Guns of Star Wars capital ships

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-27 10:57pm

I gotta say, I'm a fan of the more rugged and Crudely functional looking sf ships, like the nBsg Vipers and Raptors, Serenity, and the simpler X-wings TIE Fighters, and Corellian Corvettes in Star wars. They seem to carry the WWII/Vietnam War-ish asthetic. I suppose I'm in the minority to actually prefer seeing Z-95s, Victory Class SD's and other ships that actually look like military vessels that can dish out a pounding and take one.

I'd rather fly in a simpler fighter that looks capable of combat flight and maneuverability than fly an asterisk-winged clunky monstrosity that looks like it belongs in a book titled: "Universe's Worst Starships"

A couple of design choices in the Prequels kinda bugged me:

That new Republic whatchamacallit in ROTS splitting open to reveal a massive central docking complex that opened top and bottom along much of the vessel didn't exactly strike me as the best combat starship design.

And what was with that broadside battle in the beginning? What were the robots doing loading shells into laser guns? Could somepone please explain that to me?

Darth Ruinus · Post by **Darth Ruinus** » 2007-12-27 11:47pm

DrMckay wrote:And what was with that broadside battle in the beginning? What were the robots doing loading shells into laser guns? Could somepone please explain that to me?

Im pretty sure they resorted to those broadsides at such close range because the planetary shields were up.

As for the shells being loaded, Im pretty sure those were rail guns, so the shells being loaded in where some kind of projectile. Or something.

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-27 11:52pm

The weapons mounts were set up for broadsides and open to space. Not turret mounted. as to the shells, why use railguns (if that's even what they are) with finite range when lasers and turbolasers are far superior?

I think it was a design choice to hearken back to Age of Sail battles. I also think it was a bad creative decision, and kinda messed with my immersion into the verse.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2007-12-28 12:01am

DrMckay wrote:The weapons mounts were set up for broadsides and open to space. Not turret mounted. as to the shells, why use railguns (if that's even what they are) with finite range when lasers and turbolasers are far superior?

I think it was a design choice to hearken back to Age of Sail battles. I also think it was a bad creative decision, and kinda messed with my immersion into the verse.

Ok try this... The ships were needed and built so hastily that it was cheaper and faster to use manual loaded turbo lasers than to run the power lines to the reactor? Also, it allows the ship to route all power to shields, since this type of close quarter combat is the norm with the amount of ships in an engagement now?

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 12:14am

The only problem with that is The droids loading the shells were on Grevious's flagship. Wouldn't the flagship have the best of arms and technology?

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 12:15am

Manual loaded turbolasers? Shells = batteries?

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2007-12-28 12:20am

Darth Ruinus wrote:
The Original Nex wrote:
I thought the EAWs were VicIIs, and the VicIs were the shit winged ones, but I might be mistaken. The Battlefront ship is the Victory-class Star Frigate, no relation to the Victory- class Star Destroyer.
Victory I-class SD and the Vic-II classes looked exactly the same, but with the latter had a better engine system. I dont know what the winged ones are. I've only seen them on Google, but apperantly people have seen them elsewhere, hence people saying they looked fugly and had "wings"

Meh, and the Victory could be really improved by a decent graphic artist, just by Prequeling it up. Give it a Republic paint job, remove most or all of the ISD-esque terraces, replacing them with a Venator-esque pyramidal base. Remove the double sensor globes. Make the tower more distinct and different in profile. Give it a tail. Do something with the width/height/length ratios to make it less like a miniature ISD in profile. Give it something like a fatter hull coming to a sharp point? And the engines, how about you make them more unique and less ISDish. Engine pods that partially protrude from the hull (Executor esque?).

I like the Dreadnought concept - an old Republic warhorse "from a more civilized age..." but its look and scale blow.

Darth Ruinus · Post by **Darth Ruinus** » 2007-12-28 12:20am

DrMckay wrote:The only problem with that is The droids loading the shells were on Grevious's flagship. Wouldn't the flagship have the best of arms and technology?

Well, the flak guns are the most reliable way to shoot down fighters and incoming missiles, so they are the best arms and tech.

Darth Ruinus · Post by **Darth Ruinus** » 2007-12-28 12:22am

DrMckay wrote:Manual loaded turbolasers? Shells = batteries?

Those are the flak guns I believe. They do require shells.

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 12:26am

then why not put it in a more mobile mounting-say a turret?

Why did the droids load the shell and fire it-(it came out as a laser thingy) at the republic Capital ship instead of fighters?

