Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ParaGoomba Slayer

I don't think movable Strike Foils accomplish anything, they just look cool.

Recommended Posts

Pop up headlights were to improve aerodynamics on cars with low front ends, without going down the old E-type Jag style of heavily recessed lights behind windshields. Someone later decided they looked cool and out them on every **** thing in the 80s that didn't need them.

I'm not a lore buff but I was under the impression the X-wing foils were just huge radiators for the guns, which is why you could snapshoot a single blast with them closed, but not continually fire. Also, when they were closed, the weapon power went to engines, hence the increased speed.

But again, I'm no buff for this background stuff. I'm just here for the pewpew.

The weapon power could go to engines without closing the S-foils and I think it's not just the cannons but engines and reactor also produce heat. I don't know if there is a canon reason for closing S-foils outside of combat, but maybe the inner surface is fragile or coated with some kind of layer that wears off because of spacedust or something, that's why they are meant to be closed when they aren't necessary (or when the ship isn't fully shielded)?

Edited by eMeM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

X-wing - gun [laser] harmonisation:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_harmonisation

 

...but in this case, vertical as well as horizontal - set to converge at the pilots chosen, optimal range.

 

Well, that's perhaps one excuse, anyway ?  :unsure:

 

 

 

It's the opposite, actually. You'd want your weapons mounted as close together as possible, and as close to the centerline as you can - hence why the P-38 Lightning (with 2 cannon and 4 machine guns mounted together in the nose cone) was a great weapons platform in WW2, while the wing-mounted weapons of most fighters were really only effective at one specific range band (i.e. where they were harmonized). The X-Wing seems set up to make sure that you hit with as few shots as possible, even MORE so when the S-foils are in "attack" position, spreading the guns out even further! And don't get me started on the B-Wing, which would most likely miss close shots entirely, as the target would pass between the guns.

 

But X-Wings look cool, so I try not to let mundane concerns such as these bother me too much :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

X-wing - gun [laser] harmonisation:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_harmonisation

 

...but in this case, vertical as well as horizontal - set to converge at the pilots chosen, optimal range.

 

Well, that's perhaps one excuse, anyway ?  :unsure:

 

 

 

It's the opposite, actually. You'd want your weapons mounted as close together as possible, and as close to the centerline as you can - hence why the P-38 Lightning (with 2 cannon and 4 machine guns mounted together in the nose cone) was a great weapons platform in WW2, while the wing-mounted weapons of most fighters were really only effective at one specific range band (i.e. where they were harmonized). The X-Wing seems set up to make sure that you hit with as few shots as possible, even MORE so when the S-foils are in "attack" position, spreading the guns out even further! And don't get me started on the B-Wing, which would most likely miss close shots entirely, as the target would pass between the guns.

 

But X-Wings look cool, so I try not to let mundane concerns such as these bother me too much :)

 

EU said you could flexibly adjust the point where shots met for better firepower. Could probably have the astromech (or board computer with the B-Wing) keep on calculating the perfect angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Pop up headlights were to improve aerodynamics on cars with low front ends, without going down the old E-type Jag style of heavily recessed lights behind windshields. Someone later decided they looked cool and out them on every **** thing in the 80s that didn't need them.

I'm not a lore buff but I was under the impression the X-wing foils were just huge radiators for the guns, which is why you could snapshoot a single blast with them closed, but not continually fire. Also, when they were closed, the weapon power went to engines, hence the increased speed.

But again, I'm no buff for this background stuff. I'm just here for the pewpew.

The weapon power could go to engines without closing the S-foils and I think it's not just the cannons but engines and reactor also produce heat. I don't know if there is a canon reason for closing S-foils outside of combat, but maybe the inner surface is fragile or coated with some kind of layer that wears off because of spacedust or something, that's why they are meant to be closed when they aren't necessary (or when the ship isn't fully shielded)?

 

 

Possibly, but I'm using the non-canon science of logic here. If the wings were closed, the power flow could be automatically redirected away from the weapons for safety reasons; no point in powering something you can't use when the wings are closed. The snapshot ability could come from there being some form of capacitor (which makes sense considering it's an energy weapon) in the system, so you've got an energy buffer of one shot when firing, and you can discharge that with the wings closed if you can risk the thermal buildup.

That explains the "goes faster when closed, shoots harder when open" concept. The only major problem with that as an idea, is that it's based in logic and science, which means it's instantly flawed in the SW universe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I challenge anyone to present a ship in star wars that actually makes practical design sense in the context of space combat.

 

Does the A-Wing have some kind of vectored thrust?  In many ways it seems to me to be one of the more practical designs as there really isn't a lot of extra on the ship.

 

At some level I believe a number of the capital ships make sense.  The flyinging wedge that is the Star Destroyer is logical as a way to concentrate fire in the direction of travel.

 

 

Now if we want to talk about s-foils being good because they provided a wider field of fire I'm not so sure that is a good thing.  Going back the the video games it was generally fine as the "computer" could alter the convergence point based on what you were targeting but those shots of opportunity weren't always so easy.  When it came to clearing minefields I NEVER wanted to use an X-Wing or B-Wing because it was so much easier to just line up shots with the A-Wing and Y-Wing using iron sights and easily mow down mines.

Edited by StevenO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I challenge anyone to present a ship in star wars that actually makes practical design sense in the context of space combat.

 

Does the A-Wing have some kind of vectored thrust?  In many ways it seems to me to be one of the more practical designs as there really isn't a lot of extra on the ship.

 

At some level I believe a number of the capital ships make sense.  The flyinging wedge that is the Star Destroyer is logical as a way to concentrate fire in the direction of travel.

 

The wedge is indeed a logical way to concentrate fire in the direction of travel... but the ISD has absolutely terrible main battery placement which renders any hull shape shenanigans pointless :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, in terms of being a captial warship, the Borg had design down to absolute perfection. Cubes and spheres are where it's at, but I'll take a wedge over the outrageously stupid Nebulon-B design...

 

In SW fighters, the A-wing is probably the most realistic interpretation. The Y-wing isn't too bad either, bearing in mind most of the actual panels have been removed. Some of the Scum ships aren't bad either, like the Khiraxz and the upcoming Protectorate fighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I challenge anyone to present a ship in star wars that actually makes practical design sense in the context of space combat.

Earth Alliance Starfury :P

Ok, wrong time and galaxy.

 

 

That one is actually pretty good.  Although I am not sure why they are not more vulnerable to laser fire in that universe.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I challenge anyone to present a ship in star wars that actually makes practical design sense in the context of space combat.

Earth Alliance Starfury :P

Ok, wrong time and galaxy.

 

 

That one is actually pretty good.  Although I am not sure why they are not more vulnerable to laser fire in that universe.  

 

Mainly because earthforce has crappy combat lasers, and relies mostly on plasma weapons. Alien beam weapons tend to cut things into pieces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...