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

Okay still, if those bombs are electromagnetically ejected out of the weapons bay, there are on a linear trajectory and not travelling very fast. So the B/SF-17 must point its weapons bay at the target at such close range that the target vessel doesn't have time to maneuver out of the way. Not exactly a winning tactic/weapon/platform.

 

Are we forgetting ESB exists?

 

No. Whether those TIE Bombers are employing free-fall (gravity) bombs or bombs somehow ejected out of the weapons bay, attacking the surface of a astronomical object like a large asteroid is a lot different in my mind then a maneuvering ship.

The Empire may have suspected the Falcon had gone into an asteroid and were bombing the surface to try and cave-in their hiding place.

TIE Bombers have (from Wookiepedia - Canon):

So they are equipped to carry a range of weapons and could employ those weapons in different ways depending on the target and situation.

The tactic the B/SF-17 employed during the D'Qar evacuation was close to suicide.

 

OK but what about all those times TIE Bombers attacked capital ships in Star Wars Rebels, e.g. the Quasar Fire in Homecoming and Nebulons, Dorneans, Hammerheads, CR90s, and GR75s in Zero Hour?

 

Were the TIE Bombers used inappropriately*? My problem is that there was no reason for bombs to be used in TLJ. I'm not saying bombs shouldn't exist period. What was done at D'Qar could have easily been done by torpedoes and it would have been much safer.
*EDIT: In ESB.
EDIT 2: I haven't watched the recent seasons of Rebels.

 

There are at least 2 instances that I can recall of TIE Bombers dropping their payloads right on top of capital ship targets, many more examples of them bombing land targets, and one example of them dropping a non-explosive payload onto a YT-2400 freighter. If I were to delve into comics and novels and video games I could probably scrounge a few more, to say nothing of their implied off-screen use in the films, e.g. at Endor.

 

Like SpecForce Trooper, I do not have a problem with the employment of un-powered bombs, depending on the engagement. A TIE/sa firing out proton bombs at a capital ship makes a lot more sense than the B/SF-17 because it has a much smaller payload, is faster, and more maneuverable.

The B/SF-17 supposedly carries 1,048 proton bombs, and would make an excellent bomber against ground-targets on a astronomical object. The use of un-powered weapons deployed from the B/SF-17 is obviously limited, as we saw.

A B/SF-17 loaded with 1,048 proton torpedo...would be a devastating weapons platform against enemy ships.

 

But they are powered, they are magnetically impelled from the racks like a Gaussian gun or Rods-From-God.

 

They are not POWERED. They are imparted velocity by the weapons platform (a B/SF-17 or TIE/sa), but from what I have seen, they do not travel very fast.

Requiring a lumbering bomber to maneuver into close range of an enemy vessel in order to effective deploy its ordnance is sub-optimal.

 

If you can get 1048 Proton Torpedoes.

 

Everything about Star Wars space combat is suboptimal, you realize this yes? Line of sight weapons, no beyond visual range missiles, no point defenses on capital ships. It's almost like it's a goofy space adventure!

 

The way Star Wars is perceived is no doubt different for every person. As I am an engineer and have an interest in military equipment, I will have different opinions than you. Perhaps defending my opinion is ludicrous because as you point out, it is all make-believe, but then, what's the point of this discussion board?

I'm simply pointing that the B/SF-17 would be much better equipped for space combat with powered and guided weapons.

 

I think you're still missing the part where a single bomber completely destoryed a giant dreadnaught.

Given the context, that simply wouldn't have been possible with proton bombs. With proper coverage from a full fighter escort StarFortresses would devestate enemy capital ships.

 

I liked the idea from the art book that the bomb rack is a giant clip that can be swapped out.

 

Yeah, it reminded me of the concept for modular weapon platforms for the ShaShore-class frigates from the Legacy comics in the old EU.

Granted, we never saw it actually used in Legacy, but I always remember how cool I thought the concept was initially.

--Adm. Nick

 

Wasn't this the ShaShore? Only good Legacy era design IMO. Could go great in OT-ST era

 

It would, but it's pretty clear from the get go six bombers and one squadron of fighters against 4 Star Destroyers, a Dreadnought AND all of their fighter wings was going to have high casualties regardless of their effectiveness. As it stands, the one bomber that DID get through sunk a heavy warship. Had it not been the entire strategic reserve of the Resistance, i.e., the New Republic fleet was still in existence, it would have been a solid victory, rather than a Pyrrhic one.

 

Actually it was eight bombers and nearly two squadrons of fighters against a Dreadnought, 3 Star Destroyers and much of their fighter compliment.

 

That's still incredibly overstacked odds. Hera's squadron was torn to ribbons by Thrawn in similar circumstances, and they weren't even trying to engage a Destroyer, just punch past them.

Regardless, a handful of fighters for a dreadnought, in terms of materials exchange, was outrageously effective. The fact that the Resistance is a minuscule paramilitary force facing down a full borne armada doesn't exactly make the feat less impressive.

It's like saying, "Boy it was a stupid idea to send canvas fighters up against a battleship, I mean, they were shot to pieces!"

 

It would be.....if it could move faster than the average commuter train. It took over a minute for it to travel half the length of that Dreadnaught to hit its target. I think my old pickup truck can go faster. Sure made the FO TIEs job easy.....


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

You should be glad it made it there at all considering the cockpit and pilot had been blown up before it ever reached the Dreadnought and it was running solely on inertia

 

I'd have been glad if a squadron of B-wings had made it instead.....

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

Which reminds me that it's total baloney that there's no B-wings or TIE Defenders in Battlefront 2 when they had the frickin' models in BF2015

 

The way Star Wars is perceived is no doubt different for every person. As I am an engineer and have an interest in military equipment, I will have different opinions than you. Perhaps defending my opinion is ludicrous because as you point out, it is all make-believe, but then, what's the point of this discussion board?

I'm simply pointing that the B/SF-17 would be much better equipped for space combat with powered and guided weapons.[/QUOTE]

Exactly, this is one of those things were everyone is gonna have their own limits to their Suspension of Disbelief. Yes, Star Wars is not hard Sci Fi and has unrealistic space combat. Yet I'm sure most of the audience would be rolling their eyes if the next movie shows an AT-AT walking through space, or has Star Destroyers armed with catapults hurling rocks, or unironically repeats that Simpsons quote about "Space Air".

Star Wars plays fast and loose with the laws of physics, but everyone is going to have their own ideas or personal preference for HOW much it should bend them.

 

RE: point defense weapons, I do appreciate that we're seeing them more and more common in the new canon. Considering that Star Destroyers and Mon Cal cruisers are basically hybrids of WWII carriers & battleships, it makes sense that they field both heavy cannons (akin to the 16 inch guns of WWII), defensive cannons (think 20mm guns, 40mm Bofors, etc), and carry mixed wings of combat craft.

I believe the only guns we actually see fire on the Raddus are their point defense cannons. I know that the Ninka fires her upper heavy turbolaser turret too.

--Adm. Nick