How in Sauraks name did they get a 3rd Torpedo launcher on the XJ3?

I have studied Modles of the X-wing. Ther is no way to put an extra Proton torpedo launcher on the XJ3. But the EU sight at SW . com and the books said they did.
How! Its Physicly impossible!
Even if you got rid of the storage compartment!

How did they do it!

I HAVE TO KNOW!

 

Seems to me that the XJ3 is a re-engineered X-wing from the space frame up, so it can be made longer, the fuselage can be made larger (more volume) and add the third launcher there. Not really a big deal.

 

I hate the new X-Wing, I say they should just treat it likea real military to have them upgrade to new ships.

I would guess they either suqeezed it in on the nose part of the ship, or under on the belly between the two that are already there.

Edit: Can we please watch our language.

 

They had the third launcher on the XJ model, too. They've done alot of stuff with X-wings since RotJ. More powerful engines, lasers, and sensors on the T-65AC4. Better navigation and no astromech on the T-65D A1. A dual-seat trainer; the TX-65. And more...

 

Why is the X-wing still around? Because everyone loves it.

 

^ wont that make the X-wing a bigger target?

 

As has already been mentioned, the XJ3 X-wing is actually a newer version of the XJ X-wing introduced in VP. That version already, apperantly, had a third proton torpedo launcher. But the stuter switch was added on as some of an in the field upgrade, if I recall from Onslaught correctly. Gavin tested it in a sim and his test lead to the upgrade. Other items that were used as battle tactics found their way into the design of the XJ3, making it a new model of the XJ.

 

FYI List of X-wings Listed Chronologically:

T-65B (original Rebel version)
T-65C A2 (main variant used during the rebellion)
T-65R (recon version of the T-65C A2, no weapons)
T-65AC4 (newest version: faster speed, advanced targeting, fire control, and fire distribution over C version)
T-65BR (armed recon version. all old model X-wing refitted into this model. 4 lasers only)
TX-65 (training variant. side-by-side seating, unarmed)
T-65D A1 (no astromech, more sophisticated computers, more maneuverable, more in-flight options)
T-65A3 (improved lasers/shields, needs less power, more efficient and accuarte, secondary fire)
T-65XJ (3 protrops launchers, improved fire-linking capability)
T-65XJ3 (grab-proof shields, variable stutter lasers, decoy-enhanced pro-torps.

 

What about the Enhanced X-wing mentioned in the Corellian Trilogy? I believe it was said to be about as fast, if not faster, as an A-wing.

 

I think it would have been better for EU to treat the Republic like a real military, the old designs go out, and new ones come in. Throw X-Wings in out of the way, non-important places, and let Luke keep his, but groups like Rogue Squardron, the best the Republic has, should be using the most advanced ships in the fleet - either E-Wings or some other Ship. PLus it would push the fact that guys like LUke are getting older, their ships aren't around anymore.

 

I have no trouble believing they put a third torpedo launcher in the thing. The X-wing was meant as a "space superiority fighter," but as shown in the EU, it time and again was thrown up against capital ships without proper support. Giving it half again more heavy firepower is only logical. As to where it is, I've always assumed it's kind of under the fighter's nose.

 

By the time it reaches the end of its service run, the B-52 bomber will have been around for 100 years. It is expected to be taken out of service by 2050. Same goes for the F-4 Phantom, though it has/is already been phased out, but saw service for almost 35 years and was one of the best fighter/bombers in the US Air Force and Navy. As far as I know, it is still used in some squadrons, but is slowly being phased out and is still used for training, and was used in the Gulf War.

With that in mind, I have no problem with the X-wing seeing a service life of 50-250 years. Why? Well, it's a sound design. Second, I think the technology with which they manufacture vehicles in Star Wars land in significantly more advanced than the best that we have- better materials, more advanced design and manufacturing techniques, (They have been building space craft for 25,000 years, which gives them 24,950 year head start on what we can do here on Earth). So, I think if we can keep squadrons of aging bombers in service for 50 years, plus another 50 before phasing them out, because they still have a use, then I see no reason why the X-wing can't servive as long or longer.

