pace, gunfire all over, missiles streaming in by the dozen. It could sometimes be hard to tell what was going on but it looked really cool and put you right in the thick of things.
I also have a soft spot for the original BSG even though scenes got repeated the ships were just so god damn good looking. The original Viper MkII will always remain a top fave fighter of mine.
Similar feelings for the Starfighter in Buck Rogers as well.

One of the things I missed with Blake's 7 was the space battles but with a low budget and FX in those days it probably would have looked bad. Pity they aren't doing the new version as I would love to see the Liberator fight.



"The greatest invention ever is not the wheel. It's the second wheel." - Rich Hall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 2:00 PM

GWEK


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
We got the original BSG, the new BSG, Babylon 5, Space: Above & Beyond, Deep Space 9, etc...

Which one(s) rock your home theatre???


The spaced Chrisisall





I think that covers most of it, although I would also add both Stargate series, which I would actually put at the top of the heap.

If I were putting them in order:

1) Stargate (especially later seasons of SG-1): About as good as it gets. The closest you get to Star Wars-cool on TV.

2) BSG (new series): It's a taste thing, but I put these below Stargate because they were often, at times, too "realistic"--just not as much fun and "epic" as the SG battles. Again, though, it's a tough call, down to taste.

3) Babylon 5 and DS9: Both excellent in their day, but dated by now. And B5, in particular, was hampered at times by a limited budget.

4) Space: Above & Beyond: Haven't seen this one for years, but I remember the battles being excellent... for the time the show was produced and the budget it had.

Past those, I think it's a HUGE step down to anything else, including the original BSG, which I think is the only one from your initial list that I didn't include. Honestly, launch sequences aside, a lot of the BSG stuff bordered on lame, even for the time. I think Buck Rogers had better sequences, but wouldn't put either anywhere up to 1-4.

Edit: Did a quick online search to see what I might be missing. I forgot ENTERPRISE, which I would probably rank as below DS9, but above Space: Above and Beyond.

I also found this site, which has a poll for best sci fi TV series:

http://www.mikebrotherton.com/?p=1637

Sure, it's from over a year ago, but FIREFLY is currently #2, and don't we all love voting for FIREFLY? Why don't we fix this situation?





www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 2:11 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Also, from TOS , The Ultimate Computer, which kinda has been done a few times over, was pretty cool. The idea of those majestic Constellation class star ships, going at it, against each other... was intriguing, to say the least.


You seen the 'remastered' episode? Very not bad! IMO


The laughing Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 2:22 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by lwaves:

You mentioned what would have to be my fave with the new BSG. The fast pace, gunfire all over, missiles streaming in by the dozen. It could sometimes be hard to tell what was going on but it looked really cool and put you right in the thick of things.

Yeah, ZOIC totally outdid themselves with that stuff.
But still, my favourite one-man fighter is




The laughing Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 2:42 PM

CHRISISALL


Which brings me to the question of which design is better: this

or this





The laughing Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 3:13 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by GWEK:
I would also add both Stargate series, which I would actually put at the top of the heap.


Stargate: Atlantis?
I really liked it...


The laughing Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 3:46 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Tough call, between OS *Vipers and the new ones.


Easier, ( or not ) the OS Cylon Raiders vs the new models.


*I really DO love the lines on the Viper, but I always wondered...why the intakes for the engines that fly in a vacuum ?



"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal."


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 3:49 PM

BLUEEYEDBRIGADIER


I kinda prefer the new BSG Vipers...mainly from the fact they decals and paint schemes that are meant to invoke Earth military fighter jets

**EDITED TO REMOVE THE SHEER AWESOMENESS THAT WASN'T MEANT TO SHAME ITS TELEVISION IMITATORS**

"The revenge of the beaten comes in refusing to fall." -- Mal, in "The Losing Side - Chapter 45" by jetflair

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 5:16 PM

GWEK


Quote:

Originally posted by BlueEyedBrigadier:
People, people, people...how can we be dismissing the epic awesomeness of a single lone GunStar against a whole wing of Ko-Dan Armada reverse Y-wing fighters from The Last Starfighter?!



