6 Baffling Flaws in Famous Sci-Fi Technology
#3.
The Batwing
The Batwing is unlike anything to be found in Christian Bale's arsenal; a modified stealth jet complete with Gatling guns, missiles and a price tag that had to be somewhere north of $2 billion back in 1989. Because Batman won't hold a pistol, but he's apparently fine with missiles and vehicle-mounted mini-guns.
That's roughly a third of Bruce Wayne's net worth.
The Flaw:
Sadly, this piece of colon-evacuating awesome had two insanely glaring flaws, the first of which being its astoundingly useless targeting system. Sure, it manages to blast the crap out of some parade floats that are easily a city block wide apiece, but the damn thing can't manage to hit a man-sized target under literally ideal conditions.
Apparently those precision aiming red circles have a 10 foot margin of error.
If you watched the video linked in the above caption, you'll notice the Wright Brothers could have killed the Joker in that situation using their prototype airplane and a musket. Which brings us to the second flaw: The Batwing's armor was apparently constructed out of paper mache. It gets brought down by a gag pistol the Joker kept in his pants in the off-chance that he might need it for some spur-of-the-moment prop comedy.
Its barrel is so long that it probably slowed the bullet down to 15mph, yet it still manages to destroy the single raddest piece of Bat-technology in Wayne Manor. With one single shot.
We'll take Christian Bale's ridiculous, gravelly voice over this shit any day of the week.
#2.
The Technodrome
In the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles universe, the Technodrome is a futuristic doom base/horror tank from another world built by a gigantic brain with arms and a tripod.
It was able to withstand any environment--from the vacuums of space to the depths of the ocean--and came equipped with a robot army, deflector shields, interdimensional teleportation and even a time machine.
It also made a totally badass toy.
The Flaw:
Despite boasting some of the most terrifying technology our dimension had ever encountered, the Technodrome suffered from perhaps the most baffling design flaw in the history of fictional technology: It did not have a working power source. None. It was like a car without a gas tank or a Death Star that had to be powered by windmill.
Or a brain with no body.
We know this, because the Technodrome spent most of the entire 10-season run of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles stranded underground, trapped in Dimension X, encased in the Earth's core, frozen in ice or sitting at the bottom of the sea, always waiting for a recharge that simply never came.
Since the Technodrome could have potentially ruled the universe if given enough juice, the plot for the entire series boiled down to "the Technodrome needs a jump." Krang tried rigging it to Niagara Falls, sent the most brainless mutants on Earth to obtain power crystals, and even broke out some stationary bikes--the "Pedal Power Generator"--for Shredder, Bebop and Rocksteady to ride for a boost.
Hell, we feel bad for criticizing the Death Star's power source now. At least Darth Vader didn't spend the entire trilogy trying to get the damned thing to start.
After so many failed attempts to get the damn thing running, it was revealed in the last episode of the cartoon that the Technodrome was simply abandoned, cast aside to die like a Ford Expedition. Really, the logic of the whole show kind of falls apart when viewed from adulthood.
The toys are still awesome though.
#1.
Sentient Computers
Let's start with the HAL 9000. We'll go straight to the source:
"The 9000 series is the most reliable computer ever made. No 9000 computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error."
"Also, humble."
The Flaw:
Well, in addition to cheating at chess...
...the HAL 9000 suffered from one hell of a emotional flaw that the good people at IBM have yet to own up to.
Let's recap: HAL tells the crew that a part on the ship is about to malfunction, but when they check it out everything seems fine. He suggests that they reinstall the part and wait for it to fail, but seeing as how suggestions like that are usually made with tons of alcohol and end in a trip to the emergency room, the crew questions HAL's logic and agree to switch him off if his idea doesn't work.
HAL "overhears" this exchange by way of lip reading and decides to kill the entire crew by casting one into space and freezing the rest in their sleep.
Now, we're obviously not complaining that they designed HAL to be murderous--we realize that was a bug, not a feature. But why give him a personality at all? What good did it do? Especially when it's the personality of a sociopath with an easily bruised ego (sort of like a murderous Kanye West). Nobody floating in space should have to depend on a neurotic killer douche for survival.
