# Poorly conceived movie and/or SF inventions/technology **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 25, 2006, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916 "2006-10-25T23:45:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/141 "2006-10-29T17:44:43Z")
[QUOTE=Mangetout] Imperial Stormtrooper armour. One blaster hit and you’re dead. What’s the point? [/QUOTE] Police riot gear. One hit from a high-powered rifle and you’re dead. What’s the point? Sorry - should probably try that with less snark. But the point stands. There are probably weapons - knives, projectile guns, whatever - which are more common than blasters in the Star Wars Universe, and which the armor is a perfectly good protection against. It’s designed to stand up to that level of threat, but it’s impractical to equip it to withstand higher-powered weapons. We make the same sorts of decisions in equipping our police and soldiers. ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/142 "2006-10-29T18:50:09Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Excellent] Police riot gear. One hit from a high-powered rifle and you’re dead. What’s the point? Sorry - should probably try that with less snark. But the point stands. There are probably weapons - knives, projectile guns, whatever - which are more common than blasters in the Star Wars Universe, and which the armor is a perfectly good protection against. It’s designed to stand up to that level of threat, but it’s impractical to equip it to withstand higher-powered weapons. We make the same sorts of decisions in equipping our police and soldiers. [/QUOTE] I was gonna mention that, but the Ewoks seem to have teflon-coated arrowheads or something. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/143 "2006-10-29T19:03:58Z")
[QUOTE=Raguleader] I was gonna mention that, but the Ewoks seem to have teflon-coated arrowheads or something. [/QUOTE] Nit: Teflon-coating doesn’t in any way aid in armor penetration. It was a complete media creation meant to falsely create an OMG BAN GUNS BECAUSE EVERYONE HAS COP KILLER BULLETS hysteria. There were, indeed, rounds coated in Teflon - but they were to reduce barrel wear of JHP bullets which actually did worse against armor than standard ball ammunition. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/144 "2006-10-29T19:06:31Z")
[QUOTE=Raguleader] I mean, we’re talking about a battlefield involving missiles that can nail you from a hundred miles away, and we still put the Captain in a room full of windows on the top of a tower? [/QUOTE] Missiles aren’t designed to hit the bridge. Also, for most purposes, it can be useful for the captain to actually see outside of the ship - I doubt the little window on the ceiling on star trek bridges serves the same useful purposes. I suspect in combat situations, the captain would go to the CIC, inside the ship. ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/145 "2006-10-29T19:13:32Z")
[QUOTE=SenorBeef] Missiles aren’t designed to hit the bridge. Also, for most purposes, it can be useful for the captain to actually see outside of the ship - I doubt the little window on the ceiling on star trek bridges serves the same useful purposes. I suspect in combat situations, the captain would go to the CIC, inside the ship. [/QUOTE] Hm… something I’d have to ask in the “Navy Dopers” thread in GQ, actually. I vaguely recall, from a tour I took of a missile cruiser when I was 11, the guy telling us that at least on that ship, during combat the Captain would be on the Bridge, and the XO in the CIC. The Captain could get a summarized version of all the information available in CIC from displays on the bridge, but the XO had access to more in-depth stuff, including a big-screen map showing the local tactical situation (known locations and identities of ships, local geography, etc.). The Captain still had enough information to make any needed decisions, and the chain of succession was broken up in case one of them should be killed (though from what I’ve seen of torpedo tests on derelict ships, the XO was probably in a far more vulnerable position than the Captain). ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/146 "2006-10-29T20:25:48Z")
[QUOTE=Alessan] Who’s to say the Death Star didn’t announce its presence using all the proper military codes? Seems like SOP to me. Why wouln’t they do that? Remember, we never saw the Death Star communications center. It’s not as if the Grand Moff or Vader would handle that sort of thing personally [/quote] True. > [@](#): > > Who says they - or at least their leaders - weren’t? Besides, I doubt most Alderaanians even realized what was going on before their planet went ka-blooey. After all, _they_ weren’t watching the movie. I gotta think there was something like the Alderaan News Network, which would probably have a story about it. Not to mention any astronomer types would have to notice the thing. > [@](#): > > First of all, nothing in their past taught them that New Imperial Spacecraft=We’re all going to die. Maybe the next planet would have acted differently (although I don’t remember