Um... because THE LAST STARFIGHTER isn't a TV show, maybe?!?

Check out the name of the thread... :P

If we were doing movies, it'd be a very different list--and most of the shows we're talking about wouldn't even make the top 10!

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 5:18 PM

GWEK


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by GWEK:
I would also add both Stargate series, which I would actually put at the top of the heap.


Stargate: Atlantis?
I really liked it...


The laughing Chrisisall




I liked Atlantis, but, personally, enjoyed SG-1 more. With respect to this thread, I think that SG-1 had the better epic space battles (same reason DS9 trumps all the other Trek franchises--for this thread, anyway).

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 9:29 PM

CALHOUN


Quote:

AURaptor wrote:
Friday, October 22, 2010 15:46

*I really DO love the lines on the Viper, but I always wondered...why the intakes for the engines that fly in a vacuum ?



Hydrogen scoops man!!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 22, 2010 11:50 PM

LWAVES


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
*I really DO love the lines on the Viper, but I always wondered...why the intakes for the engines that fly in a vacuum ?




Don't know too much about the sciencey mechanical side of it but all the Viper models can enter a planets atmosphere and I always assumed it was something to do with that, sort of placing it closer to our modern jet fighters. I believe I read somewhere that the original Vipers (MKI's??) were only capable of atmospheric flight but I'm not sure where I got this idea from.

I would take the OS Viper MkII's over the new MKII's or the MKVII's but it's a very close call as they all look great.
For me, picking between the Raiders is a harder choice but I would probably go with the new Raiders mainly because of the red glowing eye and its unusual shape.



"The greatest invention ever is not the wheel. It's the second wheel." - Rich Hall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 23, 2010 1:29 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


I just like the new Cylon Raiders, as they look sleeker and do away w/ the separate pilot by making the centurion the ship itself. I mean, why does a machine need to pilot a machine ?




"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal."


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 23, 2010 6:12 AM

IMNOTHERE


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
We got the original BSG, the new BSG, Babylon 5, Space: Above & Beyond, Deep Space 9, etc...



I'm gonna have to go with Babylon 5 here.

BSG (old & new) is very, very cool, but (like Star Wars) they've gone for "20th Century Air Combat - in spaaaace!!!" (lets face it - its a show about an aircraft carrier) while Trek has gone for "Run Silent, Run Deep - in spaaaace!!!"

Babylon 5 made a much better effort at trying to envisage 3D, zero gravity battle tactics, and the design of the Starfury has subtle but important differences from X-wings and Vipers - designed to pull Crazy Ivans without turning the pilot into chunky salsa.

Plus, B5 was about the first TV show to have big, kick-ass space battles (that didn't consist of the actors running back and forth across the bridge while control panels exploded in sparks*) outside of pilots and season finales.

Its a pity that it doesn't pass the test of time so well: partly due to the "theatrical" style of the drama and partly because the decision to release the DVDs in widescreen meant the CGI and composite sequences all had to be zoomed and cropped.

* at least New BSG had an excuse for not having low voltage fly-by-wire controls - although they could have done with less shatter-prone plate glass in their C&C decor.
PS, hate to be morbid, but why is it that the main cause of fatality in space operas (apart from having a control panel explode in your face for no apparent reason) seems to be having a steel girder fall on you? Even B5 did this, although they did have a fair number of radiation burns, too. I guess that explosive decompression doesn't give you enough chance for dramatic Last Words...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 23, 2010 8:09 AM

CYBERSNARK


One of the scripts/properties I'm intending to sell someday is called Starfighter Academy, so I've put a lot of thought into how space combat would really develop (both to make it distinctive, and to justify using manned fighters when they would, logically, make absolutely no sense --as Imnothere notes, most space battles on TV are WWII aerial combat in space [Lucas deliberately copied WWII footage in Star Wars, and then everybody else just copies Lucas]).

