StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The ILM models for both Home-1 and liberty are the same length (244cm Ref: SW Archives p104). Why make the models the same length if one is supposed to be over twice the length (2.5 times) of the other?
Consider that the ISD Avenger model which the Mon-calmarian ships were filmed up close with in Return of the Jedi, is 259cm long (Ref: SW Archives p57)

Home-One isn't a battleship, it's a carrier. 10 sqds of fighters are the true power of H-1, it can stand off in deep space, as a command vessel, and direct its fighters. The weapons it carries are purely defensive, to ward off an attacker while it races for hyperspace.

Darth PhysBod wrote:The ILM models for both Home-1 and liberty are the same length (244cm Ref: SW Archives p104). Why make the models the same length if one is supposed to be over twice the length (2.5 times) of the other?

A bit unusual, isn't it? Still, cinematic scaling conclusively shows that the length of Home One is greater than that of Liberty.

Consider that the ISD Avenger model which the Mon-calmarian ships were filmed up close with in Return of the Jedi, is 259cm long (Ref: SW Archives p57)

Indeed, which would give the Liberty a length of ~1512.8m, and AFAIK that nicely corraborates with the broadside-to-broadeside shot of a Liberty and an ISD.

Andras wrote:Home-One isn't a battleship, it's a carrier. 10 sqds of fighters are the true power of H-1, it can stand off in deep space, as a command vessel, and direct its fighters. The weapons it carries are purely defensive, to ward off an attacker while it races for hyperspace.

Still, with only 29 turbolasers I doubt it could do much to ward off its attackers (even given the superior Mon Calamari shield practices).

Andras wrote:Home-One isn't a battleship, it's a carrier.

No, its a cruiser. For a battleship look to the Viscount class, for a carrier look to the Endurance class

10 sqds of fighters are the true power of H-1, it can stand off in deep space, as a command vessel, and direct its fighters.

So it is your opinion that 120 fighters packing MT level warheads are a more effective weapon then broadsides of GT level HTLs?

The weapons it carries are purely defensive, to ward off an attacker while it races for hyperspace.

To be frank, that is an idiotic statement. The guns aboard the Mon Cal cruisers are the Biggest TLs we see in the movies (those on the DCS are longer but have a smaller bore). The thing severly outguns frigates like the Katana class Dreadnaught or even Star Destroyers. And you think that makes it a carrier with a light defensive armerment?

Ender wrote:

10 sqds of fighters are the true power of H-1, it can stand off in deep space, as a command vessel, and direct its fighters.

So it is your opinion that 120 fighters packing MT level warheads are a more effective weapon then broadsides of GT level HTLs?

In the context of Rebel tactics it make sense, though. The Rebels didn't really like fleet engagements (to do so would risk valuable capital ships), so they could have a carrier vessel drop out of hyperspace somewhere and start staging fighter on long-range strikes on convoys or whatever.

To be frank, that is an idiotic statement. The guns aboard the Mon Cal cruisers are the Biggest TLs we see in the movies (those on the DCS are longer but have a smaller bore). The thing severly outguns frigates like the Katana class Dreadnaught or even Star Destroyers. And you think that makes it a carrier with a light defensive armerment?

Actually, do we really have any evidence that Home One must outgun large ships?

The rebel hq in ANH was referred as a secret place where they can refuel and repair their ships and it appeared to be a fighter base (at least it lacked large orbital docks (just as the base on Hoth)). As I know Home One was dedicated (maybe even designed) to be the mobile hq of the Alliance, wasn't it? So, a carrier which does not show up on the battlefields.
Personal opinion about the design criterias:
There is allways a chance that the imperial fleet succeeds in finding her, so she must be able to flee. If they (the imperial force) were pure warships only, the shielding would be enough. If they were warships with interdictors, no shielding would be able to save her alone. So, I think it had to be able to quickly destroy known (at that time) ships which could otherwise stop her from reaching the safety of hyperspace.

Ender wrote:

Andras wrote:Home-One isn't a battleship, it's a carrier.

No, its a cruiser. For a battleship look to the Viscount class, for a carrier look to the Endurance class

10 sqds of fighters are the true power of H-1, it can stand off in deep space, as a command vessel, and direct its fighters.

So it is your opinion that 120 fighters packing MT level warheads are a more effective weapon then broadsides of GT level HTLs?

The weapons it carries are purely defensive, to ward off an attacker while it races for hyperspace.

To be frank, that is an idiotic statement. The guns aboard the Mon Cal cruisers are the Biggest TLs we see in the movies (those on the DCS are longer but have a smaller bore). The thing severly outguns frigates like the Katana class Dreadnaught or even Star Destroyers. And you think that makes it a carrier with a light defensive armerment?

Viscounts and Endurance's don't exist during the Rebellion era. Home-One was /The/ primary Commandship during the /entire/ rebellion era. Most MC ships could carry 3 sqds, it carried 10. It would have been the height of idiocy to risk it in fleet combat when THAT WASN'T THE POINT OF REBELLION FLEET STRATEGY.

