Jump to content
SomeDudeWhoMostlyLurks

Nebulon - B????

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Viking171986 said:

The Rebels converted a lot of Neb B's to have a hanger. From what I remember they lost a lot of armament and protection but it was doable.

 

To reiterate, that's what they "say." What's ACTUALLY POSSIBLE is another matter. And it is a physical impossibility to do this on a 300m frigate.

God, are you guys REALLY going to make me bust out the 3D models and go through this whole thing all over again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ambaryerno said:

To reiterate, that's what they "say." What's ACTUALLY POSSIBLE is another matter. And it is a physical impossibility to do this on a 300m frigate.

God, are you guys REALLY going to make me bust out the 3D models and go through this whole thing all over again?

It's very doable just look at Pheonix home that's a Pelta, Fighters are VTOL so there is no need for a landing strip as far as how many it can hold maybe 2 or 3 x wings maybe more if they do racking. bring the Neb B into drydock cut a bunch of hullspace out slap a force field bam you have a hanger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Viking171986 said:

It's very doable just look at Pheonix home that's a Pelta, Fighters are VTOL so there is no need for a landing strip as far as how many it can hold maybe 2 or 3 x wings maybe more if they do racking. bring the Neb B into drydock cut a bunch of hullspace out slap a force field bam you have a hanger. 

You need more than just a **** flight deck and a forcefield. Where is the maintenance hangar? What about the fuel bunkers for the fighters? And the munitions bunker? Where are you storing spare parts? What about the heavy machinery required to physically support them? What about all of the workshops for maintaining the smaller equipment? You've just carved out a big chunk of your interior volume, where are your berths for the ground and maintenance crew, pilots, and flight crew? To say nothing of the ship's regular crew. What do you do with all the OTHER stores you need to run the ship, now that you've just eliminated a substantial part of its carrying capacity?

Edited by FFGSysops
Abusive Behavior

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ambaryerno said:

You need more than just a **** flight deck and a forcefield. Where is the maintenance hangar? What about the fuel bunkers for the fighters? And the munitions bunker? Where are you storing spare parts? What about the heavy machinery required to physically support them? What about all of the workshops for maintaining the smaller equipment? You've just carved out a big chunk of your interior volume, where are your berths for the ground and maintenance crew, pilots, and flight crew? To say nothing of the ship's regular crew. What do you do with all the OTHER stores you need to run the ship, now that you've just eliminated a substantial part of its carrying capacity?

God it's like talking to a bunch of brick walls.

Have you ever looked at the specs for a Neb? there is a ton of useless space that could be retrofitted it's doable and has been done, that being said no-one said it's efficient. As far as your attitude is concerned you must have a lot of friends. Calm down it's a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Viking171986 said:

there is a ton of useless space

What the heck I don't even

InsecureMerryAmazonparrot-max-1mb.gif

I don't care WHAT WEG, WotC, FFG, or any other RPG designer, novelist, or comic book artist wrote or drew. There is NO SUCH THING as "useless space" on a ship. It should be EXPECTED that every square meter is being used for SOMETHING, because that's how engineering works.

Edited by Ambaryerno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Viking171986 said:

Have you ever looked at the specs for a Neb? there is a ton of useless space that could be retrofitted it's doable and has been done, that being said no-one said it's efficient. As far as your attitude is concerned you must have a lot of friends. Calm down it's a game.

 

47 minutes ago, Viking171986 said:

You're putting too much thought into this. maybe star wars isn't your thing or socializing.

34 minutes ago, Viking171986 said:

Haha I'm learning a bunch from you for example a lot of what not to do in social situations. I bet you're a blast to hang out with, you strike me as the type of person who enjoys telling kids there is no santa. I'm done talking to you, you're toxic and giving the community a bad name.

Holy crap. Dude, rude.

Also... Like, yeah. There's... I mean look at the skeletal design. There's literally zero unused space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Vontoothskie said:

i am using the films dude. according to the film model, the in film shots, everything.... the nebulon B has at least 20 full decks.  just look at the windows on the side and do the math,  its enormous.  also the pictures you posted verify this very point, even if the scales are off.

the issue isn't the number of decks, it is the total volume involved. the neb-B's just do not have the volume to fit more than a handful of fighters, and two and a half squadrons are right out. and the only Neb's we've seen on screen (even in rogue one and rebels) were NOT configured for fighters at all, with no hatches big enough to even allow in an A-wing.

 

the only way it could conceivably carry the number of fighters claimed would be externally, above and below the central spar. (and lets face it.. that spar being fighter/shuttle carriage would at least give that design feature a reason to exist)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ambaryerno said:

I'm putting ANY thought into this, not just swallowing what supplementary material by rote. Maybe you should try it some time, you might learn a few things.

