Requesting Info

Milatry

Petty Officer
I was woundering how do I go about name Kilrathi's, ships and Fighter squad's and not mix up anything from another story or game. Like I what to know if I say in the story that one of the fighter groups on the ship which has no name yet is maybe the 108th Black Knights or something would that be allright? also I need a out of the way area of space for the story to be most of all an astorid field in Kilrathi Space were no one has used it before.
 

KoN21

Spaceman
Sabres, Morningstars, Vindicators, Avengers, Dragons or a whole bunch of Kilrathi and Tri-System craft would work.

This made me think, at what point does a fighter go from being classified as a heavy fighter as opposed to being a bomber. I thought it was torpedoes, but as Chris points out, there are numerous heavy fighters that have torpedo capability.
 

Milatry

Petty Officer
yes there are many heavy fighters that can carry a torpedoe put out of all thous I like the Thunderbolt for me its a better choose for me to do what I am doing in the story because in the game I've done something like what I want it to do in the story.
 

ChrisReid

Super Soaker Collector / Administrator
This made me think, at what point does a fighter go from being classified as a heavy fighter as opposed to being a bomber. I thought it was torpedoes, but as Chris points out, there are numerous heavy fighters that have torpedo capability.

This isn't just a Wing Commander question. Look at modern aircraft today. You have bombers, and you also have heavy attack craft that carry bombs. Carrying a torpedo/bomb isn't the defining factor at all. You just have to look at the overall capabilities of the craft and see what it was designed to primarily do. Bombers will typically have a greater capacity to drop heavy weaponry, and heavy attack fighters will have some of that ability, but not to the same degree and not to the exclusion of other abilities.
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
Of course. Placing a torp on an Epee doesn't make it a bomber, but makes anyone willing to pilot it nuts.
 

LeHah

212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
Placing a torp on an Epee doesn't make it a bomber, but makes anyone willing to pilot it nuts.

You can chalk that up to another installment of "You know you're in the Landreich when..."
 

Mace

Vice Admiral
This made me think, at what point does a fighter go from being classified as a heavy fighter as opposed to being a bomber. I thought it was torpedoes, but as Chris points out, there are numerous heavy fighters that have torpedo capability.

A bomber is not designed to hold it's own in a one-on-one a dogfight, while a fighter is.
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
That was a good one, Lehah.

A bomber is not designed to hold it's own in a one-on-one a dogfight, while a fighter is.

Not quite, bombers are deployed on patrol and strike missions without escort at times, what would be insane to do that if they couldn't hold their own.
 

McGruff

Banned
call me nutters then, I love light fighters!

Light fighters - ok, but I'll pass on flying balsa wood fighters. Especially on a strike mission. Though if I was the CAG, I could imagine throwing Maniac in an Epee with a torpedo strapped to it and sending him solo at a Fralthra.
 

ELTEE

Vice Admiral
That was a good one, Lehah.



Not quite, bombers are deployed on patrol and strike missions without escort at times, what would be insane to do that if they couldn't hold their own.

Despite that, it is usually not because the bomber could hold its own one on one in the dogfight. Bombers are deployed by themselves when mission commanders feel there is a reasonable chance that they will avoid detection and the necessity of defending themselves in the first place.

Obvious examples include B-2 stealth bombers or B-1's that are designed to fly in beneath radar , deliver weapons, and, once detected, outrun most potential threats or confuse them with its sophisticated electronics jamming suite.

I suppose that one of the closest examples of bombers being designed to hold their own would be the interwar years between WWI and WWII. During this time, most modern bombers could outrun their biplane fighter counterparts anywhow. At the start of WWII, B-17's were initially intended to "hold their own," but not in a one on one dogfight. They used box formation tactics to overlap firing arcs from their turrets. It didn't really work out too well, though, as evidenced by the high losses of air crews until adequate escort protection was provided.

I would additionally argue that any 'bomber' that is shown to be even remotely capable of dogfighting should probably be thought of as a heavy fighter. That's probably the easiest way to tell the difference.
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
I would additionally argue that any 'bomber' that is shown to be even remotely capable of dogfighting should probably be thought of as a heavy fighter. That's probably the easiest way to tell the difference.

So where does that leave the A-26 (later B-26) Invader, which could and did occasionally tangle with German fighters after dropping their bombs? :)
 

Milatry

Petty Officer
yes and if you watch dogfighters on the history channel you'ld also know that a B-17 took on a bounch of fighter on her recon mission but that not answering my question of how do i make up Kilrathi names and and how do i find a system with an astirod field out of the way of were any one may have talked about in the war. aslo if you see the show you'ld also know that a dive bomer took on thrid Zeros and lived it's not always what the fighter is classifed as that tell you what it can or can't do but it's the piolt that flys it that tells you what it can do.
 

