Estimating the destructive energies of the OYW Beam Rifle and Bazooka.

[Seto Kaiba]

Actually, we have no idea who wrote most of the sources, a lot of them just attribute the author as the publisher. [...]

... where in blue blazes did you get an idea like that?

Practically every publication larger than a DVD/BD pamphlet lists the author(s), editor(s), and other contributors on the same page with the publisher's statement of copyright and/or on the content itself when it comes to your typical periodicals.

Model manuals are actually overseen by mechanical designers like Katoki Hajime, he is the most famous but he is surely not the only one doing so. Most of the MG manuals are by him, [...]

He does touch-up design work on the kits themselves... unless he's actually credited with writing the manuals he's not really contributing there. Mind you, he didn't work on most of the shows he's done kits for so he's not exactly an authoritative source either even if he IS writing the manuals... which might explain why they're such a mess.

If we look at the publisher, it is most certain that Bandai is the most authoritative in this matter, unless Sotsu Agency publish something on its own.

The publisher isn't what makes a publication authoritative... it's the people who actually contributed to the work.

The scribblings of an anonymous intern at Bandai are far less reliable than a third party book which had the input of people connected with the actual production.

Also, at least the UC product line is pretty consistent [...]

It's a funny joke, sir... but a joke is all it is. UC is f*ck-mothering Retcon City.

Gundam Officials also like to acknowledge what is said in those manuals, at least whenever I cross check the related sources, like all other official or semi-official settings book published at the time, some addressed settings are even originated from unofficial sources like Gundam Century.

... you're not doing Gundam Officials any favors in the credibility department. Being twenty years out of date is one thing, but referencing non-canon materials is kind of a gut-punch to credibility.

The said page (p.11) explains about the Mega particle cannon and beam rifle, with the two diagrams showing the relationship of the input power against effective range(input up to 10MW) and temperature(input up to 5MW) as the testing of the beam rifle.
It really doesn't matter if it is bypassing the e-cap or not, as long as you accept this source, you have to acknowledge the power of the rifle can operate at 10MW even if you are not taking the e-cap into account and the 10MW from the input is directly connected to the output of the gun.

Even if we were to accept this highly dubious material penned by some anonymous wage slave in Bandai's gunpla division, it doesn't actually change anything.

Literally all that this would establish is that the XBR-M-79-07G's development team designed their beam rifle with a significant safety margin to ensure the system could stand up to abuse and would fail nondestructively if it was malfunctioning. That's just good engineering practice. It doesn't mean the weapon can actually achieve outputs like that in normal operation, those are just bench tests under extreme conditions.

The problem is that Master Archive by itself, no matter how many volumes of it, is a single source that is not directly published under the request of the license holder.
The level of officialness is in the Tier 2~3 range, where they can just write whatever they want and pay a licensing fee to get it published.

Y'see, your whole notion that the publisher determines how reliable a resource is has no real grounding in reality... authoritativeness is about who wrote it, not who published it.

Master Archive was written under the editorial supervision of Sunrise, with content contributions by staff from Gundam productions. Unlike the Macross Master File books, they don't self-disclaim as a non-canon resource.

The Rapport Deluxe books don't have anything like that kind of connection to Gundam's staff.

In which case, since Gundam Officials said either they are "Power Box"(動力ボックス) or Sub Control System (サブ。コントロール。システム), but didn't mention anything about helium core, the helium core really isn't holding much officialness unless it can be explained as part of the power box.

Gundam Officials is about twenty years out of date, it wouldn't be surprising in the slightest if its content had been retconned by later publications... the recons come thick and fast in the Universal Century.

The DeAgostini published Gundam Fact File and Perfect File is a good example of similarly licensed product, which has description completely newly written and never seen or contradict other sources, even officially published ones. It is also poorly edited, with many errors (some at a very fundamental level like where instead of a unit's name, it has ああ instead of BD-2.)

... so I take it you aren't aware that the DeAgostini's serialized encyclopedias are written in collaboration with the franchise creative staff for the property they're covering? Yeah, that new material came from SUNRISE. It was the same with their Macross counterpart Macross Chronicle, which DeAgostini inherited from the guys at Shogakukan in its second edition.

They did have some quality issues in the Gundam stuff, owing to its rushed publication schedule as a weekly serialized publication instead of biweekly or monthly like their others were. Macross Chronicle had a much higher quality level thanks to being biweekly.