Leia et. al. evacuating Yavin, either). At the very least, they would probably expect to be occupied by Imperial forces (since they wouldn’t know [though the planetary leaders most likely would suspect that this was very bad juju] of it’s planetary killing ability). Yavin doesn’t react the same, because it’s basically the last Rebel strong hold, and if they don’t stop the Death Star, it’s all over for them anyway. Plus, according to the novelization, Yavin is _only_ inhabited by animals and Rebel forces, the intelligent species native to the planet having died out some time long before this. > [@](#): > > Second of all, how many people do you think had immidiate access to spacecraft? It’s not as iff every Tom, Dick and Anakin had a Corellian Transport in his back yard. Remember, for all we know, the Death Star was only in orbit for five minutes before it blew the place up. Well, there’d certainly be trade ships, and possibly cruise ships there, but as you point out, we don’t know how long they were parked in orbit around the place. I’d think that given the Empire’s love of “shock and awe” (the AT-AT’s are clearly more designed for psychological impact than military efficiency), they’d probably have the thing in orbit long enough for everyone on Alderaan to get a good look at the thing (and contact the people they know on other planets to say, “Holy _shit!_ There’s this _big ass Imperial station here!_” so they wouldn’t think Alderaan subsequent disappearance was a natural occurance). > [@](#): > > Third of all, as **mr. jp** said, who’s to say a couple thousand foreward thinking (or just majorly paranoid) people _didn’t_ get off? There’s probably a book about it somewhere. Could be. I’m not familiar with the EU at all. If **Guin** checks in, she could provide a definitive answer, I’m sure. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/147 "2006-10-29T20:26:39Z")
[QUOTE=Paul in Saudi] Why would you build a flying motorcycle and then fly it down inside the forest? If you went up 20M you could just fly over the trees. [/QUOTE] I don’t know if you actually paid attention to how tall those trees were, but 20m up and you’d still be getting pasted against the trunk. You could go to 200m, but if you do that you can’t actually SEE anything so why are you patrolling in the first place? Besides, if they’re analogous to hovercraft there’s a limit to how high they can go. > [@](#): > > Nonetheless, Star Wars architecture seems to have an extreme aversion to handrails over dangerous precipices, and in general lack other safety regulations. Allowed the architects and engineers to say “Oh, this would be a great place for a giant chasm spanned only by a narrow bridge that has no railing and which is retractable back into the wall!” Ever see “Space Mutiny”? Proof that railings are dangerous, man! You’d be better off walking around with a cortex bomb that’s got a loose wire. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/148 "2006-10-29T20:44:36Z")
[QUOTE=Max the Immortal] I’ll second pretty much every hand-held weapon in sci-fi. The Star Trek phaser pistol (and rifle) is a major pet peeve of mine. They’re supposed to be able to disintegrate people, but I’ve seen that happen once (and I don’t think it was even a starfleet phaser). They usually just knock somebody over, or (in the case of the monster of the week) just slow them down (if that). And yet they somehow have the nerve to dismiss bullet-firing guns as primitive and ineffective :smack: . Bugs me to no end. [/QUOTE] Why, when getting shot in the chest with a disintegrating phaser, doesn’t it just vaporize their shirt? How does it know to get the person, their clothes, their shoes, and their weapon but not the ground underneath them? -Joe ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/149 "2006-10-29T20:52:43Z")
The vehicles in [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=383870) thread are included for coolness, not technical plausibility. That said, I think [the Landmaster from _Damnation Alley_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landmaster) makes no sense at all. How does that “tristar” three-wheel arrangement turn?! Does the car have six axles?! Are all of the rear ones (or front ones, or all six) drive axles?! How could they make that work? ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/150 "2006-10-29T21:58:49Z")
[QUOTE=Raguleader] I always thought it would be fun to slip an R2 unit aboard an enemy ship, and instruct it to connect to a dataport and just shut down all ship’s systems and then leave. If done during a fleet engagement, hilarity would ensue. 😃 [/QUOTE] Who says saboteurs need to be organic? -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2006, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/151 "2006-10-29T22:19:15Z")