Delance

Victory, you say?
There's plenty of cases where bombers not only fought but defeated fighters both in real aviation history and wing commander.
 

ELTEE

Vice Admiral
of course there is, but I wouldn't call it dogfighting. There are plenty of documented cases of B-17's downing enemy fighters; that's what all those guns are for! These kills were not scored as a result of dogfighting. A B-17 cannot out maneuver and actually engage an enemy fighter in a turning fight. In an aerial engagement, the Flying Fortress is purely defensive.

As far as the Marauder is concerned, there is a reason that "A" is there...:p
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
The designation doesn't necessarily mean that's what the plane does. How many dogfights have you heard of the F-117 getting into? :p

(And it's the Invader, not the Marauder. The latter was dropped in 1948, then the 'vader got redesignated B-26.)
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
how do i make up Kilrathi names and

Kilrathi names! Good subject.

First, the simple version: The basic Kilrathi name goes {name} {modifier} {hrai}. For example, Hobbes is Ralgha nar Hhallas. Ralgha is his name, nar is the modifier and Hhallas is the hrai.

The names are entirely original words. The modifier is almost always 'nar', but several others have been seen occasionally including 'lan', 'dai', 'lak' and 'ko'. Names also occasionally have no modifier -- for example, Fireclaw has no modifier in his name (Najii Ragitagha). The exact meanings are unknown, but presumably they define how the name in question belongs to its hrai.

The hrai is the family name, and it is generally a geographical location -- a planet, a continent, an estate, etc. Ie, "Hhallas", "Ghorah Khar" and so forth. There are eight 'noble' clans, which run the empire: Kiranka, Ki'ra, Caxki, Sihkag, Qarg, Kur'u'tak, Ragitagha and Sutaghi. The Crown Prince in Wing Commander II/III is Thrakhath nar Kiranka. These eight aren't the only noble clans -- they have all sorts of distaff families and offshoots and so forth (Hhallas, for instance, was of royal breeding).

Then... the exceptions. There are several Kilrathi with three names in False Colors. One is the warlord, "Ukar dai Ragark lak Haka". Ragark seems to be his name, and Haka is his family. We're not really sure what the "Ukar" is for, then -- a second name, an additional title, something of that nature? The other are Largka and Murragh, who are "Largka Cakg dai Nokhtak" and "Murragh Cakg dai Nokhtak". They're closely related... so it's possible that the 'Cakg' is some shared first name in their family.

You can find every Kilrathi name ever mentioned in the official continuity here: https://www.wcnews.com/articles/art17.shtml

and how do i find a system with an astirod field out of the way of were any one may have talked about in the war

The trick is that the vast vast majority of star systems are just names on a map -- you can create whatever you want in them for your story/project.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ELTEE

Vice Admiral
The designation doesn't necessarily mean that's what the plane does. How many dogfights have you heard of the F-117 getting into? :p

(And it's the Invader, not the Marauder. The latter was dropped in 1948, then the 'vader got redesignated B-26.)

The Nighthawk doesn't dogfight because nobody can see it. It certainly has the capability to employ air to air missiles, and the maneuverability to effectively engage another fighter if it had to.

Dogfighting is unfortunately rare today for any airframe. A stealth aircraft is designed to kill at BVR well before it is even detected.

Finally, it was the B-26 Marauder, and the A-26 Invader. The A-26 came after the B model to replace it. :p
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
It seems that your history is a little deficient, I'm afraid.

The Martin B-26 Marauder came out, more in the vein of the traditional bomber (straight and level, higher altitude). The Douglas A-26 was put into service shortly thereafter, with an operational focus more on "down and dirty" mud-moving. The Marauder was phased out of USAAF inventory by the end of WW2 (last combat mission for the Marauder was May 1945; my "1948", above, was incorrect). In 1948, the designation for the Invader was changed from A-26 to B-26. The actual planes didn't change, just their designation; A lot of B-26 Invaders served as A-26 Invaders during WW2, just a few years earlier.

The Marauder never had the maneuverability that was part of what enabled the Invader to be used against fighters, and except for a relative few airframes didn't have the heavy forward firepower of the primary Invader model during WW2, the A-26B.

As for the Nighthawk's air-air capability, the Air Force disagrees.

From the spokesman for Holloman AFB, which will be switching out its F-117s for F-22s:
"[The F-22] brings an air-to-air combat capability that the F-117 lacks."
 
Top