B-wings were designed specifically to destroy Neb-Bs and other capital class convoy escorts, so yeah, I'd say that the fighter armament is /effective in the context of it's use./

The /only/ time H-1 was deliberately risked in fleet combat, during the Rebellion, was the one battle that the entire fleet was involved in: Endor.

Retired

Ender wrote:The guns aboard the Mon Cal cruisers are the Biggest TLs we see in the movies (those on the DCS are longer but have a smaller bore). The thing severly outguns frigates like the Katana class Dreadnaught or even Star Destroyers. And you think that makes it a carrier with a light defensive armerment?

Do we have any real proof that just because the guns are bigger they're more powerful though?

I just find it hard to accept that Home One ouguns a Star Destroyer.

Well it'd be pretty fucking rediculous to have large guns that are inferior to small guns in every way. If they aren't more powerful, they must be more durable, possess higher rates of fire, better range, or some other combat benefit.

Howedar wrote:Well it'd be pretty fucking rediculous to have large guns that are inferior to small guns in every way. If they aren't more powerful, they must be more durable, possess higher rates of fire, better range, or some other combat benefit.

Could just be that they're older, less efficient models. Would fit with the rebels making use of what they had.

Andras wrote:

Ender wrote:

Andras wrote:Home-One isn't a battleship, it's a carrier.

No, its a cruiser. For a battleship look to the Viscount class, for a carrier look to the Endurance class

10 sqds of fighters are the true power of H-1, it can stand off in deep space, as a command vessel, and direct its fighters.

So it is your opinion that 120 fighters packing MT level warheads are a more effective weapon then broadsides of GT level HTLs?

The weapons it carries are purely defensive, to ward off an attacker while it races for hyperspace.

To be frank, that is an idiotic statement. The guns aboard the Mon Cal cruisers are the Biggest TLs we see in the movies (those on the DCS are longer but have a smaller bore). The thing severly outguns frigates like the Katana class Dreadnaught or even Star Destroyers. And you think that makes it a carrier with a light defensive armerment?

Viscounts and Endurance's don't exist during the Rebellion era.

Lets review:
You: "Home one isn't a battleship, its a carrier"
Me: "No its not, its design is totally different from these two designs that are those and it is not similar to either"
You: "You are wrong because Home one was during the rebellion era"

Wow, brilliant refutation there.

Let me repeat this: Its design is totally different from that of a carrier and that of a battleship. It is in fact explicetly labeled a "Star Cruiser".

It isn't a carrier, it is a cruiser.

Home-One was /The/ primary Commandship during the /entire/ rebellion era. Most MC ships could carry 3 sqds, it carried 10.

Irrelevent to the topic at hand. Quit clouding the issue

It would have been the height of idiocy to risk it in fleet combat when THAT WASN'T THE POINT OF REBELLION FLEET STRATEGY.

Rebellion era sourcebook says differently, Akbar was specifically ordered to have the fleet ready for combat, and the book also displays fleet tactics clearly showing that ship to ship combat was a priority.

B-wings were designed specifically to destroy Neb-Bs and other capital class convoy escorts, so yeah, I'd say that the fighter armament is /effective in the context of it's use./

It takes most of its fighter compliment for them to take down a small picket ship, and you think thismeans they will be effective against a ship of the line?

The /only/ time H-1 was deliberately risked in fleet combat, during the Rebellion, was the one battle that the entire fleet was involved in: Endor.

Care to prove that absolutist statement?

I'm gonna repeat this again for you since most of this didn't touch my argument:

Home one is specifically called a cruiser, and is armed and acts in a manner consistent with that, as we observe in the movies and is demonstrated in the Rebel Sourcebook.

Sharp-kun wrote:

Ender wrote:The guns aboard the Mon Cal cruisers are the Biggest TLs we see in the movies (those on the DCS are longer but have a smaller bore). The thing severly outguns frigates like the Katana class Dreadnaught or even Star Destroyers. And you think that makes it a carrier with a light defensive armerment?

Do we have any real proof that just because the guns are bigger they're more powerful though?

Maybe because that's how it is with everything else and we have no reason to believe this is a special case? Just a thought.

I just find it hard to accept that Home One ouguns a Star Destroyer.

Lets see:

Home One is a cruiser (it appears to be a heavy cruiser actually). Cruisers typically outgun destroyers.

Home One can bring a larger number of larger weapons to bear on any given point then an ISD can.

Home one is over twice as long as a Destroyer, and has almost 3.5 times the volume and corresponding tonnage.

Given that it is larger and still faster that means it has larger and thus more powerful generators meaning more power can go to weapons

It has a larger number of heavier weapons

So based off all this, you think its odd that Home One outguns an ISD? Did you think Home one was one of those WEG mon cals?

Sharp-kun wrote:

Howedar wrote:Well it'd be pretty fucking rediculous to have large guns that are inferior to small guns in every way. If they aren't more powerful, they must be more durable, possess higher rates of fire, better range, or some other combat benefit.

Could just be that they're older, less efficient models. Would fit with the rebels making use of what they had.

