Starfighter shields in the classic star wars movies

[Rogue_Firewarrior]

Hi everyone this is my first post in the forum

I was wondering why all the starfighters in the classic movies apeared to always go down to one lazer hit the X-wings seemed to be droping just as quickly as the Tie fighters. This makes it apear as if the shield made no difference. The only starship that apeared to be capable of taking a few hits was the millenium falcon. It doesn't make sence.

[Stark]

Try seaching the forum. And then try thinking. X-wings disintegrate or take serious damage and crash, whereas TIEs are often pretty much totally exploded. It's only really jarring when you compare to AOTC-style 'covered in blaster holes' stuff. TIEs probably aren't unshielded anyway, EU bullshit notwithdstanding.

PS wtf is a lazer?

[Duckie]

Ties can't be unshielded, otherwise hitting a tiny piece of debris at 2000g of acceleration would be the end. Which in the Asteroid part of ESB would be inevitable.

However, presumably the EU means that TIEs have weak, non-combat rated shields (or at least not rated for direct hits) while X-Wings can generally survive getting shot at... sometimes...

[TC Pilot]

Most of the times, we see starfighters take direct hits. In some cases, such as Luke or Wedge in ANH, they can survive, probably depending on where they were hit.

[Darth Servo]

Vympel is da man

So is Rogue 9

TIEs have shields. Highest canon.

[Connor MacLeod]

Let's get one thing clear. There IS a difference between "navigational shields" and "combat shields". All ships (as per the Black Fleet Crisis") have to carry some measure of ray/particle shield for simple navigational purposes. THat does not mean they carry combat shields. (which is the common misconception - the "no shields" for TIEs often refers to the combat shield bit.)

We SEE shiedl flashes in the movies that indicate TIEs are shielded, no biggie. We know they probably have nav shields and thats what we see (maybe they're alot stronger than normal to help offset the "no combat shield" bit. Or, maybe they are shielded. Its not as if "shielded ties" are an unprecedented concept in the EU.)

As for "shields in the movies" We DO see cases where Rebel fighters take hits without instantly blowing up - we see it several times in ANH ( we eve see one laser bolt glance off an X-wing without harming it.)

We might surmise the following:

1.) fighter-grade shielding is not as "total" protection as capital grade shielding. This is analogous to the "fighter vs capital" ship issue with regard to weapons - a capital ship can devote nearly all its energy to its guns, whereas a fighter cannot do so as easily. The same could just as eaisly apply to shields.

In fact, we know from the Lando Calrissian novels that fighter shields tend to be more "porous" than capital grade ones (a fact reinforced in other EU - one reason why "angling" shields for fighters is a big deal) and thus it is easier for "hits" to get through or strike weak areas.

2.) Given that, fighter-grade shields may also be optimised more towards deflecting rather than outright absorbing shots - we see botls often miss by small amounts, and we know from ANH that shields can deflect shots (even fighter grade shields.)

[Darwin]

We SEE shiedl flashes in the movies that indicate TIEs are shielded, no biggie. We know they probably have nav shields and thats what we see (maybe they're alot stronger than normal to help offset the "no combat shield" bit. Or, maybe they are shielded. Its not as if "shielded ties" are an unprecedented concept in the EU.)

Haven't combat shielded ties typically (but not always, I admit) been characterized with the 'duck tail' attachment?

[Marko Dash]

i always thought the duckbill was a snap-on hyperdrive?

[LadyTevar]

*snickers* Only 'ducktail' TIES I've ever seen have been in comics, not the movies.

Far as I know, the 'duckbill' was a part of the original toy so kids could hold onto it and pop the Panels off as 'combat damage'.

[Knife]

Starfighter shields could be the pervebial flac jacket rather than the first line of defense, in that the job of the deflector shield is to limit near misses or glancing blows making a hit survivable by the pilot. Basically, giving the pilot enough to eject.

Since we are talking about fighters, one would assume that the speed and manuverablity would be the primary defense for a small ship rather than systems that could drain fuel stores quicker like shields.

SW energy weapons seem capable of putting total or close to total reactor outputs into the shot, to counter it with a shield, one would reason that a comparable sized ship would need to channel it's reactor output into shields to defeat the shot. That would make the small and supposesly quick vessel, not quick at all and not able to shoot itself.