"Honestly? I'm starting to miss Windows Vista."
Which brings us to the Knight Industries Two Thousand, or KITT.
This car boasted enough high-tech equipment to commit a war crime with. It came with alpha circuit, an indestructible molecular bonded shell, a wristwatch communicator, a front mounted scanner, a microwave jammer, tear gas launcher, flame thrower, lasers and a supercomputer AI voiced by Mr. Feeny from Boy Meets World.
Our question: How many hours of AI programming did it take to turn KITT into a total dick? KITT and its driver spent half of the episodes bickering like an old married couple. There is one scene where KITT locks Michael out of the car, until Michael successfully debates him on the merits of their mission. Another time he allows Michael to literally fall asleep at the wheel after an argument and then advises Michael to lie to the police by pretending that he is deaf.
Imagine owning a cell phone, a laptop or a freaking car that was even just a fraction as condescending as KITT. It's played for laughs in the show, but only because we never got to see the inevitable situation where KITT's mistrust of its own driver finally gets the driver killed.
That's right, we're saying it right now: The only difference between KITT and HAL 9000 is the show didn't run long enough for KITT to finally go over the edge.
It would have spared everyone a lot of pain.
For a real-life comparison, check out 5 Real Historical Death Stars (Complete With Baffling Flaws). Or find out just what went wrong over at Cyberdyne, in A Series of Emails From Cyberdyne's New Tech Guy.
Do you have an idea in mind that would make a great article? Then sign up for our writers workshop! Know way too much about a random topic? Create a topic page and you could be on the front page of Cracked.com tomorrow!
And stop by Linkstorm (Updated Today!) to discover ancient videos of Y-chromosomal Adam and Eve totally doing it.
And don't forget to follow us on Facebook and Twitter to get sexy, sexy jokes sent straight to your news feed.
They did not program HAL with a personality. They even say so in the movie. He is designed to emulate emotion to make him seem more human, but that in no way is going to affect his judgement. It was a calculation. Removing his emotional emulation wouldn't have changed his decision that Frank and Dave were a liability to the mission and needed to be killed.
ReplyAnd regarding the warp core thing, when you're dealing with large sizes there's really only so much strength you can engineer into something. Considering that they can have photon torpedos fired right at it and even with shields down it's still not just gonna breach like that, I'd suppose it's probably about as well engineered as would be a good idea. Keep in mind a photon torpedo would absolutely destroy that concrete wall, and anything behind it.
"Imagine if they announced that they were going to build a power plant right in the center of Tokyo and that, oh by the way, if just one hillbilly crashes his airplane into it, it will result in a mini-supernova with about three seconds' warning. It would be time to send that s**t back to the drawing board."
ReplyHeh, well, not quite the centre of Tokyo, and not quite a supernova, and a tsunami is quite a bit heavier than a hick in a plane, but still...
There's a theory floating around that the AT-AT was originally supposed to be an artillery piece and always under escort. It being really tall was to improve its ability to hit targets with its line-of-sight weapons (which serves up another sci-fi weapons problem in big-name sci-fi: hardly anybody ever uses indirect-fire weapons like mortars). The theory continues that Palpatine saw it and said "cool; turn it into an APC, too." Finally General Veers canonically suppresses information about its blind spot to avoid losing face, then puts them into Hoth with only a little in the way of escorts, and half the force gets destroyed. (Wedge Antilles and Wes Janson tripped one; Luke tossed a grenade into another's engine; and Hobbie Klivian rammed the cockpit of the lead walker in the novelization, costing Veers his legs. Thus, irony.)
ReplyAnd as others have mentioned, the Empire was always concerned more with scary than with functionality. Hence dumping millions of people and billions of credits into superweapons rather than warships, and giant impractical walkers that shake the ground many kilometers away.
As for warp core breaches, the first time it happened it was mentioned that it was a vanishingly rare occurrence. Then the writers learned that "core breach = danger" and the words "vanishingly rare" were conveniently forgotten.