This just strikes me as poor justification for a poor aesthetic choice/allusion to hearken back to earth naval warfare without having any cogent reason for existing in the movie except to "look cool."

Darth Ruinus · Post by **Darth Ruinus** » 2007-12-28 12:29am

DrMckay wrote:The only problem with that is The droids loading the shells were on Grevious's flagship. Wouldn't the flagship have the best of arms and technology?

I really wish I had posted these last 3 posts as one large post, and that I didnt use the word post so much in this post.

But, to go about the "best or arms and technology" that you said, I looked up some of the defenses on the Invisible hand.

It says on Wookieepedia that "Each shot from the point-defense ion cannons released as much heat as a 4.8 megaton bomb, while the maximum yield of one of the quad turbolasers was equivalent to a magnitude 10 groundquake.[1] "

I assumed that a groundquake is equal in magnitude to earthquakes, and a 10 on the Richter magnitude scale is equal to 1 teraton, so there you go. It was packing some strong ass guns.

Darth Ruinus · Post by **Darth Ruinus** » 2007-12-28 12:32am

DrMckay wrote:then why not put it in a more mobile mounting-say a turret?

Im not sure about this one, maybe there is some justification for it somewhere.

Why did the droids load the shell and fire it-(it came out as a laser thingy) at the republic Capital ship instead of fighters?

I assume that even projectile weapons in SW look like all the other energy weapons because of the method of firing in SW guns. Something in the firing mechanism might make them look like "lasers"

As for why did it shoot at the capital ship instead of fighters, maybe, I dont know, because it was right there and posed a greater threat?

The Original Nex · Post by **The Original Nex** » 2007-12-28 12:32am

DrMckay wrote:then why not put it in a more mobile mounting-say a turret?

Why did the droids load the shell and fire it-(it came out as a laser thingy) at the republic Capital ship instead of fighters?

This just strikes me as poor justification for a poor aesthetic choice/allusion to hearken back to earth naval warfare without having any cogent reason for existing in the movie except to "look cool."

If you'd watched more closely you'd see that the droids are merely disposing of SPENT shells. The flak guns are loaded by conveyor belts that extend to the ceiling of the gun deck.

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 12:35am

Nice red herring. I was addressing stylistic choices by the director/producer. Ie: shells being loaded into a laser gun, and a Republic Cruiser opening top and bottom as two odd elements that attracted my attention, elements that I did not particularly care for or understand their reason for being -in the movie other than "they look cool" or "this shot withthe robots putting the shells in the gun is totally allegorical" . nowhere did I make comments regarding the power of said weapons.

Darth Ruinus · Post by **Darth Ruinus** » 2007-12-28 12:38am

DrMckay wrote: Ie: shells being loaded into a laser gun,

Shells being automatically fed into a flak gun.

Republic Cruiser opening top and bottom

Im pretty sure the Venators open only the top part of their hangars.

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 12:46am

I'm fairly sure they had doors on both top and bottom.

Anyway, I was just commenting on my personal preferences. I prefer practicality over showiness, so if indeed it was a flak gun (as you say) I would have preferred to see the shells fed in by belt or clip feed, etc, as on a 40 MM Bofors. but then, I'm a functionality fan.

I also don't know why a flak gun would be mounted in a relatively inflexible (and vulnerable) mounting, or fired at a capital ship. It looked like some of the republic heavy guns were set up the same way, while engaging the Invisible Hand though I didn't see any Clone Troopers jerking shells.

The Original Nex · Post by **The Original Nex** » 2007-12-28 12:53am

DrMckay wrote:Nice red herring. I was addressing stylistic choices by the director/producer. Ie: shells being loaded into a laser gun, and a Republic Cruiser opening top and bottom as two odd elements that attracted my attention, elements that I did not particularly care for or understand their reason for being -in the movie other than "they look cool" or "this shot withthe robots putting the shells in the gun is totally allegorical" . nowhere did I make comments regarding the power of said weapons.

I was not commenting on the merits of your stylistic complaint, simply correcting your misperception. Further, I do not believe that I made comments regarding the power of said weapons either...

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 12:54am

Sorry. I was addressing Ruinis. He got stats from Wookipedia.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2007-12-28 12:56am

DrMckay wrote:Nice red herring. I was addressing stylistic choices by the director/producer. Ie: shells being loaded into a laser gun, and a Republic Cruiser opening top and bottom as two odd elements that attracted my attention, elements that I did not particularly care for or understand their reason for being -in the movie other than "they look cool" or "this shot withthe robots putting the shells in the gun is totally allegorical" . nowhere did I make comments regarding the power of said weapons.