Much as I'm a fan of the Dominion War arc, I can't really applaud the space battles in DS9; I'm not really a fan of the "hull-scrapingly-close" approach to space combat (unless there's a good tactical reason, like in ANH or RotJ). Real space combat would be fought at huge distances, since there's no horizon to hide behind and no atmosphere to slow weapons. It's a purely visual conceit to allow you to show off multiple ships in close-ups at the same time --TOS actually got it right, thanks to their budget/technology not allowing them to get multiple ships together onscreen.

Enterprise's battles during the Xindi war were actually pretty good; they didn't have huge fleets to juggle, so they were more willing to spread out the formations.

Early Andromeda actually had the most realistic battles I've seen, with ranges measured in light-seconds (186,000 miles), and battles decided by guided smart-missiles, remote-control drones, point-defense turrets, countermeasure missiles, and ECM jamming (and piloted fighters, because human[oid] eyeballs can't be jammed). The added benefit on a TV budget is that this is actually a lot cheaper to film than a DS9-style furball.

That said, I did grow up watching Star Wars and playing the X-Wing video game series, so I have to give props to Moore's BSG for doing the best SW-style dogfighting I've seen outside Star Wars (hell, often better than Star Wars). And yes, the Battle of New Caprica was truly epic.

Babylon 5 was great for its time, and I did appreciate the wide range of ships on display (each with different technological capabilities). Again, though, everything was fought at stone-throwing range.

Space: Above and Beyond struck a good compromise by having the fighters serve as long-range attackers beyond where the carriers could reach. Trouble there was that none of the fights really felt epic; it was an open-ended war of attrition, not a strategic engagement of strike-and-defend.

Stargate SG-1 had some impressive engagements during the Ori war, and Atlantis saw some X-302/Dart action in the latter seasons, but none of them have really grabbed me --I think it's that most of the space battles there are treated as appendages or minor skirmishes that we see from the sidelines. None of the regular Stargate characters are actually spacers (except for Universe, and Destiny has had what, two minor skirmishes?). Most of Stargate's action happens on the ground.

Of course, being me, I have to bring the anime.

Macross Frontier has the flat-out best space battles I've ever seen, even if they do include transformable mecha (and singing used as ECM).



-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 23, 2010 9:04 AM

FREMDFIRMA



I second that for Macross (which is, technically TV, just not region 1) - too bad due to licensing issues us yanks will prolly never get it.

Oh, and since everyone here is talkin about really cool space battles, I also feel the need to mention Sword of the Stars, which is a game I think many of you would appreciate, 4X like Master of Orion and suchlike, but what rocks it is the battles.



EVERY battle is this epic, even a pair of scout patrols stumbling over each other.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 23, 2010 10:22 AM

CLJOHNSTON108


Quote:

Originally posted by ImNotHere:
I'm gonna have to go with Babylon 5 here.


Oh, definitely!

My favorite being...



This site hasn't been updated in ages, sadly. http://www.spacebattles.com/

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 23, 2010 6:23 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.


I think Babylon 5 had the best battles. DS9 had some good ones too. I couldn't find a video but I remember Kurn induced two Klingon cruisers to chase him toward a sun then suddenly changed course creating a solar flare which incinerated his attackers.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 23, 2010 6:47 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Which brings me to the question of which design is better: this

or this



Another thing I love about the new BSG: the scene where Apollo sneaks in back door to the mineral refining plant, and his fighter hovers for just a second. You can see the stabilizing jets actually stabilizing the fighter as it hovers. Newton's Laws on screen! CGI that obeys physics!

Yeah, I liked that.

Cybersnark: good scene.

I have the B5 DVDs, but due to the insane cheesiness of the first few episodes I've never made it further. Someday, when I'm really too bored to find anything else to do, I will watch and discover the goodness.

OK, and here I will risk internet shaming: good space battle? The new Star Wars movies. The one where there's little things landing on Anakin's wings, then the big ship crash lands. I don't even remember which movie, because the rest of the Ep 1-3 series (other than the lava world) was so dreadful that I haven't watched any it again. But that battle scene I remember as quite good. Other than having sound in space, it was believable and put you right into the chaos. I would watch that bit again.