And of course later in the EU, the Rebels/New Republic eventually treat taking out AT-ATs as relatively trivial (see Isard's Revenge). Of course the difference there is, they're using actual purpose-built combat vehicles (X-Wings) rather than glorified pickup trucks with popguns (T-47 snowspeeders).
"All of these supposedly advanced systems have an inexplicable tendency to explode at the drop of a hat." Ah, I can see why the designers had a problem then, no one in Star Trek wears hats :)
ReplyAre there no toilets on the star trek spaceships because they transport the bodily waste out of themselves to be recycled elsewhere as fuel?
ReplyWhy Isn't the TIE Fighter worse than the AT-AT? Those big ol' vertical wings kinda blocked out everything didn't they? No armor and the pilots could only see in front and back.
ReplyNot to mention they've got serious problems in atmospheric combat (see the EU). X-Wings can at least glide if need be; not only does a TIE fly like a rock without power, but those big flat panels mean TIEs have serious trouble with crosswinds.
I seriously doubt that a space fighter is designed for the pilot to visually target his opponents...
Yet, oddly enough, the AT-AT are actually quite useful in the video games. I know, the games don't take into account all the nuances of real combat, but the point in the games is that they're nearly indestructable - which is their purpose in the movie. I always assumed they walked because of the armor that made them so ridiculously heavy.
ReplyAnyway, slap some turrets on the sides, give them AT-ST escorts, and put them behind the front lines (which would go a long way to explaining why they're mounted above the battle, actually) and you have a rather effective combined arms doctrine. Seriously, how are you going to stand up long enough to stop the flood of incoming ground troops when you are a) distracted by a massive and relentless machine behind and above them, b) being bombarded by said artillery, and c) can't take destory said monstrosity. Sure, the rebels found a wayaround c, but that's what made the movie exciting.
In other words, the machines were good (especially if they had minor adjustments), but the screenwriters (like most screenwriters) don't have a clue about tactics.
This made me laugh so hard, Damn!
ReplyShouldn't it(#4) be a "warp core breach"? I was under the impression that "breech" was like how artillery and stereotypical shotguns are loaded.
ReplyAnd some babies are born, butt first. Cracked writers didn't rack up too many 100%s on their spelling tests in elementary school. They're happy to let it all hang out, here.
Wasn't the DeLorean selected for its stainless steel frame and construction, thus making it a perfect conductor of the electric charge needed for time travel?
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesAnd also because according to Doc Brown, if you're going to travel through time, you may as well do it in style.
Still doesn't explain not replacing the combustible-fuel engine, if all they needed was the frame and construction.
Brushed stainless steel may look good, but the DeLorean was a failure of a supercar.
In defense of "Independence Day," I'd always understood it as Randy Quaid's plane being in the way of the weapon so that it detonated inside the ship and that city-sized explosion happened inside instead of waiting until it hit the ground. Kind of like if you stuck a rock into the barrel of a rocket launcher or something.
ReplyOf course it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense because we saw the weapon seemingly travel through all the floors of a skyscraper before detonating at ground level, so a plane shouldn't have given it much trouble...
I always thought the same thing, though I think it was less a case of the laser not being able to travel through a plane, and more that the giant gun simply got damaged as it was charging before it could fully fire.
Joker fired an armor-piercing bullet straight into the engine. Try that with any plane and you'll see similar results, no matter how slow it's going.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesYou want embarrassing? Imagine if the first Burton Batman had him against Penguin instead. Batwing, meet birdwing. "A noble sacrifice my child! The Bat is gone, onwards, we claim this city now!" "Wak wak wak wak!"
Yeah I'm not sure how you figure a longer barrel would slow the bullet. Such a barrel would probably have rifling, giving the bullet a greater, sustained spiraling, likely making it travel faster. If anything, the fall in the gun is that the kick would likely be enough to significantly injure the Joker's wrist if fired in that manner.
Depending on the bullet and the powder used, various lengths of barrel work best for certain speeds.
But... :Googles: " As the bullet moves down the bore, however, the propellant's gas pressure behind it diminishes. Given a long enough barrel, there would eventually be a point at which friction between the bullet and the barrel, and air resistance, would equal the force of the gas pressure behind it, and from that point, the velocity of the bullet would decrease."
