Ballpark figure

[peter noble]

There are 220 ships in the fleet, how many people so you think survived the sneak attack?

[Darrell Lawrence]

Averaging it out to 100 per ship (note- this is averaging it out, meaning some had more, some less), I'd say in the ball park of 22,000 ;)

[Eric Paddon]

Apollo at one point in "Greetings From Earth" gives a figure of 7000, which I went with at first but then on further reflection struck me as way too low, so whenever I write I just multiplied that number by ten and came up with 70,000 averaging 300 plus per ship.

[Damocles]

This is the baseline data used;

http://www.cylon.org/bsg/bsg-others-01.html

http://www.tecr.com/galactica/miscships/miscships.htm

http://www.merzo.net/1mpp.htm

And the base model for the benchmark ship data:

http://ravensbranch.allen.com/galacticasize.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlestar

Assumptions;

1. The Alligator is an aircraft carrier.

2. Freighter proportions to carrier proportions remain constant(average is 1/2 the size volumetrically for the freighter to the carrier).

3. Each human being requires a minimum of 10,000 cubic meters of space for living space and consumables storage.

4. The 90/10 rocket to payload rule is in effect.

_______________________

Lets begin;

Battlestar is approximately

Hull:

Length: 1265 metres (4,150ft)
Beam: 519 metres (1,703ft)
Draft: 234 metres (768ft)
Flight Pods:

Length: 617 metres (2,025ft)
Beam: 114 metres (374ft)
Draft: 67 metres (220ft)

Total volume of the battlestar(measured as a dimensional cube displacement) +/- 20%= 1.60*10E8 cubic meters(accuracy to two decimal places.)
Apply 90/10 rule; 1.6*10E7 cubic meters(accuracy to two decimal places.)

Calculated battlestar crew; 1600 personnel +/- 50%

Calculated average freighter crew size using the above procedure=800 +/- 50%

220*800=176,000 people, which is the upper limit bound on the personnel within the RT fleet.

I tend to accept that half of that is more likely.

Eric Paddon's number of 70,000 people is within the magnitude of an 80,000 person estimate.

As always; :salute:

[peter noble]

Well, for a start Damocles, those battlestar measurements are completely wrong! :D

[Darrell Lawrence]

Think about this when doing your ship crew estimates- Just how many people do you think were on a MOVING COMPANY vessel, aka the Colonial Movers? Only the very front end of the ship was habital, and that'd most likely be for the crew.

I think some survivors stated how many of them were crammed into the Gemini Freighter in "Saga".... or maybe Apollo or Boomer mentioned it...

In addition, the Mineral ship, Flat top and Celestra weren't designed to carry a lot of people either.

[Damocles]

http://www.shipschematics.net/bsg/images/colonial/fighter_viper_mk2.gif

Estimated length=5 human beings laid head to foot. That is 8.5 meters.

http://www.shipschematics.net/bsg/images/colonial/battlestar_nova.gif

Now then, I have heard of Todd Boyce.

http://www.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Battlestar_(TOS) (http://)

http://ravensbranch.allen.com/galacticasize.html (http://)

His work checks out. Its based on film shot and pixelcount applied to a baseline Viper full sized prop dimesional set; set against the Alligator in FX shots. Film over word. Actual measurement of artifact over the word of someone who makes a casual qualitative statement instead of a quantifiably verifiable one.

However, if other better data is available, I can examine it, verify it and recalculate.

As always: :salute:

[Damocles]

Think about this when doing your ship crew estimates- Just how many people do you think were on a MOVING COMPANY vessel, aka the Colonial Movers? Only the very front end of the ship was habital, and that'd most likely be for the crew.

I think some survivors stated how many of them were crammed into the Gemini Freighter in "Saga".... or maybe Apollo or Boomer mentioned it...

In addition, the Mineral ship, Flat top and Celestra weren't designed to carry a lot of people either.

Explanation of the 90/10 rule. The 90/10 rocket rule assumes that 90 percent of the rocket is FUEL and engine structure, and that only 10 percent is payload and cargo structure. Within that rule the Colonial Movers and Gemini Freighter fits into the magnitude of calculation quite nicely. Flattop and Celestia fall within the magnitude of estimate as well. The mineral ship fits at the lower end of the rule. Rising Star, which is an oddball at 50/50, is the out of whack data distribution point, if you are looking for such.

