StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Furthermore, pure atmospheric fighters like the V-wing airspeeder, as well as starfighters that were designed to operate in atmospheres (TIE Bombers, Z-95 Headhunters, Scimitar Bombers) have been given atmospheric speeds of about 1,000 kph as well. This isn't WEG intelligently deciding that certain fighters can't operate as well in an atmosphere as they can in space, this is WEG being fucking retarded.

Actually, a question to pose would be how difficult it is to fight a battle at such speeds? Star Wars warfare is more akin to WW2, and is it possible for fighters to dogfight at speeds greater than Mach 2? Also, the stresses on the fighter are greater in the atmosphere than in space.

Already, there were remarks about humans not being able to handle a pod racer racing at less than 1000kph and Anakin was exceptional.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Actually, a question to pose would be how difficult it is to fight a battle at such speeds? Star Wars warfare is more akin to WW2, and is it possible for fighters to dogfight at speeds greater than Mach 2?

Providing you can match speeds with the enemy, it's possible. It's just not very smart. It's much easier to just make a series of strafing attacks, and it gives the enemy less time to react and shoot back at you that way to.

Edit: traditional dogfighting tactics are considered obsolete by modern air forces, as I found out the hard way once when I tried to write an AU modern world fanfic.

That was one thing that occurred to me. Current dogfighting tactics make use of the premise of "shoot first before the enemy shoots". It thus makes it natural to use speed and long range radar to attempt to shoot the missle first.

Whereas in Star Wars, given that the average dogfight is closed range laser shootouts. Aside from the occasional use of concussion missles or proton torpedos, I'm not sure also if pilots could control their fighters with the precision that is required to shoot down the enemy at such high speeds. This applies to space. The question that arises would be whether there is a "cruise" mode for fighters where the fighters can use their maximum speed to cross great distances in a short time.

The only use I have for using extreme speed is strafing attacks, but a head on strafing has long be regarded suicidal, thus limiting the effectives of the attack except perhaps attacks on capital ships.

Well in principle there's no reason you can't go faster in most cases. The engines can provide the thrust, and the shields can probably handle the friction (that does put a limitation on it I believe, it might also represent a strain or draw on the shields in combat, ,since you'd have to handle the frictional forces of passing through the atmosphere as well as weapons fire.)

I should note that by RPG evidence (WOTC's revised core rulebook speficially) atmospheric speed for the Aetherpsrite (for example) was greatly reduced from the ICS entry, so it COULD be seen as a deliberate gameplay mechanic (or a practical limitation for various reasons rather than an absolute limit. After all, they have to accelerate to escape velocity INSIDE the atmosphere, so hypersonic velocities shouldn't be impossible.)

Connor MacLeod wrote:I should note that by RPG evidence (WOTC's revised core rulebook speficially) atmospheric speed for the Aetherpsrite (for example) was greatly reduced from the ICS entry, so it COULD be seen as a deliberate gameplay mechanic (or a practical limitation for various reasons rather than an absolute limit. After all, they have to accelerate to escape velocity INSIDE the atmosphere, so hypersonic velocities shouldn't be impossible.)

Same deal for the starfighters of ROTS. Not only that, they alter other values like acceleration to make starfighters they think should be faster (due to them being "hero" craft) faster. Clearly its a gameplay mechansim.

Ignoring that many modern-day aircraft already are faster than that (if not by much) even at sea level, those 1,000kph can't a straight-line speed limit on account of the rapidity with which they can leave the atmosphere. No can do with that palsy a lower-atmosphere speed.

Wasn't there a calc done a long while ago that placed Imperators accel at in excess of 4,000 G's? Enough thrust that an ISD should be able to spin like a top just by only firing one of those massive engine thrusters.

In regards to atmostpheric capability, particle shields have been stated to be very fucking tough against kinetic forces and friction from what little I have glanced. Concussion missles aren't all that usefull against particle shielded ships and proton torps seem to deal their damage largely through radiation, which ray shields protect against. I don't think any starfighter would have stability issues even at extreme speeds in atmostphere because of their secondary systems:

Particle shields, Repulsor drives (it seems pretty much all fighters and ships have these), and inertial componsators mean that the factors we have to worry about (friction and thermal stress, loss of control, and pilot fatigue) don't come into play at all. If they did then the manuevers fighters pull in space would kill the pilots and tear apart their ships instantly. SW material tech is a given as well so these ships are very tough as is.

Thats my take and I feel environmental concerns and planetary safety are the real reason that ships don't use those speeds in atmostsphere.

Going from memory the NEGtV&V stated that ISDs had an acceleration similar to the Acclamator, Interceptors like the A-wing had accelerations similar to the Delta-7 and Eta-2, the X-wing and MF had the same acceleration as an ISD, MC Cruisers had an acceleration of like 2300 Gs which is too low in my opinion, and the Executor and Immobilisor-418 had accelerations of about 1600 Gs. Essentially the NEGtV&V took WEGs space speed stats and converted them to Gs based on the accelerations provided by the AOTC: ICS. So most look to be in the right ball park like those for ISDs and the MF, and A-wings, while those for the Executor and MC Cruisers are wrong based on observations from the movies.