So for the length of that barrel, Joker would have needed a very special load, and the necessary force and Newton's Third Law would probably have broken his wrist.
It is a very real problem; the difference between bullet powder load and the barrel. There were many instances with Japanese snipers in World War 2 the Arisaka rifles were fitted with longer barrels believing it would increase accuracy. Many soldiers would find the bullets lodged into their jackets not even realizing they have been shot, whereas if the barrel was 2 inches shorter they would have been killed. It makes all the difference.
You've awaken the nerds.
ReplyYou forgot that the power sources fueling these vessels are either massive fusion plants or antimatter (both of which, if containment is ruptured, are apocalyptic levels of destructive). Two, yes our stuff is durable--against simple impact. Factor in the fact that weapons on the scale of small nuclear warheads (for example, the most common space to space missiles in fiction are usually quoted at the 15-60 KILOTON range) are being tossed at it and unless you're flying a brick ($#%^ing Borg) you just can't build enough safeguards to keep it from going critical. Sure it's all well and good to point out immobile reactor complexes on earth, but they're not designed to sit in the center of a warship and provide power to energy weapons, life support, engines... the list goes on.
Replyroddenberry's space vessels had warp AND impulse engines. loss of a warp core would only hinder the ability to achieve faster than lightspeeds. hell, nuclear submarines have a deisel backup generators just in case.
ReplyHad to stop reading once you said the longer barrel would make the bullet SLOWER. How could you screw that up?
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesIf you want your bullet to go faster, you need more propellant and a longer barrel.
If you take a gun and its round, and simply make the barrel longer, this will make the bullet go faster.
UP TO A POINT
The point at which the propellant is completely burned and the bullet has travelled so far down the barrell that the gas has dropped to a pressure that is no longer capable of accelerating the bullet down the barrel.
It is VERY hard to push a bullet down a barell, they fit very tightly, for a reason.
So, if you stuck a few inches of extra barell onto a handgun, you might actually get a faster bullet, but stickeing a few FEET of extra barell on, might in fact, as the author states, slow the bullet down.
Wow, I typed all that? I must really not want to do this "online learning" thing that Im supposed to be doing.
ahem. the length of a rifle barrel affects accuracy of the arc of travel not the initial speed, except a very small DECREASE in acceleration from the friction of the munitions as it travels thru the barrel.
more powder = more acceleration
more barrel = more consistent accuracy
That's most likely a .357 or .44 Magnum revolver with what looks to be a 24 inch barrel--which some companies market with a removable stock to make a carbine. However, you're all wrong. Firing a load not intended to travel down that length of barrel creates the inherent risk of lodging a round in place (for example, obtain a Lee Enfield Mk1, the .32 ACP chamber insert, and fire a few rounds; the friction causes the bullet to travel little faster than a paintball, which means you can see it's flight; and comes with a warning that the round may not have enough velocity to exit the barrel).
The fact that the media is the only source of firearms knowledge for so many just proves that the California method of sapping freedom is working.
Also, regarding the AT-AT; It may have some serious flaws, many of which could probably be solved by adding turrets to the sides. If I had to guess, I'd say their biggest flaw was with how they were utilized on Hoth. They are are heavily armored, sit high above most of the battlefield thanks to those legs, and have powerful weaponry.
ReplyIn a full military campaign, I could see those being highly useful in advancing the line of battle. Safely taking out key targets from the back lines while smaller units keep pushing forward. Walking artillery. But they are not the sort of unit that I would leave entirely exposed - they deserve to be flanked by an escort of something more agile like AT-STs to ensure anything that does get by them doesn't survive long.
TLDR; AT-AT may have flaws, but the empire's arrogance is what really did those machines in
arrogance.. and unskilled marksmen with plastic body armor.
arrogance lead to their creation in the first place. Tarkin's doctrine was crap. Fear can help, sure, but I think he forgot about WINNING. Article raised an interesting point about the prequels having seemingly more usable war machines than the future. It gets even worse if you go into the videogames with the Old Republic sections. Lucas needs to totally drop a retcon somewhere that everything in the future sucks because they're all starting again from square 1. Maybe an ultra-extremist pacifist noodly-appendaged the galaxy by releasing an Eldritch horror somewhere about 600 years before the movies take place, to avert a more disastrous war.
