StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Whats the armour like inside the hanger? Would it be surrounded by armour similar to the exterior hull to prevent an easy kill shot.
In the Darksaber book an exploding TieBomber inside a hanger takes out a Super Star Destroyers main reactor and most of the engines but this strike me as more of a plot device, being the only way this book could have resolved the issue of there being an SSD fighting a single rebel MonCal, rather than the actual design of SSDs.

If the armour is so weak inside the hanger a smaller ship like a Corellian Gunship, armed with missiles could easily stay beneath the hanger, firing missiles up into the hanger, bypassing the armour. (assuming the shields were some how taken down or overloaded by a missile barrage)

It strikes me as logical however to have the hanger cut off from the rest of the ship with armour of at least the same quality as the exterior hull.

nightmare wrote:Some gunships, like the Warrior, are made to take advantage of speed and maneuverability to harass larger ships. It's by no means a foolproof win.

Requires a lot of skill. In the days of sail, it was possible for a swoop to outmanuever and defeat a larger vessel. But with Star Wars, strong shields are a mitigating factor as small ships typically don't carry very power weapons.

I could see a more nimble ship maneuvering behind an ISD and using its superior agility to stay in the blind spot while unloading one barrage after another. The big problem is that an ISD captain who realizes he's got a monkey on his back is likely to launch every fighter, bomber and whatever else he has to get it off his back. Outmaneuvering a larger ship so you can bring more guns to bear than he can should be SOP for any captain.

Lord Revan wrote:what prevent the ISD from using it's hyperdrive for tactical repositioning?

IIRC, FTL sensors aren't precise enough to allow for that sort of positioning. The so-called Thrawn Pincer was devastating because it used Interdictor grav wells to bring reinforcements to a precise spot for a mid-battle ambush.

Darth Tanner wrote:Whats the armour like inside the hanger? Would it be surrounded by armour similar to the exterior hull to prevent an easy kill shot.
In the Darksaber book an exploding TieBomber inside a hanger takes out a Super Star Destroyers main reactor and most of the engines but this strike me as more of a plot device, being the only way this book could have resolved the issue of there being an SSD fighting a single rebel MonCal, rather than the actual design of SSDs.

If the armour is so weak inside the hanger a smaller ship like a Corellian Gunship, armed with missiles could easily stay beneath the hanger, firing missiles up into the hanger, bypassing the armour. (assuming the shields were some how taken down or overloaded by a missile barrage)

It strikes me as logical however to have the hanger cut off from the rest of the ship with armour of at least the same quality as the exterior hull.

I agree with this, after all it would not be unheard of for a missle to accidentally arm or a fueling accident to occur in the hanger, so hardened armor to protect vital components is a MUST. Not to mention what would happen if a planetary turbolaser targeted that convient hole and it wasn't armored. No, I should think that the armor and shielding over that particluar area should be stronger than standard if anything.

Darth Yoshi wrote:

Lord Revan wrote:what prevent the ISD from using it's hyperdrive for tactical repositioning?

IIRC, FTL sensors aren't precise enough to allow for that sort of positioning. The so-called Thrawn Pincer was devastating because it used Interdictor grav wells to bring reinforcements to a precise spot for a mid-battle ambush.

how precise you need to be? After the main point is get the ship into such position that attacker is no longer under it.

Well, if the sensors aren't precise enough, you'd essentiallly be doing a blind jump. You might jump through the mass shadow of another ship, which would suck ass.

Covenant wrote:Thing is, ISD's don't seem to LIKE doing much at high speeds. They're fast in theory, but we've never really seen them move very quickly in combat. Neither Venators or ISDs like to blast past at a few kilometers per second or anything. They're moving really quickly all things considered, but it wouldn't be impossible at all to more than match the speeds they've exhibited in combat.

Probably because km/s level relative speeds would make hitting your target a pain in the ass.

In TESB we did see ISDs exhibit quite impressive agility (Tyrant swinging around after ion cannon hit) and linear acceleration (Falcon was unable to outrun ISDs in open space) so it's going to be very hard to stay below an ISD.

Darth Yoshi wrote:Well, if the sensors aren't precise enough, you'd essentiallly be doing a blind jump. You might jump through the mass shadow of another ship, which would suck ass.

The chances of that are about a gazillion to one against to begin with. Plus it is not a blind jump. Check if there's anything in a 5-degree or so cone around your vector, and if there's not, jump.
And I can't recall anyone ever blaming the trickiness of microjumps on the sensors, IIRC it was the timing that was next to impossible to achieve on account of the rather high speeds involved.

To be honest, I don't ever recall anyone saying why it isn't practical, just that no one ever does it. I merely pulled it out of my ass and tried to justify it somehow.

You do have a point about the speeds however, since the pseudomotion we see as a craft enters hyperspace is just that—an illusion. The craft is already in hyperspace as we watch it rocket off into the distance.

Stardestroyers DO have these neat little tools on their undersides that I have a sneaking suspicion might hurt this "tactic" a little. Tractor-something-or-others.

