Killer Bees. What was their fate?

I'm sure the Hornet could be upgraded, and there may be a time in a future WC installment when we see Hornet upgrades. It's just that as of Arena there are no instances of upgraded Hornets.

However since there is nothing saying that Hornets could *not* be upgraded, then Standoff is fine in having neutron-equipped Hornets. It's just that in the future we cannot say "sometime prior to 2668, Hornets were equipped with neutron guns" because Standoff is not canon. It just simply does not contradict canon in that regard.
 
I do wonder what the likelyhood of such a change would be - it seems like the Hornet was designed a particular way. It uses its speed and long-range guns to stay at the maximum possible range in a dogfight. Swapping those out for neutrons isn't a simple upgrade, it's changing the basic way the ship has to be flown.

Also, the fact is that neutron guns aren't some new technology - if the Hornet was coveting them it should have been back when they were standard guns rather than (supposedly) on their way out of use. It's worth noting that we don't see any Confederation fighters that use *only* neutrons, either...
 
Yet Grikaths do use their four-mounted neutrons nicely. And as for Hornets - they could use rapid-fire neutrons - like those mounted in Sabre's turret. Lots of damage in no time - that'd give the Horent the same quick punch-punch-punch that Ferret has...
 
I doubt that. Even disregarding the implementation of the game engine, the rapid-fire neutron guns in the WC2 turrets are probably only possible because of the much larger power plants in the Sabre, Broadsword and Crossbow. A Hornet's power plant is unlikely to sustain such a huge drain on the gun capacitors.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
I do wonder what the likelyhood of such a change would be - it seems like the Hornet was designed a particular way. It uses its speed and long-range guns to stay at the maximum possible range in a dogfight. Swapping those out for neutrons isn't a simple upgrade, it's changing the basic way the ship has to be flown.
Click to expand...

:cool::D I never stay at long range in a hornet... it's probably also why my crew chief is constantly looking for that long lost laser cannon and front canard wing :D
 
even if you want to come up with a reason, its not hard to imagine why they are available in standoff, heck, the game starts off with your ship facing an imminent decomission. So its possible that during the late stages of the war, the hornet was sort of dumped on 3rd or 4th tier ships and they had to deal with it a bit.

hence the choice of an upgrade, or they could have sold them for parts and bought a tarsus or two :p
 
Bandit LOAF said:
I do wonder what the likelyhood of such a change would be - it seems like the Hornet was designed a particular way. It uses its speed and long-range guns to stay at the maximum possible range in a dogfight. Swapping those out for neutrons isn't a simple upgrade, it's changing the basic way the ship has to be flown.
Click to expand...

Particle cannons then to give it firepower in the same league as an Epee, assuming an upgraded alternator can handle them.
 
So its possible that during the late stages of the war, the hornet was sort of dumped on 3rd or 4th tier ships and they had to deal with it a bit.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I've never liked this explanation for anything - it's too cheap. We do see Hornets in Fleet Action, flying off of the front line carriers at Sirius.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
I don't know, I've never liked this explanation for anything - it's too cheap. We do see Hornets in Fleet Action, flying off of the front line carriers at Sirius.
Click to expand...

Well, if we PRETEND that Blair only flies on first-line carriers, then maybe this explanation works. Otherwise, it's more likely that they're in squadrons we don't see on the same ship... or that they're on another carrier's complement, elsewhere. Of course, we know the 'Blair flies on first-line carriers' explanation is junk: the Victory was anything but, according to Blair himself, and the fighters there were (at least, to judge by the way he describes them, and how we saw some of them back in the Academy TV show) older craft, by and large.
 
An upgrade to the fighter would be only logical, especially in times of war....

Refitting hornets with Rapier II or Ferret spare parts as an upgrade makes sence, the veteran pilots could use their expertise with the fighter, and take advantage of innovations as better speeds, shields, sensors and gun capacitors....

Today's F-16 looks like the old one from 20+ years back, but it's electronics carry all the latest innovations.
 
Mace said:
An upgrade to the fighter would be only logical, especially in times of war....

Refitting hornets with Rapier II or Ferret spare parts as an upgrade makes sence, the veteran pilots could use their expertise with the fighter, and take advantage of innovations as better speeds, shields, sensors and gun capacitors....

Today's F-16 looks like the old one from 20+ years back, but it's electronics carry all the latest innovations.
Click to expand...

Except that the F-16's weapons have basically stayed the same the past twenty years - refitting its data bus and avionics isn't going to be exactly the same as swapping out the guns to replace them with another hardpoint. There's a limit to what can be done with the same frame... and the Hornets may have indeed been upgraded during the course of the war; we just never SAW them after the first game, except in novels where they were flying off other people's carriers.
 
An upgrade to the fighter would be only logical, especially in times of war....

Refitting hornets with Rapier II or Ferret spare parts as an upgrade makes sence, the veteran pilots could use their expertise with the fighter, and take advantage of innovations as better speeds, shields, sensors and gun capacitors....

Today's F-16 looks like the old one from 20+ years back, but it's electronics carry all the latest innovations.
Click to expand...

Obviously, fighters are upgraded all the time - we see it throughout the series... in fact, there's a newer version of the Hornet--with lasers--in False Colors.

The question here, though, isn't about new technology... it's about neutron guns, a technology on their way out. I doubt you'll find the military eager to mount leftover Avenger guns on an F-16 just because they cause a lot of damage.
 
