nuBSG vs Wing Commander (movie)

[Eternal_Freedom]

Pegasus could carry more fighters than Galactica did because she had both flight pods working, plus being a newer and bigger ship. Trying to use Galactica's compliment as a baseline is a really bad idea since half her hanger/launch/recovery space was a museum.

[LastShadow]

Pegasus could carry more fighters than Galactica did because she had both flight pods working, plus being a newer and bigger ship. Trying to use Galactica's compliment as a baseline is a really bad idea since half her hanger/launch/recovery space was a museum.

Sice Pegasus is listed as only have a single full compliment of Mk. VII fighters, and Galactica (in her heyday) had a full compliment of Mk. II and Mk. III vipers, Note: both had a full Raptor compliment.

Unless a full compliment constitutes a wing, which (correct me if im wrong) is generally assumed to be, 12 groups of 12 fighters for a total of 144.

But Pegasus flight pods where designed to make launch/land faster, she still only has 80 launch tubes, and there are all those facilities on board for construction and repair of vipers that Galactica doesnt have, thats GOT to take up some space.

So i am basically just going off the assumption that at minimum the compliment is that of how many launch tubes they have, at max double the fighters to launch tube ratio. so 80, or 160, or somewhere in between. Then you have storage for said fighters, they dont sit on the flight decks for the most part, they get stored below decks near the launch tubes.

Granted i am making a whole TON of assumptions, but since the wiki is rather vague on certain points, im basically making guesswork here, until i can figure out exact amounts.

[Batman]

Um-a wing in normally whatever you have available beyond a single squadron. ''Nominally', for Air Force a wing is three squadrons of 12 aircraft, a carrier air wing tends to be whatever you can fit on the carrier, and I have no idea how the Marines or Army handle aviation). Fiction tends to go with the 12x3=36 birds wing (except for Perry Rhodan which goes base ten for some reason).

[LastShadow]

Um-a wing in normally whatever you have available beyond a single squadron. ''Nominally', for Air Force a wing is three squadrons of 12 aircraft, a carrier air wing tends to be whatever you can fit on the carrier, and I have no idea how the Marines or Army handle aviation). Fiction tends to go with the 12x3=36 birds wing (except for Perry Rhodan which goes base ten for some reason).

Im going by Star Wars, which im most familiar with, which is generalized as overall instead of what a vessel can carry(also those numbers are from no longer canon sources), though it appears for the most part, that nBSG squadrons are around 40ish fighters, or close to that. So it is weird numbers all around.

But nBSG seems to go for 2 squadrons of 40,Maybe some reserve fighters stored.

Source for 40 fighter nBSG squadron - http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Galactica_Museum

Also according to that all the fighters are kept in the one pod, so the main wiki page for the Galactica says she has 80 fighters at one point, so if she can hold 80 in one pod, if both pods were fully functional it would seem 160 wouldnt be unreasonable.

According to the Mercury class wiki she can hold 200 fighters in 8 squadrons, but that alters the squadron numbers to 25 fighters per squadron.

So your guess is as good as mine.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

(except for Perry Rhodan which goes base ten for some reason).

I've noticed that about Perry Rhodan. I think it might be so the various people who've worked on the series can more easily keep that detail straight in their minds.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Pegasus could carry more fighters than Galactica did because she had both flight pods working, plus being a newer and bigger ship. Trying to use Galactica's compliment as a baseline is a really bad idea since half her hanger/launch/recovery space was a museum.

Sice Pegasus is listed as only have a single full compliment of Mk. VII fighters, and Galactica (in her heyday) had a full compliment of Mk. II and Mk. III vipers, Note: both had a full Raptor compliment.

Unless a full compliment constitutes a wing, which (correct me if im wrong) is generally assumed to be, 12 groups of 12 fighters for a total of 144.

But Pegasus flight pods where designed to make launch/land faster, she still only has 80 launch tubes, and there are all those facilities on board for construction and repair of vipers that Galactica doesnt have, thats GOT to take up some space.

So i am basically just going off the assumption that at minimum the compliment is that of how many launch tubes they have, at max double the fighters to launch tube ratio. so 80, or 160, or somewhere in between. Then you have storage for said fighters, they dont sit on the flight decks for the most part, they get stored below decks near the launch tubes.

Granted i am making a whole TON of assumptions, but since the wiki is rather vague on certain points, im basically making guesswork here, until i can figure out exact amounts.

The construction facilities almost certainly aren't in the flight pods as that would be a dumb place to put them.

