Starfigher Analysis: B-Wing

[Wolfninjajedi]

Well am back yet again doing another Analysis thread, so shortly after the Xg-1. This time folks were gonna be having a look at the B-Wing used by the Rebel Alliance, so lets have a look!

===========

 

"You're among the best pilots in the galaxy. You'll have to be if you want to control this starship."

 

―Admiral Ackbar briefing B-wing pilots prior to the Battle of Endor

 

The B-wing was one of the largest and heaviest bombers that the Rebel Alliance had, designed by the Slayn & Korpil company along with the help of Gial Ackbar. Though difficult to fly, it did participate in a number of operations both by the Rebel Alliance and then later the New Republic its primary use being an assault starfighter and later a two manned version would be introduced to act as a small transport. The B-wing was designed to replace the aging Y-wings, and though it had stronger shielding and hull it was not without its flaws, such as being difficult to fly and not having great speed or agility.

 

Its large hullframe made it an easy target so the B-wing never fully replaced the Y-wing as it was designed for. The rotating hull also made the ship abnormally delicate as too many sharp turns could put strain on the spaceframe and the rotation system could get stuck in one place. The cockpit could also be ejected from the rest of the ship like the Y-wing, however could also support atmospheric re-entry,

 

Armaments

 

ArMek SW-7a light ion cannons= 3

 

Gyrhil R-9X heavy laser cannon= 1

 

Gyrhil 72 twin autoblasters= 1

 

Krupx MG9 proton torpedo launchers= 2, 8 torpedoes each standard load.

 

Specs

 

B-Wing Schematics= http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/f/f2/Bwing_egvv.jpg

 

Max acceleration= 2,390 G

 

MGLT(Megalight)= 91

 

Max Speed(atmosphere)= 950(higher speeds possible with deflector shield on)

 

Engine Units= Quadex Kyromaster Engine 1, or Slayn & Korpil JZ-5 fusial thrust engines 4

 

Hyperdrive Rating= 2.0

 

Hyperdrive System= Slayn & Korpil HYd-997 hyperdrive motivator

 

Power Plant= Vinop O2K cryogenic power cells and ionization reactor

 

Shielding= Sirplex Zr-41 shield generator(rated 125 SBD)

 

Hull= Reinforced durasteel(rated 60 RU)

 

Sensor Systems= Fabritech ANv-9q sensor system with PH-5s long-range phased tachyon detection array and PK-8f short-range primary threat analysis grid

 

Targeting Systems= Fabritech ANq 3.6 tracking computer with IN-344-B "Sightline" holographic imaging system

 

Navigation System= Microaxial LpM-549 navigation computer

 

Avionics= Narmox HG.6w flight control avionics

 

Crew= 1 pilot

 

Cargo Capacity= 45 kilos

 

Consumables= 1 week.

 

Roles

 

Assault Starfighter

 

Bomber

====

 

Pictures

 

Simple View

 

Trio of B-wings

===

 

Thoughts: The B-Wing is nice, I like the design of it a rather interesting one compared to the other fighters that the Alliance had, I could see though it being hard to work with since the rest of the fighter is rather long so maneuvering it would be tricky among other things.

Edited May 29, 2013 by Wolfninjajedi

[LordFlasheart]

I have always liked the B-Wings, the cool rotation around the cockpit to deploy the S-Foils for combat was a neat touch (though I think the X-Wing S-Foils on the tie ball cockpit for the Twi-Lek Deathseeds was even better).

 

It's a good thing they could take a beating though, the abnormally large cross section gave ample area to hit, I remember them being great target practice in Tie Fighter. I guess that's the problem with bombers though, they sacrifice small size, speed and maneuverability for a devastating payload. I bet they were a ***** to fly in atmosphere too, make them more of a space bomber than a ground pounder.

[Wolfninjajedi]

If ya haven't checked, I do have other Analysis threads regarding Starfighters and Walkers. Hmm...I think I shall do a Walker next, though not saying which.

[tunewalker]

honestly this is one of those ones where if you put a pilot who was really skilled with a b-wing the ship would be devastating unskilled pilots are not suited for this but a really good pilot would do magic with these.

[TalonVII]

If ya haven't checked, I do have other Analysis threads regarding Starfighters and Walkers. Hmm...I think I shall do a Walker next, though not saying which.

