Terran Confederation Space Navy

[Dragon1]

I just found some interesting notes about Confed service in the Wing Commander 3 novel. Unlike the modern-day U.S. Air Force, the TCSF appears to be little more than a specialized branch/department of the larger TCSN. In fact, what makes one a Space Force officer as opposed to a "line" officer (the term the novel uses to depict the non-Space Force crew) seems to be what post that officer currently holds.

This becomes especially apparent when Eisen decides to reinstate Hobbes to flight status at Blair's request (p.15). Indeed, from the moment of his reassignment, Hobbes becomes a TCSF lieutenant colonel. This explains why Blair often holds a naval rank (Lieutenant Commander in the WCKS manual, Commodore in Prophecy).

 

[Dragon1]

Ahh...happy coincidence, maybe?

This passage in the WC3 novel reveals something interesting about the possible meaning of 'Utility Carrier' seen in the Confederation Handbook. In this passage, Blair is speculating about why Col. Dulbrunin assigned Maniac as commander of Gold Squadron (Thunderbolts): "No, Major Marshall wasn't really suitable for any other squadrons. Colonel Dulbrunin probably made the same decision when making his original assignments. The kind of *utility* combat work which heavy fighters drew was the sort of operation Maniac was least likely to knock off course if he lost his head in a fight," (p. 25).

What's interesting about this quote is that while Andrew Keith would have no knowledge about the TCS Tiger's Claw's description in the Confederation Handbook he, nonetheless, unknowingly may have helped flesh it out. The Confederation Handbook refers to the Bengals as 'Utility Carriers'. This could mean that this class was designed to carry mainly heavy fighters that would specialize in this "kind of utility (multi-role?) combat work." Maybe this contrasts with lighter pre-war carriers, like the Victory herself, that may have carried only light scout and patrol fighters before 2634.

This could, in fact, be what differentiates light and heavy carriers. We know from the game manuals and other sources that it is not necessarily tonnage. I wonder if it is the composition of the airwing. In the pre-war years, fighters seemed to be more specialized. The Fleet Carrier concept, which began with the TCS C0ncordia, may have been the first carrier to equip a mixed wing of heavy and light planes. As the war dragged on, and fighters roles became more generalized, the division between light and heavy carriers may have become blurred, hence all carriers being classified as CV with the notable exception of the escort carriers.

Ideas? What do you guys and gals think?

 

[Whistler]

I just found some interesting notes about Confed service in the Wing Commander 3 novel. Unlike the modern-day U.S. Air Force, the TCSF appears to be little more than a specialized branch/department of the larger TCSN. In fact, what makes one a Space Force officer as opposed to a "line" officer (the term the novel uses to depict the non-Space Force crew) seems to be what post that officer currently holds.

This becomes especially apparent when Eisen decides to reinstate Hobbes to flight status at Blair's request (p.15). Indeed, from the moment of his reassignment, Hobbes becomes a TCSF lieutenant colonel. This explains why Blair often holds a naval rank (Lieutenant Commander in the WCKS manual, Commodore in Prophecy).

The TCSN follows the rank of the line. Captain of the Line being equal to a Colonel in the TCSF, Commander = Lieutenant Colonel etc. Change your commission it changes your rank.

Ahh...happy coincidence, maybe?

This passage in the WC3 novel reveals something interesting about the possible meaning of 'Utility Carrier' seen in the Confederation Handbook. In this passage, Blair is speculating about why Col. Dulbrunin assigned Maniac as commander of Gold Squadron (Thunderbolts): "No, Major Marshall wasn't really suitable for any other squadrons. Colonel Dulbrunin probably made the same decision when making his original assignments. The kind of *utility* combat work which heavy fighters drew was the sort of operation Maniac was least likely to knock off course if he lost his head in a fight," (p. 25).