This is rocket science I am applying. :D

As always. ;)

[peter noble]

http://www.shipschematics.net/bsg/images/colonial/fighter_viper_mk2.gif

Estimated length=5 human beings laid head to foot. That is 8.5 meters.

http://www.shipschematics.net/bsg/images/colonial/battlestar_nova.gif

Now then, I have heard of Todd Boyce.

http://www.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Battlestar_(TOS) (http://)

http://ravensbranch.allen.com/galacticasize.html (http://)

His work checks out. Its based on film shot and pixelcount applied to a baseline Viper full sized prop dimesional set; set against the Alligator in FX shots. Film over word. Actual measurement of artifact over the word of someone who makes a casual qualitative statement instead of a quantifiably verifiable one.

However, if other better data is available, I can examine it, verify it and recalculate.

As always: :salute:


Bollocks!

It's 6080 feet based on measuring the scale of actual miniature referenced in Sci Fi & Fantasy modelling issue eight or nine, from the 90s. 6080 is the accepted size of the Big G.

[Damocles]

http://www.galacticafanfic.com/bsg-size.txt

Mark asked:

>How big is the Galactica anyway? (When asked this
>question, my usual response is "Bloody huge!")

Ah, yet another of the great UTQ's (Unanswered Technical
Questions) crops up again. We really ought to put this in the
FAQ, and I would suggest that the answer ought to go something
like this:

"There was never an exact length quoted for the Galactica on
screen, in Colonial _or_ Earth units. Various fan and modelling
publications have quoted lengths of 2000 feet or "one mile", but
these have no firm basis in the series. Recently, [forgotten his
name], one of the three men who own the Galactica Archives, a
collection of BG props, costumes and related material, wrote in a
British modelling magazine that he estimated the scale of the
original 76-inch Galactica miniature to be around 1/960, based on
the size of the landing bay entrance. This would make the
full-size ship 6080 feet (1853 metres) long -- by coincidence,
exactly (pre-SI) one nautical mile. This is as definitive a value
as we are likely to get, barring pronouncements from Glen
Larson."

A single point check measurerment? On a landing bay? on a 76 inch model?

Did he have a 1/960 Viper?

You need one benchmark and two checkpoints minimum to establish size on an unknown object.

One checkpoint might be a human being(known benchmark) standing next to a window on the Alligator that you can scale once you correlate the window to a hull shot. The second checkpoint might be the human being scaled against another opening like the landing bay. Or you can use a scaled Viper benchmark and use that set against two different parts of the Alligator for two scaling measurements-as Mister Boyce did.

Who is to say that the model measurement is not actually 1/650 or thereabouts as Mister Boyce computed; using the benchmark and two checkpoint scaling method??

Now as to the modeller who measured the landing bay on the model. What was his benchmark? None indicated. He measured a space on the Alligator and then used that as his benchmark? He used the object to scale itself?

Not valid.

The error in the base inch scale ruler is 1 in 64 hashes which on a 72 inch model amounts to about 1/8 of an inch to the foot, or 3/4 of an inch to the total length. Unless that measurement was made with a micrometer (error ratio 1/1000)and directly compared to a known scale model of a Viper to exact ratio then the claim based on a single point measurement is worthless. The error at the outset is +/- 5% if an exact measurement is made and could be out of magnitude, if the benchmark to artifact measurement is proportionally wrong.

That is if a benchmark was used and a(proper?) size ratio was established in the first place.

To recapitulate;

1. Todd Boyce uses a Viper of known size to establish a pixel ratio of the Viper to the Alligator when FX shots are shown.

2. By establishing landing bay to Viper size ratios, and launch tube to Viper size ratios, he creates two measurement scalars on the Aligator itself for width and length.

3. The Alligator provides its own width to length ratio check.

4. If the two measurements(launch tube and landing bay) fall into the width to length Alligato ratio check within magnitude +/- 20% of each other; then you can set the lengths for the two hull features. You have your length and width rulers.

