KillerMovies - Movies That Matter!

REGISTER HERE TO JOIN IN! - It's easy and it's free!
Home » Movie Genres » Sci-Fi / Fantasy » How Under-Tech Was Battlestar Galactica?

How Under-Tech Was Battlestar Galactica?
Started by: Esau Cairn

Forum Jump:
Post New Thread    Post A Reply
  Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread
Esau Cairn
Contagious

Gender: Male
Location: Australia

How Under-Tech Was Battlestar Galactica?

I was juz wondering...in the pilot episode, Galactica is established as a very old ship on it's way to be de-commissioned...

I loved the fact that being a sci-fi series, Galactica still relied on ballistic weaponery (bullets & missiles) as opposed to lasers. Also the fact that they had no force-field technology but the ability to "jump" using the FLT Drive (?).

So was Galactica itself under-tech compared to the rest of the newer BattleStars?

I just found it curious that majority of the ships in the BattleStar-verse had the technology to jump distances but lacked the basic notion of force fields.

And does anyone know what DRADIS stood for?

Old Post Nov 4th, 2010 06:21 AM
Esau Cairn is currently offline Click here to Send Esau Cairn a Private Message Find more posts by Esau Cairn Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

Re: How Under-Tech Was Battlestar Galactica?

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I was juz wondering...in the pilot episode, Galactica is established as a very old ship on it's way to be de-commissioned...

I loved the fact that being a sci-fi series, Galactica still relied on ballistic weaponery (bullets & missiles) as opposed to lasers. Also the fact that they had no force-field technology but the ability to "jump" using the FLT Drive (?).

So was Galactica itself under-tech compared to the rest of the newer BattleStars?

I just found it curious that majority of the ships in the BattleStar-verse had the technology to jump distances but lacked the basic notion of force fields.

And does anyone know what DRADIS stood for?


They probably had some sort of inertial dampeners to keep people from splattering when the FTL jump occured.


__________________

Old Post Nov 4th, 2010 06:33 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Esau Cairn
Contagious

Gender: Male
Location: Australia

You mean inertial dampeners as a form of force-field?

Old Post Nov 4th, 2010 06:42 AM
Esau Cairn is currently offline Click here to Send Esau Cairn a Private Message Find more posts by Esau Cairn Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Esau Cairn
You mean inertial dampeners as a form of force-field?


No, inertial dampeners as in dampeners of...inertia?


__________________

Old Post Nov 4th, 2010 06:51 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
-Pr-
Hey Yo!

Gender: Male
Location: Ireland.

Moderator

Direction, RAnge, and DIStance

and if you look at the Pegasus, I don't think there was that huge a difference tech wise between the battlestars. maybe pegasus was faster and had more weapons, but it still relied on the same basics iirc.


__________________

Fuck Putin. Help Ukraine

Unicef
UN Refugee Agency
Red Cross

"What does not kill me... is not trying hard enough."

Old Post Nov 4th, 2010 09:24 AM
-Pr- is currently offline Click here to Send -Pr- a Private Message Find more posts by -Pr- Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Flyattractor
Senior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location: B.F.K

And I thought they used buttlets because the producers thought "lazers" were to unrealistic.


God I hated the new BSG.


__________________
Banned 30 days for the Crime of "ETC"... and when I "ETC" I do it HARD!!!
Happy Dance Happy Dance Happy Dance Happy Dance

Old Post Nov 4th, 2010 09:13 PM
Flyattractor is currently offline Click here to Send Flyattractor a Private Message Find more posts by Flyattractor Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Esau Cairn
Contagious

Gender: Male
Location: Australia

quote: (post)
Originally posted by dadudemon
No, inertial dampeners as in dampeners of...inertia?



Yeah I understand what inertial dampeners are....I just didn't understand you mentioning them as a response to what I initially wrote...


I'm just saying the ability to jump/teleport great distances is IMO a far greater technology than creating a force field around a vessel.

Compared to Star Trek...they had force field capability but could ony acheive warp speed & teleport crew & gear "short distances".

Old Post Nov 5th, 2010 05:06 AM
Esau Cairn is currently offline Click here to Send Esau Cairn a Private Message Find more posts by Esau Cairn Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Robtard
Senor Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location: Captain's Chair, CA

Probably did it to keep the show different than others, also, if they had powerful force-fields, the use of conventional bullets, missiles and nukes would probably he useless.


__________________


You've Just Been Kirked To The Curb

Old Post Nov 5th, 2010 05:16 PM
Robtard is currently offline Click here to Send Robtard a Private Message Find more posts by Robtard Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
All times are UTC. The time now is 01:21 AM.
  Last Thread   Next Thread

Home » Movie Genres » Sci-Fi / Fantasy » How Under-Tech Was Battlestar Galactica?

Email this Page
Subscribe to this Thread
   Post New Thread  Post A Reply

Forum Jump:
Search by user:
 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON

Text-only version
 

< - KillerMovies.com - Forum Archive - Forum Rules >


© Copyright 2000-2006, KillerMovies.com. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by: vBulletin, copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.