The article's "button that makes your engine go flying out of the hood" analogy is seriously flawed. If my engine breaking down meant vaporizing the vehicle, and the battery on its own had the capability to power the car to escape said ejected exploding engine, as well as allow me to limp to a service station... You're damn right I would push that button in an emergency.
ReplyA ship without it's warp-core is not entirely disabled - the remaining power systems are sufficient to run life-support and other key systems for a time - as well as powering the impulse engines. Generally speaking, within the alpha and beta quadrants, this should be more than sufficient for another friendly vessel to render assistance.
Voyager was a somewhat unique case in that they were so far out that the loss of their warp core WAS a problem. They were well outside the Federation's supply lines (never mind out of communications range and presumed lost/destroyed for at least the first half of their journey) and could not expect assistance.
Let us not forget KITT was also pretty emotionally unstable. To the point where he even got PTSD which pretty much neutered him and made his creators consider making him a show car for potential investors and doing away with the whole "One man can make a difference by saving a divorced mother of a pretentious preteen from the biker gang of evil ex-husbands" thing.
Replyamusing read, but a few points:
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesThe AT-AT? if you are marching at an enemy base (which is immobile) you don't need a large firing arc, just a wide enough one to hit the base. add in enough armor to deal with any oncoming attack craft, and infantry support, and it does its job. it works great, in ideal situations only, admittedly, but it does work. Also, with AT-ST support helps. fast, agile, good fire arc.
And the warp core? ok, the system volatility was overplayed. but so are aliens with marginally different forehead ridges. star trek was far from perfect. but they make the point of saying that they only way to generate enough power was with a matter/antimatter reaction, which is marginally move potent than, say, a nuclear reactor. and thick concrete barriers in spaceships is just silly. and wouldn't stop a cascade antimatter reaction. all matter it contacts just increases the destructive nature of it. Additionally, star fleet has their standard containment fields for the reaction, followed buy something like 14 backups. the real issue is the backups that DON'T WORK as apposed to the reactors themselves. and ejecting the core to save the ship doesn't leave the ship useless, just unable to go FTL. Impulse drives can still power everything from life support to replicators. also, instantaneous communication via subspace means the interstellar AAA should be there for your dumb ass in a week or two.
good analogy. but still, if one was designed in real life, the design would have been to have the walkers with a turret on the top that could spin. Like a real tank.
@Bob
i whole agree. more guns with wider arcs would make it much more terrifying. but then it would look less like a giant grey metal tuskless mastadon
The AT-AT still sucks. This is the principle behind the 'assault gun' like the STuG and the Sturmmorser. They were a LOT more manueverable and faster too. And in the Sturmmorser's case, probably had thicker armour too. That thing was a BEAST. Fortunately mass production isn't one of Germany's strong suits.
Consider this, the AT-AT needs to keep its head and limbs flexible enough to move. This means it has to have lighter armour in these parts. (in fact any game with them points this out too.) Not to mention it wastes space that could be used for more weaponry/armour for gyros and springs and pistons and the like. It's far more vulnerable than an assault gun, which, once the tracks are removed, still serves as an upgraded pillbox, well armoured on all sides as it doesn't need movement. You are literally shooting at a block of steel with a cannon strapped on top. It would have been far more effective to scrap one AT-AT and turn it into several less armoured but full range firing martial walkers, as the joints give it a massively huge weakpoint. At least the walkers are fast, and they were light enough to go on while missing one leg. Everything about the AT-AT principle was done better elsewhere, either as a better walker, or as a better tank/APC hybrid.
Clearly, the empire was more concerned with inspiring fear or shock and awe than producing perfectly designed weapons. Both the AT-ATs and the Death Star are needlessly huge with catastrophic flaws. The idea was to produce something that marvelled the viewer in sheer size and destroyed the morality of the opposition(i.e. Egun Spengler's quote upon seeing the marshmallow man, "Sorry Venkman, but I'm terrified beyond the capacity for rational thought.)