What's interesting about this quote is that while Andrew Keith would have no knowledge about the TCS Tiger's Claw's description in the Confederation Handbook he, nonetheless, unknowingly may have helped flesh it out. The Confederation Handbook refers to the Bengals as 'Utility Carriers'. This could mean that this class was designed to carry mainly heavy fighters that would specialize in this "kind of utility (multi-role?) combat work." Maybe this contrasts with lighter pre-war carriers, like the Victory herself, that may have carried only light scout and patrol fighters before 2634.

This could, in fact, be what differentiates light and heavy carriers. We know from the game manuals and other sources that it is not necessarily tonnage. I wonder if it is the composition of the airwing. In the pre-war years, fighters seemed to be more specialized. The Fleet Carrier concept, which began with the TCS C0ncordia, may have been the first carrier to equip a mixed wing of heavy and light planes. As the war dragged on, and fighters roles became more generalized, the division between light and heavy carriers may have become blurred, hence all carriers being classified as CV with the notable exception of the escort carriers.

Ideas? What do you guys and gals think?

Carriers used a mix bag of ships due to the broad mission sphere of their operations. They had to be prepared for all kinds of situations from point-defense to heavy strike. The more diversity in the fighter complement the more able a carrier vessel was at accomplishing its job.

 

[Dundradal]

This could, in fact, be what differentiates light and heavy carriers. We know from the game manuals and other sources that it is not necessarily tonnage. I wonder if it is the composition of the airwing. In the pre-war years, fighters seemed to be more specialized. The Fleet Carrier concept, which began with the TCS C0ncordia, may have been the first carrier to equip a mixed wing of heavy and light planes. As the war dragged on, and fighters roles became more generalized, the division between light and heavy carriers may have become blurred, hence all carriers being classified as CV with the notable exception of the escort carriers.

Ideas? What do you guys and gals think?

There are a variety of reasons why carriers are classified as one type or another. For WC, air wing size and carrier tonnage are the important stats. I could have sworn we had a discussion about this not too long ago where we looked at the evidence and references for each "type" of carrier. (Escort, Light, Medium, Heavy, Fleet, Mega, etc).

I don't think the division was blurred. Heavy/Fleet Carriers carry 70+ (I picked that number based on real world examples) fighters and have higher tonnages for additional armor, armament, and stores. Light carriers carry ~45 fighters, trade armor and armament for cramming as many fighters as possible into the hull space. Escort carriers basically give up armor (or it's bolted on) in order to maximize the number of fighters that can be carried.

Medium, I think, only appears in FA and in a passing reference. There's not real real world equivalent (maybe Marine carriers?).

 

[Dragon1]

The TCSN follows the rank of the line. Captain of the Line being equal to a Colonel in the TCSF, Commander = Lieutenant Colonel etc. Change your commission it changes your rank.

My point is that it doesn't appear that you change your commission at all. It seems that all hold a TCSN commission. What changes is one's posting. If a pilot is posted to a Space Force unit, then that pilot is in the Space Force for the length of their tour. Thus, Blair is always a commissioned TCSN officer who periodically serves in the naval division (branch/department?) of the Space Force. It is not a separate force where one holds a separate commission.

I don't think the division was blurred. Heavy/Fleet Carriers carry 70+ (I picked that number based on real world examples) fighters and have higher tonnages for additional armor, armament, and stores. Light carriers carry ~45 fighters, trade armor and armament for cramming as many fighters as possible into the hull space. Escort carriers basically give up armor (or it's bolted on) in order to maximize the number of fighters that can be carried.

Except that we know the Victory light carrier had more armor than the Concordia fleet carrier (1000 cm. vs. 300 cm.) and greater tonnage than the Lexington heavy carrier from Armada (28,000 tonnes vs. 3,250 tonnes).

And all armor in Wing Commander appears to be "bolted on." Look at how armor is upgraded in Privateer. You buy external plates that can be quickly repaired/replaced after combat.