If only Lucas had diverted 1% of his budget from special effects and hired someone to write a decent script... *sigh*

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 24, 2010 5:01 AM

GWEK


Quote:

Originally posted by Cybersnark:
One of the scripts/properties I'm intending to sell someday is called Starfighter Academy, so I've put a lot of thought into how space combat would really develop (both to make it distinctive, and to justify using manned fighters when they would, logically, make absolutely no sense --as Imnothere notes, most space battles on TV are WWII aerial combat in space [Lucas deliberately copied WWII footage in Star Wars, and then everybody else just copies Lucas]).



At the risk if sidebarring too much from the original thread topic, if you're going to develop "Starfighter Academy" for Hollywood... sure, work on realism--but make sure that realism doesn't trump visually-dynamic, conflict-driven storytelling.

Now, I don't remember ANDROMEDA's space combat, but I don't see tons of people here singing it praises. What most of the combat styles that people are talking about here share in common is that they are visually dynamic and they keep the characters central (and typically in peril).

"Hullscraping" combat WORKS, not because it's realistic, but because it looks good on the screen and makes us worry about characters we have emotional investment in.

Not saying that what you're working on won't work, but, historically, "realistic" doesn't work in movies and TV shows (and here, I'm talking more broadly than just space combat) because it often undercuts strong screenwriting and storytelling.

(Apologies if the above has come off as adverserial or pompous... I'm in the midst of reading a bunch of screenwriting books as a refresher.)

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 24, 2010 7:03 AM

CYBERSNARK


Oh, agreed. As I said, one of my main goals is to find ways to justify this kind of combat; the more sensitive sensors are, the closer they need to be to get anything useful, 90% of space battles are to avoid being boarded, etc. The whole point of the show is that high-G snubfighter combat is a rarified field --only the true elites dare to risk it (and even then, it involves more sniping than dogfighting).

Here's some boilerplate I did for a potential website/game (as narrated by one of the characters):

Quote:

Why Starfighters?

On the surface, starfighters don't seem to make sense. They rarely do anything that a missile or drone can't accomplish, they tend to be equipped with weapons that are far less capable than those of capital ships, and a squadron of fighters is little different resource-wise than a single small cruiser. Since there is no real "stealth" in space, and many weapons have potentially unlimited range, it seems that space combat should rely exclusively on missiles and countermeasures.

The modern starfighter is the product of a long line of technological evolution.

Early Era:

For most species, the earliest form of space combat used projectiles --either "shells" (which received a burst of acceleration from their launcher) or "missiles" (which would continue accelerating until they either struck a target or ran out of fuel). Missiles tend to be larger and more destructive (through sheer kinetic impact if nothing else), and can usually reach the target faster than gunfire. Inert shells, on the other hand, are often harder for sensors to detect --they're small enough that most sensors were designed to ignore them (otherwise you'd ping every bit of space debris and dust in the solar system), and the temperature variation between them and the space around them can be negligible. Being projectiles, both missiles and shells can travel indefinitely --when a missile's fuel is used up, it stops accelerating, but continues at its final speed.

This makes these weapons hazardous not just to enemies during battle, but to civillian or allied craft, even over vast gaps of time and space. A handful of shells can get caught in a gravity well, becoming fast-moving, potentially explosive space debris that could turn up just about anywhere in a solar system and shred an unshielded craft to ribbons.

[Laser weapons are highly effective due to their destructive potential, and their inability to be blocked by conventional countermeasures, but have a wide range of weaknesses making them useless for large-scale combat. Compared to missiles and conventional guns, lasers require an absurd amount of energy to reach useful power levels. Lasers also generate a great deal of waste heat --in an atmosphere, this can be cooled via convection (blown air absorbs the heat and carries it away), but in the vacuum of space, this heat will need to be radiated slowly. Laser weapons also need very precise targeting and a sustained target lock, making them ineffective against small, evasive targets. Finally, a laser beam can be diffused by any debris or flack between the emitter and the target.]

Because early vessels were usually limited to light-speed sensors (visual light, lidar, radar), most engagements were fought within ranges of one light-second. This was both because objects beyond that range could not be accurately targeted (by the time you see the target, it has already moved), and because even missiles rarely reached relativistic speeds.

