[evan_au (OP)]

The Naked Scientists podcast this week quoted Han Solo's boast that has been annoying science geeks for decades...
- That he "made the Kessel run in under 12 parsecs"
- This uses a measure of distance as a time...
- ...Not so different from members of the public interpreting light years as a time, when it is actually a distance

After years of criticism, the Star Wars franchise did a "save" in a recent prequel, where they spin a story that IIRC:
- They are at location in a nebula
- There is a safe but really long way to get where they are going
- But they are running low on fuel...
- So Han Solo takes a reckless short-cut which gets them to their destination before they run out of fuel

So this sets up a scenario to explain that they were really were using the parsec correctly, as a distance...

[Halc]

The Naked Scientists podcast this week quoted Han Solo's boast that has been annoying science geeks for decades...

I think the entire entertainment industry has been annoying science geeks for decades.  We've learned to set our knowledge aside when watching sci-fi flicks.

- There is a safe but really long way to get where they are going
- But they are running low on fuel...
- So Han Solo takes a reckless short-cut which gets them to their destination before they run out of fuel

One does not break speed records when low on fuel. That would be time to take the slow safe route with lots of coasting. If the route was merely dangerous, it was luck/skill, not the performance of the ship, that broke the distance record.
I descended from Everest in only 12 km (since I was running low on fool and air, I just fell and let gravity take me down on a reckless route.  A speed record indeed if I survive it.

[Janus]

The Naked Scientists podcast this week quoted Han Solo's boast that has been annoying science geeks for decades...
- That he "made the Kessel run in under 12 parsecs"
- This uses a measure of distance as a time...
- ...Not so different from members of the public interpreting light years as a time, when it is actually a distance

After years of criticism, the Star Wars franchise did a "save" in a recent prequel, where they spin a story that IIRC:
- They are at location in a nebula
- There is a safe but really long way to get where they are going
- But they are running low on fuel...
- So Han Solo takes a reckless short-cut which gets them to their destination before they run out of fuel

So this sets up a scenario to explain that they were really were using the parsec correctly, as a distance...

It wasn't fuel that they were low on, It was that their cargo, which was unrefined and unstable wouldn't have lasted the longer route without blowing up the ship.  The whole "Under 12 parsecs" thing dealt with calculating a hyper space course which was short enough to get to the refining station fast enough. I assume that this is predicated on the idea that the nebula was so full of junk that had to be avoided that a "straight line course was not possible, and the only known plotted courses meandered enough to make the total distance traversed greater than 12 parsecs.

But I agree that this whole bit was ad-hoc in order to explain way the line in the first movie.

[chris]

How much screen time did that take up dealing with a gaff from an earlier episode?!

[alancalverd]

One does not break speed records when low on fuel.

Oh yes you do! If the fuel is leaking, or if it also powers your life support system, you need to optimise your time/consumption profile.

In the simplest case of a jet airplane with a leaking fuel tank, you immediately go "hot and high" to use the fuel to your advantage before it runs away, and either return to base or coast to your destination as soon as possible.

In deep space, similarly, you want to "burn it while you have it", coast to your destination or diversion (there being no air resistance) , and hopefully reserve just enough to slow down and land.

The cunning cosmonaut will use whatever gravitational slingshots are available to minimise his transit time, and since he started with a burn to max speed, he could choose a variety of distances depending on the alignment of the turning points - think glider travelling between thermals rather than powered aircraft following a great circle. So to get from A to B in less than 12 parsecs may well be a worthy mathematical achievement, particularly as A and B are not fixed in space and the shortest route is not necessarily the quickest.