StarDestroyer.Net BBS

1.
2.

if they do, for what reason they look that way in your opinion?

No inline pics thankyou! ~ Crown

They look similar too me in overall shape. Aren't they both passenger or cargo ships?

neel wrote:They look similar too me in overall shape. Aren't they both passenger or cargo ships?

the first one is. second is a military transport could that count as a cargo ship?

The second one looks more similar to the Republic cruiser as it seems the only difference is that it has been heightened with the cargo hold and the bridge face is slanted..

Republic Cruiser

They are certainly not exactly the same but there is a lot of resemblence. The overall style, engine and bridge placement are similar, the differences being the size and one is rounded and the other angular. From an eyeball scaling, the movie transport is far larger than the cartoon transport. It is certainly possible that both come from the same company, the movie transport being a large frieghter/liner, and the cartoon transport a stock light frieghter or Republic military transport. They could just as easily be form different companies who just happen to use the same arrangement.

Hmm, Now after looking more closely at the second one I noticed the gun turret on the side. It does bear a resemblance to the Republic Cruiser.

To me 2. looks mix between 1. and the republic cruiser with some aditional weapons.

I think it's probably a coincidence, but I believe the second ship might be listed in the official site's Databank. It's basically a variation of a Republic cruiser with an extended hull, and I don't think has anything to do with the first ship.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:I think it's probably a coincidence, but I believe the second ship might be listed in the official site's Databank. It's basically a variation of a Republic cruiser with an extended hull, and I don't think has anything to do with the first ship.

I don't know anything about the first one, but the second is the CR-20 troop carrier, 60 metres long, and yes, made by CEC.

I think number 2 looks an Old Rrepublic version of the Imperial Y-4 Raptor transport

Some comments on the database, if I may-

the XM-1 Missile Boat, IIRC, has the designation Nova Wing (or NovaWing, can't remember if StarWing is seperated by a space or not). Can't recall where I heard that.

Vympel wrote:Some comments on the database, if I may-

the XM-1 Missile Boat, IIRC, has the designation Nova Wing (or NovaWing, can't remember if StarWing is seperated by a space or not). Can't recall where I heard that.

The Starwing should be the name of the Assualt Gunboat.

The two look fairly similar to me, but the second bears a closer resemblance to the Republic Cruiser (as has been mentioned earlier). They're probably designed to support the three engines in the same alignment, like that, since that's likely an efficient way of placing those kinds of engines on a starship of that size, and three must be an important number of engines (ie. two are unlikely to fail, but if one fails there's still enough power).

Another comment on the database, if I may. This:

Length: 2,500-12,800 meters

is quite a disparate range for the length of a Super Star Destroyer, and how anyone can look at that picture you've got right there in the entry and even arrive at a rough estimate of less than twice the length of the ISD in front of it is beyond me...

The first one is more "organic" looking.. the lines are softer, the protrusions tend to blend more seamlessly into the overall hull. The second is more "utilitarian' in the style of the Corellian Corvette and the REpublic Cruiser - more hard edges, elements like the side protrusions and the cockpit tend to "stick out" from the main hull more prominently, while the engines on the second one are larger, and mounted on different pylons that are spaced more closely together than those on the first.

Plus, the second one has a landing ramp in the front that the first one does not. And lastly, the second one has a radar dish on top, ,which the first one lacks, and has guns (which the first one also apparently lacks).

There is a superficial similarity, but that's about it.

The first thing that came to my mind at seeing #2 was the Jawa sandcrawler.

Soontir C'boath wrote:The second one looks more similar to the Republic cruiser as it seems the only difference is that it has been heightened with the cargo hold and the bridge face is slanted..

Republic Cruiser

I concur. The only difference is that Jar-Jar hasn't appeared in CW on or near those ships.

Rogue 9 wrote:Another comment on the database, if I may. This:

Length: 2,500-12,800 meters

is quite a disparate range for the length of a Super Star Destroyer, and how anyone can look at that picture you've got right there in the entry and even arrive at a rough estimate of less than twice the length of the ISD in front of it is beyond me...

No one is claiming the Executor Class SD is 2,500 meters long. ( As far as I know the length is 12.8 km.) Go back and read the text Rogue 9 and not just the stats.

DavidVCSAndersen wrote:

Rogue 9 wrote:Another comment on the database, if I may. This:

Length: 2,500-12,800 meters

is quite a disparate range for the length of a Super Star Destroyer, and how anyone can look at that picture you've got right there in the entry and even arrive at a rough estimate of less than twice the length of the ISD in front of it is beyond me...

No one is claiming the Executor Class SD is 2,500 meters long. ( As far as I know the length is 12.8 km.) Go back and read the text Rogue 9 and not just the stats.

The Executor is 17.6 km long, not 12.8, as established canonically from in-movie scaling.

I have heard that 17.6 km length before, but starwars.com claims 12.8 km? Should StarWars.Com not be considered a reliable source?

http://www.starwars.com/databank/starsh ... destroyer/

With the regards of 8 KM, 12.8 and 17.6...it's easy

SW.com does not override the movies ...thus the Executor is 17.6 KM.

DavidVCSAndersen wrote:I have heard that 17.6 km length before, but starwars.com claims 12.8 km? Should StarWars.Com not be considered a reliable source?

http://www.starwars.com/databank/starsh ... destroyer/

When it conflicts with the movies, yes it can be disregarded, especially since we know some of SW.com's data is derived from secondary sources (which the 12.8 km figure is.)

Furthermore, did you notice that the 12.8 km figure happens to be an average between the original 8 km WEG figure and the canon 17.6 km figure? Rather coincidental don't you think?

The first pic is the 2001 model of the same transport ship series, while the second pic is the model from the mid-80s.

YT300000 wrote:I don't know anything about the first one,

My memory has returned. It is the AA-9 transport (sometimes called the Coruscant transport). Can carry 30 000 people. I'm not sure what company makes it, but the engines are made by CEC.

YT300000 wrote:My memory has returned. It is the AA-9 transport (sometimes called the Coruscant transport). Can carry 30 000 people. I'm not sure what company makes it, but the engines are made by CEC.

so it's safe to asume that the the whole thing is made by the CEC, since could the any other name in SW.com maker.