TESB TIE Fighter shield?

[Vympel]

I was taking a screenshot to debunk a claim that a TIE Fighter in the Hoth asteroid belt was destroyed by a rock the size of a "beachball"- when I noticed something.

Incidentally, taking that screenshot leads me to a (IMO) significant discovery.

Frame of impact:



Second:



Next:


Next:



Next:



Next:



Next:



Next:



Conclusion: the asteroid is gone in a matter of frames in a blue flash- not unlike the white flash of asteroids against the ISDs hull, not a trace.

That TIEs shielded.

[Bounty]

That TIEs shielded.

Isn't that just the flash of the ion thingamajig exploding?

ETA: to expand a bit on that, you've got a shot of a TIE suffering severe structural damage, which would account for the sparks; and the fighters (well, the stock version) have always been explicitly described as being unshielded to save money and weight ("To reduce the mass of the ship, TIE fighters are built without defensive shields [...]", OT ICS).

I think there's a better explanation for the flash than a shield which is explicitly said not to exist in canon.

[Vympel]

The flash is not the main point. The asteroid is gone.

As for what the EU says is and isn't so, the EU is just that. We've already got the blasts from the Falcon hitting TIEs and resulting in shield-like impacts in ANH, as well as plentiful information from the same EU that some TIEs could and were equipped with shields.

[atg]

It wouldn't be surprising to me if only a subsection of TIEs had shielding, ie Squadron Leaders, Elite Units (Death Squadron may have the "best of the best", so to speak, pilots, their units out-fitted with special made TIEs.), etc.

[Cykeisme]

It wouldn't be surprising to me if only a subsection of TIEs had shielding, ie Squadron Leaders, Elite Units (Death Squadron may have the "best of the best", so to speak, pilots, their units out-fitted with special made TIEs.), etc.

Yes, it wouldn't be surprising because as we all know, the Empire was terribly short of resources and strapped for cash, seeing as how they only had minuscle holdings.

[Bounty]

Yes, it wouldn't be surprising because as we all know, the Empire was terribly short of resources and strapped for cash, seeing as how they only had minuscle holdings.

Neither should they be portrayed as wasteful idiots any more than they were portrayed as such in the movies. TIEs don't need shielding; even a shielded fighter is lucky to survive a well-placed shot. With lord knows how many TIEs in use, why bother weighing them down with shield generators that hamper performance, decrease reliability and require extra maintenance when the gain is minimal?

Yes, the Empire can fit every TIE with a foot of armour, military-grade shielding and a class .5 hyperdrive. Point is, they don't. They had a design philosophy that emphasises simple design, manoeuvrability and pack hunting, so they stuck with it.

[Vehrec]

We do know that those wings are radiators more than they are collectors of energy. Maybe when damaged the wings dump large amounts of energy into whatever damaged them, and that was what destroyed the asteroid.
Me, I can't see the thing even when it hits the wing. Might just be me, but whatever. If you say it's gone, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

[Molyneux]

I know this is working from game mechanics, but I figured it might be relevant anyway; in the various X-wing games, especially X-Wing Alliance, I noticed that given pilots of similar caliber, a TIE or TIE Interceptor would win out against an X or Y-wing in the majority of cases - as long as the TIE hadn't already fought another opponent.

The major advantage that shields gave was the ability to self-repair. Aside from that, the advantage in speed and firepower the TIEs possessed usually proved decisive, despite what common sense might dictate.

[Bounty]

The major advantage that shields gave was the ability to self-repair. Aside from that, the advantage in speed and firepower the TIEs possessed usually proved decisive, despite what common sense might dictate.

It's the same in the Rogue Squadron games. The unlockable TIE in RS2 is capable of flying every mission except for the ones requiring special ordnance, like Hoth. In packs they're even more deadly, as shown in the Imperial bonus missions. They're simply too small and nimble to really suffer from a lack of shielding, except when flown by AI pilots.

[Jaepheth]

Though if you're going to fly into an asteroid field that has countless micrometeorites and other small debris that would impact your ship at high speeds, it would make more sense to equip a shield generator to protect against small pebbles taking out important systems.

[Anguirus]

It's the same in the Rogue Squadron games. The unlockable TIE in RS2 is capable of flying every mission except for the ones requiring special ordnance, like Hoth. In packs they're even more deadly, as shown in the Imperial bonus missions. They're simply too small and nimble to really suffer from a lack of shielding, except when flown by AI pilots.

I'll have to disagree there. They blighted the RS TIEs with godawful accuracy. Sure you can blunder your way through some missions, but it would be hard to beat an X-wing in multi-player, even if the X-wing isn't packing torpedoes or anything.

