Do you know that there wasn't an explosive mechanism (like a bomb) inside the ship, where Thor was, that pushed outward against the ship?
Basically Thanos charged the walls of the ship and had the ship explode mostly from the walls. The majority of the force acted on the walls, not on Thor or inside where Thor was. If a metal slab of 3in titanium was inside the ship with Thor then you would have to prove that it would get greatly damaged to have a point. Problem was that Thor was injured from this as well.
And spacecraft/aircraft are light. Metal skin are usually less than 0.1 inch thick.
US military has shit that can penetrate many inches of solid steel. And they have shit that can blow up huge structures like nothing.
Missiles have HEAT tech, which uses the Munroe effect to penetrate more than 6 inches thick of armor. Nothing else can do that. But nowadays, military has developed a top secret composite armor which is resistant against Heat weapons. Hell Thor may or may not be able to damage such tanks.
You guys have to stop committing these no limit fallacies. US military has shit that can even hurt Superman. Real life military >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>movie military.
In such a manner that they can kill most top movie heroes if they went to war with them.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Some missiles have shaped charge (w/c uses a much smaller warhead). Some penetrating blast fragmentation. Look at the AGM missile variants and see for yourself.
Nice red herring. Your logic is either true or false. You accept that running away -> writer's intent that character is vulnerable to bullets or you do not. You do not suddenly make up your own rules on what writer's intent means. Thanks for playing.
Last edited by Nibedicus on Sep 21st, 2018 at 06:32 AM
*-seeing as this was done in 1988, I don't think they'd be using the newer M795 shells (from what I found the newer ordinance replaced the M107 somewhere in the mid-90s. https://www.globalsecurity.org/mili...itions/m795.htm)
The results and I quote:
"The model predicted 30 percent damage to armored vehicles and tanks; however, 67 percent damage was achieved. Fragmentation from the HE rounds penetrated the armored vehicles, destroying critical components and injuring the manikin crew."
"...none of the damage to the armored vehicles were the result of direct hits-all the damage was caused by near hits."
"This test confirmed that US Army models did not accurately portray artillery effectiveness. Direct hits were not required to damage tanks and other armored vehicles"
I underlined "injuring the manikin crew" as it would need full penetration of the fragments through the armor to achieve this result.
These are shells with 22 lbs explosives.
H1 is trying to make us believe that Thor surviving explosions (w/c would include fragmentation along with the explosion) thousands of times more powerful is less than getting shot by a 30mm cannon (w/c used to be 20mm, but h1 is prone to move goalposts).
Hopefully this puts to rest the absolutely moronic opinion of bullets > explosions.
Last edited by Nibedicus on Sep 21st, 2018 at 11:25 AM
You are a bigger man than I am actually proving that.
I just plane out refused and compared it to someone asking me to prove Mike Tyson punches harder than the average 12 year old.
I mean he was inside the Asgardian ship when it exploded. We literally saw debris and fragments everywhere that would have hit Thor with the force of that explosion.
Anyway his whole premise of Thor not being bullet proof because he evaded the bullets has gone to shit now, now that he concedes Superman also evaded bullets.
At (0:59) we see Thor and Loki at ground zero getting hit by a HUGE amount of Bifrost fragments (a glass-like shard-y material that took Thor many direct hammer hits to just crack) just as the explosion happened (and before h1 goes on his "slow explosion" BS, this shot was done in slo-mo starting at (0:56)). This proves without a shadow of a doubt that Thor WAS hit by (highly durable) explosion fragments from ground zero of a far far far farx100 more powerful explosion.
This would be enough proof for every normal person. H1, of course, will most likely fall back on more of his BS tactics. So I'm not expecting miracles.
Last edited by Nibedicus on Sep 21st, 2018 at 11:50 AM
Are you an idiot? Wait, don’t answer, we know you are. I just posted an entire experiment that used High Explosive shells. None of those has HEAT tech.
HEAT penetrates COMPLETELY.
Damage a tank could mean scratch. The level of damage matters.
And you still having shown any explosions Thor took that can break through 3in of titanium.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
I did. You ignored what I said. HEAT missiles can penetrate MANY inches of steel (more than 6in). They use the Munroe effect to achieve this. I stated this from the very beginning.
What are you not understanding?
These missiles are not equivalent to random explosions. The weight of the amount of explosives is irrelevant as many random explosions can't do shit to many inches of solid steel.
Nowadays, tanks use composite armor to defend against HEAT weapons. Such armor is very effective against HEAT weapons.
I don't have to.
The claim is that the bifrost explosion >>>>>>getting hit with a 30mm round.
I gave feats for the 30 and 20mm round.
Claiming Bifrost is greater is claiming that it can penetrate or break a slab of 3in titanium.
KMC Community Forums
Sep 20th, 2018 10:23 PM
