Lit Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)

Discussion in 'Literature' started by AdmiralWesJanson, Sep 12, 2005.

  1. FTeik Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 7, 2000
    star 4
    If that were true, one has to wonder how CEC managed to stay in business? I mean, imagine the chaos, if every shipyard or drydock has a different set of blueprints for the vessels they are supposed to be working on.

    And - once again - considering the many modifications of the MF, what are the correct plans for the YT-1300?
  2. blackmyron Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 29, 2005
    star 5
    "While some enthusiasts erroneously maintain that certain YT-1300 configurations were distinct models of the 'stock light freighter', even more vexing are contradictions about the ship's overall length. Not long after CEC began production of the YT-1300, the model's keel length was improperly recorded on official classification documents, an error in specification that was distributed to spaceports all over the galaxy. Some have attributed the gaffe to a malfunctioning secretarial droid who allegedly served either CEC or the Bureau of Ships and Services (BoSS), while others have blamed it on a policy of misinformation within the highly competitive shipbuilding industry. A few industry insiders purported that the ship's estimated length was filed with the BoSS before the forward mandibles had been incorporated into the design. Spaceport officials and frustrated pilots were among the first to catch on to the numerical discrepancy because YT-1300s were frequently assigned to docking bays that were too small to accommodate their actual bulk.
    Yet another problem turned up when starship mechanics realized that CEC did not authorize the publication of many of the YT-1300 design documents that remain in circulation, and which feature vastly different internal layouts than can be found in existing ships. Some of these documents were based on legitimate alternate designs offered by CEC to buyers seeking customization, but most of these designs were for configurations that were never produced. Evidently, early in the design phase several different sets of prototype deck plans and scale models were stolen from a CEC shipyard office. These materials became widely available, and because they bear official CEC seals the designs are still frequently mistaken as schematics for actual starships."
    -- Millennium Falcon Owner's Workshop Manual, p. 14
  3. Tzizvvt78 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 12, 2009
    star 4
    It's been over half a year, still no source on where they got 120 and 160 for the DS I and II from. If it was so easy, they'd just show people where the source is. For them it would just be a Tumblr-click away. And scanning said source first, of course.
    darthscott3457 likes this.
  4. blackmyron Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 29, 2005
    star 5
    Checking through the Databank, I note that most of the classic OT ships (other than the Falcon) have the same length as they always did. But they also kept the length of the Y-wing, which was slightly different in Incredible Vehicles.
  5. Iron_lord Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    The TCW Y-wing ship looks bulkier than the ANH Y-wing- maybe they're different models.
  6. blackmyron Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 29, 2005
    star 5
    Well, in the LEU at least they are different models - but the Databank just has the "Y-wing" appear in IV,V,Vi and CW.
  7. Tied Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 18, 2013
    star 1

    I just thought it was a good joke, i was being sarcastic, i see your point
  8. seeker_two Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 3, 2003
    star 3
    Evolution of the product line.....look what happened to the X-Wing over the last thirty years.....

    Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
  9. Gamiel Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2012
    star 5
    Do we know how the inside of a Kom'rk-class fighter looks? Do it have bunks, toilet, any kind of food preparation area?
  10. Tied Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 18, 2013
    star 1
    No, and if you go by these new canon fanatics apparently they dont exist
    Last edited by Tied, Aug 10, 2014
  11. Tzizvvt78 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 12, 2009
    star 4
    You mean the ship that originated in a canon source, TCW? :p
  12. Iron_lord Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    I think what he means is that

    "bunks, toilet, any kind of food preparation area?"

    don't exist until we see them.
  13. AdmiralNick22 Fleet Admiral of Literature

    Manager
    Member Since:
    May 28, 2003
    star 6
    @AdmiralWesJanson

    And my fleet thanks you! I can field a Rebel navy larger than Endor, against an Imperial Fleet approaching the Endor size as well. :D

    --Adm. Nick
  14. Zeta1127 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 4
    I can't believe it that Wookieepedia has taken the Anaxes War College System term battlecruiser to heart, even dropping the term Star Battlecruiser from the article name of the Praetor.
    Last edited by Zeta1127, Aug 11, 2014
  15. darthscott3457 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 25, 2007
    star 3

