SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-29-07, 01:37 AM   #16
Kazuaki Shimazaki II
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,140
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Clearly, the wings have nothing to do with aerodynamics, as there is nothing aerodynamic about 99% of the vessels in the Star Wars universe, and almost everything short of the Death Star makes controlled landfall and takeoff. (Seriously, how does the Millennium Falcon do it? It’s a stunted frisbee! Eh, a question for another day…)
With the raw power of SW engines, it is possible to make a brick fly through the air, and dissipate or withstand the friction heat with shields and uber-hulls. This does not equate that aerodynamics does not help.

Quote:
As to the suggestion that the so-called “S-foils” are used to generate deflector shields, that doesn’t explain how the other fighters in the Rebel fleet create defensive energy screens (well, maybe the B-Wing). It just doesn’t add up.
That the X-Wing employed a certain technical solution to a common problem does not equate that other technical solutions are impossible.

Quote:
Now, I grant you, looking for science in Star Wars is a largely a futile gesture (Parsecs are a unit of distance, not time!)
They actually retconned this one in the EU by saying that Han Solo, flying a difficult course and cutting corners, managed to reduce the total distance of a trip by what must have been a tiny fraction, just enough to get it under 12 parsecs of distance.
Kazuaki Shimazaki II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-07, 05:50 AM   #17
joea
Silent Hunter
 
joea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: At periscope depth in Lake Geneva
Posts: 3,512
Downloads: 25
Uploads: 0
Default

Ok I was wrong about the TIE fighters.



:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
joea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-07, 11:15 AM   #18
SUBMAN1
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,866
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Well, here is what the rest of the world though about this question:

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/geekend/?p=522

-S
__________________
SUBMAN1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-07, 11:38 AM   #19
fatty
The Old Man
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,448
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0
Default

I recall from a few of the X-Wing novels that the wings served two purposes. First, in their deployed mode, they spread the cannons far enough apart that their high-powered discharges wouldn't damage each other. Second, they provided improved maneuverability during combat in atmosphere. Yes, with enough engines and repulsorlifts anything could fly, but not necessarily fly well. In one of the books they state that the TIE fighters lost all of the maneuverability advantages they had in the vacuum of space when fighting the skies, and the X-Wings were able to fly circles around them.
fatty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-07, 04:21 PM   #20
TLAM Strike
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Rochester, New York
Posts: 8,633
Downloads: 29
Uploads: 6


Default

Fatty is on the right track.

I have about as much sim-flight time in X-Wings as some around here have in say F-16s etc so...

The S-Foils do four things.
1) Places the cannons away from each other and the hull so they don't damage the X-Wing.
2) Repulsors on each wing add to monuverablity in atmo. Think about an minature X-Wing hovering in mid air, push at the far end of one S-Foil and what happens compared to pushing near the engines. A repulsor at the end of the S-Foil has a more dramadic effect.
3) Heat disspation without compamizing atmospheric handeling, Eyeballs (TIE Fighters to you non-Starfight folk) have huge pannels to disspate heat, in atmo those pannels act like massive speedbreaks in turning manuvers forcing the pilot to bank and then turn. X-Wings don't simply because the S-Foils allow air to flow around them.
4) Weapons Placment. The cannon are farther away from center giving the pilot a bigger cone of fire.
__________________


TLAM Strike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-07, 04:00 AM   #21
d@rk51d3
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 1,952
Downloads: 207
Uploads: 0
Default

I know that the TIE fighters "wings" were solar panels to charge weps and shields, probably something similar for the X-Wing too.:hmm:



I guess they couldn't really call it an X-Wing if it didn't have wings though.
d@rk51d3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-07, 12:53 PM   #22
goldorak
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,320
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
I was reading something, and found this question in an article. Maybe we can answer this question here! I can't give a good idea as to why, nor could I when I was 10 years old either. Maybe someone can enlighten me?

-S
No scientific explanation but an artistic one.
Lucas wanted to capture WW2 aerial dogfighting in Star Wars.
Just look at the movements of the x-wing fighters during the attack on the death star, the dives, the incoming flack, the tie fighters vs the x-wings its all reminescent of ww2 aerial dogfighting and bombing, think zeros against corsairs.
In private showings of early edits of the film he actually used real ww2 footage to convey the kind of combat in space he was aspiring to depict in the final film.
You shoud read the book : The making of Star Wars by J.W Rinzler.
It discusses the whole Star Wars project from the early seventies up until the release in 1977.
goldorak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.