What a load of fallacies and lack of evidence this is!
Adarx, remember that you said you had actual evidence.  You have provided
none.  When you reference something, it is your job to provide it for me and
the audience to review.  All you have done is make some vague references to
various things, most of which have nothing directly to do with the Vorlon
fighter, and most of the information you have given is incorrect.

> First, the failure of the shields of the craft to activate when struck
> indicates they were non-functional and thus the craft was damaged.

Circular Logic fallacy.  You are saying that the fighter was damaged because
the fighter was damaged.
You have to show that the shields were down.


  There is
> no shield effect when it is struck, a stark contrast to ?Interludes and
> Examinations? where we see shields activate on a Vorlon Heavy Cruiser when
> it is struck by a Shadow Molecular Slicer Beam


Two problems here.
*Red Herring.  We are talking about Vorlon *fighters*.  Please stay on
topic.
*I don't recall any shields appearing in that episode.  You must give
evidence, not vague references.
Despite your Red Herring, I will address your statement.
As far as I can tell, there were only two incidents in that episode where
Shadow beams contacted a Vorlon ship.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/shields1.jpg
In this image, we see the Shadow beam has not yet reached the Vorlon ship.
The Vorlon ship is powering weapons, preparing to fire.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/shields2.jpg
In this image, the beams collide.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/shields3.jpg
In this image, the beams cancel each other out, producing a brilliant light
display, but no apparent damage.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/shields1.mov
This is the entire sequence.  This is not a case of beams hitting shields.
This is a case of beams cancelling each other out.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/shields2.mov
This is the other beam striking a Vorlon ship.  It is unknown whether these
are the same two ships or not, as the scene cuts at least twice between the
scene above and this one.  The Shadow beam hits the Vorlon ship directly,
without interference from any kind of shields.  It penetrates all the way
through the appendage and out the other side.  Debris is visible floating
away.

So where is your shield reference?
I have a couple more from "Into the Fire."
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/quicktime/vorlondamage1.mov
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/quicktime/vorlondamage2.mov
No shield effects seen, whether they are there or not.


; also to ?War Without End?
> where we see the shields of the White Star activate when shot by a Shadow
> fighter


Red Herring.
We are talking about *Vorlon fighters*.
*Whitestars are much larger and presumably more powerful than Vorlon
fighters.
*The shield effects seen on the Whitestar were never again seen in the
entire series.  Not when Whitestars were hit by Thunderbolts, larger ships,
or even other Shadow fighters.  This is the exception rather than the rule.
It is likely that the effect seen was that individual ship's response that
that particular type of weapon.  Lennier said that the system learns from
previous experiences.


; and the most clear example was ?Thirdspace? where we see very
> clearly the Vorlon Shields are activated when it is shot by the
> Minbari/Babylon 5 fleet.


The Vorlons weren't in combat in Thirdspace.  What are you talking about?
The artifact?
Those weren't Vorlon shields, Adarx.  The "field" didn't appear until the
aliens came through the gate and created it.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/tspace1.avi
In this clip, the aliens appear, and their ships begin forming the field.
Cut to a Starfury pilot who discusses the newly appearing field with another
pilot.  Then the Starfuries attack the artifact, and their weapons react
with the field.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/tspace2.avi
More ships attacking the field.  Note how the beams react.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/tspace3.avi
Ships attacking the alien ships, which have shields like the one they put
around the artifact.  Note how the beams and pulses react with these
shields.  Identical to the one on the artifact.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/tspace4.avi
A whitestar toe to toe with an alien ship.  Note that the beam reacts with
the shields just like they do on the artifact.  Also note there are no
"shield effects" on the Whitestar.

The shields around the artifact were not of Vorlon design.  They were
created by the aliens to protect the artifact so they could bring more of
their ships through.


 There has been some debate as to whether or not
> the Vorlons have shields.  Two canon sources state they do.  First,
Babylon
> 5 Wars source material makes reference to Vorlon EM shields a great many
> times.


Yes it does.  Babylon5 Wars has a nice forward by JMS
(http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/JMS-AOG.jpg) stating that it has canon
authority.  However, the canon status is debated by some.  I prefer to use
sources that cannot be contested, namely the show itself.
However, since you brought it up, let's discuss it.