Yes, but 1.9MW isn't an insanely high amount compared to 1.38MW, thus if you are really only powering a Mega particle cannon with just 1.9MW, it would seems like the e-cap isn't necessary for the miniaturization of it, conventional capacitors or fast discharge batteries can have similar effect to just compress the M particles even without an e-cap to meet that kind of requirement.

Considering 1.38MW was already an extremely high output for a reactor small enough to fit inside of a mobile suit, 1.9MW was an insanely high power level by comparison. That's almost 40% more power than the MS using it can produce. The e-cap is necessary because a mobile suit's reactor can't sustain the level of particle production and the electrical output necessary to run the condenser, and even it could the rate of fire would be a laughably low one to the point that the weapon would be nigh-on useless on the battlefield. If your main weapon can only fire once every few minutes, you're not going to get much done on the battlefield... especially if it drains such a huge amount of power and Minovsky particles that you can't run the actuators that make your mobile suit move.

Yes, beam sabres can be doubled as beam guns because of this reason. The only disadvantage of doing so seems to be the shorter range of it and a higher possibility of it being blocked by an EM field because it carry charges.

Side note, I do question the shorter range because with the electric charge, it forms an I-Field lattice which should make the beam disperse slower. While the mega particle is a neutral beam, it carries the Tau force which is repulsive in nature and is pushing each other apart.

Wouldn't the tightly compressed Minovsky particles inside the plasma stream naturally start repelling each other almost immediately thanks to their charge? It seems pretty logical to me... it's the electrical blooming, the same problem with conventional charged particle beam weapons.

Well, it can focus, but from footages(anime) we see it making a 60cm hole and thus it must be able to vaporize that much material.

Unless there's some other effect in play, related to the mega particles but not part of the kinetic energy of the beam... or just the high-temperature plasma surrounding but not part of the actual beam as diagrammed.

Secondary effects still require the energy to cause damage.
The melting I mentioned is a secondary effect, which still took energy from the source.
Just like the shock wave of a nuclear bomb is taking energy from the nuclear reaction, and not from the surroundings.

Which is why I've been wondering if there is some secondary effect inherent to mega particles but not related to the kinetic energy of the beam as several other flavors of swiss army particle from Gundam AUs (and other sci-fi) have.

From your reply, I do want to clarify one thing.
The 1.9MW you are talking about, are you referring to the total output of the beam rifle, meaning 1) the beam carries 1.9MW of power, or are you referring to 2) 1.9MW being just a part of the power of the beam and thus there is the secondary damage from the other parts for more power?
1) 1.9MW, period.
2) 1.9MW as thermal(or whatever)+X MW of kinetic+Y MW as shockwave+Z MW of bleh

1 1/2: 1.9MW is the kinetic/thermal energy of the beam, but I'm wondering if there is some other property of mega particles that could account for extra destructive force.

Vaporization is making the particles move away by themselves.

But on a different, more localized scale... which is why above a certain energy level directed energy weapons are more efficient than kinetic rounds.

Battleship main gun class can mean a lot of things, but in this case it is specifically stated as 威力, so it is hard to say it is anything but the raw destructive power. I am not saying this is a reasonable settings, but it's wording is so rigid that we can't really interpret it too much. A similar problem exists in RX-93 settings, where its beam rifle highest output is on par with period battleship class main guns, but the shield mounted beam gun, which is more powerful in the power rating, listed it to be on par with the OYW beam rifle in terms of output energy.

A fairly straightforward explanation would be that the model kit manual is an obviously unreliable source which clearly failed to do basic research.

The only way I could see rationalizing this would be that the listed output ratings are the standard output of the weapon and that they can operate above those ratings at the cost of reduced endurance, risk of damage, and so on. The obvious catch would be that the F91's VSBRs are the only real case I've seen of a beam rifle (those aren't really, but close enough) with variable output, though output tweaking is mentioned in ranging adjustments for initial-gen beam spray guns... and certainly not to THAT extent.

We actually can attach a power number to many parts of the beam rifle:
A) the input from the MS to the gun
B) the plasma of the e-cap going into the guns' chamber before compression
C) the power to compress the plasma in the chamber
D) the power used to maintain the I-Field in the chamber
E) the power of the beam going out of the muzzle
F) the power to maintain the I-Field of the barrel

Even the model kit manuals pretty consistently use 出力 (output) for the measurements of power, so E is the only valid interpretation as the others you mention are all inputs.

[MythSearcher]

... where in blue blazes did you get an idea like that?

Practically every publication larger than a DVD/BD pamphlet lists the author(s), editor(s), and other contributors on the same page with the publisher's statement of copyright and/or on the content itself when it comes to your typical periodicals.