I agree. It was unbelievably stupid and incompetent and silly on a level which distracted from my immersion and suspension of disbelief. Lucas should really try subtlety occasionally with his allusions and stylistic references. At least we didn't get the cooking-off space gasoline scene in the actual film.

Darth Ruinus · Post by **Darth Ruinus** » 2007-12-28 12:57am

DrMckay wrote:I'm fairly sure they had doors on both top and bottom.

I think it only has a dorsal hanger bay.

so if indeed it was a flak gun (as you say) I would have preferred to see the shells fed in by belt or clip feed, etc, as on a 40 MM Bofors. but then, I'm a functionality fan.

A belt or clip?
If only they were smart enough to but a belt feeding the gun with its ammo!

I also don't know why a flak gun would be mounted in a relatively inflexible (and vulnerable) mounting,

Im not sure about that one.

or fired at a capital ship.

Again, because it was in the line of fire and posed a greater threat than ANY fighter could ever hope to.

It looked like some of the republic heavy guns were set up the same way, while engaging the Invisible Hand though I didn't see any Clone Troopers jerking shells.

Maybe because Venators dont have flak guns?

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 01:07am

Touche` I'll concede the belt clip-sorry havent seen the movie in a while...

I'm still not convinced it is a flak gun, however...

Darth Ruinus · Post by **Darth Ruinus** » 2007-12-28 01:12am

DrMckay wrote:Touche` I'll concede the belt clip-sorry havent seen the movie in a while...

I'm still not convinced it is a flak gun, however...

Convinced enough?

Though I agree, it doesnt seem like it can move around alot. Like I said, maybe that is explained somewhere, though if I had to take a guess, maybe it can move about?

This pic here shows what looks like "rails" at the bottom of the gun (near where the droid operator is sitting, on the floor) maybe the guns can swivel from side to side and up and down, but in this particular instance, with the other capital ship being right there and all, it didnt need to?

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 01:21am

The rails look like they only move the piece laterally-to another gunport open to space down the line- brilliant structural design, that!

okay, nice justification for the function of a "flak gun," just piss poor idea, design, and implementation on the part of the moviemakers.

DrMckay · Post by **DrMckay** » 2007-12-28 01:29am

Oh, and according to Wookiepedia, the source you used,

"In addition to a standard ventral hangar bay, the bow of a Venator could open up to reveal a half kilometer long dorsal flight deck. This flight deck enabled the Venator-class to rapidly launch hundreds of fighters. However, the slow opening and closing of the armored bow doors could leave the ship extremely vulnerable."

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Venator- ... _Destroyer

directly quoted from the "Complement" section.

Really brilliant Idea for a combat ship, that. Personally, I'd rather have a ship that can will still be around to recover the fighters after the battle is over, and launches the fighters a bit more slowly instead of getting waxed as it opens up a goodly portion of its length (and is structurally weaker, to boot)

you are right in that the "Design Flaw Launching Bay" was only a dorsal characteristic, but that doesn;t make it any less of a completely stupid design flaw.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2007-12-28 01:30am

Its swiveling capability is quite beside the point when its line-of-sight is tightly restricted by a narrow gunport. Its totally ridiculous for flak weapons; such weapons need a very broad engagement envelope and a fast response time - so they must be relatively light and easily reoriented against multiple, fast targets. They also need to have high rates of fire to increase kill probability against small and fast targets.

A better idea is they are hastily-added-on modifications in order to increase anti-surface bombardment capability with a variety of mass driver payloads. That removes the rate of fire and line-of-sight problems. Maybe the Venator's analogs are similar, who knows. Perhaps against some targets volley fire from a large battery of individually-limited-line-of-sight light guns is the best solution, compared to a smaller battery of more traversable guns or larger guns?

Perhaps the Invisible Hand's gun deck is of the type I speculated, while the handful of small crewed-guns aboard the Venator are volley batteries designed to provide covering fire in the event of other batteries failing? Perhaps they are low-watt volley batteries for use when a Venator is groundside for defense, since the primary and secondary guns would cause extreme mass-destruction events? Or how about synthesis: we know Skywalker and Kenobi have taken some personal touches in applying modifications to their armada. So perhaps there are close-in blind-spots in the Venator's CIWS defensive coverage, and they built superficial battlements in those blind-spots, mounting crewed surface guns in the battlements' gun deck and using volley fire to fill-in the gaps. When a ridiculously close trajectory takes the GRS Guarlara obscenely close to the CSS Invisible Hand these special-purpose and improvisational weapons add considerably to the available broadside fire between the two ships.