No, I don't think the division between light and heavy carriers has been in any way decided. Moreover, you are also assuming that fleet and heavy carriers have the same role. For one thing, per Action Stations, we know heavy carriers existed well before the war (TCS Coral Sea), while Fleet Carriers, such as the Concordia and Ark Royal, were recent innovations.

 

[Whistler]

My point is that it doesn't appear that you change your commission at all. It seems that all hold a TCSN commission. What changes is one's posting. If a pilot is posted to a Space Force unit, then that pilot is in the Space Force for the length of their tour. Thus, Blair is always a commissioned TCSN officer who periodically serves in the naval division (branch/department?) of the Space Force. It is not a separate force where one holds a separate commission.

The books and games treat them as seperate commissions. I'm not going to quote every example. Officially the Navy and Space Force are two separate services operating concurrently under the TCSC (Terran Confederation Space Command), a collection of high-ranking military officers and civilians including the President of the Confederation as Commander-in-Chief of Armed Forces.

Except that we know the Victory light carrier had more armor than the Concordia fleet carrier (1000 cm. vs. 300 cm.) and greater tonnage than the Lexington heavy carrier from Armada (28,000 tonnes vs. 3,250 tonnes).

Concordia is the first true Dreadnaught class ship according to canon. She got this designation for her fighter complement and that bastard of a gun the Phase-Transit. Yorktowns are built around its fighters and laser screen as its primary defense. Technology may scale differently between the two games but the majority of Concordia's armor was likely sacrificed to accommodate the mass of that weapon while still keeping some measure of speed and maneuverability. The Victory and her sister ships, lacking the weapon, can afford to pad the armor since (in WC3) Shields and Armor can be brought down with weapons OTHER than torpedoes.

And all armor in Wing Commander appears to be "bolted on." Look at how armor is upgraded in Privateer. You buy external plates that can be quickly repaired/replaced after combat

You're forgetting that in Privateer they are civilian vessels with customization options. Major fleet ships are built from the yard as they are unless modified in a different shipyard. For example TCS-Tarawa's history of rebuilds.

No, I don't think the division between light and heavy carriers has been in any way decided. Moreover, you are also assuming that fleet and heavy carriers have the same role. For one thing, per Action Stations, we know heavy carriers existed well before the war (TCS Coral Sea), while Fleet Carriers, such as the Concordia and Ark Royal, were recent innovations.

The classing is based on tonnage/armament/fighter complement from what I've seen. Since these classings are set by Origin and licensed publishing I doubt this argument has any point. Fleet carriers, when assumed, are generally heavy carriers similar to the TCS-Lexington, TCS-Ark Royal, TCS-Leyte Gulf, etc. Classing of carrier vessels helps tacticians properly designate Order-Of-Force. Why send a major fleet carrier to tackle a job a light carrier can handle? How do the Admirals and Generals tell at a glance? Classing.

 

[Dragon1]

The books and games treat them as seperate commissions. I'm not going to quote every example. Officially the Navy and Space Force are two separate services operating concurrently under the TCSC (Terran Confederation Space Command), a collection of high-ranking military officers and civilians including the President of the Confederation as Commander-in-Chief of Armed Forces.

What is your source? As far as WC1 is concerned, everyone, including the CO of the Tiger's Claw holds army-style ranks and are part of the TCSN. Remember, Blair graduated from the Terran Confederation Naval Space Academy, Hilthros. As far as the early material goes, there's no mention whatsoever of two branches of service fighting side-by-side (other than maybe the Marine Corps mentioned in the WC:Movie-- Rosie appears to have been a Marine pilot).

Concordia is the first true Dreadnaught class ship according to canon. She got this designation for her fighter complement and that bastard of a gun the Phase-Transit. Yorktowns are built around its fighters and laser screen as its primary defense. Technology may scale differently between the two games but the majority of Concordia's armor was likely sacrificed to accommodate the mass of that weapon while still keeping some measure of speed and maneuverability. The Victory and her sister ships, lacking the weapon, can afford to pad the armor since (in WC3) Shields and Armor can be brought down with weapons OTHER than torpedoes.

