WC Carrier question

[AD]

The Tiger's Claw doesn't actually have one runway -- it has one recovery deck, and multiple launch tubes, similar to the Midway in Prophecy. Notice that the 'tube' you shoot out of at the start of a mission isn't the same as the open deck where you land (and you run past a 'TUBES 6-9' sign during the scramble sequence).

I'm not disagreeing here, as I think that's how it is too. But I just wanted to add that it's possible though unlikely (as the movie came after the fact) those signs refer to the torpedo launch tubes as seen in the movie. What makes it more likely fighter launch tubes is that we see it after the pilots leave the briefing and they go pretty much straight from there to the flight deck. It would be rather odd location for torpedo launchers.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

I'm not disagreeing here, as I think that's how it is too. But I just wanted to add that it's possible though unlikely (as the movie came after the fact) those signs refer to the torpedo launch tubes as seen in the movie.

Yeah, that's a good point -- still, you do shoot out a closed hexagonal tube rather than the rectangular open flight deck that you land in the return sequences.

 

[Dran]

Yeah, that's a good point -- still, you do shoot out a closed hexagonal tube rather than the rectangular open flight deck that you land in the return sequences.

Dang I forgot about that. How odd. So is the deck just to land?

 

[Quarto]

The Tiger's Claw doesn't actually have one runway -- it has one recovery deck, and multiple launch tubes, similar to the Midway in Prophecy. Notice that the 'tube' you shoot out of at the start of a mission isn't the same as the open deck where you land (and you run past a 'TUBES 6-9' sign during the scramble sequence).

...And a number of lateral hangar entrances, in the Academy cartoon.

 

[ChrisReid]

Dang I forgot about that. How odd. So is the deck just to land?

We see it primarily used for landings, but we all see takeoffs, so no. The point is that all of the carriers you talk about in your original post have much more versatility in launching and recovering fighters than you were originally thinking.

 

[Houkiboshi]

Well, we see the Concordia/Ranger class have that appearance because they were pre-war ships and the Bengal/Confederation as the result from experience... but then we see a chance in Confed doctrine, focusing on the simplest design that could get the job done with... So they saw their most successful carrier as the Concordia... As for the Vesuvius, I think is a legacy of the past, like a Concordia on steroids, they just went with what they knew… (And the graphics issue )

There is one question; What happened with the new carriers like the TCS Kennedy??. Saratoga class if I remember right, they had secondary bays for flight ops...

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Well, we see the Concordia/Ranger class have that appearance because they were pre-war ships and the Bengal/Confederation as the result from experience... but then we see a chance in Confed doctrine, focusing on the simplest design that could get the job done with... So they saw their most successful carrier as the Concordia... As for the Vesuvius, I think is a legacy of the past, like a Concordia on steroids, they just went with what they knew… (And the graphics issue )

Almost every carrier functions the same way once you ignore the lack of a 3D engine -- shared bays for both launch and recovery. From pre-war Concordia-class ships to mid-war Confederation-class ships to post-war Vsuvius-class ships, the design doctrine is identical.

The only exceptions are the Bengal (pre-war) and the Midway (post-war), which have separate launch tubes and recovery decks. So... there's no clear evolution here, simply two competing philosophies.

There is one question; What happened with the new carriers like the TCS Kennedy??. Saratoga class if I remember right, they had secondary bays for flight ops...

None of those things appear in Wing Commander, though -- it's all elaborate fanfic stuff created by sites like Fleet Tactics. We never see a 'Saratoga class' carrier, and the TCS Kennedy is simply a ship listed on the gunnery competition results in Victory Streak.

 

[Houkiboshi]

None of those things appear in Wing Commander, though -- it's all elaborate fanfic stuff created by sites like Fleet Tactics. We never see a 'Saratoga class' carrier, and the TCS Kennedy is simply a ship listed on the gunnery competition results in Victory Streak.

Well, then what's the word on them, are they considered at least posible for the WC history? because they appear in the (fan made) Wing Commander Saga... Any way, can we know if the TCS Kennedy was of this class? (or does anyone have any way of finding the class of the ship?)

The Ranger class carriers (Like the TCS Victory) don't show up in WC 1/2, but they are there... It could be possible for this Saratoga class carriers to exist...

 

[AD]

Well, then what's the word on them, are they considered at least posible for the WC history? because they appear in the (fan made) Wing Commander Saga...

From what I understand, we hear about the ship clas but never *see* it so we don't know what Saratoga class ships look like.

Any way, can we know if the TCS Kennedy was of this class? (or does anyone have any way of finding the class of the ship?)

No, it's never stated in official material what class the Kennedy is, or even remotely hinted at.

 

[ChrisReid]

Any way, can we know if the TCS Kennedy was of this class? (or does anyone have any way of finding the class of the ship?)

No, there is no other information to find out. It's simply mentioned by name in one line of one piece of documentation.

Well, then what's the word on them, are they considered at least posible for the WC history? because they appear in the (fan made) Wing Commander Saga... The Ranger class carriers (Like the TCS Victory) don't show up in WC 1/2, but they are there... It could be possible for this Saratoga class carriers to exist...

That doesn't make sense. The Victory appears in WC3, and we're told in the game that it's decades old, therefore it existed at the time of WC1/2. Ship classes that were invented by fans solely to fill up space at their websites or in their fan projects do not exist in the official Wing Commander continuity.

From what I understand, we hear about the ship clas but never *see* it so we don't know what Saratoga class ships look like.
No, it's never stated in official material what class the Kennedy is, or even remotely hinted at.

The TCS Saratoga was in Fleet Action. There is no "Saratoga class" ever mentioned anywhere, and no connection ever implied between a Saratoga and Kennedy.

 

[LeHah]

The Victory appears in WC3, and we're told in the game that it's decades old, therefore it existed at the time of WC1/2.

However, The Victory was pulled from being decommissioned in an attempt to fill the ranks after the Battle Of Terra. So, yes, the class existed during WC1/2, but was (probably) not in service at the time.

(I'm going off memory here, I could be wrong)

 

[Quarto]

Well, the Victory wasn't recommissioned, it was merely brought back to the front lines. Eisen mentions spending most of his career on the Victory, and Tolwyn says the Victory has a good history - so it seems like the ship probably didn't spend the previous three decades gathering dust.

 

[TCSGettysburg]

Backwater system patrolling. Somebody had to do it, after all. Why send a Concordia or Jutland class CV when you had an antique pre-war carrier available?

Or, maybe other duties. Training ship for the Academy (like the Formidable or Ablemarle). Fighter transport (like the USS Langley). InSys Defense ship for the Inner Worlds. Something that you wouldn't want to use modern warships for.

If World War II was any indication, antique warships wouldn't get decommissioned until the war was really over. They may have been older and far less capable than modern designs, but they were still a combatant warship. Take the USS Ranger. She was not suited for Pacific duty, but she still served during Operation Torch. Later in the war, she served as a training ship and fighter transport.

Just my little theory.

 

[LeHah]

Backwater system patrolling. Somebody had to do it, after all. Why send a Concordia or Jutland class CV when you had an antique pre-war carrier available?

If you're refering to the Victory's assignment to Orsini at the outset of WC3, you're not much closer to the frontlines in the Kilrathi War than in that system in that point in time.

(Also, the irony of your statement is that the Concordia met her fate in a rear-guard action at Vespus, a "backwater system".)

 

[SabreAce]

Orsini was indeed basically on the front lines by the time Blair got to the Victory, but between the way the war was going for Confed, and Tolwyn's shifting of assets in preparation for bringing in the Behemoth, the Victory had all the reason in the world to be on the front lines. Pre-Battle of Earth, I imagine she was indeed floating around in some backwater sector, where the most she'd have to deal with would be the odd pirate or two, maybe a Kilrathi recon flight.

And, of course, the Concordia was pretty heavily damaged in the Battle of Earth, so it's not as though she was at full strength when she went down at Vespus. Thus, even the limited resistance in such a backwater system could prove enough to down her.

 

[NinjaLA]

Orsini was indeed basically on the front lines by the time Blair got to the Victory, but between the way the war was going for Confed, and Tolwyn's shifting of assets in preparation for bringing in the Behemoth, the Victory had all the reason in the world to be on the front lines. Pre-Battle of Earth, I imagine she was indeed floating around in some backwater sector, where the most she'd have to deal with would be the odd pirate or two, maybe a Kilrathi recon flight.

Why would you assume this? All real life carriers, old or new are constantly cycled between frontline and rear guard duties... if you put your assets on the line constantly, you lose them. There is no such thing as a carrier assigned primarily to backwater sectors of anywhere. A carrier, by its very nature, is a powerful offensive craft, even an obsolete carrier can be equipped with top of the line equipment.

Do you really think Tolwyn would have chosen an obsolete carrier with little combat history to be in the right place at the right time to take on kilrah. He chose the Victory for a reason and probably was totally aware of its military successes and failures over decades of service (no small accomplishment in its own right)

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Well, then what's the word on them, are they considered at least posible for the WC history? because they appear in the (fan made) Wing Commander Saga... Any way, can we know if the TCS Kennedy was of this class? (or does anyone have any way of finding the class of the ship?)

The Ranger class carriers (Like the TCS Victory) don't show up in WC 1/2, but they are there... It could be possible for this Saratoga class carriers to exist...

Well, yes, anything is possible -- but it's dangerous to create and observe a particular 'fanon'. Psych or the Saga mod deciding to name a ship Saratoga-class does not make the rest of the fandom recognize it. There's a desire to slavishly 'fill in' things like this, when really they should be left open -- more room for future stories or for your own work.

Star Trek ran into this exact problem in the 1970s. Fans created their own elaborate listings and histories for everything that could possibly be made up... and then the show came back and ignored all of that material. Ship classes in particular still cause confusion there today.

As for the TCS Kennedy... *all* we know is that it's the home of the 253rd Reconnaissance Wing. That means it could be anything from a large destroyer to some kind of starbase... there's just no way to know -- but there's also no *reason* to, either.

(Also, as common as 'Ranger class' is, the Victory is never actually given this designation...)

Backwater system patrolling. Somebody had to do it, after all. Why send a Concordia or Jutland class CV when you had an antique pre-war carrier available?

Jutland is another bit of 'fanon' -- you won't find it mentioned anywhere in a Wing Commander game/novel/guide/etc.

From what I understand, we hear about the ship clas but never *see* it so we don't know what Saratoga class ships look like.

Not even a class. The TCS Saratoga is one of the carriers in Fleet Action... it's never described in any more detail than that.

(Also, the irony of your statement is that the Concordia met her fate in a rear-guard action at Vespus, a "backwater system".)

Vespus was not a backwater system -- it was a major Confederation headquarters.

Orsini was indeed basically on the front lines by the time Blair got to the Victory,

It's hard to classify it. Rollins says that it's "pretty quiet", and there's certainly no major battle there... but the Victory does find some commerce raiders, a cruiser and a forward supply depot.

Do you really think Tolwyn would have chosen an obsolete carrier with little combat history to be in the right place at the right time to take on kilrah. He chose the Victory for a reason and probably was totally aware of its military successes and failures over decades of service (no small accomplishment in its own right)

Tolwyn was intentionally shifting experienced personnel (Blair, Maniac, Hobbes) to a ubiquitous carrier in preparation for the Behemoth mission.

 

[Chicken]

I usually take Fleet Tactics with a grain of salt, but they seem to change ship classes often. Sometimes I just find it easier to call it a 'carrier' or 'destroyer' than fill in a class name.

 

[LeHah]

Vespus was not a backwater system -- it was a major Confederation headquarters.

I skimmed the WC3 novel last night and only found the brief mention of Vespus at the beginning. Where is it mentioned that it was a "major Confederation headquarters"?

 

[Bandit LOAF]

I skimmed the WC3 novel last night and only found the brief mention of Vespus at the beginning. Where is it mentioned that it was a "major Confederation headquarters"?

It's in the WC3 novel, during the Blackmane section. They talk about how the base is being disassembled in favor of Vespus and Torgo.

The key here is that being behind the line isn't the same thing as being a backwater planet. It's the difference between an attack on Washington DC and one on Griswold, Iowa... neither are on any sort of front line, but only one is a backwater city.