5. Count the pixels. Apply the rulers

6. You'ved sized the Alligator.

Now unless this modeller did that threeway check as I outlined and as I've reviewed then; your presentation needs more evidence to negate my conclusions and Mister Boyce's original work.

Can you supply this data?

As always; :...:

[peter noble]

You can pontificate all you want it's still 6080 ft long .

I trust someone who's actually had the model in front of them more than someone who's done some screen grabs! :D

[Damocles]

No pontification, Peter. Unless I can check the measurement claims beyond a "well I did the measurement and this is what I came up with statement", then I park that statement and that claim into the qualitative statement file. At least with Mister Boyce, you have his evidence in front of you; and you check it and his methodology for error. Its called duplicating the research to see if the conclusion is valid.

He meets the minimum criteria for verification.

I see his evidence and can check it.

Now consider it this way;

Based on the filming miniature, 6080 could be an approximate correct answer. This can be derived this way:

The Viper's exit ports on the miniature are 1/4" in diameter. In full scale, we can assume a tube big enough to handle a Viper would be roughly 20 feet in diameter. The ratio of 1/4"=20' translates to 1/960 scale.

Now that is an arbitrary number assigned without any actual ratio test.

Since the length of the Galactica model is 76 inches we get:

76 x 960 = 72960 inches in length, or 6080 feet or 1852 meters.

That would be one way to arrive at your nautical mile figure.

However if the launch tube was 13-16 feet in diameter, as may be likely from the Viper/launch tube measured ratios? That is 1/768 scale if we take the upper bound number of 16 feet established in the estimate. Crunch the numbers.....

4864 feet or roughly 1483 meters.

That is a ratio measurement error of 1/5 or 20% to the measurement Mister Boyce claimed. That is an acceptable error in the measurement magnitude.

Now do you see how I get my double check numbers?

As always; :salute:

[peter noble]

Surrender Dorothy (and Mr Boyce). ;)

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3366/size2ni.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Darrell Lawrence]

Where's the "Continue" image? :D

[peter noble]

Where's the "Continue" image? :D

Err.... that's another eight pages D! :D

[Damocles]

Need I remind you of the famous Sharlin foul up in B-5?

The original CGI goof(the instrument readout) had the Sharlin size based on a mile long Babylon 5 station.

Then some genius in rewrite(JMS) scripted a five mile long station(8 kilometers). Oops. Subsequenrtly the CGI models were all scaled to the station. Surprise there is that famous readout that shows the Sharlin at 300 meters and numerous screen shots where against a five mile long station it has to be at least 1300 meters in length.

Canon sources put the Sharlin subsequently at 1500 meters and so it was officially scaled.

The Station was/is the size benchmark for all models seen on the show.

Sharlin;

http://www.babtech-onthe.net/minbari/warcruiser.html (http://)

Babylon station;

http://www.babtech-onthe.net/b5/

Just as the Alligator is for CBSG.

Sizing the Alligator against known size objects(Human being and Viper) puts it anywhere from 1200 meters to 1500 meters.

The original writer's intention, notwithstanding.

By the way; "Surrender Dorothy?" The witch lost.

As always; :salute:

[peter noble]

Hey Gordon, can you ask Mark B about the scale of the Big G?

He's another person I know who's actually worked on it and hasn't had to deal with not very precise FX footage and foreshortened full-size props.

[peter noble]

I went and asked another expert.

Charles Adams

Administrator

6080 feet would be my best guess. I have probably the most accurate plans for the studio miniature (spent over 5 years mapping it out) and I did take the time to do a scale comparison once with a Viper and Shuttle. I compared them to both the size of the launch tube openings and the landing bay opening. I came up with an overall size of roughly one nautical mile. . .
__________________
Webmaster/StarshipBuilder.com

[Darrell Lawrence]

If he used the same technique Todd did, then how did they end up with different numbers? ;)

[braxiss]

There are 220 ships in the fleet, how many people so you think survived the sneak attack?


are you asking how many people escaped, or how many survived in general?

[peter noble]

are you asking how many people escaped, or how many survived in general?

How many survivors populate the rag tag fleet?

That's the question.

[braxiss]

ok, i'd say no more than 50,000 and i think that's high

[Damocles]

I went and asked another expert.