 

Well.. the US military are still using F-14 Tomcats aren't they? Comparison match, I believe the X-Wing is the equivalent, meaning that they keep upgrading it to try to match the others...

And what Kier said, it makes sense to me too

 

Actually, I'd say the F-16 Falcon or F-18 Hornet is a closer match to the X-wing than a Tomcat, which I think is closer to a Y-wing. (As I understand it, the F-14 has replaced the F-4 as the 'Lead Sled'.)

 

I would really like to see a picture of the beauties.

 

and remember the x-wing is just an upgrade from the z-95 headhunter

 

I was thinking the third launcher was EXTERNAL, like the gun on an F4.

that would look cool.

 

Lets see, an aircraft designed as a fleet air superiority fighter vs a general fighter/attack aircraft. No, I'd have to say the Cat over the Hornet as comparison to the X-wing. The X-wing was designed as a space superiority fighter, but has been used in multiple roles, just like the Tomcat.

 

Lets see, an aircraft designed as a fleet air superiority fighter vs a general fighter/attack aircraft. No, I'd have to say the Cat over the Hornet as comparison to the X-wing. The X-wing was designed as a space superiority fighter, but has been used in multiple roles, just like the Tomcat.

Well, not a Y-wing now that I actually think about it, the Y-wing is a bomber, and not really cut out for the starfighting end of the bargain, though it can do it.

The F-16 is a multi-role aircraft- fighter and bomber, plus it can do intercept duty, same with the F-18, the only major difference is that the Hornet is carrier based, whereas the Falcon is not. The F-14 has never been configured for bombing missions, something the X-wing can do, i.e. torpedo runs against a capital ship vs. Phoenix missile runs on a sea-going vessel. Unless of course there have been changes to the uses of the Tomcat that I don't know about (very likely).

 

Excuse me, but the Tomcat has been configured for bombing runs. Snakeye bombs have been loaded under the fuselage on the missile pallets which regulary carry the AIM-54 Phoenix AAM. Despite being designed as a Fleet Air Superiority fighter, the Cat was also designed to carry out ground attacks. In addition, using the Tactical Airborne Reconnaissance Pod System (TARPS), Tomcats (more precisely the F-14D) can act as recon aircraft. And they have flown bombing mission over Afganistan this year. If you would like, I can see if I can get some scans of Cats armed with Snakeyes and a TARPS. I assure you I have the pics, both of which appear in Gallery Books book Classic Warplanes: Grumman F-14 Tomcat by Lindsay Peacock.

 

Um, Knight, chill out, 'kay? Read the last sentence of my post, especially the two words in parenthesis.

 

Kier, no offense was meant. But the data I was using was from the late 80s. Any changes made since then are not reflected in that post. Considering the Tomcat is my fav modern fighter, I tend to be picky about it.

 

Wow, only 30 seconds before the response screen popped up after I hit 'Post reply', could the boards be any slower?

Knight, I'm almost 33 years old and I haven't delved into fighter aircraft with any great detail since the EARLY 80's, so my knowledge was limited and I said as much. I wasn't offended, but rather taken aback by the abruptness of your reply.

To be honest, I haven't liked the 'Cat since Top Gun- that film ruined it for me.

I was actually always partial to the Phantom; it was such an extraordinary aircraft.

 

I know how you feel Knight. I've got a large soft spot for the Tomcat. Ever since I first saw it and I fell in love with it. I saw Top Gun for the first time last year, it was okay but I don't like Tom Cruise, I watched it for the Tomcat, just like I started to watch JAG because the promo for it when it started here in 1996 showed the Tomcat a lot. Though now I like the show for some other reason (not just because of Catherine Bell).

It is going to be a sad day when it finally retires.

If I ever get rich enough I wouldn't mind buying an old Tomcat.