StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Except that design, which makes sense for an ocean-sailing carrier, makes zero sense for a space ship. A space ship in Star Wars has no need for a runway- its just wasted hull space that leaves the ships its carrying exposed while reducing the amount of weaponry/sensors/etc. it can mount on its hull.

Sure, it doesn't look utterly ridiculous visually, but that's only because of what 21st. Century audiences are used to in a "ship". I expect to an actual spaceship engineering in a society like that of Star Wars, if such a thing existed, it would look face-palmingly ludicrous.

Well there is also the fact that it was called a fleet transport, not a warship, but I digress.

As I said originally, compared to some ships that need mocking, that one is fairly low on the list compared to some.

You are making the assumption it is a runway, instead of just a large area for landing pads.

Just because you have a flat deck doesn't mean you have a runway. Amphibious Transport Docks, for instance, do not use their large flat decks as a runway for most of their embarked aircraft and if they really don't want to ANY of their embarked aircraft.

That's obviously not artists intention of course...

we should also be vary of what predictions we make about engineering in scifi universes (including Star Wars), especially if your prediction is "they're idiotics and any child could think of something better" as we rarely if ever anywhere close to complete picture of the strengths and weakness of the technologies involved, any such statement will only be bashing something you like and not dispassionate evaluation. That said you can say the bloody thing looks ugly as hell as that's just a subjective opinion and doesn't pretend to be objective fact.