So I'd contend that on a small manuverable ship, using said agility would be better suited for defense rather than using all available power to deflect/defeat the all available powered shot from another ship it's size. An underpowered (for SW) shield for a bit of extra protection, though, that doesn't use up a large percentage of available power but gives the pilot some semblence of survivabilty on a close hit or glancing hit, makes sense.

[Darth Servo]

Far as I know, the 'duckbill' was a part of the original toy so kids could hold onto it and pop the Panels off as 'combat damage'.

The toy needed the duckbill because there was no other place to put the batteries.

[Bluewolf]

*snickers* Only 'ducktail' TIES I've ever seen have been in comics, not the movies.

Far as I know, the 'duckbill' was a part of the original toy so kids could hold onto it and pop the Panels off as 'combat damage'.

I actually have one of those. They're fun.

[Ziggy Stardust]

There's also the fact that in ANH, the fighters in the trench had their shields full forward to protect against the turbolaser turrets. They weren't expecting to be attacked from behind. They say this rather explicitly in the movie.

[Darth Servo]

There's also the fact that in ANH, the fighters in the trench had their shields full forward to protect against the turbolaser turrets. They weren't expecting to be attacked from behind. They say this rather explicitly in the movie.

On the first trench run with the Y-wings, as soon as the turrets stop firing, Gold 5 tells his two companions to "stabilize your rear deflectors, watch for enemy fighters"

[Lord Pounder]

There's also the fact that in ANH, the fighters in the trench had their shields full forward to protect against the turbolaser turrets. They weren't expecting to be attacked from behind. They say this rather explicitly in the movie.

Red Leader also ordered the shields to be evened out when reports of the incomming TIE's was reported, though it's been a while since I saw ANH.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Nevertheless, the rear shields of the fighters were not at "full strength," so to speak.

[Lord Pounder]

The shields where ordered to be evened just after the start of the battle but thats irrelevant to you? In case you missed it most of the X-Wings where killed after Red Leader ordered the shields evened out.

[Mad]

SW energy weapons seem capable of putting total or close to total reactor outputs into the shot, to counter it with a shield, one would reason that a comparable sized ship would need to channel it's reactor output into shields to defeat the shot. That would make the small and supposesly quick vessel, not quick at all and not able to shoot itself.

What support is there for the assumption that a comparable amount of energy is required to "defeat" an incoming shot of a given energy level? (Does the shield system end up giving off waste heat equal to twice that of the original shot?)

It's more likely that the small deflector shield systems on fighters overheat quickly when absorbing incoming fire. Besides, their main purpose is probably to deflect the incoming shots, not absorb them.

[Knife]

I was working off the idea that the shield system is energy in nature, and not just a shit load of heat sinks around the ship itself. I was assuming that if you were going to 'project' energy from your ship with the idea to cancel out or deflect incoming engergy, a comparable amount would be needed.

[Mad]

I was working off the idea that the shield system is energy in nature, and not just a shit load of heat sinks around the ship itself.

Huh?

I was assuming that if you were going to 'project' energy from your ship with the idea to cancel out or deflect incoming engergy, a comparable amount would be needed.

Yeah, I know; I was asking what support there is for that assumption.

Deflecting incoming attacks could easily require significantly less energy than the attack itself contains. The amount required would depend on how much the attack must be accelerated to avoid collision with you and how much energy is required to achieve that acceleration, not how much energy is contained in the attack. (It could also require more energy to deflect in certain circumstances, though I'd think that would be a rare situation.)

[Lord Relvenous]

There are examples in the EU, many of them, where direct hits, and not glancing blows, drain shields dangerously fast, which i would take to indicate that absorbing the energy requires much more energy than deflecting.

Also, about the porous shields, i can think of a few cases off the top of my head where good shots have pierced full strength shields in dogfights.

Moving on to a new point, Wedge touches on the fact that the wingmen in the trench knew they were there as an extra set of shields. If i was going to be an extra set of shields to protect against rear attacks, i would have my shields at least balanced, most likely concentrated to the rear. IIRC, the raiders did the same, the shields just couldn't absorb the amount of energy the TIEs were able to pump into the shields in a short time, seeing as how no extensive manuevering was occuring. So in my view, X-wings exploding on first hits in the trench is inconclusive as to shield strength.

