Dragon1 said:Oh I see, Confed utilizes a quantum phase-flux inducer to magnify the gravatetic isolinear acceleration tiles to thrust fighters into space.
FlashFire82 said:With the kind of power that these ships put out, and the fact that the force of lift isn't needed in space, a catapult system would seem inneffective.
Dragon1 said:Are these magnetic or gravitic catapults that we are talking about?
Death said:As I recall (don't have WC4N handy at the moment), it wasn't the propulsion mechanism itself, but the magnetic guides that kept the ship to be launched in proper alignment, so it wouldn't get, for example, catapulted into the sides of the bay.
That's from memory, though, so it's entirely possible I'm misremembering things.
Bandit LOAF said:The Concordia-class doesn't predate the Bengal-class.
That said, all the carriers seem to have decks for *recovering* fighters rather than for launching them.
Now - the WC4 novel does mention a booster rocket system that was used to launch fighters that couldn't accelerate fast enough to clear the carrier that was moving forward. In that aspect, I could understand using a catapult to accelerate the ship ahead of the forward-moving-carrier.
Edfilho said:That doesn`t make sense at all. If you fighter is at rest INSIDE the capship, then the capship's velocity is ADDED to it in launching, no matter what tech they used. That is why it was EASIER to launch from a moving carrier than a stopped one, in WW2.
Even combat landings cannot really explain the need for runways.
- The flight deck provides a place to park craft and perform maintenance.
- Having a long, pass-through deck allows for "touch and go" landings.
- More fighters can be lined up for launch on the runway
Dragon1 said:These are all good thoughts. Another question; Why does Confederation and Bengal-class ships have runways exposed to the elements of space? The Concordia and Ranger classes with their internal bays make much more sense. In WC2 we saw just how vulnerable the exposed launch/landing runways were on the Confederation-class (even through the phase shielding). Confed would have probably known about this glaring vulnerability, so why design ships in that manner?
AKAImBatman said:Different from a wet carrier, however, a space carrier will be *accelerating*. If the engines on the fighter flame out before the clearing turn, the carrier will run over over the fighter without a second thought.
AKAImBatman said:Super Wing Commander agrees with you. In that game, the fighter parks itself next to the carrier and waits to be tractored in. WCP and Secret Ops also agree with you thanks to their shorter flight decks.
Blackfaer said:A carrier in space is not necessarily accelerating. Keep in mind, the faster it goes, the more incapable of rapid turns and changes in direction it will be.
Maj.Striker said:Don't believe me? Look at a big city skyline...you'll see several asthetically pleasing buildings that don't make sense from a simple realistic sense. (A huge square building would be the most economical and realistic but not many want to build those).
Chernikov said:hanging motionless outside of a landing bay waiting to be tractored in would be unappealing at best. (speaking of which, does anyone have screens/captures of this?)
apparently the guy's scoops stopped him but his engines flamed out. And the Carrier kept on going, and didn't leave much to bury.