He does touch-up design work on the kits themselves... unless he's actually credited with writing the manuals he's not really contributing there. Mind you, he didn't work on most of the shows he's done kits for so he's not exactly an authoritative source either even if he IS writing the manuals... which might explain why they're such a mess.

The publisher isn't what makes a publication authoritative... it's the people who actually contributed to the work.

The scribblings of an anonymous intern at Bandai are far less reliable than a third party book which had the input of people connected with the actual production.

Y'see, your whole notion that the publisher determines how reliable a resource is has no real grounding in reality... authoritativeness is about who wrote it, not who published it.

Yes, they list all of those, but only a very little of them actually ring a bell with what you see in the actual credits of the shows. None of them is actually more authoritative than any of the ones you refer to anonymous intern or wage slaves.
In fact, even if Tomino himself is involved in the writing, like he was interviewed and gave his two cents, it really doesn't matter to the official stance of the settings.(And this has been done, G-Reco is deemed after CC2345 by Tomino in an interview on video, but official statement issued almost immediately afterwards still maintained it to be before CC2345.

The authority from a franchise is obviously the copyright holder, they are the ones who got the power to say no and retcon everything.
That is what I mean by authoritative.
This has been done before and we all know that it will be done in the future, sooner or later.
They already did so recently with TB, tagging it with a "Alternative UC" to kick it out of the continuum.

Working with the original creative crew isn't helping, Gundam Century is the ultimate example. We have Tomino, Okawara, Yasuhiko, etc. working on it, but it doesn't change the fact that almost everything in it is changed including completely irrelevant things at the time like the actual date of the OYW.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

It's a funny joke, sir... but a joke is all it is. UC is f*ck-mothering Retcon City.

Ok, I might not be clear on this, what I mean is by each item themselves, they don't do straight out changing everything and discard the past iterations.
You can see that you have pretty much the same description on the HG, MG, PG, GFF, etc. product manual and Gundam Officials, Ver.1.5, etc. for longer or shorter on the same mecha.
Between many different units, they do have a lot of contradictions and discrepancies, but on the same unit, they pretty much just copy and paste the same description with some addition or deletion.

... you're not doing Gundam Officials any favors in the credibility department. Being twenty years out of date is one thing, but referencing non-canon materials is kind of a gut-punch to credibility.

You do know that Gundam Century has a certain historical value in it, right?
It is the first book with anything resembling a settings book instead of a common picture book aimed at children. It translated essays about space colonies, robotics and mass drivers for the discussion of Gundam and is the first one to treat Gundam as what we are doing right now, and is one of the pushing forces of what started numerous harder sci-fi shows.
It is the authoritative you are talking about, its power isn't coming from the copyright holder but the fans. You can also see it being acknowledge in Sentinel's appendix material.

Even if we were to accept this highly dubious material penned by some anonymous wage slave in Bandai's gunpla division, it doesn't actually change anything.

Literally all that this would establish is that the XBR-M-79-07G's development team designed their beam rifle with a significant safety margin to ensure the system could stand up to abuse and would fail nondestructively if it was malfunctioning. That's just good engineering practice. It doesn't mean the weapon can actually achieve outputs like that in normal operation, those are just bench tests under extreme conditions.

And if we accept this, 1.9MW will only have a rather short range and at around 5000 degrees C on the graphs.

Master Archive was written under the editorial supervision of Sunrise, with content contributions by staff from Gundam productions. Unlike the Macross Master File books, they don't self-disclaim as a non-canon resource.

The Rapport Deluxe books don't have anything like that kind of connection to Gundam's staff.

Supervision of Sunrise does make it a tier above Rapport Deluxe.

Gundam Officials is about twenty years out of date, it wouldn't be surprising in the slightest if its content had been retconned by later publications... the recons come thick and fast in the Universal Century.

Retcons are thick and quick but that is exactly what Gundam Officials and Ver. 1.5 are doing. They compiled everything and give you the official word of it.

... so I take it you aren't aware that the DeAgostini's serialized encyclopedias are written in collaboration with the franchise creative staff for the property they're covering? Yeah, that new material came from SUNRISE. It was the same with their Macross counterpart Macross Chronicle, which DeAgostini inherited from the guys at Shogakukan in its second edition.

They did have some quality issues in the Gundam stuff, owing to its rushed publication schedule as a weekly serialized publication instead of biweekly or monthly like their others were. Macross Chronicle had a much higher quality level thanks to being biweekly.