Doesn't fit unless you think there is a gaping disparity between the ISD 1 and ISD 2 class. Which tthere isn't.

Both are able to do a BDZ in the same amount of time, but the ISD 1 has far fewer HTLs. Thus those HTLs must be more powerful. They are also larger, so it follows the larger the weapon is, the more powerful.

Howedar is right that barrel length influences range (another edge for the Mon Cals) However overall size is also related.

Crayz9000 wrote:First off, Home One was not an MC80. The MC80 was a much, much shorter design.

Home One measured approximately 3.2 kilometers in length. The MC80, by comparison, measures 1.2 kilometers.

As for when it retired, I'm not sure.

The Home One is ~3.8 kilometers according to Saxton's scaling calculations.

Darth PhysBod wrote:The ILM models for both Home-1 and liberty are the same length (244cm Ref: SW Archives p104). Why make the models the same length if one is supposed to be over twice the length (2.5 times) of the other?
Consider that the ISD Avenger model which the Mon-calmarian ships were filmed up close with in Return of the Jedi, is 259cm long (Ref: SW Archives p57)

Then again, in ANH the corvette model was over twice the size of the ISD model.

YT300000 wrote:

Darth PhysBod wrote:The ILM models for both Home-1 and liberty are the same length (244cm Ref: SW Archives p104). Why make the models the same length if one is supposed to be over twice the length (2.5 times) of the other?
Consider that the ISD Avenger model which the Mon-calmarian ships were filmed up close with in Return of the Jedi, is 259cm long (Ref: SW Archives p57)

Then again, in ANH the corvette model was over twice the size of the ISD model.

The one used in the same shots?

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

YT300000 wrote:

Darth PhysBod wrote:The ILM models for both Home-1 and liberty are the same length (244cm Ref: SW Archives p104). Why make the models the same length if one is supposed to be over twice the length (2.5 times) of the other?
Consider that the ISD Avenger model which the Mon-calmarian ships were filmed up close with in Return of the Jedi, is 259cm long (Ref: SW Archives p57)

Then again, in ANH the corvette model was over twice the size of the ISD model.

The one used in the same shots?

Yes, I was refering to the models used in the opening scene.

YT300000 wrote:Yes, I was refering to the models used in the opening scene.

How does that work for the image of the Tantive docking inside the ISD?

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

YT300000 wrote:Yes, I was refering to the models used in the opening scene.

How does that work for the image of the Tantive docking inside the ISD?

It must have been another model.

SW.com wrote:For A New Hope, ILM used a single Star Destroyer model for all the required shots in the film. Ironically, the model of the Devastator, Darth Vader's ship, was smaller than the Rebel blockade runner it was chasing. This 91-centimeter long miniature sported a distinctive X-shaped structure on its command bridge, which subsequent publications identified as an advanced tractor beam grid.

YT300000 wrote:It must have been another model.

Which is the point! Such a model does depict the vessels in accurate-scale relationships. You don't use the huge model which wasn't in a proper scaling relationship on film anyway to disprove the man's point.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

YT300000 wrote:It must have been another model.

Which is the point! Such a model does depict the vessels in accurate-scale relationships. You don't use the huge model which wasn't in a proper scaling relationship on film anyway to disprove the man's point.

Sorry that I wasn't clear enough, I meant that the hangar must have been another model. Looking at the SW.com quote, only 1 ISD model was used in the movie, so it can't have been another complete model.

YT300000 wrote:

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

YT300000 wrote:It must have been another model.

Which is the point! Such a model does depict the vessels in accurate-scale relationships. You don't use the huge model which wasn't in a proper scaling relationship on film anyway to disprove the man's point.

Sorry that I wasn't clear enough, I meant that the hangar must have been another model. Looking at the SW.com quote, only 1 ISD model was used in the movie, so it can't have been another complete model.

Not a problem: you compare the Tantive IV to the hangar mock-up hangar-bay length, then extrapolate that to the ISD model.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Not a problem: you compare the Tantive IV to the hangar mock-up hangar-bay length, then extrapolate that to the ISD model.

Which makes it clear that the CRV is about one tenth of an ISD (length).

But that's not the point. PhysBod was using the model lengths themselves, and asked why a ship twice as long had a model the same size, to which I replied that the ISD was smaller than the CRV in ANH.

Ender: There's no reason to assume a large fleet carrier cannot carry heavy guns which outmatch vastly less massive destroyers.

The poor firing arcs of Home One, her cavernous and unarmored hangar bays exposed upon broadsiding (which is really the Home One design's advantage would be heavy broadsides), and an emphasis on hangar space, as well as the Rebel premium on fighter operations suggests to me that the Home One was a heavy fleet carrier, perhaps a cruiser-carrier.

The Viscount-class and Mediator-class prove nothing about the Home One. The formers were scaled as battleships and battlecruisers over two decades after Home One was built. There's no compelling reason vessels built decades apart by radically different groups for different purposes fighting different kinds of warfare scaled vessels the exact same.

Besides, the Calamari scale the Liberty-class Star Cruisers as such, but Connor calced them as being less massive than the Imperial-class Star Destroyers.