If you quote canon numbers and math (based on studio models, of course -- nothing else really much matters), people will tell you it doesn't feel right. If you show physical limitations of a space and studio models, they'll quote canon stats instead. Ain't no winnin' with this crowd, mate. I've spent 5 years arguing with people over the size of an AT-AT and boy is that getting tiresome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mithril2098 said:

the issue isn't the number of decks, it is the total volume involved. the neb-B's just do not have the volume to fit more than a handful of fighters, and two and a half squadrons are right out. and the only Neb's we've seen on screen (even in rogue one and rebels) were NOT configured for fighters at all, with no hatches big enough to even allow in an A-wing.

 

the only way it could conceivably carry the number of fighters claimed would be externally, above and below the central spar. (and lets face it.. that spar being fighter/shuttle carriage would at least give that design feature a reason to exist)

The biggest problem with the internal volume is the SHAPE of the ship.  The only part of the hull which could possibly store fighters internally is the upper part of the bow. However while it's not clear from many of the schematics, that part of the hull has a somewhat flattened hexagonal shape, so the usable interior space is even more limited than it seems.

Forward.PNG

This is the XWA Upgrade Nebulon-B, which was modeled as accurately to the effects model as we could get it (some liberties were taken with the weapons placements; she's missing her bow and stern chasers, and all of the 18-odd guns in the bow). The X-wing is a model I'm working on, again, drawn directly from the studio effects models (this sucker is ACCURATE. I've even got the hinged armored plates INSIDE the S-foil mechanism visible on Red Two).

SFoilPlates.PNG

So yeah, it's safe to say the scaling and dimensions here are balls-on accurate.

To even have space for ONE X-wing, the flight deck would have to occupy almost the entire width of the upper hull. The Nebulon's forward hull has THAT narrow of a beam. As for height, there needs to be sufficient overhead clearance for the fighter to safely exit the bay. I estimate any launch port would need to be a MINIMUM of twice the height of the fighter. There is simply NOT enough space for this to work unless you were to significantly enlarge that part of the forward module.

And as I mentioned before, I have doubts that the docking tubes were actually intended to be that when the model was designed. The Falcon is very clearly NOT "docked" from the top hatch, and instead the tube connects to something in the middle of the engines. My guess would be that's a fueling probe and the Falcon is taking on fuel. Luke was transferred over via another method. It's just another case of West End Games slapping a label on something without even bothering to do due diligence in their research first.

Edited by Ambaryerno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Wondergecko said:

If you quote canon numbers and math (based on studio models, of course -- nothing else really much matters), people will tell you it doesn't feel right. If you show physical limitations of a space and studio models, they'll quote canon stats instead. Ain't no winnin' with this crowd, mate. I've spent 5 years arguing with people over the size of an AT-AT and boy is that getting tiresome.

Hey, we got the size of the Executor fixed, (was anyone else around for the 8km War?) so I have hope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ambaryerno said:

The biggest problem with the internal volume is the SHAPE of the ship.  The only part of the hull which could possibly store fighters internally is the upper part of the bow. However while it's not clear from many of the schematics, that part of the hull has a somewhat flattened hexagonal shape, so the usable interior space is even more limited than it seems.

Forward.PNG

This is the XWA Upgrade Nebulon-B, which was modeled as accurately to the effects model as we could get it (some liberties were taken with the weapons placements; she's missing her bow and stern chasers, and all of the 18-odd guns in the bow). The X-wing is a model I'm working on, again, drawn directly from the studio effects models (this sucker is ACCURATE. I've even got the hinged armored plates INSIDE the S-foil mechanism visible on Red Two).

SFoilPlates.PNG

So yeah, it's safe to say the scaling and dimensions here are balls-on accurate.

To even have space for ONE X-wing, the flight deck would have to occupy almost the entire width of the upper hull. The Nebulon's forward hull has THAT narrow of a beam. As for height, there needs to be sufficient overhead clearance for the fighter to safely exit the bay. I estimate any launch port would need to be a MINIMUM of twice the height of the fighter. There is simply NOT enough space for this to work unless you were to significantly enlarge that part of the forward module.

And as I mentioned before, I have doubts that the docking tubes were actually intended to be that when the model was designed. The Falcon is very clearly NOT "docked" from the top hatch, and instead the tube connects to something in the middle of the engines. My guess would be that's a fueling probe and the Falcon is taking on fuel. Luke was transferred over via another method. It's just another case of West End Games slapping a label on something without even bothering to do due diligence in their research first.

yep. of course, the EU crammed 4 TIE fighters into the lower bow of a CR-90 (when the entire bow hammerhead is almost smaller in volume than 2 standard TIE's) and then somehow fit in a dozen X-wings later on.. the old EU had serious issues with ship scale.

one reason i was so glad that when the CR-90's in Rebels carried fighters, they did so using external clamp-docks, limiting them to 2-3 each.. which we later saw wasn't really a special mod, given that the Ghost could do the same using its own docking ports.

 

also, regarding the Nebulon-B weapons mounts.. every version seems to have a different weapons loadout and placement, so who is to say what is "standard".  the OT model from ROTJ had one weapons set up, Rebels had a different set up when it appeared there, and the Rogue One model had a third set up.. interestingly enough, it is likely this was meant to be the same set of ships in each appearance.

personally i've generally figured that  this, combined with the lack of an real info on them in the new canon, suggested that the ship were originally civilian, or at least 'demilitarized' when the rebels got them, and the weapons they carried were retrofitted by the rebellion to make a non-combat ship into a combat one.