  Secondly, a line I happened to catch from ?Into the Fire? that was
> said by Delenn after White Star 9 had just concluded its strafing run on
the
> Vorlon Observation Post.  She said, ?Forward screens are down.?  This
> clearly refers to shields by their other name.


And it exhibited none of the shield effects you mentioned.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/shields3.avi
In this clip, we see the Whitestar fleet attacking the Vorlon outpost.  When
weapons hit the outpost, no shield effects are seen.  Note that several
shots come before Delenn tells Captain Sheridan that the "screens are down."
When weapons hit the Whitestars, no shield effects are seen.


>
> Secondly, if you examine the scene where the Vorlon Fighter is destroyed,
> you will notice no debris of any kind, indicating that the entire craft
was
> vaporized in only one shot from the T-Bolt.


Incorrect and incorrect.

http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/debris.jpg
Looks like debris to me.

http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/1bolt.jpg
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/2bolt.jpg
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/3bolt.jpg
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/4bolt.jpg
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/5bolt.jpg
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/6bolt.jpg
At least 6 bolts hit the Vorlon fighter before it was completely destroyed.
You can visually track the bolts when viewing the file frame by frame, and
you can easily see how the explosion increases in intensity each time a bolt
hits.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/debrisani.gif
GIF animation of the 6 bolts striking the Vorlon fighter.

All of the images that show actual firing can be seen here:
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/jpg/


  Yes, I know you say one
> ?volley? but if you examine the scene, only a single bolt comes close to
> hitting the fighter before it explodes.


I count 6 bolts striking the Vorlon fighter before complete destruction.


  Odd that such light weapons will
> leave no debris at all


Much debris.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/debris.jpg


 where the two occasions where a Vorlon Fighter is hit
> by a Shadow Molecular Slicer Beam, one during the initial charge and the
> other right before the Walker Ship appears, there is very clear and
> distinctive debris left after the fighter is destroyed.


See above.


  This indicates that
> the Vorlon fighter was in fact in very poor condition when it was hit by
the
> T-Bolt?s weapon considering it completely disintegrated upon being hit
once.


It was hit at least 6 times in about 2/3 second (about 20 frames or so).
But it is interesting that the destruction was so violent.  It leads us to
an idea that the Thunderbolt hit something that contributed to the
explosion, like the engines, weapons, etc.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/enginesani.gif
This is an animation of two consecutive frames from the video.  You can
clearly see that a bolt has struck the Vorlon fighter's engines.  The bolt
that is hitting the engines approached from the other side of the fighter.
You can also see some more bolts approaching, which also hit the fighter.


>   Also note that less durable fighters (Starfuries, Thunderbolts) are seen
> leaving debris after being struck by Thunderbolts weapons after multiple
> hits in ?Severed Dreams.?


Red Herring.
We are talking about *Vorlon* fighters.  Please stay on topic.
http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/debris.jpg


>
> Thirdly, Babylon 5 Wars states all of the following:  Earth Thunderbolt
> Fighter ? Page 15 Ships of the fleet:  ?The Thunderbolt is as fast as a
> Minbari Nial and just as heavily armed, sporting a single gatling pulse
> cannon capable of blowing nearly any fighter out of space in a single
shot?
> (direct quote).  Sounds good for your case, right?

Minbari fighter stats: http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/Nial-fighter.jpg
Well, a Minbari fighter can destroy a Vorlon fighter in one 3-shot volley
according to the stats.
The damage rating is 1d6+4, so a perfect roll on all three guns would be 10
points apiece, or 30 points total.
Because the guns are fire-linked, they must penetrate shields and armor
individually.  So, take away 4 points for armor and 1 point for the shield
per gun, leaving 15 points of damage.  If the "adaptive armor" isn't set to
defend against Minbari "molecular" weapons, the 15 points equals the 15
points of structure on the Vorlon fighter, and *boom*.

Vorlon fighters page 81 B5 Wars "Ships of the fleet"
"Vorlon fighters use adaptive armor skins, just as
their ships do.  These skins do not benefit from any
"learning" made by their carrier, but do learn from
damage suffered from other fighters in their flight.
The entire flight must assign its armor points the
same way.  Unlike ships, the adaptive armor on
fighters cannot begin the scenario in any sort of
"ready" state, and it loses its memory relatively
quickly (after several days)  In campaign, it can be
assumed that all memory is lost after each campaign
turn."
So, it is not a wild assumption that the "adaptive armor" may not be set for
Minbari weapons.
It is very possible for a Minbari fighter to destroy a Vorlon fighter in one
combat turn by game rules.  And that is by brute force, without hitting
engines, weapons, etc.
Note that this is one 3-shot burst from the Minbari fighter.  The
Thunderbolt hit the Vorlon fighter at least 6 times.


