How would the Arwing stack up against SW starfighters?

Do you think the Arwing would be able to defeat X-Wings, TIE fighters, and other SW fighters?

 

I think it could hold its own against the X-Wing and the TIE series up to the Interceptor. I think the more advanced fighters from the NR and IR would give it a run for its money though.

Still, it all comes down to piloting skills.



Go n-ithe an cat thú is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat.

 

True, but the Arwing is more agile and nimble than almost any fighter in SW. Plus it has shielding equal to, if not better than, the X-Wing.

 

In order to determine one's strength relative to another, we have to look at the weapons' specs in scientific and mathematical terms.

*pulls out StarFox 64 Player's Guide with specs*

According to this guidebook's specs, the Arwing is 18.5 meters in length and 5.5 meters tall (the S in front of the meter symbol most likely indicates an intergalactic standard unit) -- this covers slightly less than a domestic housing property in terms of area, so we know that the Arwing is fairly good-sized. Take that in contrast to the X-wing, at 12.5 meters in length. The Arwing is bigger -- while that enables it to have more stuff, it also makes it a bigger target.

Keep in mind that this is SF64 -- the Arwing has seemingly had a substantial redesign for Star Fox Assault, and is far more compact, as is the Landmaster. This is mentioned in the guide -- the four original Arwings are prototypes developed by Arspace Dynamics under Beltino Toad, Slippy's father, as a test bed for the G-diffuser's gravity-altering technology.

The X-wing, according to all sources that I have on hand (if someone possesses a copy of Saxton-type work saying otherwise please step in and set me straight), hovers around 1,050 km/h in atmosphere within safety limits, which are determined by the ship's responsiveness and shield strength; going much faster would not destroy the ship or anything like that, but it would cause the pilot to lose control. This takes into account the immense durability of the ships we're talking about -- even such a weak ship as the Jedi Starfighter pukes out a kiloton of energy per blaster cannon shot. That's 4,186 GJ every time the moron at the controls feels like pulling the trigger. In less than five seconds, said moron has surpassed the total energy output of the Hiroshima bomb. Even going at a good fraction of C in atmosphere, the energy delivered by the friction and electrostatic force would still be insufficient to destroy the ship in a timely manner, but the KE delivered by crashing head-first into the planet because you sneezed on an oversensitive joystick will be, due to Newton's Third Law. However, the X-wing's default "absolute" speed in space is substantially higher -- 80 MGLT. Its sublight acceleration is listed in the NEGVV as 3700 G. MGLT stands for megalight, which, judging from the cockpit readouts in X-wing Alliance, is one thousandth of the speed of light (when the MGLT readout hits 999, as high as it will go, the warp field appears and you're in hyperspace going a hell of a lot faster than light.) Hence, one megalight is 300,000 m/s. In meters per second, that makes the X-wing's default non-atmospheric speed 24,000,000 m/s, or 24,000 km/sec. Think about that -- it can go around the entire Earth in one second. It's unknown at what absolute speed the Arwing progresses on its own in space, however, since no reading is given for that. No acceleration readout is given, either.

Possible weapon energy levels for the X-wing's cannons include everything from the most conservative estimate, 60 GJ, to figures in the low kiloton range, usually less than ten or so, judging both by known asteroid vaporization figures and the preceding generation of weapons. Let's take an example -- in the Rogue Squadron series, the games have been consistent in that a post-ROTJ blaster cannon takes 3 shots to waste enough a turbolaser to cause an explosion. The cannon itself is bolstered with structural integrity fields to guard against the kickback -- but the rest of the turret obviously isn't. Guess they figure on the gunners destroying the targets before they ever get close enough to get off a clean shot. However, since I didn't want to go around and find a bunch of figures for the chemical properties of steel, I used a scaled shot of a TL and an X-wing to calculate the approximate volume of the turbolaser, and then used geometric formulae to figure out what radius an asteroid would have to have in order to equal that volume. Plug that figure (a diameter of around 20 m) into Mike Wong's handy-dandy Asteroid Destruction Calcula

 

I was wondering if I'd get to see you post in this thread alpha_red. I enjoy seeing how detailed you are in making your decision, and it helps others make their's as well. And I was referring to the mkII Arwing, though I know how hard it can be to find any tech. specs for it.

 

I was wondering if I'd get to see you post in this thread alpha_red.

...I have fans?

I am a physics major and a math addict, so I live for this kind of stuff.

 

You have fans....and I don't....I'm shocked....Ok, not really....

 

I could have told you the Arwing would win without doing all of that analyzing and stuff.

The Arwing simply "feels" better than the X-wing. I'd rather pilot the Arwing. Who wouldn't?

 

Wow alpha_red...you shock me senseless all the time. Trying to apply real physics and math to made-up sci-fi stuff. Truly astonishing. Now, for your next trick, can you tell us now how to make a real lightsaber?

 

You want to see people REALLY try and apply real physics to SF? Go to the OS and check out the Star Trek vs Star Wars debate. It's insane.

 

I think any SW starfighter could easily take the Elvish princess.

What's she going to do, ride on her horse yelling at Wedge, "If you want him, come and claim him," while being strafed by starfighter-scale blaster fire.