Edited by mithril2098

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2018 at 1:04 PM, mcintma said:

Just feel I need to add my voice to this: YESSS!

Also, slightly OT,  but I'd love it if FFG would produce a 6' x 3' Star Destroyer playmat.

If they make a ISD mat, I think it would be awesome and thematic to show other ships mixed in too, to sell the impression of a starfighter battle amongst the fleets.

On a slight tangent, I think with the SSD being introduced to Armada, they should increase the play area to 6'x4'.  It will help to absorb some of its obscene size to make it more playable on the table.  Lots of folks play on that size table anyway via Warhammer 40k and others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether it can carry a squadron of fighters or not, I’d still love to see a model of it offered in X-Wing.  The SSD for Armada shows that FFG is willing to do ~2 1/2’ models on 3’ board, even if they are going to meander straight across the board for the most part.  $300 - $400 for a Nebulon-B would put me in sticker shock, but if it looked good I’m sure I would find a way to acquire one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, mithril2098 said:

yep. of course, the EU crammed 4 TIE fighters into the lower bow of a CR-90 (when the entire bow hammerhead is almost smaller in volume than 2 standard TIE's) and then somehow fit in a dozen X-wings later on.. the old EU had serious issues with ship scale.

IIRC, there was a line of dialogue implying Night Caller's hammerhead was twice the size of a standard CR90's to try to handwave it, but even that was grossly insufficient for the number of fighters they were trying to carry (especially because at the same time the Wraiths were surprised when Night Caller turned out to be something other than a standard Corvette).

The ONLY model for a Corellian Corvette properly carrying fighters that I can see working was the one from Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight. However while that ship was of the same configuration, it scaled at something like twice the size of the standard Corvette, and had an underslung launch deck added underneath the midships module.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Commander Kaine said:

Oh. Well, yes. That. 

Heheheh.

 

3 hours ago, Ambaryerno said:

The biggest problem with the internal volume is the SHAPE of the ship.  The only part of the hull which could possibly store fighters internally is the upper part of the bow. However while it's not clear from many of the schematics, that part of the hull has a somewhat flattened hexagonal shape, so the usable interior space is even more limited than it seems.

Forward.PNG

This is the XWA Upgrade Nebulon-B, which was modeled as accurately to the effects model as we could get it (some liberties were taken with the weapons placements; she's missing her bow and stern chasers, and all of the 18-odd guns in the bow). The X-wing is a model I'm working on, again, drawn directly from the studio effects models (this sucker is ACCURATE. I've even got the hinged armored plates INSIDE the S-foil mechanism visible on Red Two).

SFoilPlates.PNG

So yeah, it's safe to say the scaling and dimensions here are balls-on accurate.

To even have space for ONE X-wing, the flight deck would have to occupy almost the entire width of the upper hull. The Nebulon's forward hull has THAT narrow of a beam. As for height, there needs to be sufficient overhead clearance for the fighter to safely exit the bay. I estimate any launch port would need to be a MINIMUM of twice the height of the fighter. There is simply NOT enough space for this to work unless you were to significantly enlarge that part of the forward module.

And as I mentioned before, I have doubts that the docking tubes were actually intended to be that when the model was designed. The Falcon is very clearly NOT "docked" from the top hatch, and instead the tube connects to something in the middle of the engines. My guess would be that's a fueling probe and the Falcon is taking on fuel. Luke was transferred over via another method. It's just another case of West End Games slapping a label on something without even bothering to do due diligence in their research first.

THANK YOU. GOD, THANK YOU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mithril2098 said:

the issue isn't the number of decks, it is the total volume involved. the neb-B's just do not have the volume to fit more than a handful of fighters, and two and a half squadrons are right out. and the only Neb's we've seen on screen (even in rogue one and rebels) were NOT configured for fighters at all, with no hatches big enough to even allow in an A-wing.

 

the only way it could conceivably carry the number of fighters claimed would be externally, above and below the central spar. (and lets face it.. that spar being fighter/shuttle carriage would at least give that design feature a reason to exist)

The struts on the bottom, the keel looking thing, is a giant truss for holding modular cargo pods.

It can hold anything that fits, from decomissioned freighters (like its carrying in empire strikes back) to a stack of hangar bays thwt fit 30+ fighters.  The whole point of the nebulon b is that its essentially a heavily armed container ship with variable loadouts

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

The struts on the bottom, the keel looking thing, is a giant truss for holding modular cargo pods.

It can hold anything that fits, from decomissioned freighters (like its carrying in empire strikes back) to a stack of hangar bays thwt fit 30+ fighters.  The whole point of the nebulon b is that its essentially a heavily armed container ship with variable loadouts

 

Wow you are just trying to die on this hill aren't you? Did you even look at the diagrams? Those containers all have a purpose.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...