Whats the better Star Fighter, Colonial Viper Mk2 or X-Wing Fighter? - Page 1

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Whats the better Star Fighter, Colonial Viper Mk2 or X-Wing Fighter? (Page 1 of 3)

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:34:14 PM EDT

damn...been bugging me all day long...
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––-

http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Viper_Mark_II

Performance
The Mark II can rotate 180 degrees vertically in .35 seconds (Act of Contrition). It accelerates at six to seven G's (The Hand of God (RDM)), or 60 to 70 m/s²
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

http://hangarbay.tripod.com/td-xw.html
X-Wing is the common name for the Incom T-65c A2 Starfighter, a 12.5 meter snub fighter with two wings that split in two by activating S-foils. Having the wings in the "X" position allows for greater maneuverability and firing accuracy; each of the split wings has its own laser cannon (total of four). Having the S-Foils down allows for better flight control in atmosphere. It is a single-pilot ship, with an R2 astromech droid socket. The R2 unit is used in place of a navigation computer. It is extremely maneuverable, even at its top sublight speed of 110 MGLT. It has also been clocked at 1,050 kilometers per hour in an atmosphere.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:35:12 PM EDT

[#1]

Viper.....

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:36:22 PM EDT

[#2]

I'm inclined to lean X-Wing. Targeting system better than just a MK-I eyeball, hyperdrive, shields, heavy weapons to include proton torpedoes.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:38:52 PM EDT

[#3]

SA43 Hammerhead

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:39:01 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

I'm inclined to lean X-Wing. Targeting system better than just a MK-I eyeball, hyperdrive, shields, heavy weapons to include proton torpedoes.

Shields.
End of debate.

EDIT: You also have to walk the Viper to the target. We see this same effect in every show at least 3 times before they ever hit a Cyclon ship in the old series. Seriously. WWII bellygunner targeting.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:40:53 PM EDT

[#5]

They both suck

end of debate.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:42:00 PM EDT

[#6]

Viper it would of actually worked the xwing worked on magic to turn.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:43:02 PM EDT

[#7]

Viper bitches frackin get some

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:43:42 PM EDT

[#8]

I just wanted to click on this thread to witness then gheyness inside. I'm sure I won't be disappointed

roy d...I had both when I was a kid and they never went faster than a slow-pitch softball

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:44:30 PM EDT

[#9]

much as I love the Viper.....the X-Wing takes it 10 out of 10 times.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:46:06 PM EDT

[#10]

The statement that the top speed of the T-65 is 110 mglt (sublight) is patently ridiculous. The top speed of any vessel in sublight is just short of light speed,

if it has enough fuel to get to that speed. Space is a zero friction environment (notwithstanding flying through the dust clouds that were once planets,

destroyed by Death Stars) so you can get to any speed you want, subject to your fuel reserve limitations.

Every..and I mean EVERY...sci-fi space show or movie also commits the unpardonable sin of having engines lit all the time while in cruise. Bullshit. You cruise

with engines OFF. Engines are only on for acceleration, deceleration, or course adjustments. You won't slow down when you shut down the engines.

Also, nearly every space program or movie has applied aerodynamic handling principles to space battles. Only Space: Above and Beyond even came CLOSE to

getting that right, with fighter maneuvering sequences based on zero gravity, zero atmosphere ballistics rather than aerodynamic principles.

You do NOT bank to turn in space. You orient for Gs to be exerted in the axis you want them to be, but you don't bank turns!

The optimal fighter design for space is a sphere, as compact as possible, with huge attitude jets at all axes. Minimal surface area for a given volume, smallest

possible target. No need to compromise the design for non-existent aerodymamic functionality.

Since BSG is SLIGHTLY more realistic than Star Wars, from a physics perspective, I'd bet on the Viper. There is no cinematic evidence that a T-65 is even in the same

league as the Mark II in terms of maneuvering performance. In eyeball range, I'd bet on the Viper.

CJ

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:47:44 PM EDT

[#11]

A Wing

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:47:48 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
SA43 Hammerhead

Damn Skippy.

Semper.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:52:39 PM EDT

[#13]

A-10.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:53:07 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
The statement that the top speed of the T-65 is 110 mglt (sublight) is patently ridiculous. The top speed of any vessel in sublight is just short of light speed,
if it has enough fuel to get to that speed. Space is a zero friction environment (notwithstanding flying through the dust clouds that were once planets,
destroyed by Death Stars) so you can get to any speed you want, subject to your fuel reserve limitations.