Haesslich said:
Except that the F-16's weapons have basically stayed the same the past twenty years - refitting its data bus and avionics isn't going to be exactly the same as swapping out the guns to replace them with another hardpoint. There's a limit to what can be done with the same frame... and the Hornets may have indeed been upgraded during the course of the war; we just never SAW them after the first game, except in novels where they were flying off other people's carriers.
Click to expand...

There really haven't been that many great advances in weapons, however; just the way they are employed and the software and tracking devices that they utilize to increase their accuracy and lethality. In that respect, upgrading the F-16's software and avionics ensures that it will be lethal well into the next decade.

For example, the latest version of the Fighting Falcon will employ the same air to air missiles as the latest (and possibly last manned) fighter aircraft, the F-35.
 
Haesslich said:
Except that the F-16's weapons have basically stayed the same the past twenty years - refitting its data bus and avionics isn't going to be exactly the same as swapping out the guns to replace them with another hardpoint. There's a limit to what can be done with the same frame... and the Hornets may have indeed been upgraded during the course of the war; we just never SAW them after the first game, except in novels where they were flying off other people's carriers.
Click to expand...

Well, modern F-16s can carry a lot more types of ordnance than early models. The most obvious of these is that modern F-16s can carry AMRAAMs on the wingtip rails when early F-16s could only carry Sidewinders. In addition, modern F-16s can carry EGBU-27s, Harpoons, HARMs, JDAMs, JSOWs, LANTIRN pods, Shrikes and WCMDs.
 
Vinman said:
Well, modern F-16s can carry a lot more types of ordnance than early models. The most obvious of these is that modern F-16s can carry AMRAAMs on the wingtip rails when early F-16s could only carry Sidewinders. In addition, modern F-16s can carry EGBU-27s, Harpoons, HARMs, JDAMs, JSOWs, LANTIRN pods, Shrikes and WCMDs.
Click to expand...

The airframe's the same, the guns are the same (still M61 Vulcan cannons), and most of the hardpoints are the same. Most of the changes are internal - the avionics have been upgraded, which allow most of those other weapons you mentioned to be mounted and used; the hardware that controls them has been installed on the F16. But at the same time, most of the weapons systems in the F-16 are basically identical to what she started out with, thirty years ago; it's not like they've taken out the Vulcan to replace it with a GAU-8 or something, which is pretty much swapping the lasers in a Hornet for a neutron gun would be doing - the Vulcan is an integral part of the F-16's design, or at least the frame was built around such a weapon, whereas it wasn't built around something else.

ELTEE said:
There really haven't been that many great advances in weapons, however; just the way they are employed and the software and tracking devices that they utilize to increase their accuracy and lethality. In that respect, upgrading the F-16's software and avionics ensures that it will be lethal well into the next decade.

For example, the latest version of the Fighting Falcon will employ the same air to air missiles as the latest (and possibly last manned) fighter aircraft, the F-35.
Click to expand...

The F-35 also uses the latest revision of the M61 Vulcan cannon, much like the one used in current F-16s. Switching out the Hornet's lasers for something else would be much like the example I mentioned above. We KNOW the Hornets have been upgraded, or at least other fighters have over the course of the war (the Hellcats we see in Wing Commander Academy TV are different from their WC3 counterparts, which in turn are different from the ones we fly in WC4 (slightly). However, their missions would've necessitated different weapons, and that's something we see reflected in the variants which were revealed in Arena.
 
The military generally doesn't switch guns around, and for a good reason, they want standardization. It is a lot simpler to carry nothing but 20mm M61 ammo, rather than needing different ammo for F-14s, F-15s, F-16s, F/A-18s, F-22s, etc.

For an example of an aircraft whose gun armament varies, look at the A-4. American A-4s had their guns upgraded from 20mm to 30mm cannons, and A-4s in foreign air forces were armed with all sorts of different cannons. Not to mention that early model A-4s look clearly different from late model A-4s.

Examples from World War II abound, with some airframes carrying various calibers of machine guns and cannons throughout their lifetimes.
 
Haesslich said:
The airframe's the same, the guns are the same (still M61 Vulcan cannons), and most of the hardpoints are the same. Most of the changes are internal - the avionics have been upgraded, which allow most of those other weapons you mentioned to be mounted and used; the hardware that controls them has been installed on the F16. But at the same time, most of the weapons systems in the F-16 are basically identical to what she started out with, thirty years ago; it's not like they've taken out the Vulcan to replace it with a GAU-8 or something, which is pretty much swapping the lasers in a Hornet for a neutron gun would be doing - the Vulcan is an integral part of the F-16's design, or at least the frame was built around such a weapon, whereas it wasn't built around something else.
Click to expand...

It's worth noting, however, that the current trend in aircraft design is to place the guns in mounts that are fairly integral to the frame: the M61 is in the leading wing edge near the cockpit. Swapping it out would take no small amount of work.

A Hornet's lasers are all the way out on the wing. I can't say this with absolute surety, but it seems that it would be easier to modify one of those.

It still might be expensive and costly, of course. Me, I'd consider refitting some of the Hornets with mass drivers and using them to supplement Ferrets in the ISS.
 
Aginor said:
I had that soooo often......
It sucks.
Click to expand...

Not in the SNES version! Once you lost one laser you had a weapon that fired very rapidly...

(... and an edit to note that the lasers in the SNES version looked like neutrons. :))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top