 

Nice one as always wolf. You and I seem to do some interesting starship analysis, but our style is different.

 

All the same lovely job!

 

Oh and if you find something that's an oddball ship and don't have the time, kick it my way, I try to find the not so well known ships or the one of a kind ships and kick them center stage.

[dazednconfuzed]

Sorry for the late entry to this topic, but I though tOP might be interested to know that Wedge Antilles (Commander, Rogue Squadron) once decided that piloting was the wrong word. He felt that the correct term should have been 'driver' because of the way the cockpit rotated made him feel separated from the rest of the fighter.

[IchibanSaru]

honestly this is one of those ones where if you put a pilot who was really skilled with a b-wing the ship would be devastating unskilled pilots are not suited for this but a really good pilot would do magic with these.

 

I loved flying the B-Wing in the old Lucas Arts game X-Wing (The B-WIng expansion disc). It was built like a battleship and flew like one. The turning radius on the B-Wing made them poor against dogfights, but B-Wings were often escorted by either X or A Wings for support. The B-Wing itself could take a great amount of punishment before throwing in the towel. It was designed to go toe to toe against corvette and frigate class ships so it was made to dish out and take a beating.

If used in the right way, with the proper support, the B-Wing was a dream to fly. The number of loadout configurations (hard points) on the B-Wing made it very versatile as well. It could be made into a pure missile boat, a wall of laser destruction or anything in between.

They weren't fast or nimble, but they weren't supposed to be. They surpassed the Y Wing in both survivability and lethality. Great ship. My favorite SW fighter.

[Ghisallo]

A bit of a necro post but in seeing it I have to say just this... the B-Wing was never JUST a bomber.

 

To use a RL aircraft it seems more a kin to say an F/A-18. It tires to thread the needle from being a a fighter and an attack aircraft (read fighter style bomber) however I think in seeing what happened in both the EU and rl, threading that line is damned close to impossible. Even according to the EU because of the issues the B-Wing had they introduced an upgraded Y-Wing (think A-6 Intruder/A-10 Warthog). One ring to rule them all seems to work well for Tolkein but not for aircraft

[MadDutchman]

Plus it looks like the B-wing lore is being thrown out the window along with the rest of the EU and being reintroduced in Rebels season 2 almost a decade earlier

 

Still, seeing Hera at the controls of something with proton torpedoes makes me smile

[IchibanSaru]

Plus it looks like the B-wing lore is being thrown out the window along with the rest of the EU and being reintroduced in Rebels season 2 almost a decade earlier

 

Still, seeing Hera at the controls of something with proton torpedoes makes me smile

 

I'd like to see an updated B Wing in Ep7 along the same lines as the new X-Wing fighter (T-70 versus T-65). Slightly updated, but still familiar. I'm thinking the B Wing shown in the Battle of Endor had to be an block A or B model if it was new at that time so there is plenty of room for growth and change in the 30+ years since Endor.

I saw the Rebels S2 trailer and was happy (and initially confused) when the I saw the red B-Wing. It did throw what the EU gave us as the time-line of the ship, it could be an early prototype (hence the bright paint scheme). Rather than Akbar designing it, perhaps the Rebels stole it. /shrug

Either way, it was great to see the B Wing playing a role in the new content. :-)

 

And I agree. The B Wing is not a simple bomber. I would liken it to an A-10 Warthog myself. It's not an air-superiority fighter (F15 & F22) or even the air/ground fighter (F/A18 & F35) because both of those roles can dogfight and hold their own with almost anything flying from an airframe and nimbleness point of view.

The A-10 was designed to bring the hurt against tanks. It was designed around a single weapon system, its gatling gun. It was designed to survive flying low and slow over a crowded battlefield as it hunted or lined up for strafing runs. The B Wing was designed to go head to head with smaller capitol ships and group up to take out the larger ones. It was designed to absorb the sort of damage corvette class ships could dish out so its speed had to be compromised for stronger shields. It wad designed to be rock solid on an approach run without being rocked around by hits and nearby blasts and that's why I think it's sluggish. Like the A-10, it can maneuver and bank for evasion, but it's not an air to air platform. Like the A-10. It wasn't designed to take on fighters. The B Wing CAN if pressed into the role, but its more about targets of opportunity rather than one on one fights against TIE ships.

