Ship of the Week : Carrack-class cruiser

[Captain Seafort]

Considering the shields that the Carrack has and that the attacking craft could focus their fire into a single area to support the oncoming attack from a Neb-B. Even a small effect would be useful against a ship with already poor shielding when facing another ship with fresh shielding.

Deep, we're talking about a difference of at least half a dozen orders of magnitude. It's the equivalent of overtaxing a nuclear reactor by plugging in a couple more lightbulbs.

Not really. To my knowledge only six fighters fit in the shuttle bay. The rest are on flight or dock with the exterior ports.

I'm talking about six fighters - the depth of Neb-B's elephant's trunk (or whatever you want to call it) is only three times the length of an X-Wing, and it's not much wider than the wingspan of one.

[Deepcrush]

Deep, we're talking about a difference of at least half a dozen orders of magnitude. It's the equivalent of overtaxing a nuclear reactor by plugging in a couple more lightbulbs.

Look, I'm not pretending it really makes OOU sense. But, IU, we know that bombers can hurt smaller ships in the Frigate range.

I'm talking about six fighters - the depth of Neb-B's elephant's trunk (or whatever you want to call it) is only three times the length of an X-Wing, and it's not much wider than the wingspan of one.

If its a tight fit like that of a car port and double stacked it would work as long as you don't try to turn around inside.

[Captain Seafort]

But, IU, we know that bombers can hurt smaller ships in the Frigate range.

I don't have an issue with bombers hurting them - if even Slave I can lob low-GT seismic charges around then I have no qualms about the idea that TIE bombers can carry considerably more powerful weapons. My objection is that we're not talking about bombers - we're talking about fighters. Your bog-standard, twin-lasers-only, eyeball.

[Deepcrush]

Oh, I was talking about bombers launching from the Neb-B to attack the Carrack. Not standard TIE/Fs hitting the Neb-B.

[Captain Seafort]

Oh, I was talking about bombers launching from the Neb-B to attack the Carrack. Not standard TIE/Fs hitting the Neb-B.

I very much doubt they (or anything short of an ISD or a dedicated carrier for that matter) carry bombers. They'd have enough trouble cramming a couple of squadrons of fighters in without trying to carry bombers as well.

[Deepcrush]

That would be true for Bombers that don't have their own hyperdrive. However most Rebel craft did. So their need would be more of a rest stop vs a carrier.

[Captain Seafort]

That would be true for Bombers that don't have their own hyperdrive. However most Rebel craft did. So their need would be more of a rest stop vs a carrier.

However, given that we're presumably talking about TIE Bombers, given that the origin of this line of debate was started by the EGVV comparison between the Carrack and the Neb-B, they don't have hyperdrive and are therefore irrelevant to the comparison. I'm also dubious about the idea of counting fighters that simply use the ship as a service station as part of their complement. The Falcon did the same with the Redemption in ESB, but she obviously isn't part of her usual complement.

[Deepcrush]

Okay, that's true enough. If counting only early Imperial fight/bomber classes then their effect would be useless against the Carrack.

[Tyyr]

I like the Carrack's for much the same reason I like Star Destroyers. The shape is right. While it's true that in space you don't have to obey any kind of aero/hydrodynamics and with things like inertial dampners and structural integrity even common sense doesn't have to dictate how you shape something, but simple geometry will tell you that ships like the Neb-B are ridiculous. Having too much external surface area per unit volume to let you armor (or shield) them without expending vastly more tonnage or energy to do the same with something like a Carrack or ISD. That's not going to change and ships like the Carrack behave like it's a real consideration.

As for the fighters, the X-Wing series, which seems to get relative sizes right for the most part, makes it pretty obvious that the Neb-B carrying any fighters is somewhat ridiculous, the thing doesn't have the internal volume to do it. You might be able to cram in a squadron or so of something compact like TIE Interceptors or Advanceds, but forget doing any kind of servicing of them or of a quick recovery. You might be able to put them in racks and get them out in space fast but you had better be sure you win because if you have to retreat quickly your fighter pilots are going to find out just how disposable they are to the Empire.

[RK_Striker_JK_5]

I gotta agree on the absurdity of the Neb being able to carry fighters. The shape is all wrong for it.

[Captain Seafort]

Even if they were a more sensible shape their fighter compliment would be ridiculous. Their volume is less than 200,000 m^3, and yet they carry twice as many fighters as the Dread (volume somewhere a bit shy of eight million m^3) and as many as the VicStar (over 13 million m^3). The hangar bay of the Flurry, a dedicated carrier, has a volume of about a million m^3, and she can only carry twice as many fighters.

So yeah, the Neb-B would be pushed to carry a flight, let alone two squadrons.

[Deepcrush]

I think we're in agreement here that the Carrack is a superior escort, despite its lack of fighters, then the Neb-B.

[Captain Seafort]

Indeed. I think we're also in agreement that the Neb-B as described in the EU is, to use a technical term, a wanked-out piece of crap.

[Deepcrush]

I don't believe I would call it "wanked", however I would call it greatly over rated.

[Captain Seafort]

As many fighters as a VicStar in less than a sixtieth of the volume? A better combatant than the Carrack despite being less than a fifth the volume and having that bloody spar? If that isn't wanked I'd be very interested to know what is.