I was referring to the Concordia-class Fleet Carriers (Lexington and Princeton from WC4), not the TCS Concordia of WC2, a Confederation-class Dreadnought. Thus, my example holds.

You're forgetting that in Privateer they are civilian vessels with customization options. Major fleet ships are built from the yard as they are unless modified in a different shipyard. For example TCS-Tarawa's history of rebuilds.

Source? Why can't military vessels also be customizable? And we are not talking about rebuilds. Pulling off 20 cm. of plasteel for 20 cm. of tungsten would hardly qualify as a rebuild.

The classing is based on tonnage/armament/fighter complement from what I've seen. Since these classings are set by Origin and licensed publishing I doubt this argument has any point. Fleet carriers, when assumed, are generally heavy carriers similar to the TCS-Lexington, TCS-Ark Royal, TCS-Leyte Gulf, etc. Classing of carrier vessels helps tacticians properly designate Order-Of-Force. Why send a major fleet carrier to tackle a job a light carrier can handle? How do the Admirals and Generals tell at a glance? Classing.

Except, that as I pointed out earlier, the Victory has greater tonnage than the one war-era heavy carrier that we get a look at, the WC:Armada Lexington. And it has greater armor than the Fleet Carrier Lexington from WC4.

 

[Ilanin]

What is your source? As far as WC1 is concerned, everyone, including the CO of the Tiger's Claw holds army-style ranks and are part of the TCSN.

We never meet the CO of the Tiger's Claw in WC1. Colonel Halcyon is the CAG. We know he's the CAG because of the way he's a Colonel, the same rank every other CAG in a Wing Commander game holds. The CO of the Tiger's Claw during WC1 is never specified, but based on Academy and the WC2 intro, it was very probably then-Commodore Tolwyn.

 

[capi3101]

There's also a Captain Thorn mentioned in Freedom Flight who's the ship's CO. I believe he gets mentioned again in the WC3 Novel, when Blair is reminiscing about how big of a jackhole Tolwyn is.

 

[Dragon1]

We never meet the CO of the Tiger's Claw in WC1. Colonel Halcyon is the CAG. We know he's the CAG because of the way he's a Colonel, the same rank every other CAG in a Wing Commander game holds. The CO of the Tiger's Claw during WC1 is never specified, but based on Academy and the WC2 intro, it was very probably then-Commodore Tolwyn.

*Commander* Patricia Drake was CAG of the Midway. Just as a nitpick, I don't think any of the carrier wing commanders are ever called CAG other than Drake. I think Angel at one point is called 'commander flight group' at some point.

Also, we know that Halcyon commanded the Claw during at least part of Blair's tenure on the carrier (SM1, I think...). Tolwyn commanded the carrier after Sansky, and I think Halcyon took over after Tolwyn. Thorn was relieved by Tolwyn at some point, but I don't remember when.

 

[Dundradal]

Except that we know the Victory light carrier had more armor than the Concordia fleet carrier (1000 cm. vs. 300 cm.) and greater tonnage than the Lexington heavy carrier from Armada (28,000 tonnes vs. 3,250 tonnes).

You're assuming "heavy" is in relation to mass. If you look at what has traditionally played the largest role in carrier types it's air wing size. Larger air wings are found on larger carriers. To use the WW2 example: Essex class Fleet/Heavy/Attack (all those were used to describe the hulls) carried roughly 80 aircraft. The Independence class Light carrier carried rougly 30-35 aircraft. The Bogue class Escort carrier (the most numerous class) carried 20-24 aircraft. Of those three, two are actually considered "Fleet" carriers. Both the Essex and Independence were classified as such. Why? They operated with the main fleet. They were not part of the scouting or screening, but instead with the line. The CVEs were not Fleet carriers because they could not keep up with the fleet (33 knots vs 18 knots).