The B Wing isn't the greatest ship of the Rebel Alliance, but it's my favorite and I'd pick it over the others in a heartbeat. It's not the answer to all problems by any means. It has "flaws" when compared to pure fighters, but I love idea of saying "Yeah go handle those TIE fighters. I got this frigate over here to blow up."

[Ghisallo]

I would just see it as leaning the opposite way of the F/A-18. The F/A-18 is big F, "little" a. It can do the job of attack but its durability and loiter time really make it not all that good for the job. The Navy simply didn't want to deal with having both dedicated "A" and "F" carrier born aircraft so they had the airframe modified to carry more ordinance.

 

The B-Wing on the other hand would he the space equivalent of "small" f, "big" A in terms of its design purpose.

 

I just remember doing call for fire missions in the army as a 19D. If I heard I had an A-10 incoming I had a smile. I knew he would get low and slow, would drop the ordinance RIGHT were it needed to be and I had as much as 45 minutes of "play time". If it was an F-16 I groaned. That guy would be going as fast as possible, and still get the job done, so he didn't get his but shot out of the sky and I was lucky to have 15- 20 minutes of play time.

[IchibanSaru]

I would just see it as leaning the opposite way of the F/A-18. The F/A-18 is big F, "little" a. It can do the job of attack but its durability and loiter time really make it not all that good for the job. The Navy simply didn't want to deal with having both dedicated "A" and "F" carrier born aircraft so they had the airframe modified to carry more ordinance.

 

The B-Wing on the other hand would he the space equivalent of "small" f, "big" A in terms of its design purpose.

 

I just remember doing call for fire missions in the army as a 19D. If I heard I had an A-10 incoming I had a smile. I knew he would get low and slow, would drop the ordinance RIGHT were it needed to be and I had as much as 45 minutes of "play time". If it was an F-16 I groaned. That guy would be going as fast as possible, and still get the job done, so he didn't get his but shot out of the sky and I was lucky to have 15- 20 minutes of play time.

 

First off, I'd like to thank you for serving our country. Second off... I will say the idea of a B-Wing loitering "over" a busy space battle is analogous to an A-10 doing the same. Call in the thunder and the B-Wing sets up for a strafing run and unleashes a wall of pain towards the area of concern before making a lazy turn to line up again if anything was stupid enough to remain alive.

The X-Wing would be the Falcon jet... in and out fast. The A-Wing, even faster. The Y-Wing could loiter, but couldn't take the punishment that a B-WIng could and couldn't bring the same amount of firepower. The B-Wing could take out larger threats (corvette and frigate class ships) as well as act as a deterrent to fighters. Sure fighters could use swarm tactics on a B-Wing... but like a bear, one swipe of the claw and you're done.

B-Wings are situational ships. They work best with at least a single fighter flying as escort to keep the flies off. They aren't "jack of all trades" like an X-Wing or TIE Defender, but what the B-Wing does bring in a single seat ship is unmatched... even against Lucas Arts own Xg-1 Imperial Assault Gunboat. Only the TIE Defender could defeat a B-Wing one on one in my opinion. The TIE Defender was nauseatingly fast and powerful. It could catch A-Wings. The TIE Defender is of course... non-canon for the time being so that point is moot, but I brought it up due to the relevance it had within the game.

[Ghisallo]

First off, I'd like to thank you for serving our country. Second off... I will say the idea of a B-Wing loitering "over" a busy space battle is analogous to an A-10 doing the same. Call in the thunder and the B-Wing sets up for a strafing run and unleashes a wall of pain towards the area of concern before making a lazy turn to line up again if anything was stupid enough to remain alive.

The X-Wing would be the Falcon jet... in and out fast. The A-Wing, even faster. The Y-Wing could loiter, but couldn't take the punishment that a B-WIng could and couldn't bring the same amount of firepower. The B-Wing could take out larger threats (corvette and frigate class ships) as well as act as a deterrent to fighters. Sure fighters could use swarm tactics on a B-Wing... but like a bear, one swipe of the claw and you're done.