 

Yeah but she beat up the Wraith Squadron.

 

Wow alpha_red...you shock me senseless all the time. Trying to apply real physics and math to made-up sci-fi stuff. Truly astonishing. Now, for your next trick, can you tell us now how to make a real lightsaber?

Project an uber-strong magnetic containment field in a cylinder shape using a strong enough power source (Adegan crystal) and then inject a bunch of hyper-intense light waves into the field. The longitudinal waves will ricochet back and form a saber shape. You could do the same thing with plasma, which is on the edge between matter and energy, but you likely wouldn't get much of a difference in terms of effect -- it's the wattage that matters, as matter and energy both exhibit wave properties in addition to particular ones. As far as the crystal's power source, we are supposed to believe that it stems from the Force and is a nearly perfect method of energy transmission. The only real way to do something like that without Force access would be to hook the saber up to some kind of generator. Then you'd have to avoid tripping over the cable. So until someone discovers the Force, we're stuck. The latter mechanism is likely the secret behind Halo's Covenant plasma sword.

*juggles twenty thermal detonators while eating a deep-dish pizza*

You're only making yourself look stupid by refusing to acknowledge quantitative science and by refusing to think when you watch or play something.

You want to see people REALLY try and apply real physics to SF? Go to the OS and check out the Star Trek vs Star Wars debate. It's insane.

There's no real debate -- quantitative analysis based on minimum and maximum-strength weapons yield figures conclusively shows that SW would win any day, any time, against any ST ship. The only people who still debate for the ST side are those who have no concept of either science or the art of debate. I'm quite the connoisseur of those, myself. However, I've heard that the mods over at TOS are idiots -- not just in general but in terms of recognizing what qualifies as valid science -- backing your assertions up with logic and NUMBERS. There's a reason why those who can understand these principles guide the path of our world -- because they're the only ones smart enough to.

Yeah but she beat up Wraith Squadron.

*collapses laughing*

 

Actually, I wouldn't exactly say that the SW.com mods are idiots since I used to post there, by yeah the only people who support Trek in those sorts of debates have the intelligence of a brick wall which basically means that they can't be reasoned with.

BTW were you aware that if Luke's lightsaber projected a rod of plasma, Luke would have very nice set of third degree burns on his face and hands.

Yeah but she beat up the Wraith Squadron

Team of highly commandos armed with guns and bombs>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>single Elven princes armed with a sword.

 

Nope she sent those Wraiths packin with that waterfall attack.

 

Fine, then they just jump in their X-wings and vape her with blaster cannon fire and proton torps. Lets see Elven magic stop high powered particel weapons.

 

quantitative analysis based on minimum and maximum-strength weapons yield figures conclusively shows that SW would win any day, any time, against any ST ship.

Pardon me, and my apparent ignorance, but I would say that is an exaggeration.
The Enterprise-E could easily destroy a TIE fighter. I realize that that is a ridiculous match-up, but it does prove you wrong in saying that SW could defeat any ST ship.
But why limit ST to Federation vessels? A Borg cube would give even an Imperial-class Star Destroyer a run for its money.
The Scimitar from Star Trek: Nemesis would be more than a match for virtually any Star Wars ship. The radiation weapon alone would kill the entire population of a planet; targeting a Star Destroyer would be overkill. Add that to that the ability to fire while cloaked, and only a few ships in all of SW could defeat the Scimitar. And that's not even considering its 52 disruptor banks.
Anyway, the strength of a weapon only matters as much as the brain behind it. It is not weaponry so much as tactics that determine the outcome of a battle. I'm sorry, but the crew of the Enterprise-E has superior training compared to that of, say, the Devastator.
I will admit, however, that I do not know the specific strength of a phaser as compared to a turbolaser, o its effects on ST or SW shielding. I know turbolasers are not really lasers, but a type of superheated plasma, but that is the extent of my knowledge on the technicalities.

 

The main guns on an Acclamator Clone Wars vintage ship are rated at 200 gigatons per shot. The Enterprise's phasers are rated at around 7 megatons per second of beam (through unofficial analysis; I think the TM has them lower, actually).

I'd put my money on any Star Wars capship, especially since their shields are designed to withstand that sort of energy.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/

 

Good link. The Empire or the New Republic would tear Starfleet, the Klingons or anyone else from the Star Trek universe apart.

 

I'd put my money on any Star Wars capship, especially since their shields are designed to withstand that sort of energy.