Some help please?

They're some kind of beams, I think.

Pfft, says a lot you guys know...they're rays...Tractor RAYS!!!!

As for the whole beating an ISD this way, says that you can pump that much energy into your engines, so you're really in little need to out manuver the ISD, given the advantage you have....unless you're a fighter craft.

*clears throat*

'No power in the universe can project a traction beam one million spacials'.

So that can't be it. It's got to be a tractor FIELD. And doesn't that just conjure strange mental images of rampaging farm machinery.

If someone tried to do this why wouldn't the ISD just spin in the opposite direction? Most of it's mass is on the center line, so it would have very little momentum while rolling while the ship running around it would have much more due to moving all of it's weight at the same speed. You should be able to pull a quick decelerate, and reverse your rotation faster than the orbiting ship could reverse course.

Or, just you know... stop all of a sudden.

a nice trick to screw an ISD is to get under it's shields and then use some concussion missiles to destroy important parts, like Solo did in "the courtship of princess Leia"

freker wrote:a nice trick to screw an ISD is to get under it's shields and then use some concussion missiles to destroy important parts, like Solo did in "the courtship of princess Leia"

This would be an excellent plan, except that the movies show that the innermost layers of capital ship shielding is "skintight"; it's either mere centimeters above the hull, or possibly on the hull itself.
Of course, they're a volumetric effect that extends outward some distance, but you can't fly "under" the shields.

Alan Bolte wrote:Perhaps tractor and repulsor beams could be used to prevent the opponent from rolling.

Where are you going to come up with a ship or collection of ships that has enough power and tractor beam emplacements to lockdown an ISD like that--and is still undergunned enough to need to do so?

Alan Bolte wrote:Or one could target the thrusters and engines with projectiles or ion cannons, making it unwise to have shield holes there for the thrust to leave. That, or some sort of weapon that more directly prevents thruster operation, however that might be done.

There are two problems here. First is getting an angle precise enough to shoot through the shields and hit the thrusters--we don't know just how much of a gap the ISD must leave in its shields for its engines to work; it could very well be that the gap is barely sufficient for the exhaust "plume" to escape and in order to shoot into the engine you'd practically have to be inside the propellant wash, which would probably be unhealthy for a vessel that isn't as powerful as an ISD already. Keep in mind also that the engines are already heavily-armored or shielded enough to survive their own engine wash; sufficient firepower to damage them might not be that easy to come by.

The other problem is getting into the position to do this in the first place; dropping out of hyperspace precisely into the arc that will let you threaten the ISDs engines requires you to first know where the ISD will be and at what attitude towards your vessel (ie, facing, turned to the side, etc). It's not impossible, but it would probably require some sort of craft in the vicinity playing 'spotter' and sending a hypercomm message to let the captain of the attacking vessel know where to drop out of hyperspace.

OK, here's my guaranteed way to screw an ISD.

First step, get a largish freighter. Maybe 300m long. It must have a hyperdrive.

Next, point it at the ISD.

Finally, engage hyperdrive. Both ships go boom.

Wouldn't the shields hold? I seem to remember a couple of star destroters hitting the Executor bridge tower head on and just vapourising, leaving the Executor unhurt, wether this is because of the uber level of the executors shields I dont know. The Ram ships in the Corellian trilogy did relatively little damage, and they had reinforced durasteel hulls, 4 of them only crippled a ship slighlty larger than themselves didnt they? (long time since I've read those books)

If ramming was such a powerful tactic it would invalidate the existance of war ships, and would probably make-grav well generators compulsory on every ship.

ramming isn't used because the Alliance can't throw away ships like that?

Plus, grav-wells are useless against hyperspace ramming. The only reason grav-well ships work is because there are software safeties on hyperdrives that drop you out of hyperspace if there's a large mass nearby. If you disengage the safeties, ram away!

I recall there was an EU novel where a mon cal hyper-rammed a SSD and crippled, if not destroyed it.

Plus there was Daala's plot to hyper-ram Coruscant with an ISD, causing huge damage.

You know, hyper-ramming might not even work. It does crazy things to the ships mass, and it's possible striking something in hyperspace kills YOU and does SHIT ALL to the object you hit.

Well, it destroyed an SSD in one of the EU novels. NOw, I konw EU novels aren't exactly the best sources, but as far as I know it hasn't been contradicted.

Hawkwings wrote:Well, it destroyed an SSD in one of the EU novels. NOw, I konw EU novels aren't exactly the best sources, but as far as I know it hasn't been contradicted.

Still, one would think the tactic would be employed more often. I don't think General Grievous would have been too adverse to sending a few of his escort ships into hyper-ram to knock down a portion of the shield that was blocking the Invisible Hand's escape from Coruscant. Certainly, planetary shields are more powerful than an that of an SSD, but since CIS ships were already being destroyed by the hundreds in a vain holding action, you'd think if it was a viable tactic, their deaths would have been put to better use.