Trying to guess number of fighters by launch tubes is also dumb - would you assume a Nimitz class has four fighters because it has four catapults?

I think tht Galactica-type vessels having 80-120 Vipers when fully operational is a reasonable number, with the specifically newer, larger, more powerful Mercurys (Pegasus) carrying 200 is also reasonable.

[LastShadow]

Pegasus could carry more fighters than Galactica did because she had both flight pods working, plus being a newer and bigger ship. Trying to use Galactica's compliment as a baseline is a really bad idea since half her hanger/launch/recovery space was a museum.

Sice Pegasus is listed as only have a single full compliment of Mk. VII fighters, and Galactica (in her heyday) had a full compliment of Mk. II and Mk. III vipers, Note: both had a full Raptor compliment.

Unless a full compliment constitutes a wing, which (correct me if im wrong) is generally assumed to be, 12 groups of 12 fighters for a total of 144.

But Pegasus flight pods where designed to make launch/land faster, she still only has 80 launch tubes, and there are all those facilities on board for construction and repair of vipers that Galactica doesnt have, thats GOT to take up some space.

So i am basically just going off the assumption that at minimum the compliment is that of how many launch tubes they have, at max double the fighters to launch tube ratio. so 80, or 160, or somewhere in between. Then you have storage for said fighters, they dont sit on the flight decks for the most part, they get stored below decks near the launch tubes.

Granted i am making a whole TON of assumptions, but since the wiki is rather vague on certain points, im basically making guesswork here, until i can figure out exact amounts.

The construction facilities almost certainly aren't in the flight pods as that would be a dumb place to put them.

Trying to guess number of fighters by launch tubes is also dumb - would you assume a Nimitz class has four fighters because it has four catapults?

I think tht Galactica-type vessels having 80-120 Vipers when fully operational is a reasonable number, with the specifically newer, larger, more powerful Mercurys (Pegasus) carrying 200 is also reasonable.

Like i said i was making a TON of assumptions, and later found some conflicting information on the same wiki. A guess is never dumb, unless the guess is so far off and stupid sounding, that it makes no sense.

Also you have to think Battlestars in nBSG launch their fighters in EXTREMELY different ways than a nimitz does, comparing the way they launch fighters for a carry capacity is dumb.

Guessing based on number of launch tubes actually makes sense on something like the Galactica or Pegasus, because of the size of the pods, length of the tubes and number of tubes. 80 tubes is at the least number you would expect a multipurpose carrier type ship with 80 launch tubes to carry.

In theory you could say triple the number if they had fighters stored normally and the tubes always packed with fighters ready to launch.

But still theory and supposition. Though the Pegasus has less space below due to the second "upside down" flight deck. Though pegasus is listed as having 200 fighters in 10 squadrons, 8 active, 2 reserve. So using that as a base line for the lack of numbers for Galactica type, you would get less ships, which would still come to the 80 - 160 margin.

So even if my reasoning isnt totally sound the underlying results are roughly the same, so for a teacher or employer it may not work, but for a discussion on a fictional ship with very little information, its pretty good.

Now if you compared it to something closer to it, instead of a modern ship that functions in no way the same. Comparing a different type of fictional ship that has similar size and functions would have made more sense.

[Eternal_Freedom]

I think you missed my original point. Using Galactica's fighter strength as seen during the series is a bad idea as a) only one flight pod is active and b) it's an extremely unusual situation for the ship.

Actually, a Battlestar launches fighters in a similar fashion to modern carrier: attach fighter to catapalt, fire fighter off the flight deck. Just Battlestars fire them at right angles to the ship's hull rather than straight ahead, in space and with more at once. Basic principle is the same. And it was intended to be a facetious remark to highlight a less-than-sensible comparison, so, yay reading comprehension?

On a different note, IIRC the Mercurys only had one flight deck, fighters landing on the "upside down" landing decks were flipped rightside-up by the elevators. Which strikes me as a needlessly complicated arrangement, since having 4 landing decks instead of 2 is only really of use in combat landings where getting the entire viper group in quickly is important, the upside-down ships can then shuttle themsevles to the rightway up landing deck after they jump to safety.

[ZOmegaZ]

I don't think Confed and the colonial fleet would have many problems getting along. I do think the Cylons would try to kill them all, as would the Kilrathi. Three-way war at that point, and the Cylons lose, badly.

I do think the colonials have one major advantage over Confed tech: they can jump from anywhere to anywhere, not just at predefined jump points along specific routes. That dramatically changes the tactical landscape.