Typically, missiles were used for long-range assault/interception, with shipboard guns functioning as close-range point-defense (shooting down incoming missiles). Specialized missiles were used as countermeasure interceptors, detonating incoming warheads either through collision, fratricide explosions, or by generating EM pulses that destroyed a missile's targeting ability (leaving it easy prey for point-defense guns).

Space combat with missiles has been described as "a delicate dance of range" --if you were too far away from your target, they would have plenty of time to intercept your missiles. If you were too close, you wouldn't be able to intercept theirs. One strategy that developed from this is point-blank or "hull-to-hull" combat. Draw extremely close to a target and use the point-defense turrets to generate a flack-storm. Any missiles your enemy tries to fire will be destroyed shortly after clearing the tubes --possibly damaging the enemy ship itself as they detonate. At close enough ranges, the point-defense guns can themselves reach the enemy ship, blasting through hull as easily as they cut through missiles.

The Rise of Drones:

Missile-based combat inevitably became a race between more agile missiles (to avoid the countermeasures) and more agile countermeasures (to intercept the more agile missiles). The continuous-thrust engines that made missiles so destructive ended up impairing their manoeuvrability --the more a missile accelerated toward its target, the harder it became to change course.

Multiple-stage missiles were designed to break apart when countered --one missile turning into six or more, with one being "sacrificed" to the countermeasures. Countermeasures adapted to this as well, switching to electronic means and developing tighter-turning "pursuers" that could chase down any missile that escaped the initial contact.

Simple computer programs (barely worthy of being called AI) were written, allowing missiles to vary their thrust and perform sharper evasive manoeuvres --this necessitated more advanced sensors and computers built into the missiles themselves. Interceptors became ever more manoeuvrable, developing inertial-drive "sit-and-spin" tactics.

The first plasma cannons were developed to serve as point defense weapons in populated systems. The bolts (magnetized bottles of charged plasma) dissipate rather than leaving stray shells to endanger traffic. They also offer effectively unlimited ammunition, when drawing energy from a generator. The development of energy shields (capable of absorbing and dissipating plasma charges) was an inevitable outgrowth.

Smaller plasma cannon (powered from a smaller power cell rather than a full generator) were eventually mounted on missiles to increase both survival rates and effectiveness (interceptor countermeasures could bring down more missiles, while missiles could destroy interceptors from a distance).

The Age of Starfighters:

The development of these heavily-armed and versatile "missiles" signalled the birth of the modern combat drone.

As drone missiles became more complex (and thus expensive), the explosive warhead became reduced and marginalized. Finally, simpler continuous-burn missiles experienced a resurgence --fired from the drones themselves, which could then be recovered (to save money).

By now, electronic countermeasure (ECM) technology had developed to the point where the drones' targeting systems could be reliably scrambled (jamming had long-since rendered remote control useless). Hardening drone computers against ECM gained only diminishing returns, and proved useless against direct attack by plasma-based ionization weapons (which simply delivered too much ionization for most shielding to tolerate). Drone programming was reaching the Turkhov limit --it could progress no further without actual, thinking, AI.

The obvious solution, given the lack of reliable, cost-effective AI, was to employ living pilots. While a fighter's sensors can sometimes be foiled by ECM, a pilot's eyes cannot, and no jamming field can affect a pilot's innate reflexes and judgement. More, pilots are capable of learning from their experiences, improving their skills over the course of multiple sorties.

There's also the pilot's innate "BSI quotient." A reflection of individual unpredictability (the human-coined acronym stands for "Bat-S#*% Insane"), the higher the BSI, the harder it is for a thinking system to anticipate the pilot's movements. Drones only have a BSI of 0 or 1. Normal sapients average around 2 or 3. Fighter pilots start out around 5. The best pilots are around 7 or 8 --if you're hearing this, congratulations, you're one of us. To learn more about people with a BSI rating of 10, check a history book. Their names tend to be the chapter headings.