No, I don't think the division between light and heavy carriers has been in any way decided. Moreover, you are also assuming that fleet and heavy carriers have the same role. For one thing, per Action Stations, we know heavy carriers existed well before the war (TCS Coral Sea), while Fleet Carriers, such as the Concordia and Ark Royal, were recent innovations.

But it has and they do. You're kind of trying to undo the history of the carrier. It's not like they completely ignore the lessons of earlier carrier operations in Wing Commander. A Fleet carrier is a doctrinal definition. If a carrier operates directly with the fleet. It is a Fleet Carrier. When the TCS Tarawa is working with the Concordia at the fifth Battle of Munro, she is technically a fleet carrier. All carriers have the same general role. They use their fighters/strike craft to project power. There's no innovation that we are aware of in the Concordia or Ark Royal compared to the Coral Sea. The only thing we really know about Coral Sea is that she was the heaviest carrier in the fleet (in this case it definitely means displacement) and how she brews up. There's nothing that really separates it from the other carriers save age.

And all armor in Wing Commander appears to be "bolted on." Look at how armor is upgraded in Privateer. You buy external plates that can be quickly repaired/replaced after combat.

No, not all armor. Armor plate on civilian ships you can imagine is bolted on to the hull in places. In military craft and capital ships, armor is an integral part of the structural integrity of the vessel. Armored decks are used as part of the strength of the hull. In most American carriers, the hangar deck was the first armored deck of the ship and provided important structural support to the ship.

Source? Why can't military vessels also be customizable? And we are not talking about rebuilds. Pulling off 20 cm. of plasteel for 20 cm. of tungsten would hardly qualify as a rebuild.

They are. Look at the evolution of AA batteries on WW2 ships. The Essex class had a basic setup, but as the war went on they were modified. The starting AA batteries, late-1944 and then late-war batteries are very different as a result of the chaning nature of the combat.

Fleet Action. Tarawa is basically a wreck when it returns to Confed space. The entire front of the ship, the "bolted on" bow section, ripped off the ship during that final battle. The bridge was destroyed by the kamikaze. The hangar/flight deck had damage from the Sartha that was ripping rounds into it. It spent a year being rebuilt. Originally, she was to be scrapped, but when the public found out, they screamed for her to rejoin the Fleet.

 

[Dundradal]

*Commander* Patricia Drake was CAG of the Midway. Just as a nitpick, I don't think any of the carrier wing commanders are ever called CAG other than Drake. I think Angel at one point is called 'commander flight group' at some point.

Also, we know that Halcyon commanded the Claw during at least part of Blair's tenure on the carrier (SM1, I think...). Tolwyn commanded the carrier after Sansky, and I think Halcyon took over after Tolwyn. Thorn was relieved by Tolwyn at some point, but I don't remember when.

Wing Commanders and CAGs aren't the same thing. Wing Commander command a wing. CAGs command an air group, which is composed of several wings. Drake is a CAG because of the large size of the Midway's air group (288). The Vesuvius class would also have a CAG because of its large air group (400).

 

[Dragon1]

You're assuming "heavy" is in relation to mass. If you look at what has traditionally played the largest role in carrier types it's air wing size. Larger air wings are found on larger carriers. To use the WW2 example: Essex class Fleet/Heavy/Attack (all those were used to describe the hulls) carried roughly 80 aircraft. The Independence class Light carrier carried rougly 30-35 aircraft. The Bogue class Escort carrier (the most numerous class) carried 20-24 aircraft. Of those three, two are actually considered "Fleet" carriers. Both the Essex and Independence were classified as such. Why? They operated with the main fleet. They were not part of the scouting or screening, but instead with the line. The CVEs were not Fleet carriers because they could not keep up with the fleet (33 knots vs 18 knots).

No, sir. I'm specifically countering the claim that light/heavy related to mass by showing that the heavy carrier is actually lighter than the light carrier. If you look at my original post, it mirrors much of what you are saying here in that the designation more corresponds to what kind of planes the carriers carried.