Now, in RS1, the TIE Interceptor was a perfectly serviceable ship with a glass jaw. In the Gamecube games, they are deathtraps. Which, as all of us know, is really stupid.

[Bounty]

Sure you can blunder your way through some missions, but it would be hard to beat an X-wing in multi-player, even if the X-wing isn't packing torpedoes or anything.

I don't own RS3, but I have flown the TIE in RS2 and it's not a death trap as long as you don't sit still. Even with your braindead AI wingmen you can complete a good few missions - it's a leaner, nastier A-wing, not a flying coffin. Granted, you're dead when you stray near fixed defences and without explosives it's almost impossible to damage anything other than fighters...

Want a death trap? Try Slave I

Now, in RS1, the TIE Interceptor was a perfectly serviceable ship with a glass jaw.

The Interceptor was awesome. When that briefing guy said it could run laps around an X-wing, he wasn't lying.

[Batman]

Though if you're going to fly into an asteroid field that has countless micrometeorites and other small debris that would impact your ship at high speeds, it would make more sense to equip a shield generator to protect against small pebbles taking out important systems.

And no doubt when the equipped Death Squadron Valen knows how long before the events of ESB they naturally knew they'd have to chase a souped-up freighter through said asteroid field and prepared for that instead of just stacking them with run-of-the-mill TIEs which seemed to do well enough against Rebel craft by and large.
Not that I find the TIEs in ESB having particle shields all that disturbing to begin with. We know for a pact that some TIEs have shields, inclusing ray shields as per ANH, and for fighters capable of engaging at serious fractions of c some sort of particle shield to avoid being turned into an expanding debris cloud by inconveniently placed micrometeors doesn't seem like such a bad idea.

[Stark]

I think the PT shows that even shielded fighters last about as long as TIEs anyway, so the EU thing with TIEs being disposable because the evil Empire won't shield the pilots they paid millions of bucks to train is just bullshit. Look at ARCs being torn to shit in seconds and tell me shielding makes much difference - given the lineage of TIEs, they probably have the same low-end shielding of the PT fighters they evolved from.

We've been over this a million times, and there is little real evidence that the 'heavily shielded' rebel fighters are actually significantly more durable than TIEs, and certainly not enough to make up for their larger size (given combat results). The EU (originally from the RPG if I remember) just made it up. Direct hit on a fighter pretty much = you're dead.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

We've been over this a million times, and there is little real evidence that the 'heavily shielded' rebel fighters are actually significantly more durable than TIEs, and certainly not enough to make up for their larger size (given combat results). The EU (originally from the RPG if I remember) just made it up. Direct hit on a fighter pretty much = you're dead.

Yup. I still remember playing X-Wing as a kid and the first time I shot a shielded fighter, I thought "What the?? The X-Wings in the movies died instantly!"

[Stark]

I remember in X-Wing, they weren't just 'shielded', they had absurd amounts of shield hitpoints, and several times the 'hull points' of a TIE as well. You could RAM TIEs TO DEATH.

Most people are fine with a compromise - saying X-wings are 'more shielded' and thus glancing hits are mitigated and the fighter isn't crippled (as happens in ANH). But I don't see why we need to rationalise with the EU when it's baseless stuff they just made up, and the movies show something different.

[Ritterin Sophia]

You could RAM TIEs TO DEATH.

Or you know... kill yourself by destroying an Alphabet-Wing only to have it's cockpit fly right back at you, rather than continuing on it's current destination (which would be AWAY from you), because apparently the Rebels are immune to Universal Laws.

[Balrog]

On another tangent, what does this say about TIE durability? What kind of force was behind that impact? (unless this has been done before...)

[Anguirus]

I don't own RS3, but I have flown the TIE in RS2 and it's not a death trap as long as you don't sit still. Even with your braindead AI wingmen you can complete a good few missions - it's a leaner, nastier A-wing, not a flying coffin. Granted, you're dead when you stray near fixed defences and without explosives it's almost impossible to damage anything other than fighters...

Want a death trap? Try Slave I Very Happy

Unfortunately, this doesn't leave many missions. Anything with a Star Destroyer in it is trouble for the TIE, and flying one in the Vader missions borders on the absurd: you need to kill those shielded X-wings insanely fast, and without missile backup the lasers on the TIE just aren't accurate enough. If you can beat those missions with the TIE/ln, my hat's off to you.

If you strip the A-wing's missiles its decent lasers alone make it the superior craft, not to mention it is slightly beefier and has a targetig computer.