Do me a favor?

Ask him if a one/eighth of an inch measuring error on his referent scalars could introduce a gross measurement error of 22% on the final size estimate between a 1460 meter battlestar and a 1852 meter battlestar?

I'd be VERY interested to read his answer.

By the way, my own calculations were an attempt to establish an upper bound for the number of possible survivors-not to definitively state that 176,000 Colonials survived the destruction of the Colonies.

As always; :salute:

[BST]

I've always thought the 50,000 number to be way too conservative an estimate. As a matter of fact, I've considered approximately 30-50% of that number to be on the Galactica alone! That's right, somewhere between 15,000 - 25,000 people.

Think that's daft? Well, check the following, especially the highlighted items:

USS Ranger (CV-61) – United States Navy aircraft carrier
Nickname – Top Gun of the Pacific Fleet
Commissioned – August 10, 1957, Newport News, VA
Powerplant – eight boilers
producing over 280,000 horsepower
Crew complement – 5,100 with air wing aboard
Length – 1,071 ft., 11 in. (304 m)
Width at flight deck – 271 ft. (19.3 m)
Height – 97 ft. (29.5 m) Waterline to Bridge
Draft – 36 ft. (11 m)
Displacement – 81,000 tons
Rudders – 2 at 45 tons
Propellers – 4 at 21 feet diameter each
Maximum speed – 30 plus knots
Catapults – 4 steam powered
Arresting Wires – 4 hydraulic
Aircraft elevators - 4
Anchors – 2 at 30 tons each
Anchor chain links – 1,128
each weighing 360 lbs.
Aircraft complement – 70 to 80 assorted
Telephones – 2,300

Source: http://www.highironillustrations.com/shipyard_specification/spec_forrestal.html

[Damocles]

I've always thought the 50,000 number to be way too conservative an estimate. As a matter of fact, I've considered approximately 30-50% of that number to be on the Galactica alone! That's right, somewhere between 15,000 - 25,000 people.

Think that's daft? Well, check the following, especially the highlighted items:

USS Ranger (CV-61) – United States Navy aircraft carrier
Nickname – Top Gun of the Pacific Fleet
Commissioned – August 10, 1957, Newport News, VA
Powerplant – eight boilers
producing over 280,000 horsepower
Crew complement – 5,100 with air wing aboard
Length – 1,071 ft., 11 in. (304 m)
Width at flight deck – 271 ft. (19.3 m)
Height – 97 ft. (29.5 m) Waterline to Bridge
Draft – 36 ft. (11 m)
Displacement – 81,000 tons
Rudders – 2 at 45 tons
Propellers – 4 at 21 feet diameter each
Maximum speed – 30 plus knots
Catapults – 4 steam powered
Arresting Wires – 4 hydraulic
Aircraft elevators - 4
Anchors – 2 at 30 tons each
Anchor chain links – 1,128
each weighing 360 lbs.
Aircraft complement – 70 to 80 assorted
Telephones – 2,300

Source: http://www.highironillustrations.com/shipyard_specification/spec_forrestal.html

Aircraft carrier follows the 40/60 rule-40/% machinery/60% people.

Not applicable to a closed cycle system.

Better example is the submarine. This is the 70/30 rule. 70% machinery/30% people.

The rocket rule 90/10 is very generous as most engineering estimates for real spacecraft put that rule for machines/people actually at 99/1 for long endurance vessels.

As always; :salute:

[BST]

You're describing machine-people ratios using current day technology. Imagine for a moment that a space faring race had developed machinery that is a fraction of the size of ours. Would not that allow more of the available space on board the craft, to be utilized by people?

[Damocles]

You're describing machine-people ratios using current day technology. Imagine for a moment that a space faring race had developed machinery that is a fraction of the size of ours. Would not that allow more of the available space on board the craft, to be utilized by people?

No.

The bulk of a spacecraft is fuel/propulsion. A good chunk of it has to be the heat radiator and the shielding. The cargo and life support section would be very small.

Try am extremely advanced example, the anti-matter rocket;

http://www.aiaa.org/Participate/Uploads/2003-4676.pdf

There the 95/5 rule applies.

As always; :salute: