FANDOM

7,576 Pages

Nano-laminated Armor Vulnerabilities

The Nano-laminated armor states currently that it's weak to napalm based attacks.  I was wondering if we should change it to be a weakness to thermal damage or just a weakness to high temperatures?  It doesn't seem to be a weakness to napalm specifically from what I've seen, otherwise it would probably mention that the chemical composition of napalm weakens it or something.  The way the article's worded, it seems like it's just melted by high temperatures.    Rui Usagi (talk) 22:08, November 29, 2015 (UTC)

Maybe we should just say that nepalm is capable of melting it, since that's what we know for now. That's different and more specific than "Nepalm-based attacks" and more specific to what we know for now. -SuperSonicSP (talk) 14:11, December 2, 2015 (UTC)
The referenced source is episode 7. The context is that while Isaribi is fleeing from the Hammerhead, Biscuit warns they have to maintain enough distance or they'll "be in range of Anti-Ship Napalm". A pair of missiles come at them, one is shot down, the other looks to detonate closer, if not hit the ship, and that causes Biscuit to complain that if they "keep getting hit by Napalm, even the Nano-laminate will melt". There doesn't seem to be an outright implication of it being weak in that, nor that it's weak to Napalm specifically, just that continued damage will degrade the armor.
It makes sense if you think about it - Nano-laminate is a topical application that they're using in paint form, capable of being mixed for different colors. Over time and abuse the paint will wear. It's very similar to the anti-beam coatings used in other timelines, usually on shields, where it can block several hits from beams and even beam sabers, but eventually wears out. -- Jadzi (talk) 16:43, February 25, 2016 (UTC)
"Weak" in this context just means that it does more damage than average. The implication of weakness comes from the idea that the Nano Laminate Armor is conventionally a very strong armor except for specific type of attacks. That doesn't necessarily mean it would be beaten immediately but there does seem to be an implication that the nepalm does more damage than normal ammunition does at some level though probably not at the level of melee weapons which seemingly kills it even faster and is stated as an outright weakness in texts. -SuperSonicSP (talk) 20:49, February 25, 2016 (UTC)
The thing is, you want to be very careful about how you phrase things, or you might end up in a game of Telephone. 'Weak' is a strong word, and while it could technically fit, you have to keep in mind how it will be read. A writer might use it loosely on a partial qualification, but a reader won't know that, and could interpret it as full qualification. We don't necessarily want someone to come along and infer that nano-laminate's kryptonite is napalm, simply because one scene in one episode had a character worrying aloud that another ship's weapons would melt 'even the nano-laminate' if they got in close enough.
Moreover, this wasn't a technical manual, it was a line of dialogue in the middle of a tense battle, so I wouldn't take it as gospel, or any more specific an indictment than was presented. After all, if napalm were so potent against nano-laminate, nano-laminate is as common as presented, and the knowledge common enough that a random teen mercenary knows it, why are no mobile suits using it? Why is it only mentioned in one ship-to-ship engagement, and thereafter followed by at least one comment from an enemy that the ship was a tough shell to crack? -- Jadzi (talk) 02:18, February 28, 2016 (UTC)
Personally I don't know what weaker words to use other than weak at this point. And I'm not sure that no mobile suits are using it. There are plenty of missiles weapons in the show wielded by MS that could easily contain it or forms similar to it. What we saw may not be a technical manual but it was still a decision by the writer and director to emphasize that nepalm is a little bit more special in the show other normal projectiles. Otherwise there would be no reason to mention nepalm at all or it melting the armor because Nana Laminate Armor (which the show and the texts emphasize as special and powerful earlier on) is still pretty much destroyable by any weapon. Just that some weapons like melee are much better, effective and faster at it. It is also possible that they are other logistical issues that makes using more of a pain or impractical much like how Tekkadan used that ancient Nano-weapon against Gjallahorn, which was good for specific narrow use-cases.
Perhaps if Nano Laminate wasn't mentioned or emphasized as special or powerful I would agree with you, but I think because they spent time saying it was special and strong and made a scene in the anime about nepalm melting it, I think that's an insight meant of some sort of weakness. It is probably not necessarily to the point of kryptonite weakness like you said but sounds like an above average weakness. For an armor with really strong strength against most forms of attack, I think anything that does more than average should qualify for the weakness category.
But you may be right that emphasizing how specific that weakness is probabaly a good idea as opposed to making a simple statement about "weakness" which can be interpreted more broadly by the readers. -SuperSonicSP (talk) 13:09, February 28, 2016 (UTC)
Fyi, the four-barreled rocket launcher used by Hyakuren and Hyakuri is stated to be able to carry napalm shells.Zeph08 (talk) 01:44, February 29, 2016 (UTC)
  How do we know that the napalm used over 400 years from now is the same as the stuff we use now. seeing as NLA can handle the heat of reentery and that given off by beam weapons its likely a muc hoter compound then what we use. it likely has a lot more heat then normal napalm. also the melting seemed to be more like acid then napalm. Guyver92 (talk) 21:31, January 30, 2017 (UTC)
    First try at posting on one of these, so forgive me if I'm clueless. We don't know the composition of this 'napalm' but from the graphics it seems perhaps this might be of a more explosive, shorter burning nature than the napalm we have currently. This armor seems to have a limit in the sense that there is just so much it can take. However, it can simply be overwhelmed with pure brute force. Barbatos and other units massive, BLUNT weapons seem effective because of massive kinetic overload over a wide area. Crushing force. This can be applied all at once, via huge mace, or slowly, via vice grip, sissor like weapons. Powerful saw like weapons might also work. This 'overload' seems achieved by smaller, lighter weapons used by units with only one Ahab reaction by using a concentrated impact point, in other words 'edged' weapons. I have no idea if these super strong materials in the weapons also include monomolecular edges (something that usually makes a weapon less durable) or have a vibroblade component. However, looking at the term 'napalm', this normally indicates both a heat based weapon, an adhesive or liquid composition or both. Not knowing the composition or mechanism of destruction from a technical standpoint, it MIGHT be saying 'napalm' could be slang. With an explosive component, short burn time, it's likely to be medium to lower end, high density plasma. (Currently, high explosives are used to insta-melt and accellerate copper slugs into hot plasma for cutting through armor in some military warheads, in real life. Possibly the archaic, great great grandpa to such fictional weapons as these.)
     It could be that heat has some role to play in the application of the armor coat or it's crafting, thus high temps being a weakness, OVER TIME. Then again, it could just be that continuous damage type weaponry wears the armor down. Like the constant application of force by the wrench/sissor weapons, it might be that slow, constant application of damage by heat, physical force, whatever, simply, eventually, wears down the armor. Note Biscuit using wording like.. the napalm... would eventually.... wear down even... His wording makes me feel the armor would take a few hits, but be degraded even though it was so formidable, and this was the point of such a short range, antiship weapon. It was just the nature of the attack to degrade and destroy by attrition. (Gundam00Reaper (talk) 17:00, April 6, 2017 (UTC))