Sigh, many of them said it is supervised or in collaboration with Sunrise, but the fact is that they aren't really, and Sunrise in this case aren't the creators of the anime but also some of those wage slaves you are talking about.
They seldom show anything remotely knowledgeable to the current settings and seems to just be making up things on the go.

Considering 1.38MW was already an extremely high output for a reactor small enough to fit inside of a mobile suit, 1.9MW was an insanely high power level by comparison. That's almost 40% more power than the MS using it can produce. The e-cap is necessary because a mobile suit's reactor can't sustain the level of particle production and the electrical output necessary to run the condenser, and even it could the rate of fire would be a laughably low one to the point that the weapon would be nigh-on useless on the battlefield. If your main weapon can only fire once every few minutes, you're not going to get much done on the battlefield... especially if it drains such a huge amount of power and Minovsky particles that you can't run the actuators that make your mobile suit move.

The 40% more is just for a few seconds of it. In fact, in most of the case where the gun is just firing for a sec or less, thus on something with the efficiency I have estimated above in one of the posts, you don't really need to dedicate a few minutes to each shot. Even if you save 20% power for the rifle, that is 7~8 sec charge for each shot and 1 sec of full power during the shot itself.

The particles maybe another issue, but I don't recall a source bringing up about the MS doesn't produce enough of. The energy issue seems to be the main problem and even later models which didn't use e-caps don't have any mention about carrying tanks of M particles around for the firing.

Wouldn't the tightly compressed Minovsky particles inside the plasma stream naturally start repelling each other almost immediately thanks to their charge? It seems pretty logical to me... it's the electrical blooming, the same problem with conventional charged particle beam weapons.

That would be the same for Mega particles if we only look at the pressure in a tightly compressed particle beam. While it may have less particle count in the beam, the pressure in it wouldn't be much of a difference because once the pressure drops, it is no longer viable for it to maintain the degeneracy state.

What I am saying is that M particles have +ve ones and -ve ones and they simply form a lattice which is strong enough to slow it from accelerating to sub-light speed until it expands to 100 km in diameter after scatter, thus they should have more forces pulling itself together than the Mega particle beam. It is a bit different than conventional charged particle beam and will be closer to a plasma beam which is electrically neutral in charge, but still different because of the I-Field it forms.

Although I can see that it is still expanding in a rather quick manner since scattered M particles does disperse quickly on the battle field, they should be dispersing slower than Mega particles.
The only reason I can think of it being shorter range will be the mega particle beam is travelling at a greater speed, and thus even with the faster expansion rate, it takes less time to travel the distance and thus still more compact.

Unless there's some other effect in play, related to the mega particles but not part of the kinetic energy of the beam... or just the high-temperature plasma surrounding but not part of the actual beam as diagrammed.

Which is why I've been wondering if there is some secondary effect inherent to mega particles but not related to the kinetic energy of the beam as several other flavors of swiss army particle from Gundam AUs (and other sci-fi) have.

1 1/2: 1.9MW is the kinetic/thermal energy of the beam, but I'm wondering if there is some other property of mega particles that could account for extra destructive force.

A fairly straightforward explanation would be that the model kit manual is an obviously unreliable source which clearly failed to do basic research.

The only way I could see rationalizing this would be that the listed output ratings are the standard output of the weapon and that they can operate above those ratings at the cost of reduced endurance, risk of damage, and so on. The obvious catch would be that the F91's VSBRs are the only real case I've seen of a beam rifle (those aren't really, but close enough) with variable output, though output tweaking is mentioned in ranging adjustments for initial-gen beam spray guns... and certainly not to THAT extent.

That will imply it has more energy.
It doesn't matter if the swiss army particle has more functions, scientifically if you don't have that much energy, you cannot cause that much destruction.
What you are saying here is that Mega particles packs some kind of unknown effect in it that can give you that extra energy needed, which means you are trying to say that the output power is incomplete and requires more of it. That is exactly what I am saying here, using 1.9MW isn't enough as an output.

Instead of trying to cover it by saying something not supported by either sources or science, wouldn't it be easier to just acknowledge that the settings got the term wrong and 1.9MW is the power rating and not the output? It is not completely unsupported by sources (because some does list it as power and not output), and is supported by science.
Actually, I am not even trying to tell you to disregard the settings, I am just saying they are not realistic, just like we both have doubt in what they call "battleship class main gun power".