    It is actually listed as a Star Battlecruiser in the latest AoR core rule book. At least it mentions that in the wookieepedia article. AoR also talks about the Anaxes system, I think its nice both get a mention as to show both systems can co-exist , though my personnel preference lies with the Kuati "Star" system.
  16. Zeta1127 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 4
    I am aware of that, which is part of my problem with what Wookieepedia has done.
  17. Iron_lord Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    That book kind of alternates - the article in the AoR book begins with "Praetor II-class Star Battlecruiser" as the heading - but throughout the article itself, it's referred to simply as "battlecruiser".
    darthscott3457 likes this.
  18. Tied Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 18, 2013
    star 1
    If i had a a credit for every Page that was dedicated to bickering over the Anaxes system and battlecrusier namage i could buy a friggin Preator 2
  19. Gorefiend Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 2004
    star 5
    Thought you might find these interesting.
    [IMG][IMG]
    Last edited by Gorefiend, Aug 16, 2014
  20. FTeik Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 7, 2000
    star 4
    One would assume, that TPTB would use the Reboot to get rid of some of the more stupid ideas of the old EU like solar-power collecting TIEs, but no ... .

    Seriously, why even bother, if half of the old stuff becomes part of the new continuity anyway?
    darthscott3457 likes this.
  21. Gorefiend Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 2004
    star 5
  22. Iron_lord Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    Maybe the guys at Lucasfilm Licencing simply prefer WEG to Saxton?
    Gorefiend likes this.
  23. ShanOffirin Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 14, 2006
    star 1

    It's all anyone wants to talk about. I tune out when it comes to Anaxes because I don't care for a planet that never did anything useful for the Empire or the New Republic. When it comes to battlecruisers, I stopped caring after reading Essential Guide to Warfare and just accept what's there.

    Move on to something more interesting please...

    Such as the Rebel Alliance Fleet at Endor, I want to see more on it! (And don't argue about Mon Cal cruisers either).
  24. FTeik Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 7, 2000
    star 4
    1) IIRC, the TIEs colleting solar-power isn't WEG.
    2) this has nothing to do with WEB VS Saxton, because
    3) it is a stupid idea, no matter who came up with it first
    4) if we have to keep parts of the old EU, I wish the "guys at Lucasfilm Licencing" would keep those parts of WEG, that made sense like "augmented Sectorgroups" (ISB), "Imperial Armed Forces doubling in size between ANH and ROTJ" (RASB) or "every Moff has access to weapons of mass-destruction like SuperStarDestroyers or TorpedoSpheres" (CTD).

    All that aside, the Reboot suffers from the lack of a clear cut. Instead of new stories (even new backstories for existing characters), tighter editorial control and a concept, where the journey will go nothing has changed, nothing improved - we are getting a new EU with the same kind of stories, with a lax continuity-control at best, TPTB picking out of the old EU what catches their fancy (and consequently putting into question "what now is part of the New Continuity and what not?"), in other words a weed-like growth, that in a short time will get us, where we have been before: a hugely blown up EU with three dozen models of TIEs, where one dozen would be enough and the main story-lines dealing with Jedi vs Sith, Sith vs Jedi, Sith vs Sith, Jedi vs pseudo-Jedi, with the occasional Mandalorian bounty-hunter thrown in.

    I think my disappointment stems from the fact, that a Reboot would have been a huge chance, if done right. And unfortunately - from the looks of it - this chance is wasted.
  25. Iron_lord Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2012
    star 6
    I wonder. Maybe it goes all the way back to Lucasfilm behind the scenes info?

    "ISD-I: 60 turbolasers 60 ion cannons 10 tractors" seems to be continuing into the new EU - with the Rebels Visual Guide.
  26. Gorefiend Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 2004
    star 5
    I never understood why people where even bothered by it, the TIE is not purely solar powered, it uses a Twin Ion Engine which just happens to get supplemented by whatever solar energy it happens to be able to collect, however little that might be. [face_dunno] The only place that kind of messed up is Black Fleet Crisis in regards to that.



    I really don’t see the problem here, as the ones introduced at least all have varying functions, unlike a certain ship type that had become rather overexposed in the past EU.
    Gamiel likes this.