B-Wings are situational ships. They work best with at least a single fighter flying as escort to keep the flies off. They aren't "jack of all trades" like an X-Wing or TIE Defender, but what the B-Wing does bring in a single seat ship is unmatched... even against Lucas Arts own Xg-1 Imperial Assault Gunboat. Only the TIE Defender could defeat a B-Wing one on one in my opinion. The TIE Defender was nauseatingly fast and powerful. It could catch A-Wings. The TIE Defender is of course... non-canon for the time being so that point is moot, but I brought it up due to the relevance it had within the game.

 

 

First Thank you. TBH I never felt like I served when wearing BDUs, nor do I feel I serve now wearing Blue. It is a calling imo and no need to thank people who do what they are called to do (yes I was raised Roman Catholic lol).

 

Second I get what you are saying... I am just saying the B-Wing is a better fighter than an A-10. I am looking at the B-Wing Kinda like a F-105. While designated a Fighter, it was really a high speed bomber, that could also dog fight IF it absolutely necessary but it's crazy payload... ability to get in and out FAST but lack of maneuverability vs "real" dog fighters meant it became a bomber. The A-10... yeah if it ends up in a dog fight it's never going to end well lol

 

This kinda stuff actually has always interested me. before I enlisted I studied to be a History teacher and all of my papers focused on military conflicts or their aftermath in college. Yes I always intended to make questionable salaries lol.

Edited April 30, 2015 by Ghisallo

[IchibanSaru]

First Thank you. TBH I never felt like I served when wearing BDUs, nor do I feel I serve now wearing Blue. It is a calling imo and no need to thank people who do what they are called to do (yes I was raised Roman Catholic lol).

 

Second I get what you are saying... I am just saying the B-Wing is a better fighter than an A-10. I am looking at the B-Wing Kinda like a F-105. While designated a Fighter, it was really a high speed bomber, that could also dog fight IF it absolutely necessary but it's crazy payload... ability to get in and out FAST but lack of maneuverability vs "real" dog fighters meant it became a bomber. The A-10... yeah if it ends up in a dog fight it's never going to end well lol

 

This kinda stuff actually has always interested me. before I enlisted I studied to be a History teacher and all of my papers focused on military conflicts or their aftermath in college. Yes I always intended to make questionable salaries lol.

 

We see eye to eye for the most part. I agree that the A-10 can't dog fight anything more advanced than a Cessna 105 that's armed with a .22 caliber. The B-Wing can dog fight (thanks to its heavy armoring that allows it to take a beating as it maneuvers lol).

 

The downfall of any Star Wars talk about ship to ship dog fights is of course, the unrealistic physics used in maneuvering in a vacuum. Lucas famously modeled his Ep4 dogfights after WW2 analogs. Which is fine for dramatic effect, but poor in relation to showing how ships move in a vacuum. Wide banking turns (famous in Star Wars) are superfluous when it's possible to change the orientation of the ship while keeping its forward momentum. The old game Wing Commander 3 and the great reboot series of Battlestar Galatica showed how a ship could turn sideways and still be moving "forward" as it attacked. Maneuvering thrusters keep the ship pointed where it's needed to go while the main thruster(s) propel it.

This little nugget of fact makes most of the downsides of the B-Wing's reputation of "flying a brick" a moot point. I know we must adhere to the Star Wars Universe's laws of physics, but imagine a B-Wing that wasn't hamstrung by WW2 fighter physics. One can dream I guess (Looks at JJ Abrams).

[Ghisallo]

We see eye to eye for the most part. I agree that the A-10 can't dog fight anything more advanced than a Cessna 105 that's armed with a .22 caliber. The B-Wing can dog fight (thanks to its heavy armoring that allows it to take a beating as it maneuvers lol).

 

The downfall of any Star Wars talk about ship to ship dog fights is of course, the unrealistic physics used in maneuvering in a vacuum. Lucas famously modeled his Ep4 dogfights after WW2 analogs. Which is fine for dramatic effect, but poor in relation to showing how ships move in a vacuum. Wide banking turns (famous in Star Wars) are superfluous when it's possible to change the orientation of the ship while keeping its forward momentum. The old game Wing Commander 3 and the great reboot series of Battlestar Galatica showed how a ship could turn sideways and still be moving "forward" as it attacked. Maneuvering thrusters keep the ship pointed where it's needed to go while the main thruster(s) propel it.

This little nugget of fact makes most of the downsides of the B-Wing's reputation of "flying a brick" a moot point. I know we must adhere to the Star Wars Universe's laws of physics, but imagine a B-Wing that wasn't hamstrung by WW2 fighter physics. One can dream I guess (Looks at JJ Abrams).

 

When ever people mention Galactica I wanna scream "BABYLON 5 did it first?!?!?!""

Wish I couldfind one someone did not put their own sound track choice over but... B-5 was very often about how physics would work in space. Heck some of the fighters were such that they were specifically stted not to be capable of atmospheric fight like this one..https://youtu.be/p04J5N_SEjA?t=21

 

 

I miss that show

Edited May 1, 2015 by Ghisallo

[IchibanSaru]

When ever people mention Galactica I wanna scream "BABYLON 5 did it first?!?!?!""

Wish I couldfind one someone did not put their own sound track choice over but... B-5 was very often about how physics would work in space. Heck some of the fighters were such that they were specifically stted not to be capable of atmospheric fight like this one..https://youtu.be/p04J5N_SEjA?t=21

 

 

I miss that show

 

I didn't say BSG did it first. I used BSG as my example because I loved the series and liked the "hard science" without hand waving that showed the various maneuvering thrusters firing as the vipers flew. I'm not taking anything away from B5 (which premiered a year before my other example: Wing Commander 3). I just used two examples that I knew from personal experience.

To be completely pedantic about it, I think "2001 A Space Odyssey" was the first realistic depiction of "real world" physics when it came to maneuvering in space in a fictional movie and that came out in 1968.

 

I get it. Star Wars has never been about science and "how and why". The EU did a lot to try to fill in the blanks, but that is now washed away until it isn't.

On a tangent: I would like your input to know how an X-Wing can fly in atmosphere (as seen in the Ep7 teasers) with no apparent movable surfaces or maneuvering thrusters. Aircraft can get away from traditional forms and lifting surfaces if they have the computational power to compensate for the inherent non-aerodynamic shape of most modern fighters. But a ship or plane still needs some means to maneuver via either by thrust or movable control surfaces. Those X-foils are not designed to create atmospheric lift being that they are flat and parallel to the angle of attack. Not to mention then amount of drag the foils would cause when the ship moves any angle greater than 5 degrees AOT. It would constantly stall. /shrug

A B-Wing has no more business being in atmosphere even though it has a much larger lifting surface when flown "sideways". That cockpit being on one end makes everything unstable unless there is a lot of stuff going on we don't know about.

Star Wars: A fantasy space opera about space wizards. Not about science fiction.

[Ghisallo]

 

On a tangent: I would like your input to know how an X-Wing can fly in atmosphere (as seen in the Ep7 teasers) with no apparent movable surfaces or maneuvering thrusters. Aircraft can get away from traditional forms and lifting surfaces if they have the computational power to compensate for the inherent non-aerodynamic shape of most modern fighters. But a ship or plane still needs some means to maneuver via either by thrust or movable control surfaces. Those X-foils are not designed to create atmospheric lift being that they are flat and parallel to the angle of attack. Not to mention then amount of drag the foils would cause when the ship moves any angle greater than 5 degrees AOT. It would constantly stall. /shrug

.

 

Repulsorlift technology... Star wars version of the Heisenberg Compensator

[IchibanSaru]

Repulsorlift technology... Star wars version of the Heisenberg Compensator

 

"A wizard did it." Got it.

 

A question... repulsing what exactly? Anti-gravity repulsers? EM repulsers? (that would be hell on anything below it).

 

So if I understand this correctly... in the Star Wars universe, atmospheric altitude adjustments are done using repulser technology while the engines provide thrust. That must be some magic tech that fit in both a small TIE Fighter fuselage and an X-Wing with no visible tell-tales. lol

In a A New Hope, I remember seeing an X-Wing lift up off the floor of the Yavin 4 temple hanger using some form of levitation mechanics, but I assumed it had a "limit" of how far off the ground it could be used. Apparently not.

[Ghisallo]

"A wizard did it." Got it.

 

A question... repulsing what exactly? Anti-gravity repulsers? EM repulsers? (that would be hell on anything below it).

 

So if I understand this correctly... in the Star Wars universe, atmospheric altitude adjustments are done using repulser technology while the engines provide thrust. That must be some magic tech that fit in both a small TIE Fighter fuselage and an X-Wing with no visible tell-tales. lol

In a A New Hope, I remember seeing an X-Wing lift up off the floor of the Yavin 4 temple hanger using some form of levitation mechanics, but I assumed it had a "limit" of how far off the ground it could be used. Apparently not.

 

Repulsors, in the now Legends canon (the books and RPGs), require gravity wells in which to work so it is not proximity to the surface that matters, rather just being inside the planet's gravity well. In the "regular canon" (the movies and cartoons) no explanation is given to how they work, only that everything from speeders, to space craft, to the Cloud City on Bespin use the tech to stay off the ground.

 

While you do not see them in the movies, the books talk about in space the various ship types using maneuvering jets in zero g. These are described as small Ion engines mounted in strategic places.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Ghisallo

[IchibanSaru]

Repulsors, in the now Legends canon (the books and RPGs), require gravity wells in which to work so it is not proximity to the surface that matters, rather just being inside the planet's gravity well. In the "regular canon" (the movies and cartoons) no explanation is given to how they work, only that everything from speeders, to space craft, to the Cloud City on Bespin use the tech to stay off the ground.

 

While you do not see them in the movies, the books talk about in space the various ship types using maneuvering jets in zero g. These are described as small Ion engines mounted in strategic places.

 

Thanks for the "in universe" explanation (albeit, from the now defunct EU).

 

As for real world: gravity wells are what causes objects to fall due to warped spacetime in the form of a depression caused by mass. It's popular in fiction to throw around the term "anti-gravity" as a catchall for levitation, but it requires that its powered by EM or aerodynamic lift or thrust or something beyond "anti-gravity waves"... which would cause more damage than good to the surrounding spacetime if they were used as a field or propellent... or actually existed at all.

I know the EU took great strides to try to fill in the technical gaps left by the movies regarding technology, but the ships don't move as if they're under maneuvering thrusters. They maneuver for the most part like airplanes (the WW2 analog again) that seem to have to follow the rules of fluid physics (atmosphere) while in a vacuum. They have to bank rather than rotate. All yaw, pitch and roll changes are done as if in a fluid (air) rather than a vacuum.

 

Good talk. B-Wing for president.

[SentinelThain]

I loved the B-wing in swg.With the right engine in it was a great fighter and could pack some punch (I had 4 re'd borstal disruptors in mine if I remember right).Along with the Firespray they where my 2 favourite ships in that game.

[Anishor]

My end game setup was L10 gun in the nose, 3 Borstels in the wings, 10 cap, 10 armor, 10 shield, Crafted 125 speed engine and a pre-nerf reactor, and Ir2s/P3s. Had I had Jolson's L10 gun I could have used a mining cap!

[AlrikFassbauer]

I lovede the B-Win in the first X-Wing game. I was extremely difficult to maintain, it was freighteningly slow when the shields were on, but the shields were thick, and if you could switch them around (forwards shielding, backwards shielding, balanced shielding), you could get enough shielding into 1 side - so much that I felt attacks rather as mosquito stings.

 

But there were most dangerous moments as well ... And that was mostly when the enemy got fresh reinfornements. I was sooooo glad that the B-Wing with ALL energy towards the engines (and thus all shields down) was by far the fastest ship in that fleet - no-one could hit me because I did outrun even missiles.

 

But with shields even at minimum rate, it SO sluggish ...

[IchibanSaru]

I lovede the B-Win in the first X-Wing game. I was extremely difficult to maintain, it was freighteningly slow when the shields were on, but the shields were thick, and if you could switch them around (forwards shielding, backwards shielding, balanced shielding), you could get enough shielding into 1 side - so much that I felt attacks rather as mosquito stings.

 

But there were most dangerous moments as well ... And that was mostly when the enemy got fresh reinfornements. I was sooooo glad that the B-Wing with ALL energy towards the engines (and thus all shields down) was by far the fastest ship in that fleet - no-one could hit me because I did outrun even missiles.

 

But with shields even at minimum rate, it SO sluggish ...

 

Yeah. The X-Wing PC game was when I fell in love with the B-Wing. The ship made me feel nearly invulnerable against TIE Fighters with all power to the shields. Sure I was moving 25 mph, but I was unstoppable!

 

Fighter Design 101:

 

A. Fast & Maneuverable

B. Strong Survivability

C. Lots of Weapons

 

You can only have two of the three in any single design.