Thermal Phase Transition & Ahab Thrusters?

As I've been purusing the Mecha pages for the units in Iron Blooded Orphans, I've come across a small mention of a Thermal Phase Transition Thrusters and a Ahab Thrusters within the side "Technical Specifications"  side box thing. The examples, as of Feb.19:2017, being the ASW-G-XX Gundam Vidar, ASW-G-64 Gundam Flauros (Ryusei-Go), and the ASW-G-01 Gundam Bael. Within these mech pages that have this little bit of information I see nothing else that reveals what these things are,what they do and how they work, or even any relevant mentions other the little bullet in said side Info Box.

Does anyone have any information sources to add to this little bit of technical minutia, to at the very least confirm it? If I knew more I would have put a mention of them in this 'Post Disaster Technology' page myself. Stabber ApSig 04:28, February 20, 2017 (UTC)

J-Wiki had it in its page and cited the IBO Mechanics and World sourcebook for the info on those two things. I did a translation and posted on some forums just for discussion but I didn't edit them into Gundam Wikia for some reason. Somebody else here likely translated the J-Wiki page and inserted the info in those pages.
Anyways, Thermal Phase Transition Thrusters are the "main" thrusters of mobile suits and ships, and you can see them in animation all the time. I dont know how they work in detail but they are pretty straightforward rocketery stuff. They burn fuel and emit thrust, and once their fuel runs out they can't function anymore. Basically like most of the other rockets in Gundam and hard sci-fi series.
In Episode 2, when Barbatos thrusters stopped working because of lack of fuel, those are its thermal phase transition thrusters, which are also its main thrusters.
Ahab Thrusters on the other hand are these other secondary thrusters that are used on mobile suits for altitude and positional adjustments (IE they are used to readjust the body positioning). They are extremely energy efficient and because they are directly powered by semi-perpetual Ahab Reactors, they can never completely run out. However their drawback is that they are weak, and because of that they are not used as the main thrusters. They work by using the fundamental forces created/of the Ahab Waves to generate thrust. I don't think we know how they look like or where they are but they are apparently standard issue for mobile suits. I also speculate that they're really small but nothing confirms or denies that. They may not even be visible because they use the fundamental forces of the Ahab Waves as opposed to traditional propulsion mechanisms.
If the Ahab Thrusters technology was stronger, it would probably be the main thruster and we get a situation like in the 00 series - where the semi perpetual Original GN Drives power the main thrusters with its special particles as well and there would be no need to rely on normal fuel. Since the technology of the Ahab Thrusters are not as good, they still need to rely on the thermals phase transition theusters and whatever fuel that powers them.
Anyways, this is what I translated from the J-Wiki article some time ago about the Ahab Thrusters. May have changed since then and there is always a chance my interpretation is imperfect. Note that if we could, its probably best to translate from the book scans directly as opposed to a second hand source:
"Thruster used for inertial flight and attitude control of MS. While it is inferior to the main propulsion systems of MS and large ships (thermal phase transition thruster), It excels in energy efficiency because it emits elementary particles/fundamental forces of Ahab Waves with directionality in order to obtain thrust." -SuperSonicSP (talk) 10:43, February 23, 2017 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.