MC80/ MC80a - what's the difference?

Is there a difference between the MC80 and the MC80a? Or are the designations menat to represent civilian and military versions of the ship?

Does the MC80 refer to civilian vessels, while the MC80a refers to military vessels? If so, do converted civilian ships change designation from MC80 to MC80a?

 

This is one of the most difficult-to-answer (for me, anyway) questions on Mon Cal cruisers.

According to Star Wars Ships and Vehicles, the MC80a differs from the MC80 in hull design. However, as I recall all MC cruisers differ from each other in hull design. Perhaps it's a big difference, or maybe it's in the structure or materials involved rather than the shape or appearance. The Star Wars Technical Commentaries tends to agree. This is the explanation that I'm comfortable with.

This same site claims that X-wing vs. TIE fighter shows the MC80a as a totally different ship with a length of 1300 m. But the closeness of the designation between MC80 and MC80a makes this hard to believe.

Brody's Star Wars Ships offers different stats for the MC80a, while at the same time saying there is an MC80m but never mentioning the MC80.

 

Hmm... I'll double-check my sources, but I don't think there is much of a difference -- it's probably a weapons/general systems upgrade or something, like MC80a to MC80b.

Edit: Warlord_Ken -- do you have any actual CANON sources, with quotes, saying any of that? I mean, I like verifiable evidence, with canon groundings, and the Tech Commentaries leave a lot to be desired, sometimes.
If not, I'll dig through my extensive library; odds are, if I can't find anything, then the Tech Commentaries and the other sources you listed are just listing BS, and there really isn't an answer (offhand, MC80m sounds like BS -- the only designations I've heard of are MC80, MC80a, and MC80b, and then it goes into MC90).

 

Was the Mon Remoda a MC80/a

 

Mon Remonda was a MC80b as I recall - but the MC80 and the MC80a both seem to have the small stats (length, weapons, etc.)

On the face of it, there is no difference, yet there must be if they warrant two class names.

 

I always theought they just were more heavily armed and such.

 

The MC80 was proabably the original cruiser that the Mon Calamari used as pleasure liners and the MC80As are the crusier with weapons and the like.

 

That seems very logical.

 

I found a good site that illustrates the difference... which is basically squadrons of starfighters for weaponry.

MC80
MC80a

 

Hmm.. as cool as those links are, they don't provide any source information for where they got their data; I've seen enough websites with made-up WEG-esque RPG stats for stuff, that if I don't see a source list of some kind, it ain't canon as far as I'm concerned. I could slap together a MonCal stats website right now, post it to the 'net, and say "Hey guys, lookit!" and so long as my stats jive with the way WEG used to do their stats, and it *seems* reasonable enough, no one would know the difference.

See what I mean?

 

The terms MC80 and MC80a have been used very loosely in the various gaming and other EU sources. There have been at least four distinct Calamari ship designs that have been attributed the name MC80a.

 

You're right Syntax. I am very guilty of not fact checking my sources, so I'll go see if I can do that tonight.

 

Well, the Empire Databank here seems to at least cite their sources. They list the ships as almost identical, though the MC80a carrying more starfighter squadrons.

 

Syntax - Sorry, I don't have any canon sources. LFL doesn't care about Mon Cal cruisers.

In fact, where do we get "canon" sources, other than movies? I'd say novels/comics but few feature Mon Cal cruisers (they focus mainly on those damn Star Destroyers) and when they do they don't mention the length or even the name, often they give vague designations like "light cruiser" or "battleship".

I think the MC80a having a different number of starfighters is the most plausible hypothesis. Due to their near-identical designations, MC80's and MC80a's can't be that different. And I think several warships were also classified as MC80's, so no, they're not exactly the civilian version.

 

Anyone here have the Essential Guide to Vehicles???? I think that may help

 

It doesn't as it lists the winged cruiser Liberty as an MC80 where other sources like the X-wing Strategy Guide list the winged cruiser as an MC80a. WEG's design in the Rebel Sourcebook has been referred to as an MC80a but also the same stats are used in the Thrawn Trilogy Sourcebook under MC80. The various X-wing computer games have created at least three different designs that are all named MC80a.

 

Yes, I do have the EgVV. It states that standard MC80s have three fighter squadrons - it is only the Home One (and any sister ships - possible evidence of their existance in ROTJ) that have ten squadrons. MC80a's have three squadrons - they only started to increase the fighter capacity with construction of the MC80b (Mon Remonda had four squadrons of fighter).

The look of the vessel is unimportant - all Mon Cal vessels are unique. Home One could be a MC80, albeit a larger version of one, and many of the vessels at Endor were different configurations, but all are likely to be MC80s.

MC80 could refer to the original vessels converted for war; the MC80a could be those vessels constructed specifically for war. These could be new vessels that were constructed, or already under construction vessels that were converted.

 

"Canon source" = anything with a Star Wars label, and a LFL copyright. Anything licensed by LFL.

Fan-made websites don't count, unless they can accredit their info to some sort of source that IS canon.