So I do not understand why you have such attachment to 1.9MW being the absolute literal sense and cannot be doubted, yet you keep questioning "battleship class main gun power", even when I have listed the Gundam.info video, site link with exact wording, Gundam Officials as sources. It seems quite double standard.

But on a different, more localized scale... which is why above a certain energy level directed energy weapons are more efficient than kinetic rounds.

Above a certain energy level.
Or I should make it more specific, above a certain energy "density" level.
1.9MW for a sec on a 60cm diameter circle hasn't quite reach that level.

We actually can attach a power number to many parts of the beam rifle:
A) the input from the MS to the gun
B) the plasma of the e-cap going into the guns' chamber before compression
C) the power to compress the plasma in the chamber
D) the power used to maintain the I-Field in the chamber
E) the power of the beam going out of the muzzle
F) the power to maintain the I-Field of the barrel

Even the model kit manuals pretty consistently use 出力 (output) for the measurements of power, so E is the only valid interpretation as the others you mention are all inputs.

And that is why I am asking you to doubt that specific term used, if you are willing to doubt other settings like the battleship class main gun level.

Yes, the term 出力 is used, and yes, if you take it literally it means E.
Yet it your standard is to take it literally without rationalizing it, then you will have to take it literally that it is battleship class main gun level, which also makes as little sense as what we have discussed above since it is not enough energy to do what the show gives us unless you also need to try to add in something not present in the settings: a secondary effect with a mysterious energy.

My first post tried to adhere to the anime, settings and science as much as possible, giving it a more plausible energy level that will be closer to the effects in the anime and settings about it being on par with battleship main guns, while maintaining the spec numbers without diverging from it too much, only stating they may have used an incorrect term for it.

[Seto Kaiba]

Yes, they list all of those, but only a very little of them actually ring a bell with what you see in the actual credits of the shows. None of them is actually more authoritative than any of the ones you refer to anonymous intern or wage slaves.

Ah, no... if you actually bother to check, it's quite easy to tell which publications are more authoritative than others based on how involved the IP owners were with its production. Frankly, for many of them it should be freaking obvious even without that amount of checking by exercising common sense... official artbooks, creator commentary, and works on which the creative team collaborated are obviously much more reliable than publications written without the input of the Sunrise staff or stuff without a known author like toy and model kit books.

Really, in pretty much any fandom they'd give you a weird look if you tried to cite materials from a model kit or toy as a source since those tend to be pretty inaccurate in almost any franchise.

Come to that, the other Gundam fans on these very boards seem to reject practically every aspect of your views on sourcing including the supposed reliability of Gundam Officials as utterly unfounded claims...

In fact, even if Tomino himself is involved in the writing, like he was interviewed and gave his two cents, it really doesn't matter to the official stance of the settings.(And this has been done, G-Reco is deemed after CC2345 by Tomino in an interview on video, but official statement issued almost immediately afterwards still maintained it to be before CC2345.

But BOTH of those statements came from Tomino... so your argument doesn't really follow, logically.

This is a "Flip-Flop of God", as TVTropes would call it.

The authority from a franchise is obviously the copyright holder, they are the ones who got the power to say no and retcon everything.
That is what I mean by authoritative.

That's what I'm saying, the authoritativeness is about how involved the creators were in its production... not who published it.

They already did so recently with TB, tagging it with a "Alternative UC" to kick it out of the continuum.

Now, I distinctly recall that the last time you tried to make this claim you were called out for this being incorrect...

(Not that I would shed any tears for Thunderbolt if it ended up in that same "we don't talk about it" status G-Saviour had at one time...)

Working with the original creative crew isn't helping, Gundam Century is the ultimate example. We have Tomino, Okawara, Yasuhiko, etc. working on it, but it doesn't change the fact that almost everything in it is changed including completely irrelevant things at the time like the actual date of the OYW.

Is it, though? Or are you just preferencing the sources that corroborate conclusions you've already arrived at over more reliable sources elsewhere? I have a copy of the Renewal Edition of that book, but I've never bothered to read it... sounds like I should.

Ok, I might not be clear on this, what I mean is by each item themselves, they don't do straight out changing everything and discard the past iterations.

*record scratch* Now I KNOW that isn't true...

In any one iteration they don't throw everything out all in one go, but give them two or three goes and they'll have thrown out everything that was originally there, retconned in fifty new predecessor designs, a five hundred MSVs, one-offs suddenly become mass production units, and so on and so forth.

The only thing consistent about the Universal Century besides its unrelenting grimness and hopelessness is that the details don't stay fixed for long. Hell, Zeta Gundam: A New Translation so thoroughly f*cked things up that Tomino had to declare it an Alternate Universe retelling of Zeta because it invalidated the existence of ZZ and Char's Counterattack.