[QUOTE=John DiFool] My biggest quibble with the Death Star and the destruction of Alderaan is how _quickly_ it happened. I can’t imagine what kind of energy source would be capable of blasting an object many thousands of miles wide and many zillions of tons in mass into tiny bits virtually instantaneously. It is likely that any such weapon would probably blow up the delivery vehicle too (as it would need massive amounts of unobtanium to shield the laser cannon). A sustained planetary bombardment over many days yes, leaving the planet uninhabitable, but not what we saw in ANH. [/QUOTE] Sure. Now tell me how much energy is required to rip open a hole in the universe, propel your ship into another dimension, have shields to protect them from said dimension, and then rip a hole back into realspace. Oh, and all that energy and unobtainium is contained in something the size of an A-Wing fighter. When you’re dealing with orders of magnitude beyond what you can really imagine, quibbling about the numbers probably won’t get you very far. Besides, the Death Star was obviously exceptional in the destructive ability it was packing - Han, who was in the Imperial Navy, couldn’t even conceive of an actually completely-demolished planet. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![tanstaafl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ba8739/32.png) [@tanstaafl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tanstaafl)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/152 "2006-10-30T01:29:33Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] That said, I think [the Landmaster from _Damnation Alley_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landmaster) makes no sense at all. How does that “tristar” three-wheel arrangement turn?! Does the car have six axles?! Are all of the rear ones (or front ones, or all six) drive axles?! How could they make that work? [/QUOTE] Apparently the tristar wheel [is a real design](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tri-star_(wheel_arrangement)). From [here](http://www.visi.com/~dc/tristar/ad34.jpg) and [here](http://www.visi.com/~dc/tristar/ad35.jpg) (sorry; jpegs, not text) it appears that there is a fourth “wheel” behind the three you can see. The fourth wheel is actually the one that is attached to the axle. The three outer wheels are attached to this fourth wheel. This fourth wheel is what turns the other three (through a combination of gears and chains). As long as the wheels on the ground are turning they work normally. But, if the leading wheel hits an obstruction, the entire wheel assembly rotates around the fourth wheel, allowing it to roll over the obstruction. [Here is another site](http://www.visi.com/~dc/tristar/bkground.htm) with most of this info linked off of it that has to do with building such an arrangement. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/153 "2006-10-30T01:48:17Z")
[QUOTE=Merijeek] Who says saboteurs need to be organic? -Joe [/QUOTE] The Saboteur’s union raises up a stink every time they try to introduce more automation into the industry. ---
**Author:** ![BMalion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@BMalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BMalion)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/154 "2006-10-30T14:23:52Z")
[QUOTE=Raguleader] During WWII, American infantry fighting in the pacific had standing orders to shoot at any Japanese soldier carrying a sword _first_. This was for two reasons: A Katana **(and many of these were heirlooms from the days when katanas were made specifically for combat)**… bolding mine [/QUOTE] Nitpick, I believe most of them were new. [Shin Gunto:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shin_gunto) > [@](#): > > Until 1934 the standard sword of the Japanese military was known as the kyu gunto first military sword. The kyu gunto closely resembled European and American swords of the time, with a wrap around hand guard and chrome plated scabard. > > In response to rising nationalism within the armed forces, a new style of sword was designed for the Japanese military in 1934. The shin gunto was styled after a traditional slung katana of the Kamakura period (1185-1332). Officers’ ranks where symbolized by coloured tassles tied to a loop at the end of the hilt. The corresponding colours where; Brown/red & gold General, brown & red field officer, brown & blue company or warrant officer, brown sergeant, sergeant major or corporal. ---
**Author:** ![Anne\_Neville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Anne\_Neville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anne_Neville)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/155 "2006-10-30T17:53:26Z")
[QUOTE=Raguleader] That reminds me, in some militaries, say the British military, you find members of the Royal Family serving in the armed forces (IIRC, Prince Charles was in the Royal Navy, and I think one of his sons recently joined too). If war breaks out, is the Prince pulled from front-line duty to serve in a more royal fashion, or is he allowed to stay on the front lines until such time that he has to carry out his duties as the heir to the Crown? Would it largely depend on the relative personalities of the Royal family, the military brass, and the officer in question? [/QUOTE] [It’s not as if there aren’t any other heirs to fall back on if something happened to Charles while he was serving in the Royal Navy.](http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/page389.asp) ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/156 "2006-10-30T18:23:46Z")