The Slave 1 is a ridiculous death trap, but anything in its forward arc at least is toast. You HAVE to fly the RS3 Slave 1, because not only did they improve its maneuverability and durability so it flies like a big boy ship, it has TWENTY REGENERATING SEISMIC CHARGES.

[Connor MacLeod]

The Black Fleet Crisis mentioned that all interstellar ships Civilian or military had to carry some form of ray and particle shielding as some sort of "navigational deflectors" at least, to protect from stray impacts or radiation. Given that, and common sense, it makes sense that TIEs WOULD be shielded to some extent, although 'shield" does not mean 'combat shields" either.

(THere are of course the "shielded" TIEs that always show up multiple times in the flight sim games, of course, but someone may argue they aren't canonical, although they appear in fluff.) And in other cases we know TIE interceptors were capable of carrying shields (Wraith Squadron and the Thrawn books) so its not impossible (the Empire just didn't want to give them heavy duty combat shields. And really why bother?)

As for the "one hit kill" nature of X-wings and TIEs in the OT movies... fighter shields are alot more porous and simpler in operation than capital scale (or even planetary) shields. You have much fewer "arcs" or facings, and you have smaller/less robust generators (much the way fighters can channel only a fraction of their reactor output through their guns unlike cpaital ships, really.) Any fighter is equally killable if you shoot through the holes (or gaps) or if the shields aren't aligned properly.

[Cykeisme]

Yes, it wouldn't be surprising because as we all know, the Empire was terribly short of resources and strapped for cash, seeing as how they only had minuscle holdings.

Neither should they be portrayed as wasteful idiots any more than they were portrayed as such in the movies. TIEs don't need shielding; even a shielded fighter is lucky to survive a well-placed shot. With lord knows how many TIEs in use, why bother weighing them down with shield generators that hamper performance, decrease reliability and require extra maintenance when the gain is minimal?

Yes, the Empire can fit every TIE with a foot of armour, military-grade shielding and a class .5 hyperdrive. Point is, they don't. They had a design philosophy that emphasises simple design, manoeuvrability and pack hunting, so they stuck with it.

I was bristling at the idea that TIEs have no shielding whatsoever, which is downright ridiculous with a rudimentary understanding of the physics involved in spaceflight. Even a tiny micrometeorite of ferrous composition will impart a tremendous amount of kinetic energy upon impact, considering the relative velocities may well be relativistic. All already discussed here, anyway. Particle shielding is a must, unless materials technology in Star Wars are even more wanky than we now believe.

Unless we are to accept that the comparatively thin clear materials in a TIE viewport (as well as most other SW ships) provide adequate shielding against charged and neutral cosmic rays, as well as electromagnetic radiation, I'd also surmise that TIEs (and indeed all spacefaring craft with transparent cockpit canopies) have ray shielding as well.

TIEs do obviously have some measure of navigational shielding, and the "military-grade" shielding that Rebel starfighters have is clearly not much better at resisting even starfighter-grade weapon fire.

[Mange]

Indeed. I've assumed that the TIEs don't have combat-grade shielding but some sort shielding to protect them from hazards such as micro-meteorites etc.

[Lazarus]

As far as I was aware, the debate over TIE's and shields leads to a reasonable conclusion whereby TIE's in general have navigational shields as a necessity, as stated in the BFC, and based on movie evidence. On top of that, some TIE's have combat shields, as suggested by the X-Wing series and Thrawn trilogy. This is not irrational due to the Empire's massive resources negating any possible cost-saving measure, it's simply a design decision where enhanced durability is traded for improved maneuvrability, reliability etc. As far as I'm aware, the X-wing series is the only real source which paints the lack of shields as a significant disadvantage, but considering the lack of technical reliability present throughout the series this isn't surprising.

[Cykeisme]

The disparity between the X-Wing series' game mechanics and the movies are so vast that there can be no contention.

For example, in X-Wing Alliance, an X-Wing's shields can take 50 points of damage, and its hull can take 20, for a total of 70 "hit points". The shields can be doubly charged to 100, for a total of 120 "hit points".
A TIE fighter, by comparison, has a hull with 9 hit points. Yes, nine.

A quick review of Episode IV or VI would quickly reveal that not only is it merely game mechanics, it has absolutely no bearing on the "reality" portrayed in the movies.


Fortunately for the Rebels, though, TIE series craft don't appear to have as large a maneuverability advantage over Rebel starfighters as in the games, either.

[Balrog]

On another tangent, what does this say about TIE durability? What kind of force was behind that impact? (unless this has been done before...)

I realize it's an old topic, but I was still wondering if you can get any KE calcs out of the incident and the question went unanswered. Unless this has been covered already and by search-fu is just weak...