by purple_dave, September, 5, 2016 IMDb member since March 2004

The more I see of Disney Wars fighter craft that (even pre-Ep4 now) hail back to the TIE Interceptor design, the more I realize that the original Starfury was pretty much the epitome of sound space fighter craft design. Yes, it felt like it left the pilot extremely exposed (though we don't know how tough those canopies were, and we don't know that a metal hull would have been any tougher). But aside from having maximum leverage with the engine pods being way out on arms, the pilot had a nearly unobstructed view of everything in front and to the sides (at least to the extent of the average human's peripheral vision), where all these Disney TIEs have long protrusions sticking way out into the pilot's field of view (at least the Ep3 Jedi Starfighters appeared to have the pilot looking down the plane of the wing rather than trying to look directly through it). And I can understand why the changes were made to the second generation Starfuries so they'd be capable of atmospheric flight, but strictly in terms of a fighter craft designed for spaceflight only, I can't think of any single design that trumps the original Starfury.

by kerryedavis, September, 5, 2016 IMDb member since May 2004

Well put. And for the most part they didn't do the "swooping around" dogfighting stuff that can only be done with wings in an atmosphere.

by purple_dave, September 5, 2016 IMDb member since March 2004

Star Wars did that in part for cinematic effect, and partly because it allowed them to match movements from old WWII dogfighting footage (which is probably why some of the movement in Ep4 makes the fighters look like they're sliding sideways just a bit). Star Trek took the laziest path and most of their space battles look like fights between a pair of beached whales (this got a bit better in some of the movies, and then so much worse when TNG introduced the concept of relying on a handful of very predictable attack and defense patterns that still looked like beached whales duking it out). And Babylon 5 introduced actual physics into the mix. But BSG also used realistic physics in their space battles, except the Viper design looks more like it was designed for setting new straight-line speed records like all those rocket-powered cars they use for land-speed records. And the updated Raider design looks like there may have been drugs or the loss of a bet involved during the design process.

by kerrydavis, September, 5, 2016 IMDb member since May 2004

What I remember of BSG, both the original and new versions, were that the Vipers and other ships never turned around and decelerated first before heading in the opposite direction, as would actually be required in zero gravity and no atmosphere.

by purple_dave, September 5, 2016 IMDb member since March 2004

I don't think the Vipers were as married to real-world physics as the Starfuries were, but I remember seeing them flip end over end so they could shoot at something that was tailing them. That doesn't work in a setting where constant thrust equals constant motion. However, I'm pretty sure their engines were always glowing, which doesn't really match with real-world physics where constant thrust equals constant acceleration.

by kerrydavis, September, 5, 2016 IMDb member since May 2004

Actually, flipping end over end is one thing they CAN do, in space rather than with wings in an atmosphere. For purposes of reversing course, they would do the flip while their "main engines" were off, then run up again if they were intending to quickly stop their forward motion, and/or go back the way they came.

by MikeNTxs, Mon Sep 12 2016 IMDb member since December 2005

I would love to see this show back on the air. And I never saw season 5 because I didn't have cable at the time.

by huginn12, Wed Sep 14 2016 IMDb member since February 2010

The Last Starfighter (1984) came out before B5 and the fighter used was similar to the Starfury https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/11884-the-last-starfighter

Now about the star wars fighters. Why are they using humans as pilots? If they use droids then the question of field of vision becomes a non issue as the sensors are advanced enough and with droids there is no need for life support systems

Also what is the intended use for the fighter? is its primary function dog fighting or attacking large targets.

by purple_dave, September 5, 2016 IMDb member since March 2004

The engine layout on the Gunstar may have been similar to the Starfury, but the cockpit is built more like a traditional fighter jet's, with a long tapered design and an opaque hull below the pilot that eliminates a huge chunk of the potential field of view. Only the Thunderbolts used that general design, and then only so they were capable of atmospheric flight. Beyond that, the Gunstar also relies on a separate gunner, who can't even see much of what the armaments are capable of shooting at, since the forward turret is mounted directly below the pilot. And in true 80's movie fashion, the whole thing is pretty much designed to fail miserably until they pull out the Voltron sword...I mean, the Death Blossom maneuver.

In SW, the Empire uses human pilots because the Empire arose out of the Old Republic, which fielded cloned humans against droid armies. So they had a pile of clones available but no droids. They had piles of Starfighters that those humans could pilot, but no droid fighters. They had the whole "human vs droid" thing going, and had already chosen "human". And with droids, everything it can possibly do has to be preprogrammed, unless you can bestow it with true sentience. Humans can improvise when necessary, and can recognize very unusual patterns that computers might miss.

In terms of purpose, the SW fighters saw a fairly wide spread of intended purposes, from heavy bombers designed to take out capital ships, to light attack craft, to something that falls somewhere in between. Some were designed to work really well in atmosphere, and others aren't so much. On B5, the Starfury is a jack-of-all-trades. It's a fighter craft, a bomber, and even a space tug when necessary. And due to the reliance on actual physics meaning it can fly sideways and basically keep the guns aimed at a specific point, it makes for a highly effective offensive capability while also making it very hard to actually shoot down. With traditional atmospheric fighter craft, usually shooting means you have to fly directly towards your target, and that makes your flight path highly predictable and easy to fill with ordnance.

by huginn12, Wed Sep 14 2016 IMDb member since February 2010

Well yes the Empire used clones over droids but what is stopping the rebels or Hutts or anyone else from using droids. You have droid armies and in TESB you see a droid assassin so wouldn't it stand to reason that droids can handle aerial combat

by purple_dave, September 5, 2016 IMDb member since March 2004

The Rebels are limited to whatever they can get their hands on, and the Clone Wars also proved the fatal flaw of a robot army (either you give them autonomy and risk having them turn on you, or they can all be shut off with the flick of a single switch). Besides, if you have to get from Point A to Point B, would you rather drop into an X-Wing, or cling to the back of a Droid Fighter?

Hutts certainly could use them, but they pay a lot of goons to do the dirty work for them, and sending a droid army in means all that money's going to waste. Besides, if a few of them die every so often, there's a marked decrease in payroll due.

by huginn12, Wed Sep 14 2016 IMDb member since February 2010

When was it shown that all droids can be turned off by the flick of a remote switch? How much autonomy can droids be given before they turn on you? Palpatine was behind the droid army and wanted it to lose at some point in time so yes it makes sense for those droids to disabled that way

What advantage does an X-Wing piloted by human over a Droid Fighter or an X-Wing piloted by a droid when going from one place to another

In a dogfight between a human and a droid its been argued a droid have the advantage as it can react faster. The fighters are so small and agile it may be extremely hard to score kills in dogfighting. Against capital ships or large targets you probably will have a high attrition rate but put the brain of a droid in the cockpit of TIE fighter give it a tactical nuke and you may have one hell of a cruise missile. Urban pacification is another area. Droids won't have a problem with it but humans might

What costs more droids or pilots and which will have a higher attrition rate? You make it sound that if the Hutts use droids they will lose a lot of them but if they use goons they wont lose that many

by alwaysannoying, Sun Feb 12 2017 IMDb member since October 2016

I think most sci-fi combat tends to mimic out of date techniques purely for entertainment value.

Modern aircraft rely far more on stealth technology and long range air to air missiles than they do on dogfighting.

Surely in space attack angles would be defunct since a ship could spin on it's axis to point in any direction. Vision might also be of little use because of huge distances and limited visibility -- it can get quite dark the further away from a sun you are. And think how close you'd need to be to eyeball a 30/40 foot long camouflaged ship.

Far from the romance of WWI aces, surely space combat would be a game of sensors and weapons range.