But it has and they do. You're kind of trying to undo the history of the carrier. It's not like they completely ignore the lessons of earlier carrier operations in Wing Commander. A Fleet carrier is a doctrinal definition. If a carrier operates directly with the fleet. It is a Fleet Carrier. When the TCS Tarawa is working with the Concordia at the fifth Battle of Munro, she is technically a fleet carrier. All carriers have the same general role. They use their fighters/strike craft to project power. There's no innovation that we are aware of in the Concordia or Ark Royal compared to the Coral Sea. The only thing we really know about Coral Sea is that she was the heaviest carrier in the fleet (in this case it definitely means displacement) and how she brews up. There's nothing that really separates it from the other carriers save age.

Except that the Concordia-class were the first carriers intended to act as fleet-strike platforms. Previous carriers, per Action Stations, either scouted for the battle line or focused on surface attacks. Again, I think we are trying to make Wing Commander's history parallel too closely to carrier development in the pre-World War II years.

No, not all armor. Armor plate on civilian ships you can imagine is bolted on to the hull in places. In military craft and capital ships, armor is an integral part of the structural integrity of the vessel. Armored decks are used as part of the strength of the hull. In most American carriers, the hangar deck was the first armored deck of the ship and provided important structural support to the ship.

Source? Can we use American ocean-going vessels as a point of comparison here? The only thing we know about armor in Wing Commander is how it is used in Privateer. Didn't the Tarawa survive an attack at one point because one of it's turrets was not integrated into the hull and armor? This would directly contradict how naval vessel armor works.

They are. Look at the evolution of AA batteries on WW2 ships. The Essex class had a basic setup, but as the war went on they were modified. The starting AA batteries, late-1944 and then late-war batteries are very different as a result of the chaning nature of the combat.

My point exactly!

 

[Dragon1]

Wing Commanders and CAGs aren't the same thing. Wing Commander command a wing. CAGs command an air group, which is composed of several wings. Drake is a CAG because of the large size of the Midway's air group (288). The Vesuvius class would also have a CAG because of its large air group (400).

This is the point I made in reply to the previous poster.

 

[Dundradal]

Except that the Concordia-class were the first carriers intended to act as fleet-strike platforms. Previous carriers, per Action Stations, either scouted for the battle line or focused on surface attacks. Again, I think we are trying to make Wing Commander's history parallel too closely to carrier development in the pre-World War II years.

No, they weren't. You are confusing the weapons mounted on fighters versus the ships themselves. The Coral Sea could have undertaken a fleet strike, no problem. However, the fighters would not have been able to defeat a battlewagon. The Varni come closest by using coordinated attacks. (Note how AS makes that the big deal. Forstchen is replaying the pre-, and early, war fight between black shoe (surface/gun club) and brown shoe (aviation) admirals and which ship will be the leader of the fleet). I don't think we are trying to make it at all. It does. Let's be honest, Action Stations is the WC version of "At Dawn We Slept". Forstchen clearly used Prange's work as an outline for the ideas he had for AS.

Source? Can we use American ocean-going vessels as a point of comparison here? The only thing we know about armor in Wing Commander is how it is used in Privateer. Didn't the Tarawa survive an attack at one point because one of it's turrets was not integrated into the hull and armor? This would directly contradict how naval vessel armor works.

Yeah, every military vessel ever built. No, we know of three images from Privateer showing armor plates.

You are thinking about the canibalized turrets from the Kilrathi space station they hit after Kilrah. Those are literally strapped onto the bow and the turret crews wear EVA suits to operate them. The entire bow section of the ship was not integrated into the hull because it was added on when the ship was converted from a medium transport to an escort carrier. It shears off the ship up to the point of the main hull. But it doesn't contradict how naval armor works. Tarawa was not built from the ground up as a military vessel. Not only that, its construction is rushed to fill in the gaps left by the losses Confed suffered in 2666 (8 carriers). They were designed to be Cheap, Vulnerable and Expendable. One of the many plays on the CVE title.