Every..and I mean EVERY...sci-fi space show or movie also commits the unpardonable sin of having engines lit all the time while in cruise. Bullshit. You cruise
with engines OFF. Engines are only on for acceleration, deceleration, or course adjustments. You won't slow down when you shut down the engines.

Also, nearly every space program or movie has applied aerodynamic handling principles to space battles. Only Space: Above and Beyond even came CLOSE to
getting that right, with fighter maneuvering sequences based on zero gravity, zero atmosphere ballistics rather than aerodynamic principles.

You do NOT bank to turn in space. You orient for Gs to be exerted in the axis you want them to be, but you don't bank turns!

The optimal fighter design for space is a sphere, as compact as possible, with huge attitude jets at all axes. Minimal surface area for a given volume, smallest
possible target. No need to compromise the design for non-existent aerodymamic functionality.

Since BSG is SLIGHTLY more realistic than Star Wars, from a physics perspective, I'd bet on the Viper. There is no cinematic evidence that a T-65 is even in the same
league as the Mark II in terms of maneuvering performance. In eyeball range, I'd bet on the Viper.

CJ

However, both the X-Wing and Viper are both designed for in-atmo flight as well, which means that they have to be capable of aerodynamic flight.

Fantasy throw down, X-Wing wins every time.

Realism forces me to give the Viper points though, because aside from the cruise issues CJ pointed out, and the magic turns that every starfighter makes, they're what space fighters should be.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:53:11 PM EDT

[#15]

Neither, Valkyrie Veritech Fighter, FTW.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:56:07 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Neither, Valkyrie Veritech Fighter, FTW.

VF-1S Strike Valk for the win!

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:56:28 PM EDT

[#17]

Tie Defender. I flew one of those back in '94-95. It had better shields then all the rebel craft, which went a long way with us pilots. Plus having two separate hard points with the ability to carry a shit ton of concussion missiles or balance with proton torpedoes was nice. Factor in that you could do long bombing runs by dumping all your residual power from shield and blasters to over torque the P-sz9.7 engines and deliver proton bombs at nearly 200! Then throw in the twin ion cannons and quad blasters an you could singlehandedly disable capital ships.

Damn bantha-counters screwed the program. Who cared if they cost 300,000 credits each! So what if it was 5x the cost of a regular tie. Can a regular tie face down a victory class star destroyer and survive while disabling it's sublight engines while the interdictor holds them in place. Only complaint I ever had was the hyperspace engine. We didn't need it. a jump of more than a parsec was cruel and unusual punishment and severely degraded pilot performance. We were always based out of a cruiser or larger anyway. That could have saved a few credits.

I miss the old girl.

Posted: 3/16/2010 5:57:35 PM EDT

[#18]

It's funny you ask. My brother and I used to speculate on this all the time back in the 80's.

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:00:48 PM EDT

[#19]

Fokker DVII for the win.

Unlike the X-wing or Viper, it can glide once its motor cuts out.

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:01:27 PM EDT

[#20]

It's whatever the one the script writer chooses.

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:02:10 PM EDT

[#21]

I have to go with the Viper on this one. But I have to say that the B5 Starfury is pretty damn wicked...

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:03:23 PM EDT

[#22]

The GunStar........Death Blossum Baby.

ok,ok XWING

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:05:04 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
http://img2.blogs.yahoo.co.jp/ybi/1/90/44/x15xlr99/folder/132315/img_132315_6538005_0?1263056149

The GunStar........Death Blossum Baby.

ok,ok XWING

What do we do now?

:"Flipping eye patch hud":

We die.

KAAABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!11!!!!1

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:06:58 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Neither, Valkyrie Veritech Fighter, FTW.

VF-1S Strike Valk for the win!

http://www.dfwstangs.net/coppermine/albums/userpics/10013/strikeroy.JPG

Beautiful. Definitely the only choice for atmospheric combat. But in space? X-Wings FTW. Shields, proton torpedos, hyperdrive, R2 units, and Jedis.

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:07:57 PM EDT

[#25]

Unrelated question.....in the original Battlestar Galactica series, one Battlestar was fighting a neverending battle with the Cylons....where the hell did they get replacement Vipers from????

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:09:14 PM EDT

[#26]

Thread fail - lack of poll

Colonial Viper FTW

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:11:55 PM EDT

[#27]

A challenger appears!

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:14:48 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
I just wanted to click on this thread to witness then gheyness inside. I'm sure I won't be disappointed

roy d...I had both when I was a kid and they never went faster than a slow-pitch softball

vmax84

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:17:36 PM EDT

[#29]

X-Wing for sure.

