One-Punch Man: Flashy Flash Speed Upgrade

[KLOL506]

But it is. The OP just admitted they used a crack that looked the best on an object they admitted has issues with crack consistency. It breaks the rule

Then IDK, I wasn't necessarily making my case for the crack, just for objects whose size you have to find with multiple scans for like say, a big doorway where you obviously can't see the length, width and thickness at the same time in one image and need to take shots from different angles to obtain your values, or the size of a giant robot where it's too big so you have to use a human sized character to find out its arm width/length or whatever and then use another full shot of the robot where all its parts are visible in order to find the robot's true height.

 

[Kachon123]

The OP just admitted they used a crack that looked the best on an object they admitted has issues with crack consistency

I never said that. Stop putting words in my mouth.

In the scan I used to find the new width of the hole, the other cracks are at an angle that make is literally impossible to pixel scale accurately.

I used the crack that able to be pixel scaled without it either inflating the results (the other cracks seem much smaller due to the perspective).

 

[Damage3245]

Wait, what makes this new size for the hole more accurate than the previous size?

 

[Kachon123]

Wait, what makes this new size for the hole more accurate than the previous size?

The previous size uses the height of the tower to find the size of the hole (this scan) even though the tower is much closer to the screen than the hole.

 

[Damage3245]

The previous size uses the height of the tower to find the size of the hole (this scan) even though the tower is much closer to the screen than the hole.

There's a simple way to get around that; the widest point of the tower in that panel is equal to the hole's diameter, no? So you don't need to scale from the hole to the tower - you just scale the tower to the widest part of the tower.

EDIT; Wait, that's what the calc does anyway. So what is the problem?

 

[Qawsedf234]

They literally are.

The are not:

• List of scans where the craters have no cracks: 1 2 3
• List of scans where the craters' cracks will randomly change in size and in distance: 1 2 3 4 5 6
• List of a same scan where the cracks change position and size between panels: 1

I used the crack that able to be pixel scaled without it either inflating the results (the other cracks seem much smaller due to the perspective).

Why didn't use use the next couple pages where we see Sage Centipede? Why use that scan where its far in the background with a random crack? In fact with the SC scan you can just compare the hole directly to streets, buildings and city blocks.

EDIT: Wait your calc wouldn't even work in the first place. You're using the hole SC appeared from. The crack you measured was from the MA base being lifted and before the spear was thrown into the ground. So I think you scaled two different holes to each other and used the wrong hole for your calc.

 

[Kachon123]

Why didn't use use the next couple pages where we see Sage Centipede? Why use that scan where its far in the background with a random crack?

If that works better, then I'm open to using it.

 

[Qawsedf234]

If that works better, then I'm open to using it.

Just scale that hole to the streets or buildings and then use the left hole for the size comparison.

At least I think that's the correct hole for everything.

 

[Kachon123]

Just scale that hole to the streets or buildings and then use the left hole for the size comparison.

Are you referring the the streets in the Sage Centipede scan you sent?

 

[Qawsedf234]

Are you referring the the streets in the Sage Centipede scan you sent?

I think I can vaguely make out some large streets, but that might be buildings. But there's definitely some square apartment blocks/midrises near the hole.

 

[Kachon123]

I think I can vaguely make out some large streets, but that might be buildings. But there's definitely some square apartment blocks/midrises near the hole.

Why can't I just use the cracks in that scan-

 

[Qawsedf234]

Why can't I just use the cracks in that scan-

To repost my edit

EDIT: Wait your calc wouldn't even work in the first place. You're using the hole SC appeared from. The crack you measured was from the MA base being lifted and before the spear was thrown into the ground. So I think you scaled two different holes to each other and used the wrong hole [diameter] for your calc.

 

[Kachon123]

To repost my edit

Ohhh I see.

I'll try what you suggested.

 

[Kachon123]

Ohhh I see.

I'll try what you suggested.

Instead, I'll use Sage Centipede to find the hole width.

 

[Kachon123]

To repost my edit

Edited.

End 1: 0.574644273c
End 2: 2.86829303c

 

[Damage3245]

Instead, I'll use Sage Centipede to find the hole width.

That doesn't work.

The width of Sage Centipede - which is what is being used to find the "height" of one of his segments (which is what you're using to measure the crater) - is derived from that same crater in the first place. See here.

 

[Recon1511]

FTL Flashy?

 

[Qawsedf234]

Edited.

Only thing I see left is using the 0.1 second timeframe rather than subsonic timeframes.

Well that and changing how the scale works since SC's size is based on USK's 2.3 km calc.

 

[Kachon123]

Well that and changing how the scale works since SC's size is based on USK's 2.3 km calc.

-_-

 

[Recon1511]

So I guess the calc is being remade then?

 

[Kachon123]

So I guess the calc is being remade then?

Yeah, I've just been too busy to make calcs recently

 

[Tamasensei123]

waiting for the conclusion

 

[Qawsedf234]

In my view just use the original version of the calc but use Garou's 0.1 second reaction speed.

• 4086193.468543 / 3 / 0.1 = 13,620,644.89 m/s

Which is consistent with the current accepted adjusted end of the Flashy kicks that were rated at 12,804,581.586 m/s

 

[Recon1511]

Flashy slower than the Atomic Slash again

 

[Kachon123]

In my view just use the original version of the calc but use Garou's 0.1 second reaction speed.

• 4086193.468543 / 3 / 0.1 = 13,620,644.89 m/s

Which is consistent with the current accepted adjusted end of the Flashy kicks that were rated at 12,804,581.586 m/s

Edited. This should be usable now.

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

Sub-relativistic oof.

 

[Kachon123]

Sub-relativistic oof.

I know right. All that work for barely an upgrade.

 

[Recon1511]

So do I just apply the CRT I made for Flashy speed then?

 

[Qawsedf234]

It's probably fine.

 

[Tamasensei123]

so has the calculation been accepted?

 

[Kachon123]

Yes