 

[Dragon1]

No, they weren't. You are confusing the weapons mounted on fighters versus the ships themselves. The Coral Sea could have undertaken a fleet strike, no problem. However, the fighters would not have been able to defeat a battlewagon. The Varni come closest by using coordinated attacks. (Note how AS makes that the big deal. Forstchen is replaying the pre-, and early, war fight between black shoe (surface/gun club) and brown shoe (aviation) admirals and which ship will be the leader of the fleet). I don't think we are trying to make it at all. It does. Let's be honest, Action Stations is the WC version of "At Dawn We Slept". Forstchen clearly used Prange's work as an outline for the ideas he had for AS.

I concede the point.

Yeah, every military vessel ever built. No, we know of three images from Privateer showing armor plates.

We can infer a great deal more about how armor works from privateer. For one, when you sustain damage, your armor can be quickly repaired or replaced (a feature that would be incredibly vital in the context of the Kilrathi War). I'll agree that military ships may have reinforced internal structures that are difficult to repair, but, all evidence in the games and the books reveal that the plated armor (the stuff that actually absorbs the damage) is bolted on. This is how, and why old ships, such as the Victory, could have 1000 cm. equivalent of durasteel armor in 2669. Could the Yorktown-class have been designed with 1000 cm. of durasteel? I guess it's possible, but that wouldn't make any sense seeing as how the Bengal-class Strike Carriers of 2619 only had 20-25 cm.

 

[Ilanin]

Plated armour that is bolted on wouldn't work. Bolting armour on to a vessel creates a massive stress concentration at the point where you attach it and lowers the effective force required to crack it by a factor of 3-5 (yeah, I have two degrees in materials science, next question?). If the impact is an energy weapon rather than a kinetic one (in which case the armour is ablative) then bolting it on in panels rather than forming it as part of the hull will inhibit its ability to conduct heat away from the impact point and lead to a higher rate of ablation in the areas of weapon strikes, which sounds like a bad idea to me.

 

[Dragon1]

The armor does not necessarily have to be bolted on. I am merely stating that whatever the process entails, armor in the Wing Commander universe is replaced/repaired incredibly quickly and easily. It does not require weeks or months in a shipyard.

 

[Mace]

You REPLACE the armor, it does not magically regenerate, same as you get a flat tire, you get one from under or in the trunk and do not wish one into existence out of thin air. Not unlikely that one would carry some spare hull plating in a compartiment in your cargo vessel.

In these days, all vehicles ranging from scootmobiles for fat people to the most advanced production-line military fighters are modular. Armor plating can be replaced as easy(unless the underlying support structure is damaged and has to be fixed/replaced itself) in an operation no more complex then changing a tire or your car stereo, so it's repair time is minimal. Time=money, and repair stations perform these standards procedures in minutes while they charge you for an hour, that's how an engineer makes his money.

Civilian vessels do not need armor as a standard issue, since they are not combat vehicles. And unless you are member of the A-team, you don't take a streetlegal car, slap some gulvanised iron on it and drive it into a warzone to engage a tank. Should in the (distant)future the need arise, armor would likely be an optional module, and individual industry standard armor plating slates would be available in any spacedock.

 

[Ijuin]

To address the original question on the service branches, the US Army and Navy in WWII each operated their own internal Air Forces (one often hears reference to the "Army Air Force", for example). Carrier pilots were almost entirely Navy personnel. It was only after the war that all air operations were combined into an independent Air Force (though the US Navy still flies many fighter planes).

Thus, given the deliberate parallels between Wing Commander and the Pacific War, and the knowledge that carriers were considered "useless" before the Kilrathi War began, we can hypothesize that there was no independent TCSF before the war began, and it was only created afterward. This idea is also supported by the fact that (IIRC) all of the carrier pilots that we see in Action Stations have Navy type ranks (if their ranks are given at all).