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:17:38 PM EDT

[#30]

Gunstar

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:18:35 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

Quoted:
http://img2.blogs.yahoo.co.jp/ybi/1/90/44/x15xlr99/folder/132315/img_132315_6538005_0?1263056149

The GunStar........Death Blossum Baby.

ok,ok XWING

What do we do now?

:"Flipping eye patch hud":

We die.

KAAABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!11!!!!1

Fuck you X-Wing!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlAsSyDAWR8

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:31:53 PM EDT

[#32]

A challenger appears from the Outer Rim.

Kushan / Hiigaran Blade Mk II Interceptor

Class: Fighter
Maneuverability: >360 deg / per second in all axis
Acceleration: 975 m/s^2
Max Velocity: 875 m/s
Mass: 60 tons

Weapons: 2 rapid-cyclic mass drivers
Range: 4,500km

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:32:06 PM EDT

[#33]

Much as I loved the Viper and thought the X-Wing was just "meh" amongst Star Wars ships... Xwing wins this one hands down.

A trio of X-Wings would easily take an entire squadron of Vipers.

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:33:28 PM EDT

[#34]

Hands down...

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:33:37 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
I'm inclined to lean X-Wing. Targeting system better than just a MK-I eyeball, hyperdrive, shields, heavy weapons to include proton torpedoes.

Because of this, the X-wing.

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:40:17 PM EDT

[#36]

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:42:40 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Tie Defender. I flew one of those back in '94-95. It had better shields then all the rebel craft, which went a long way with us pilots. Plus having two separate hard points with the ability to carry a shit ton of concussion missiles or balance with proton torpedoes was nice. Factor in that you could do long bombing runs by dumping all your residual power from shield and blasters to over torque the P-sz9.7 engines and deliver proton bombs at nearly 200! Then throw in the twin ion cannons and quad blasters an you could singlehandedly disable capital ships.

Damn bantha-counters screwed the program. Who cared if they cost 300,000 credits each! So what if it was 5x the cost of a regular tie. Can a regular tie face down a victory class star destroyer and survive while disabling it's sublight engines while the interdictor holds them in place. Only complaint I ever had was the hyperspace engine. We didn't need it. a jump of more than a parsec was cruel and unusual punishment and severely degraded pilot performance. We were always based out of a cruiser or larger anyway. That could have saved a few credits.

I miss the old girl.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/d/d6/Defhanger.jpg

Former Tie Defender pilot here as well.

Nothing beats this. Nothing.

Posted: 3/16/2010 6:48:51 PM EDT

[#38]

X-Wing: VTOL Goodness ahead of its time...

Posted: 3/16/2010 7:00:29 PM EDT

[#39]

I won't weigh in on which is better. You'd have to settle on one set of sci-fi physics first.

Instead, I'll just post some pics of my personal favorites:

Posted: 3/16/2010 7:06:21 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Tie Defender. I flew one of those back in '94-95. It had better shields then all the rebel craft, which went a long way with us pilots. Plus having two separate hard points with the ability to carry a shit ton of concussion missiles or balance with proton torpedoes was nice. Factor in that you could do long bombing runs by dumping all your residual power from shield and blasters to over torque the P-sz9.7 engines and deliver proton bombs at nearly 200! Then throw in the twin ion cannons and quad blasters an you could singlehandedly disable capital ships.

Damn bantha-counters screwed the program. Who cared if they cost 300,000 credits each! So what if it was 5x the cost of a regular tie. Can a regular tie face down a victory class star destroyer and survive while disabling it's sublight engines while the interdictor holds them in place. Only complaint I ever had was the hyperspace engine. We didn't need it. a jump of more than a parsec was cruel and unusual punishment and severely degraded pilot performance. We were always based out of a cruiser or larger anyway. That could have saved a few credits.

I miss the old girl.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/d/d6/Defhanger.jpg

best post ever /end thread

Posted: 3/16/2010 7:08:02 PM EDT

[#41]

I'm taking a Super Hornet above all of them.

Posted: 3/16/2010 7:14:53 PM EDT

[#42]

peacekeeper prowler.

Posted: 3/16/2010 7:16:36 PM EDT

[#43]

Dorks are hot.

Posted: 3/16/2010 7:19:01 PM EDT

[#44]

B-wing. Shields, hyperdrive, and enough firepower to take out a capital ship.

Posted: 3/16/2010 7:20:01 PM EDT

[#45]

When in the hell are they going to re-release the Xwing and Tie Fighter series to work on newer computers? I would be all over buying and playing them again.

A-wing would have been the better head to head for this poll.