  Wrong.  Almost any = Not
> quite all.  Naturally the most durable fighters would be the very few that
> can survive multiple hits.  The Vorlon fighter was tied as the most
durable
> fighter from the front at the time the product was released.  Therefore,
the
> most durable fighters survive one shot, the Vorlon fighter is the most
> durable, therefore it can survive more than one shot.  Simple huh?


Not quite.  Going from "capable of blowing nearly any fighter out of space
in a single shot" to saying that a Vorlon fighter can withstand a hit just
because it is the most durable around is a Leap of Logic fallacy.
You must now provide a direct quote that tells us that a Vorlon fighter can
withstand a direct hit from a Thunderbolt.


> Fourthly, Babylon 5 Wars makes special note of the Vorlon fighters
> durability on page 81 of Babylon 5 Wars:  Ships of the Fleet:  ?Vorlon
heavy
> fighters have one light discharge gun and no other armament.  They are
> heavily shielded and armored (and even a couple of adaptive armor points),
> and can take considerable punishment before being destroyed.?

http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/VF-Consht.jpg
The Vorlon fighter has 4 points of armor protection on the front, 2 points
of adaptive armor protection and 1 point of shield protection.  So, assuming
the "adaptive armor" is set to protect against Thunderbolt weaponry (a
best-case scenario for your argument), the Vorlon fighter has a total of 7
points of protection.

http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/t-bolt-consht.jpg
The Thunderbolt's firepower is rated 2d6+6.  This is a pair of 6-sided dice
+6 more points added to the roll.  So, assuming a hit (as happened in the
episode), the Thunderbolt can deliver from 8-18 points of damage per turn.
So, assuming best-case scenario for the Vorlons, and worst-case scenario for
the Thunderbolt, the Thunderbolt's guns shoot right through the Vorlon
defenses and still have 1 point of damage to inflict on the internal
components!
A more fair scenario results in the Thunderbolt punching through the
defenses and having 1-13 points of damage left to inflict on internal
components.  Things which may explode like engines or weapons.

Even if the engines were not hit (they were), one more turn would finish off
the Vorlon fighter through brute force alone, beating the few points of
"structure" left.
But how long is a combat turn?  Is it ever defined?
I've calculated something for comparison.  A Minbari fighter can fire its
three guns once during a combat turn, and this is considered one volley, per
page 46 of the 2nd edition rules compendium.

*Minbari fighters can fire all three guns in 7 frames, twice each in 16
frames of NTSC video.
*The Thunderbolt hit the Vorlon fighter at least 6 times in about 20 frames
of NTSC video.

If a Minbari fighter can only fire once per turn, then a turn must be no
more than a quarter second long.  They can fire each gun twice in a half
second.
Since the Thunderbolt fired on the Vorlon fighter for ~2/3 second before
total destruction, it took just over two turns.
So using Babylon5 Wars stats, the Thunderbolt could destroy a healthy Vorlon
fighter in the time shown.
Assume a moderate first hit of 12 points, out of a maximum possible 18.
First round penetrates the shields, adaptive armor, and armor, applying the
remaining 5 points to the "structure."  "Structure" now has 10 points left.
The Thunderbolt only needs to apply 56% (10 points out of a possible 18) of
its firepower in the next round to destroy the Vorlon fighter by brute force
alone!

*The Thunderbolt hit the engines, or some other explosive thing in the
Vorlon ship in the first hit.  That component exploded, contributing to the
craft's demise.  This would probably not happen to a more resilient vessel
(stronger shields), like a Vorlon battleship.
*The volley appears to have taken at least two "turns," in which time the
Thunderbolt could destroy the Vorlon fighter even if the engines didn't
explode.
There is no evidence in Babylon5 Wars to suggest that the fighter was
damaged beforehand.


