Something big

[fractalsponge1]

In the angled launchers, up to one extended-length torpedo/rocket (an actual tube-like torpedo, not the tiny cone torpedoes in an X-Wing). The kind that would make a starfighter bomber actually useful against capital ships in sufficient numbers, in the 100 gigaton to 1 teraton range. In the fuselage launchers, multiple concussion missiles in a rotary magazine or single long warhead. The angled launchers would be removable, to carry various other payloads. Thermal detonators/proton bombs would stack in each launcher, bigger warheads or mines can be handled with different launching/release arrangements.

And yes, I know we don't have good numbers for fighter warheads, but for a few hundred fighters to be more than a nuisance to a destroyer-sized ship, they'd have to carry triple-digit gigaton warheads. For a Group of ~400 fighters, 16 warheads each, 100 gigatons per warhead ~ 640 teratons, which is under dissipation rate for a destroyer outputting 2500 TTs/second and radiating 33% of that off shields. At 1 teraton per warhead, we're talking a much more respectable 6400 teratons, which might actually do more than tickle a command-equivalent ship.

Guns; designed for strafing things like corvettes, but not as powerful as an XG1s. Really I'm guessing for the heavier scale fighter weapons. We know most snubfighter/capital PD laser cannons in AOTC were in the 1-10 kiloton per shot range, with high rates of fire. Actis and later big fighters can probably do better, by gun mount size if nothing else, maybe up to several dozen kilotons per shot? If Arc170/XG1-sized guns could maybe do 100+ kilotons per shot, these guns are near the 50kt range perhaps. Again, blind guesswork; anyone have better numbers for heavy fighter laser yield per shot?

Some fuselage and wing detail (plating and inset sensor cluster). Removed wings for render otherwise it'd be impossible to show this stuff well.

[Rogue 9]

im digging the triple wing setup, however i believe that this design would be inneficient for close quarters combat like that in the interior of the death star in return of the jedi.

And just how often do you think close quarters combat like that comes up in the limitless vacuum of space?

[Azron_Stoma]

Just thinking of 400 TIE Scimitars launching all those 16 lower missiles all at once and them streaking across space makes me think of one phrase.

"Take them to the Circus"

[Ketan]

big empty spaces on the body?

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Scimitar_assault_bomber

what are the black stripes?

[fractalsponge1]

You mean the window-strips on the cockpit module?

[Ketan]

no the stripes in the other hull downside

[fractalsponge1]

I have no idea what you're talking about...

[Raesene]

I have no idea what you're talking about...

I think ketan refers to the two twin-skis (?) at the broader end of the conical main body, in front of the downward-facing launchers in this picture.

My guess would be landing gear retracted into flight position, but it could also be mount points for superheavy torpedoes.

[Ketan]

landing gear retracted into flight position

exactly right

[fractalsponge1]

Eh, the essential guide has the "skids" top and bottom on the fuselage. I probably won't make them skids; I feel like TIE series ships should be designed for rackmounting in the hangar, and keep as much internal space as possible reserved for something more useful than landing gear that'll never be used. The Actis was extravagant with its gear, with was probably a mistake, given how small the bloody thing actually is. Was before the imperial rack system was common though, I guess.

If the Scimitar ever did need to sit on the floor, a simple dolly would do just as well.

Detailing coming along:

[Thanas]

If the Scimitar ever did need to sit on the floor, a simple dolly would do just as well.

Or just set the repulsorlifts to hover. It is not as if there are so many instances where it needs to land on a strip of dirt/concrete anyway. If it is planetbased, the garrison will have racks, if it is based on a spaceship, ditto.


That said, Crimson Empire depicts a Scimitar having landed on a deck. I'll see if I can track down the image.

[fractalsponge1]

This: http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/comics ... tar-ce.jpg is all I've found so far. Doesn't show the landing mechanism (if any). More and more likely, on thinking about it more, that my version will not have landing skids or gear...

[Thanas]

This: http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/comics ... tar-ce.jpg is all I've found so far. Doesn't show the landing mechanism (if any). More and more likely, on thinking about it more, that my version will not have landing skids or gear...

The dialogue before that mentions tractor beams to be used to pull it in, so they are most likely still holding it in place.

[Vehrec]

Really, is there anything that hard to believe about these things just resting on their wings with the repulsors in a balancing mode? I mean, they can withstand a couple kilotons of energy, why wouldn't they be strong enough to support the whole thing?

[fractalsponge1]

I have no problems with that; landing gear on snubfighters always struck me as a fairly inefficient extravagance, when rack launch systems exist.

Top of the main module is done:

[Thanas]

Really, is there anything that hard to believe about these things just resting on their wings with the repulsors in a balancing mode? I mean, they can withstand a couple kilotons of energy, why wouldn't they be strong enough to support the whole thing?

Guess what I suggested a few posts above.

[fractalsponge1]

One of these days I will have to make a fully articulated grapple for a TIE rack system. Will be painful fun to get one that can handle all the tie series and assault gunboats... OK, maybe just the TIEs, but you still need to be able to take x1/defender/scimitar heavy variants...

[Questor]

One of these days I will have to make a fully articulated grapple for a TIE rack system. Will be painful fun to get one that can handle all the tie series and assault gunboats... OK, maybe just the TIEs, but you still need to be able to take x1/defender/scimitar heavy variants...

Could the grapple be modular, with different mating devices for different fighters?

[fractalsponge1]

Could the grapple be modular, with different mating devices for different fighters?

I suppose so; keep the central spar/frame that connects the mating claw/mount with the rest of the rack constant, and have a few different arms attached to an adaptable universal joint. I'll probably need multi-arm arrangements for the big fighters though. The Defender, for one, will likely be a nightmare to try and grab by the wing pylons in a way that looks at all stable, even with multiple arms.

[fractalsponge1]

Progress:



This has got to be setting a personal record or something - usually not this quick about things.

[Grahf: Seeker Of Power]

Hah, I know what you mean. Sometimes you're inspired and the progress just flows out.

[Questor]

Could the grapple be modular, with different mating devices for different fighters?

I suppose so; keep the central spar/frame that connects the mating claw/mount with the rest of the rack constant, and have a few different arms attached to an adaptable universal joint. I'll probably need multi-arm arrangements for the big fighters though. The Defender, for one, will likely be a nightmare to try and grab by the wing pylons in a way that looks at all stable, even with multiple arms.

Perhaps it could grip the defender here (using your post):


Isn't that module common to most of the TIEs?

Looking at your gallary, it looks like you have it on the Interceptor at least.

[fractalsponge1]

The circular bit is common to all of my TIEs that use the ball-module. I'd probably make the attachment on the pylons though; seems more stable.

Scimitar is approaching completion:


Cut-away because it really is quite hard to see otherwise:

[fractalsponge1]

Almost done:

[fractalsponge1]

Complete. Full gallery up:

http://fractalsponge.net/gallery/Starfi ... index.html

Thoughts?