[Mad]

There are examples in the EU, many of them, where direct hits, and not glancing blows, drain shields dangerously fast, which i would take to indicate that absorbing the energy requires much more energy than deflecting.

No, when a shield absorbs a shot, the system gains energy, not loses it:

When overloaded by incoming energy charges, a shield projector's matrix boards will burn out rather than flooding the generator with energy and destroying the entire shield system. Tech crews can repair burned out-out projectors in just a few minutes to get the shields back up to full power.

Coolant pump circulates a superfluid with enormous heat capacity to moderate the shield matrix during critical power spikes that cannot be radiated away quickly
...
Shield heat-sink and radiator matrix converts unusable energy surges into heat for disposal

R2-D2 whistled a warning and shut down the overloaded shield generator to begin an emergency cool off.

A pair of fighters streaked by, spitting fire. The Falcon's shields glowed and pulsed, absorbing the energy, feeding it into the reactors. There were limits to the amount that could be absorbed that way - in which case the reactor would come apart, taking the ship and everything within a thousand kilometers with it - but for now, each unsuccessful pass fed the Millennium Falcon's engines. And her guns.

Shields "draining" is a result of the shield system failing due to overheating. I know the X-Wing novels refer to diverting power from lasers to shields to refresh them, but that's taken straight from the game mechanics of the X-Wing games and so should be taken with a grain of salt.

[Connor MacLeod]

Have any of you bothered to consider the thermodynamic implications of these "shields" as you claim and Mad is arguing about? If they are sucking up energy, what, if any, work are they doing? Energy is only used when work is done on an object (or as waste heat in inefficiencies - but a shield system consuming large amounts of energy as waste heat for no purpose is a stupid design and need not be dealt with.)

The only circumstances under which shields might use large quantities of energy is with a phyiscal projectile/impactor of some kind (either providing some sort of accelerating counter-force to change the momentum/energy of incoming shots, or merely to destroy impacting projectiles.) And even then, it will only consume energy when the shields are doing "work"

But even then that's largely conjectural - you don't NEED much (or any) energy to slow/stop a proejctile - Walls or armor plate can do the same function just fine without energy being consumed, after all. Thinking of it as a "wall of energy" or an "energy field" does not change this (Is such a thing even possible? I don't think so.)

Appealing to the novels isn't going tow ork either, since the concept potentially violates a rather fundamental concept of sci-fi analysis (thermodynamics.) Moreover, since the "shields consume energy" bit is something of a blatant rip-off of the X-wing/TIE games (remember the power distribution system and bieng able to suck off energy from shields as well as weapons?) which was purely game mechanic, even if it DOES appear in novels. And lastly, perhaps, STackpole isn't known for being the most scientifically consistent writer out there - in the First X-wing novel he flat out indicated that X-wing lasers fired "kilojoules" of energy - yeah, really useful when your anti-ship weaponry are LESS powerful than a lightsaber....

[PainRack]

SW energy weapons seem capable of putting total or close to total reactor outputs into the shot, to counter it with a shield, one would reason that a comparable sized ship would need to channel it's reactor output into shields to defeat the shot. That would make the small and supposesly quick vessel, not quick at all and not able to shoot itself.

What support is there for the assumption that a comparable amount of energy is required to "defeat" an incoming shot of a given energy level? (Does the shield system end up giving off waste heat equal to twice that of the original shot?)

It's more likely that the small deflector shield systems on fighters overheat quickly when absorbing incoming fire. Besides, their main purpose is probably to deflect the incoming shots, not absorb them.

I don't understand.... i thought the rationale for energy requirements was to dump the incoming energy back into space?

You know, the conventional bolt splintering as well as white radiation.

[Stark]

The whole idea of shields that demand huge amounts of energy and can be strengthened by sending more power at it doesn't make a whole lot of sense (even from the 'why'd we have the power grid to send 140% power to the shields anyway). If it's the superconductive-volume idea that is often discussed in SW (at least that's how I understand it) than beyond waste energy from the generators it should just be a matter of moving energy around in the shield to re-radiate and/or sucking it in to heat-sinks. The whole network of projectors and conductors and heatsinks would have engineering limits. I could maybe buy running the generators hot to make a better, less efficient shield volume briefly, but waste heat means too much power is going to quickly burn out the shield generators, right?