Starfighter Nerd Talk - Debunking "TIE Fighters are inferior to rebel ships"

[Gavin_Kelvar]

The thing I mentioned earlier- that deflector shields don't ever seem to be able to stop a blaster shot at ALL, but only work on physical objects- may be at work here. Certainly we have no reason to assume the Y-Wings are "better shielded" than the X-Wings (or the TIE Fighters) based on anything we see in Holy Trilogy. Later sources give them a "bomber" role with more substantial defenses in some cases, or make them an archaic previous model, or make them maneuver like a boat, but we see nothing like that in Holy Trilogy.

 

It was always my understanding that they wanted Y-Wings to be bombers with a rear turret (like a WWII TBF) but the limits of special effects prevented that design from ultimately being used. So the intention for Y-Wings to have a bomber role was always there, and if the special effects of them time permitted we would know Y-Wings that looked clearly like bombers with rear turrets.

 

It is true however that later sources that reinterpret what "bomber" means and gives them greater defense. Based on how the scenes are filmed I'd guess Lucas never intended bombers to be better armored than X-Wings and was inspired by the Battle of Midway where the American torpedo bombers that attacked without a fighter escort were utterly destroyed by Japanese fighters.

 

Again though I think we're largely looking for evidence of X-Wings being able to shrug off lots of hits like we're used to in video games and when that doesn't happen are concluding they have the same durability of TIEs. I think AgentRobP is on the right track looking at the number of instances X-Wings are not destroyed by the initial hit. It's my recollection that, even when the pilot is a red shirt, it takes long enough to destroy an X-Wing to give them last words/screams whereas TIEs just blow up after a single hit. That doesn't mean TIEs have NO shields but it does seem to suggest that their overall defenses are weaker than an X-Wing. Maybe not weaker by the large margin we're used to but nevertheless weaker.

Edited March 24, 2015 by Gavin_Kelvar