>
> Fifth, we have a logic point instead of a science point.  The Vorlon
fighter
> was moving in a strait line behind the Thunderbolt that hit (and killed)
it.
>   Vorlon fighter made no evasive maneuvers despite having a few seconds
> warning.


http://www.babtech-onthe.net/adarx/adarx2.avi
The Thunderbolt first fires in frame 33.  The first bolt hits in frame 45.
This is just under a half second (12 frames at 29.97fps) the Vorlon fighter
had to react.
The Vorlon fighter had a partner - a wingman.  They were in formation
pursuing a pair of Thunderbolts in formation, and you don't coordinate a
maneuver with your wingman in 1/2 second.

Do you contend that the other Vorlon fighter was also damaged, because it
didn't take evasive action in 1/2 second?  Was the other thunderbolt damaged
too?

Do you contend that this individual fighter was a derelict, but was able to
maintain formation with the wingman while in pursuit of two Thunderbolts?


  Instead, it drifted in a strait line into the enemy fire.  Not
> only this but with an enemy directly in front of it, what possible reason
> could they have had for not pulling the trigger and destroying the target
> which was now trying to shoot it.


They probably were trying to shoot them.. That is why they were in pursuit.
Do you contend that it is easier to chase someone by flying a wild course?
Do you contend that it is easier to shoot an enemy while you are flying a
wild course?


  With a beam all you have to do is drag it
> over your enemies position so even if you are a little off you can turn
your
> ship by a few degrees and destroy them.


With 28,000 ships around, 10,000 of which being your own, that may be
dangerous.  Ever heard of "friendly fire?"  That is one thing that causes
it.


  What possible reasons are there for
> these oddities?  After all, are Vorlon fighter pilots suddenly in a hurry
to
> die?


False Dilemma fallacy.
The truth is that they were flying in formation while in pursuit of two
fighters in formation.  And they only had 1/2 second to react, communicate
with each other, make a decision, and coordinate their maneuvers.


>The most reasonable answer is that the fighter was dead in space.


Leap of Logic fallacy.
A fighter "dead in space" doesn't maintain formation in a high-speed chase.


  It
> had no propulsion, no weapons, no shield.


Leap of Logic fallacy.
A ship with no propulsion doesn't maintain formation in a high-speed chase.
A ship with no weapons would not continue to participate in the battle, much
less pursue two enemy ships.
I have shown that there is no evidence of the shields not working.
*Videos linked above show that Vorlon ships don't exhibit shield effects
when hit.
*The first bolt hit on the opposite side of the fighter.  If there were any
shield effects, we wouldn't see it.
*The shields may not have been set to defend from that type of weapon.  See
the game rules.  They only count for 1 point of damage anyway, so don't
start crowing that this is why the ship was destroyed.


  It was a sitting, or rather
> drifting, duck.


Drifting in perfect formation during a high-speed chase???


  If it were undamaged as you suggest, it should have blown
> the T-Bolt out of space before it was ever hit.
>


False Dilemma.
There are other possible reasons for this.  Chief reason may be that they
were preparing to fire - that is why they were in pursuit.

So, thus far your argument has been based on
*missing shield effects - which I've shown to be the rule rather than the
exception
*lack of debris - I've shown there was a lot of debris
*a play on semantics about the Vorlon fighter being so tough, and the
statement about the Thunderbolt being powerful enough to blow *nearly* any
fighter out of space - which I've shown that you took out of context and
applied the actual stats myself
*Tautologies about the Vorlon fighter not evading or firing - it didn't do
either in a fraction of a second, so what?

You have used a lot of Red Herrings, False Dilemmas, Leaps of Logic, and
Circular Logic.  You have made many statements that simply aren't true (no
debris, only one bolt, etc.)
You have not presented evidence.  You only made a few vague references to
episodes, Babylon5 Wars, etc., without any quotes!  I have shown that those
references do not support your position.

On the other hand, I have dug through your references to find evidence that
they do not support your position.  I have provided video and still image
evidence to back up my points.  I have quoted Babylon5 Wars and shown that
the events in the series are in no way contradicted.

I feel that your first post has served only to weaken your argument.  Maybe
you should present real evidence rather than make vague references that turn
out to be incorrect?
Remember that the Burden of Proof is on you.  I suggest you read this:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Debating-1.html#Burden


Brian Young
Babtech on the Net
http://www.babtech-onthe.net