-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 24, 2010 9:02 AM

IMNOTHERE


Quote:

Originally posted by cljohnston108:
Oh, definitely!

My favorite being...



Oh yes.

But it also illustrates my point about the danger of falling girders in space combat


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 24, 2010 2:44 PM

CLJOHNSTON108


Quote:

Originally posted by ImNotHere:
But it also illustrates my point about the danger of falling girders in space combat


That's partly why I posted it.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 24, 2010 3:14 PM

CYBERSNARK


Just dug this up; it seems appropriate:



-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 24, 2010 3:36 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Re: Hullscraping.

Yeah, despite it not being realistic, this does add a lot of the "holy crap!" factor during space battles, in particular USS Reliant's near miss of USS Enterprise in Wrath of Khan, come on, who DIDN'T go "Whoa!" on that one, eh ?

Of course, that's several times funnier if you know enough about Trek to realize that during battle stations there's some poor sodder stationed up in the top of the saucer section where the emergency transmitter is located - I bet THAT poor schlep needed a change of pants after the battle.

Re: BSI.

Generally fighter pilots tend to die like flies in any major/protracted air warfare, so your 5's there are the cannon fodder - there's this hard break between them and the next level of it, the whole "If you survive X days, you'll be around a while", and those guys are your 7-8's as a rule...

And then you got your Yaegers, your Richtofens, pilots with "The Gift", something no amount of training or experience has much affect on, you either got it, or you don't.

Those guys, no matter how "good" a machine is, no matter how perfect it's programming, they will consistently beat the ever living crap out of it in practice, no matter what your simulation says, not one time, or ten times, but EVERY time, because whatever it is that gives them "The Gift" is a wholly human thing, forever beyond the reach of machines, so far as we know of.

This is well touched on in both a physical (Frank Marcus) and a spiritual (Johann Karlson) sense in Fred Saberhagens Berserker series of books.
Quote:

“Under this burden some men became like brutes, and the minds of others grew as terrible and implacable as the machines they fought against. But I have touched a few rare human minds, the jewels of life, who rise to meet the greatest challenges by becoming supremely men.”
-Third Historian


So long as the essential spark, the Ka, or whatever you call it, is beyond the reach of machines, so too will be the ability to effectively compete with humanity - and if it ever is, what then would not make THEM "human", simply in another form ?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 24, 2010 4:36 PM

CYBERSNARK


Or, as XKCD puts it:


{{title text: The moment their arms spun freely in our air, they were doomed -- for Man has earned his right to hold this planet against all comers, by virtue of occasionally producing someone totally batshit insane.}}


-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Riverdale actor Ryan Grantham killed is own mother, the curse of CW's Riverdale tv show
Mon, September 26, 2022 21:23 - 3 posts
Save JOURNEYMAN Petition!
Fri, September 23, 2022 17:27 - 14 posts
Are There New TV Shows This Fall You Must See?
Thu, September 8, 2022 09:12 - 45 posts
Marvel / DC / Comic Thread
Wed, September 7, 2022 16:32 - 36 posts
Binge-worthy?
Sun, September 4, 2022 19:24 - 79 posts
Worst Sci-Fi Ever.
Sun, September 4, 2022 12:37 - 157 posts
Room for a unique western flick on your queue, or is this the wrong crowd? (no spoilers please)
Fri, August 12, 2022 13:59 - 49 posts
Nichelle Nichols dead at 89
Tue, August 2, 2022 01:41 - 6 posts
The Unbridled Leftism, The Wokeism, The Ceaseless Nihilistic Sexi-Ista-Phobia Culture... It's All Finally, Thankfully, Coming to an End...
Tue, July 5, 2022 11:55 - 40 posts
2021 to 2022 another dead year for Scifi tv Shows and Block Buster Cinema movies?
Sat, July 2, 2022 10:54 - 8 posts
Good News, Everyone!
Fri, June 10, 2022 22:35 - 3 posts
Frank Langella Fired from tv series "The Fall of the House of Usher" is a short story by American writer Edgar Allan Poe.
Fri, April 29, 2022 19:04 - 2 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL