Wing Commander 3: Silly Stuff

[CptHobbes]

wc2 ships are newer than wc3 ships (i think that was stated) but in wc2, you fly from the concordia (fleet flagship) whereas in wc3 you fly from "tin can sally" a ship with a "very long career" the victory is aged, and not on the front lines, so it makes sense that it be equipped with older, less up to date weapons and ships (in fighter, and battlegroup terms)

This raises an interesting question, though. If the Concordia and the Victory were in service at the same time, wouldn't the Concordia have the newer fighters (Hellcats, Thunderbolts, etc.) and the Victory be equipped with the older-model (WC2) craft? Since the Concordia is on the front lines, this is even more reason for the ship to have the latest in fighters and weaponry.

So this might imply that the WC3 fighters weren't in service during the WC2 era, so the "because you can't see them, that doesn't mean they are vanished" theory doesn't really hold here, does it? The WC3 fighters should have been introduced sometime in those two years between WC2 and WC3 and replaced the WC2 craft, otherwise the Concordia would have been using those ships. Since even the Victory - a ship that was destined for the scrapheap and assigned to a less than major role than Confed's fleet carriers - has fighters that were more advanced than those used on the fleet flagship, one would assume that all of the WC2 fighters have been replaced during this time.

Or maybe I'm totally wrong and I'm half-asleep writing nonsense. That's probably more like it.

 

[Lionheart]

But we saw WC3 fighters in Wing Commander Academy. I don't know if that's considered canon or not, though. But Hellcats were being used and we also saw an Arrow there, so they have been around since the early 2650s at least...

 

[psych]

Whatever it's worth, I'm not going to take any stands on this issue, but the WC4 novel kinda made it quite clear that craft like Arrows, Hellcats, Thunderbolts, and Longbows were all front-line. All the others, Ferrets, Rapiers, Sabres, Broadswords were considered obsolete and cast-offs only suited for Border Worlds service. But how does that stand up to stuff from Academy, and others, all equally suitable information? The debate continues.

 

[Bob McDob]

It's possible though - even probable, I think - that the ships used by the UBW were simply outdated versions of the WCII-era ships. They used an "early-model Arrow", so the rest of their ships might be of similar vintage. Confed seemed to select a narrow array of craft and mass produce/upgrade them throughout the war.

The older ships (Hornet, Raptor, et all) are almost certainly headed for the junkyard, though.

 

[Col.Dom]

Okay, here is what I've seen here, at the CIC, and at the TCE site.

The WC3 ships, minus the Thunderbolt VII, Longbow bomber and Excalibur, are all old. The Arrow and Hellcat V have been around for sometime by the time WC3 rolls around.

Most of the WC2 ships are still in service (during WC3). Some ships, like the Scimitar, are known to have been retired, with a known retirement year. The Broadsword and Crossbow bombers were probably retired, since the Longbow blows both away. The whole Morningstar debate is insane. We can assume that the Morningstar was probably never mass-produced, since there were more cons than pros about it; it had an iffy jump drive, crappy engines and its Mace nuke wasn't exactly "safe."

Perhaps it was rolled out but in limited numbers, like Confed's other problematic "wonder fighter," the Bearcat?

Confed obviously does have a narrow list of fighters it upgrades and keeps. We see this in the Rapier IIs and the Hellcats and the Arrows.

By WC4, it was decided that, since it was peacetime, that it could save money by cutting back on a lot of military spending. Therefore, you've got the RIF and a massive "standardization."

Being the tried-and-true, the Hellcats, Arrows, Thuds and Lonbows were probably selected to be kept around. Notice that their weapons are different and more "vanilla;" especially the Thunderbolt VII. Also, Arrows can now cloak. The Excalibur, a proven fighter (one blew up Kilrah, after all) was kept but with massive changes for the cheaper; less missiles and little armor and shielding upgrades. The Excalibur, also, received cloaking.

As for the UBW arsenal, it's pretty freakin' obvious from the get-go that they're economically weaker than the Confederation. In fact, the majority of their wartime fleet came from Confed, no...? At any rate, the UBW is known to fly Scimitars, which we know to have been retired 20 years earlier! Spacecraft like the Ferrets, Rapiers, Sabres, etc. were probably cast off because there wasn't much you could do with them that couldn't be done with the more cost-effective, easier-to-mass-produce WC3 ships (I know they were designed to meet technology limits but, from a practical standpoint, the WC3 ships are much less complex in design than WC1 & 2 ships and look so much easier to slap together).

The Bearcat, true, was an expensive craft. However, I think of it as the WCU F/A-22 (it even looks like one ). It was designed and began production during peacetime. There wasn't a necessity (at the time) and it was probably started up to get people investing and to create jobs. Of course, unlike the F/A-22, the Bearcat uses a new engine system (like the Morningstar's, is iffy) and is a maintenance pig.

Either way, WC3 ships are older than WC2 ships. WC3 ships stood the test of time and are cheaper. WC2 ships became obsolete at war's end. Border Worlds are poor and can only afford old, tossed Confed materiel.


Take what you want from that... because I think I totally deviated from the point... but, whatever, as this has been debated to death

 

[psych]

I don't know what you are talking about as far as the Bearcat is concerned. There is no mention in the canon that the Bearcat was unreliable, in fact, it was the Aces club who started spreading ideas about the Bearcat's ion engines being unreliable and required high maintainance. I was around when that first happened, and they did it because they were afraid the Bearcat was better then their fan-created fighters, so they tried to find a way to make Origin's fighters less capable then their own. You probaly got that info from the TCE, and I knew that guy who made it (he was an Ace). The argument is bunk really, if the ion engines were in fact new, then why did the WC1 fighters have ion engines?

The Bearcat was ConFleet's first step into making a space superiority fighter. It was created by BuShips as a legitimate regular deck fighter, rather then the Excalibur which had its beginning in Special Operations. In fact, it was designed for mass production and lacks any bells/whistles (cloak, jump drive, etc etc).

 

[Haesslich]

I suspect that the Bearcat either was a prototype or testbed for new technologies, or ended up being produced in the same sort of fashion that Excals were - not spread out too much among the fleet, given that their improved capabilities would prove somewhat more expensive than desired in a 'peacetime' fleet. While they'd be out there, I doubt that every carrier deck would have one of those babies. Just as the Vampire, its spiritual descendent.

 

[Col.Dom]

I don't know what you are talking about as far as the Bearcat is concerned. There is no mention in the canon that the Bearcat was unreliable, in fact, it was the Aces club who started spreading ideas about the Bearcat's ion engines being unreliable and required high maintainance. I was around when that first happened, and they did it because they were afraid the Bearcat was better then their fan-created fighters, so they tried to find a way to make Origin's fighters less capable then their own. You probaly got that info from the TCE, and I knew that guy who made it (he was an Ace). The argument is bunk really, if the ion engines were in fact new, then why did the WC1 fighters have ion engines?

The Bearcat was ConFleet's first step into making a space superiority fighter. It was created by BuShips as a legitimate regular deck fighter, rather then the Excalibur which had its beginning in Special Operations. In fact, it was designed for mass production and lacks any bells/whistles (cloak, jump drive, etc etc).

Ahhh. That I did not know. Thanks for shedding light on the situation! I always wondered what was so bad about its ion engines and just figured it was a new type of ion engine. At any rate, thanks for clearing up all the "made up" mucky-muck about the Bearcat's cons.

So, then, it would seem the Bearcat is just as cheap as the other "front-line" fighters.

 

[Bob McDob]

The Bearcat was ConFleet's first step into making a space superiority fighter. It was created by BuShips as a legitimate regular deck fighter, rather then the Excalibur which had its beginning in Special Operations. In fact, it was designed for mass production and lacks any bells/whistles (cloak, jump drive, etc etc).

It probably wouldn't even be able to hold them - it's a comparitively compact fighter with a tiny silhouette. Modifying it too heavily would lose the whole point of its creation, which might be why we see more of the larger Excaliburs and Thunderbolts among the Home Guard squadrons in SO - they're easily upgradable, the Bearcat isn't.

 

[Viper61]

I always kindof liked the idea that the facilities that produced the WC2 fighters were all/mostly destroyed in the Kilrathi's advancement on Earth. The Kilrathi irradiated half a dozen inner worlds on their way to Earth and also bombed many cities on our planet before they were stopped. Could the facilities that built the WC2 craft have been hit/destroyed in this march?
I mean look at the craft we fly in WC3, they are all made by Douglas Aerospace (with the exception of the Bow which is made by McCall Industries). Could it be that Douglas and McCall were the only Confed fighter producers that survived the Kilrathi? I can't recall if the producers of the WC2 fighters were ever mentioned (other than the fact that from the WC4N, Pliers said that the Rapier(?) had some interchangeable components with the Thud).
Anyway, just a thought thats been in the back of my head a while. Even if this isn't the case, on a small carrier such as the Victory where storage space and service technicians are at a premium, standardization would be key. I'm sure in the serious shortages that probably followed the BoT that having 3 out of 4 craft on your flight deck being produced by the same company would be a pretty smart thing to do (interchangeable components, similar company design characteristics, etc).

I'm tired or I'd try to recall more of my reasoning for my first hypothesis. Anyway, take the theory for a spin, see what comes up (or falls apart ).

C-ya

 

[Quarto]

Whatever it's worth, I'm not going to take any stands on this issue, but the WC4 novel kinda made it quite clear that craft like Arrows, Hellcats, Thunderbolts, and Longbows were all front-line. All the others, Ferrets, Rapiers, Sabres, Broadswords were considered obsolete and cast-offs only suited for Border Worlds service. But how does that stand up to stuff from Academy, and others, all equally suitable information? The debate continues.

I would suggest that the WC3 fighters were developed from earlier designs, but had been given new designations by the Navy. This would explain why a fighter like the Longbow, which we know existed in 2654, had a designation number (F/A-76) that would suggest it was newer than all the WC2 ships.

Speaking of designations, here's an interesting question. If Confed did not have torpedo bombers prior to 2634, and all the bombers we encountered in WC1-4 had designations like F-something or A-something, where the heck did Prophey's TB-80 and TB-81 come from? Was there really so many torpedo bombers that we didn't see, does Confed assign multiple designations to its ships (i.e., so that the A-17 Broadsword is also designated TB-something), or what?



Col.Dom: We do know, however, that the Morningstar was eventually used on the frontlines and was considered a successful design - the Academy manual refers to it as "the current Confederation state-of-the-art capital ship destroyer".

 

[Col.Dom]

Originally Posted by Quarto
Speaking of designations, here's an interesting question. If Confed did not have torpedo bombers prior to 2634, and all the bombers we encountered in WC1-4 had designations like F-something or A-something, where the heck did Prophey's TB-80 and TB-81 come from? Was there really so many torpedo bombers that we didn't see, does Confed assign multiple designations to its ships (i.e., so that the A-17 Broadsword is also designated TB-something), or what?



Col.Dom: We do know, however, that the Morningstar was eventually used on the frontlines and was considered a successful design - the Academy manual refers to it as "the current Confederation state-of-the-art capital ship destroyer".

The "MDS" (Mission Design Series) designations have nothing to do with the order they were made. The design, which is the numerical portion of an MDS (ex. F15C Eagle), is simply that- the design number. Out of however many drafts for the Eagle were made, the 15th one was actually produced. That is why earlier fighter jets in USAF history have insane numbers like 86, 100 and 105, whilst the more contemporary ones are the more humble 14, 15 and 16. That, however, is how its done in the modern USAF; as we've seen in countless examples, Confed military does things a bit differently.

As for the Morningstar, again, an excellent bit of info! I'm glad to see that it did so well. I'm a Morningstar fan. After all... it's Maniac tested and approved

 

[psych]

I would suggest that the WC3 fighters were developed from earlier designs, but had been given new designations by the Navy. This would explain why a fighter like the Longbow, which we know existed in 2654, had a designation number (F/A-76) that would suggest it was newer than all the WC2 ships.

Speaking of designations, here's an interesting question. If Confed did not have torpedo bombers prior to 2634, and all the bombers we encountered in WC1-4 had designations like F-something or A-something, where the heck did Prophey's TB-80 and TB-81 come from? Was there really so many torpedo bombers that we didn't see, does Confed assign multiple designations to its ships (i.e., so that the A-17 Broadsword is also designated TB-something), or what?

Maybe here's a good possibility. We saw the predecessor of the Longbow as some sort of search-and-rescue transport in WC Academy. Back then, it *was* some sort of general purpose shuttle. Then after the Battle of Earth, BuShips was looking for a new bomber to replace the Broadsword. McCall Industries simply took their personnel transport, and heavy modified it with armor plating, shielding, milspec power plant and engines, and missile/torpedo hardpoints (this is where a transport would help, all that extra space is usable to hold these new goodies. And as we all know, it won the contract and was put on the front-lines. That way, it shows the Longbow still has its roots in WCA, but was known throughout the Space Force as new design (we also can't ignore the False Colors novels, which referred to the Longbow as a new and recent bomber).

Same for the Arrow. Maybe it used to be some sort of one-man shuttle craft from somewhere, Special Ops later used it as a scout craft in Armada, then Douglas Aerospace acquired the blueprints somehow and redesigned it as a full-fledged light fighter.

As for the TB, my good guess is that ConFleet will redesignate them later on in the future, once their philosophy of specialized fighters and bombers were brought online and were in place.

It probably wouldn't even be able to hold them - it's a comparitively compact fighter with a tiny silhouette. Modifying it too heavily would lose the whole point of its creation, which might be why we see more of the larger Excaliburs and Thunderbolts among the Home Guard squadrons in SO - they're easily upgradable, the Bearcat isn't.

To tell you the truth, I would think BuShips deliberately made the Bearcat to have such a small silhouette. Reason? Small radar cross section which means harder to pick up on radar. I wouldn't think BuShips would have full fledged access to cloaking technology like Covert Ops/Special Ops did in the making of the Excalibur, so instead of active cloak (cloaking device to actively make it invisible), they tried passive stealth (make design to make it less detectable on radar). That's one of the main goals and ConOps (Concept of Operations) when it applies to designing aircraft of any kind (my degree was in aerospace engineering), to minimize the radar detection signal. No idiot designs a vessel deliberately with the intention of making it's radar signature as big as possible, especially if it's a combat craft.

 

[Quarto]

Maybe here's a good possibility. We saw the predecessor of the Longbow as some sort of search-and-rescue transport in WC Academy. Back then, it *was* some sort of general purpose shuttle.

I'm not sure if the Longbow in WCA didn't use weaponry, but your general idea does make sense (although it doesn't explain the F-86 Hellcat in WCA... but we can just go with the "it's a Wildcat" theory for that one).

As for the TB, my good guess is that ConFleet will redesignate them later on in the future, once their philosophy of specialized fighters and bombers were brought online and were in place.

So, basically all the war-era F-something and A-something fighters that could carry torpedoes were later on given an additional TB-something designation? That would make sense, although it would result in a lot of ships having double designations.

Col. Dom: Uh, huh? Within the 1962 designation system (and every designation system before it), the design numbers are assigned sequentially - it's no coincidence that you had the F-4 and F-8 in the 1960s, then the F-14, 15 and 16, and now you have the F-22. The reason why there's a huge downward jump in the designation number from 1962 onwars is because when the new system was put in place, they started from 1 again rather than continuing with the numbers reached in the USAF's 1948 system (a logical decision, given that the new system was to apply for all three services, and simply tacking on the USN fighters would have been crazy - suddenly, you'd have obsolete Wildcats with a higher designation number than the latest USAF fighter).