In sheer numbers, a Star Wars capital would be able to defeat a typical Star Trek ship.
But a Borg Cube would surely defeat a Star Destroyer or Mon Calamari Cruiser. A squad of Borg drones could easily beam over to a Star Destroyer and have control of the ship in a matter of hours.
Also, that site you posted has a few things wrong:
We had subspace sensors more than 25,000 years ago, during the time of Xim the Despot. We can detect cloaked ships using focus-scans or CGT sensors/
That is incorrect. If Star Wars sensors could detect cloaked objects, then the asteroids that Thrawn placed around Coruscant would have been found and destroyed.
The results of those efforts have been seen in projects such as the Suncrusher, World Devastators, and Galaxy Gun.
That is focused almost totally on the Empire. The New Republic had no super weapons of that sort, save for Alpha Red.
They have devoted intense research efforts to the areas of health, recreation, convenience and beauty. However, they appear to have a negative attitude toward aggressive military research, so nascent technologies with potential military applications have languished. This anti-military cultural bias will only make them easier to defeat in a lightning campaign.
Again, this is focused mainly on the Empire. It also assumes that they will only face the Federation. Therefore, this is an incomplete article. I see nothing regarding Klingon or Romulan weaponry; all that is mentioned regarding energy weapons are phasers. Disrupters are not mentioned.
Besides, some species/governments have devoted themselves totally to war; Klingons, Romulans, the Dominion, Cardassians, the Borg, Jem'Hadar,Gorns, Lyrans, Hydrans, Mirak, InterSteallar Concordium... every culture has a different mindset... some even opposes the Federation view.
Also, i see no mention of Fusion Beams, Hellbore Cannons, Plasmatic Pulsar Devices, Plasma Torpedoes, or Expanding Sphere Generators. These may prove decisive in a battle between Star Wars ships and Star Trek ships. To omit them is a serious error on the part of the author of the article.

 

We had subspace sensors more than 25,000 years ago, during the time of Xim the Despot. We can detect cloaked ships using focus-scans or CGT sensors/

That is incorrect. If Star Wars sensors could detect cloaked objects, then the asteroids that Thrawn placed around Coruscant would have been found and destroyed.

Ummmmmmmmmm...........They were. The Empire and the New Republic both use Crystal Grav Trap scanners to search for gravitation anomalies when hunting for cloaked starships.

The results of those efforts have been seen in projects such as the Suncrusher, World Devastators, and Galaxy Gun.

That is focused almost totally on the Empire. The New Republic had no super weapons of that sort, save for Alpha Red.

No, that's true the New Republic does not currently have any super weapons, aside from Alpha Red, but it DOES have the plans for the Death Stars and probably the other Imperial super weapons like the Sun Crusher, the Galaxy Gun and the World Devestators, which means that if the New Republic decided that building a super weapon was necessary, they already have several to chose from.

Also, i see no mention of Fusion Beams, Hellbore Cannons, Plasmatic Pulsar Devices, Plasma Torpedoes, or Expanding Sphere Generators.

What are these exactly?

And tell me what exactly does the Federation use for ground armour, oh that's right I forgot it doesn't becasue it relies on transporters, which is an incredibly finicky piece of technology and one that is absurdly easy to neutralize.

 

I much as I enjoy this current line of discusion, I believe we've strayed too far of topic.

 

Yeah, you're right. If anyone's interested in debate Star Wars vs Trek, go here

 

The Enterprise-E could easily destroy a TIE fighter. I realize that that is a ridiculous match-up, but it does prove you wrong in saying that SW could defeat any ST ship.

Touche, but you know what I mean. The E's guns would indeed make a mess of a TIE fighter. The main phaser banks are rated at about 8.5e4 TW.

But why limit ST to Federation vessels? A Borg cube would give even an Imperial-class Star Destroyer a run for its money.

No, it wouldn't. Considering the comparatively abysmal rating of Trek shields that the Borg cube's beam took multiple seconds to slice through, a Borg cube would be destroyed in short order by nearly any SW ship.

The Scimitar from Star Trek: Nemesis would be more than a match for virtually any Star Wars ship. The radiation weapon alone would kill the entire population of a planet; targeting a Star Destroyer would be overkill. Add that to that the ability to fire while cloaked, and only a few ships in all of SW could defeat the Scimitar. And that's not even considering its 52 disruptor banks.

52 disruptor banks and crappy shielding VS more than 60 turbolasers rated at 200 GT per shot and exponentially, empirically better shielding. Do the math.

Anyway, the strength of a weapon only matters as much as the brain behind it. It is not weaponry so much as tactics that determine the outcome of a battle. I'm sorry, but the crew of the Enterprise-E has superior training compared to that of, say, the Devastator.

I'll grant you that; Imperial officers aren't known for high IQs.

I will admit, however, that I do not know the specific strength of a phaser as compared to a turbolaser, or its effects on ST or SW shielding.

Then you don't know physics at all. It isn't the delivery system that matters -- it's the wattage behind it.

I know turbolasers are not really lasers, but a type of superheated plasma, but that is the extent of my knowledge on the technicalities.

You would be correct there. SW has a far more realistic depiction of plasma weaponry in its blaster technology.

But a Borg Cube would surely defeat a Star Destroyer or Mon Calamari Cruiser. A squad of Borg drones could easily beam over to a Star Destroyer and have control of the ship in a matter of hours.

Depends on whether their technology can handle the SD's computer systems. I'm betting no. Also, they can't beam through shields, and they'd never manage to get off enough firepower to bring them down.

Also, i see no mention of Fusion Beams, Hellbore Cannons, Plasmatic Pulsar Devices, Plasma Torpedoes, or Expanding Sphere Generators.

I recognize the names, but can you come up with power figures for them?