Ok, it's been 10 days since last post, but. I always took the ~Mach 1 speed limitation to be a limitation of repulsordrive. Every craft with them go about 1200 kph, max. If you want faster, you need to put on extra engines (of a different type). I know of no repulsorcraft that can go much faster. It's also probably an inherent limitation rather than a safety detail since the same thing goes for podracers and swoops.

So we can reconciliate WEG with ICS and say that they can run about x10 with ion engines if need be, but it's risky if you're skimming terrain at such speeds. Takeoff shouldn't pose the same problem.

Call me silly but isn't repulsorlift antigravity, period? Whatever movement they can provide is vertically upwards and that's it. Lateral movement has always been provided by some sort of thruster or other.
Or hasn't it?

Batman wrote:Call me silly but isn't repulsorlift antigravity, period? Whatever movement they can provide is vertically upwards and that's it. Lateral movement has always been provided by some sort of thruster or other.
Or hasn't it?

There's plenty of vehicles with only repulsors moving in all directions. It may be most noticeable in droids, like the probot, Maul's Dark Eyes or the assassin droid outside Padme's apartment. No thrusters anywhere.

Crap. I completely forgot about those.

One might imagine the repulsor only negating gravity on part of the craft, thus making it "fall" forward. This would also give an upper limit to acceleration and speed in atmoshpere (aka terminal velocity). Of course t.v. should probably be lower than 1200 kph due to atmospheric drag, but we don't know the actual workings; maybe they lower friction with a forcefield or something. In any case it follows that you have factual upper limits which depends on the strenght of the gravity well you're in since it provides the pull.

Which would create a need for some kind of thrusters if you want to exceed that limit.

Um-if it negates gravity on only part of the craft the rest of it will still fall downward. The only way to make it fall forward its to put a gravity source in front of it.

Also, if gravity is "off" on one part of the vessel and "on" on another, the torque should cause spinning.

Batman wrote:Um-if it negates gravity on only part of the craft the rest of it will still fall downward. The only way to make it fall forward its to put a gravity source in front of it.

Surlethe wrote:Also, if gravity is "off" on one part of the vessel and "on" on another, the torque should cause spinning.

Hence the word "imagine", as in an analogy. Feel free to come up with your own explanation.

It seems unreasonable to suggest the MF has the same acceleration as an ISD, although perhaps this could be true if all power is directed to engines. In the various chase scenes in SW, the MF would have to have its shields up, which, being quite powerfull for a ship that size (IIRC), would necessarily have to take up a significant chunk of the ship's power.

Alan Bolte wrote:It seems unreasonable to suggest the MF has the same acceleration as an ISD, although perhaps this could be true if all power is directed to engines. In the various chase scenes in SW, the MF would have to have its shields up, which, being quite powerfull for a ship that size (IIRC), would necessarily have to take up a significant chunk of the ship's power.

Unofficially, the peak accel of the MF is 2,750 Gs to the Imperator's 3,000 Gs. Whether or not that will ever be official or not depends on if the tons of notes Dr Saxton left with LFL were added to the Holocron as backinformation or not.

Pretty cool Ender. Hopefully oneday DR. Saxton will post some of his notes from ICS up on Technical Commentaries. Do you have any other nuggests to share?

nightmare wrote:

Batman wrote:Call me silly but isn't repulsorlift antigravity, period? Whatever movement they can provide is vertically upwards and that's it. Lateral movement has always been provided by some sort of thruster or other.
Or hasn't it?

There's plenty of vehicles with only repulsors moving in all directions. It may be most noticeable in droids, like the probot, Maul's Dark Eyes or the assassin droid outside Padme's apartment. No thrusters anywhere.

Good point , though if you listen when Luke is training against the remote in ANH you can clearly hear compressed air being used to move the remote around, Mauls droids might use a system like that.

I don't think it's compressed air (though that is what it sounds like) cos it's makes the sound at the start of the move, but IIRC not at the end... it would need to also use a jet of air to stop it's movement as well as start it. Not only that it's amazingly steady and controlled, like it's held in place, not just floating.

I think it uses a repulsor for lift and compressed air for movement using small burst of air for X and Y axis movement , the stabillity comes from the repulsor, The steady and controlled behavior comes from the jets being controlled by a small droid brain.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Whereas in Star Wars, given that the average dogfight is closed range laser shootouts. Aside from the occasional use of concussion missles or proton torpedos, I'm not sure also if pilots could control their fighters with the precision that is required to shoot down the enemy at such high speeds.

That seems kind of contrived. If a human can't react fast enough why not just have the gun slaved to a computer? SW can create sapient droids and use for them house servants, so a simple fire-control computer should be a snap.

Star-Blighter wrote:Thats my take and I feel environmental concerns and planetary safety are the real reason that ships don't use those speeds in atmostsphere.

It doesn't strike you as a bit silly to worry about damaging people's hearing from sonic booms while you're also bombing them?