Between many different units, they do have a lot of contradictions and discrepancies, but on the same unit, they pretty much just copy and paste the same description with some addition or deletion.

So, in short, they're not consistent at all... unless you treat every single piece of information as an island unto itself. :p

It is the authoritative you are talking about, its power isn't coming from the copyright holder but the fans. You can also see it being acknowledge in Sentinel's appendix material.

The fans hold it up as authoritative precisely BECAUSE the original creators were so heavily involved in it.

And if we accept this, 1.9MW will only have a rather short range and at around 5000 degrees C on the graphs.

Graphs from a source that you yourself admitted a few short lines ago are not remotely reliable or consistent.

Supervision of Sunrise does make it a tier above Rapport Deluxe.

And what does having the art done by Gundam franchise staff get it? :p

Retcons are thick and quick but that is exactly what Gundam Officials and Ver. 1.5 are doing. They compiled everything and give you the official word of it.

But, from what other fans have said about it on other threads, it isn't actually the official word at all...

Sigh, many of them said it is supervised or in collaboration with Sunrise, but the fact is that they aren't really, and Sunrise in this case aren't the creators of the anime but also some of those wage slaves you are talking about.
They seldom show anything remotely knowledgeable to the current settings and seems to just be making up things on the go.

Having extensive experience with DeAgostini's work for Macross and their close work with Macross's creators on getting the content laid out and fact-checked, I strongly disagree with this assertion of yours. Their editorial process clearly needs work but they're pretty damn diligent when it comes to research and collaboration with the creators.

The 40% more is just for a few seconds of it. In fact, in most of the case where the gun is just firing for a sec or less, thus on something with the efficiency I have estimated above in one of the posts, you don't really need to dedicate a few minutes to each shot. Even if you save 20% power for the rifle, that is 7~8 sec charge for each shot and 1 sec of full power during the shot itself.

You're assuming perfect efficiency though, and that the mobile suit can devote 100% of its generator output to the system... neither of which is a realistic operating condition.

The particles maybe another issue, but I don't recall a source bringing up about the MS doesn't produce enough of. The energy issue seems to be the main problem and even later models which didn't use e-caps don't have any mention about carrying tanks of M particles around for the firing.

Later models which don't use e-cap or e-pac systems have much more powerful reactors, and even then those weapons are acknowledged to have extremely low endurance and to be EXTREMELY draining on the mobile suit to fire. The ZZ Gundam's high mega cannon being the chief example there...

That would be the same for Mega particles if we only look at the pressure in a tightly compressed particle beam. While it may have less particle count in the beam, the pressure in it wouldn't be much of a difference because once the pressure drops, it is no longer viable for it to maintain the degeneracy state.

But the beam is moving at an extremely high velocity compared to a beam made up solely of Minovsky plasma, and thus has less time for repulsion forces to impact its focus.

(That decay back into Minovsky particles may be one of the factors causing extra damage not covered under the kinetic energy of the beam.)

What you are saying here is that Mega particles packs some kind of unknown effect in it that can give you that extra energy needed, which means you are trying to say that the output power is incomplete and requires more of it. That is exactly what I am saying here, using 1.9MW isn't enough as an output.

No, what I am saying is the output is the output power of the beam... the (kinetic) energy carried by the mega particles themselves as a high velocity particle beam. If there is some other process in work like the fission of mega particles back into Minovsky particles adding energy to the equation independent of the discharge of the weapon, that wouldn't be covered in the weapon's output power.

Instead of trying to cover it by saying something not supported by either sources or science, wouldn't it be easier to just acknowledge that the settings got the term wrong and 1.9MW is the power rating and not the output? It is not completely unsupported by sources (because some does list it as power and not output), and is supported by science.

Not covered by sources, or simply not covered by the sources you want to reference?

With most sources being clear about 1.9MW being the output of the beam weapon, I can't really see a case for dismissing that. Either the nontraditional physics surrounding Minovsky particles aren't being properly accounted for, or there is something else to it.

So I do not understand why you have such attachment to 1.9MW being the absolute literal sense and cannot be doubted, yet you keep questioning "battleship class main gun power", even when I have listed the Gundam.info video, site link with exact wording, Gundam Officials as sources. It seems quite double standard.

You've offered a remark that's contradicted by other sources, an unviewable video, and a book other fans have indicated clearly is not a reliable reference... and you're surprised I question it?