Subject:
|
Re: Comparing Starfighter Speeds
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Sat, 25 Jan 2003 13:59:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
673 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Leonard Hoffman writes:
>
> Using this site as a reference:
> http://www.wizards.com/starwars/article.asp?x=sw20020725aconversion2
> * = data from UCS stickers from Gareth's fbtb.net section
>
> I've found some disturbing stats about relative starfighter speeds:
(snip)
> Umm.. hello? does anyone notice that the three Prequel fighters, designed
> and made years before the class movies all go faster than the X-Wing? Even the
> z95 headhunter is faster!! Wasn't the X-Wing supposed to be an amazing upgrade
> to everything that came before? It looks more like a step down! (at least
> speed wise).
>
> And uhhh, the Twin Cloud Car can outspeed the A-Wing and the TIE
> Interceptor? Whaa? This whimpy little thing has better speed than two of the
> most formidible Starfighters? I can only guess that the Cloud Car is designed
> for atmospheric travel, while the A-wing and Tie-Int are for space fighting,
> but still.
>
> Someone please tell me that these figures aren't correct. They seem so
> contrary to reason.. ughh
Now, now, that's High Cold War thinking, equating
speed to power. In dogfighting, the ability to
attain a high absolute speed is secondary to the
ability to maneuver. For example, in WWII (always
a popular referent!) Me-262 pilots, capable of
travelling much faster than any of their opponents,
were routinely shot down by piston-engined P-47s and
P-51s because they were not as capable of maneuver.
The German jets did best when they "lanced through"
a formation of bombers and rapidly shot out of range.
The same holds true in dogfighting today. The
longevity of the F-16 series owes much to the fact
that there's only one jet combatant that can *turn
inside its radius* (the JAS-37 Gripen). The faster
planes in service rely on their standoff-kill capacity
or guided missiles rather than dogfighting ability.
If it were all about speed, we'd never have cancelled
that A-12 programme (which gave us the SR-71, still
the fastest aircraft in service). And the USAF'd still
be afraid of MiG-25s.
So don't worry about the atmospheric-speed numbers;
acceleration and maneuverability are far more im-
portant (and far harder to quantify). Also, the
speed in air is not necessarily the speed in space;
friction is a defining factor in the former, where-
as engine power / mass is the indicator of the latter.
all best
LFB
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Comparing Starfighter Speeds
|
| (...) In this example, there are a lot more factors than just speed vs. manoeuvrability: - Many of those 262s that were shot down were jumped during take-off or landing, when their speed couldn't help them. - That late in the war there were very few (...) (21 years ago, 27-Jan-03, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Comparing Starfighter Speeds
|
| Using this site as a reference: (URL) = data from UCS stickers from Gareth's fbtb.net section I've found some disturbing stats about relative starfighter speeds: Classic Movies: A-wing = 1300 km/h* B-wing = 900 km/h* X-wing = 1050 km/h Y-wing = 800 (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jan-03, to lugnet.starwars)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