[QUOTE=Anne Neville] [It’s not as if there aren’t any other heirs to fall back on if something happened to Charles while he was serving in the Royal Navy.](http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/page389.asp) [/QUOTE] Having a senior member of the Royal Family die isn’t a problem. Having them captured is. Imagine the crisis if insurgents in Iraq took Prince William hostage and threatened to behead him. Or if while a POW Elizabeth and Charles died elevating him to the throne. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/157 "2006-10-30T18:25:22Z")
[QUOTE=Raguleader] Actually, I don’t know if we ever see transporters used for most of the things you say they can be used for. If we don’t see it on screen, then it doesn’t count 😉 [/QUOTE] No, we’ve seen all of the above on screen. Duplication can happen by accident, see the duplication of Riker and Kirk, bonus points if you split the duplicates into good and evil halves. Reverse-aging was done by accident, it turned Picard into a pre-teen, and at the end of the episode the characters were aged back to “normal”. And didn’t they use transporters to reverse the aging virus in TOS’s “The Deadly Years”, and they did the same thing to Dr. Pulaski in TNG. You can merge two people into one, like Tuvok and Neelix merging into Tuvix, and Tuvix was forcibly de-merged at the end of the show, with Janeway ignoring his objections that the de-merging would be equivalent to killing him. Scotty was famously stored for decades in the transporter buffer. Viruses, bacteria and parasites are edited out by the transporter’s biofilter. How many times have we seen “the transporter buffer” used in the show’s epilog to restore a character to their orignial state. No matter what damage a character has taken, you can fix anything by using the transporter buffer. Although this should logically restore the character to the state they were in when the buffer was recorded…that is, their memory of the show’s events should be wiped out. In other words, you just kill the afflicted character and restore a fresh copy from your archive. So human duplication is clearly easily done. Yeah, yeah, ethical objections, sure. But duplication should be a clearly understood transporter phenomenon. And in fact it seems to me that transporters really are duplicators, it’s just that Star Fleet is careful to always disintegrate one of the duplicates. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/158 "2006-10-30T18:29:07Z")
> [@](#): > > And in fact it seems to me that transporters really are duplicators, it’s just that Star Fleet is careful to always disintegrate one of the duplicates. “If our transporter simply creates a duplicate elsewhere, then shouldn’t we just shoot the one that’s in the _Send_ booth? After alll, if we don’t then he hasn’t _gone_ anywhere.” – Larrt Niven, _The Theory and Practice of Teleportation_ (quote from memory) ---
**Author:** ![Jake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jake)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/159 "2006-10-30T20:12:18Z")
[QUOTE=Mangetout] Imperial Stormtrooper armour. One blaster hit and you’re dead. What’s the point? [/QUOTE] The same applies to Galaxy class ship’s shields. If they’re that far advanced, why can’t they come up with something where the shield absorbs the energy of an impact and converts that energy back into the shield system? No more “shields failing” crap. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2006, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916/160 "2006-10-30T22:11:35Z")
[QUOTE=Jake] The same applies to Galaxy class ship’s shields. If they’re that far advanced, why can’t they come up with something where the shield absorbs the energy of an impact and converts that energy back into the shield system? No more “shields failing” crap. [/QUOTE] Roger Ebert had a [funny comment](http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20021213/REVIEWS/212130305/1023) along similar lines when the last Trek movie came out: > [@Roger Ebert](#): > > I’ve also had it with the force shield that protects the Enterprise. The power on this thing is always going down. In movie after movie after movie I have to sit through sequences during which the captain is tersely informed that the front shield is down to 60 percent, or the back shield is down to 10 percent, or the side shield is leaking energy, and the captain tersely orders that power be shifted from the back to the sides or all put in the front, or whatever, and I’m thinking, life is too short to sit through 10 movies in which the power is shifted around on these shields. The shields have been losing power for decades now, and here it is the Second Generation of Star Trek, and they still haven’t fixed them. Maybe they should get new batteries. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/poorly-conceived-movie-and-or-sf-inventions-technology/377916.md?page=9)