Fighters and other subships

[Graham Kennedy]

A thread of fighters. This time I am going to start modern and work backwards. So to begin with, the Bloodlust class fighter.

The Bloodlust is a point defence fighter; cheap and easy to make, it is small, fast and agile, but lacks the range to do more than defend a capital ship from attack. The Coalition divides fighters into gunfighters, missile fighters, and dual fighers which carry both.

The Bloodlust has a single pilot. Ahead of him is the sensor package, with a rift generator below it which allows the craft to pass between normal space and mispace. The fuel tank is aft of the cockpit. Below the fuel tank is a total conversion reactor, which is what causes the prominent bulge at the rear. There's a zero point energy power multiplier and power conversion unit ahead of it. Twin midspace shunts are mounted, with normal space propulsor engines at the rear of the engine nacelles.

Two short range missiles are carried.

[Mikey]

Nice. As usual, Graham, you consider necessity and utility over what would look "pretty" but be completey non-functional... which I appreciate. I took a minute scrolling up and down between the exterior and cutaway views, thinking that something was wrong, before I remembered that your craft don't have a traditional cockpit with a canopy!

[Captain Picard's Hair]

The graphic of the "lucky lady" was a nice touch, alluding to real life jet fighters/bombers.

[Graham Kennedy]

The Deathdealer class fighter is a gunfighter counterpart to the Bloodlust class missile fighter. The two have a high commonality, being based on the same hull, power system, and drive systems. The main changes related to shortening the hull to reduce weight and so increase agility, the addition of a large hull module under the fuselage to handle an AMP cannon and M/AM tanks, and a larger sensor system in the nose. The latter required more space, necessitating reclining the cockpit chair and thus further reducing fuel tankage.

[Graham Kennedy]

The Samurai was for many years the ubiquitous Coalition fighter. A multi role craft, the Samurai was capable of engaging other fighters with either gun or missiles, or of launching attacks on capital ships at long range.

The Samurai has been classed as a master of all trades which doesn't really excel at any of them, and there is justification to this description. The Samurai is not a great dogfighter by any means; it has a very respectable combat record in fighter v fighter engagements, but that is largely due to superior pilot training, tactics and weaponry.

As an attack craft the Samurai lags behind the likes of the Massacre class in range and payload, but can carry a useful load for a useful distance and deliver it accurately.

The great advantage of the Samurai is a numerical one; a capital ship carrying a Samurai complement can use its entire aerospace wing to defend against an attack... then use the entire wing to launch a counterattack later. This kind of advantage is big enough to outweigh a significant quality shortfall.

[mwhittington]

This has probably been asked and answered, but what program do you use for your ship designs, Photoshop? Just curious. Great fighter designs, BTW. Everything you need, nothing you don't, and still in an attractive package!

[Sionnach Glic]

I think Graham mentioned that he used Photoshop, before.
Nice ships, by the way. I particularly like the Samurai, pretty sleek looking, in a way.

[Reliant121]

Of all of them, i like the Samurai most. I am not keen on the designs because there is little elegance to them. But they are a fuctional and relatively simple design.

[Mikey]

As I've said, I like that alleged lack of "elegance" because it is done in favor of utilitarian concerns. I also appreciate the fact that you balanced the Samurai's multi-capable nature with a decrease in ability to perform any one particular task, vs. a single-purpose craft. It only makes sense, but that fact gets forgotten way too often.

[Reliant121]

Priorities of the individual differ from person to person. I've nothing wrong with Utilitarian concerns but I try to balance with Aesthetic designs. I find Beauty and Elegence in even Cardassian and Klingon designs.

[shran]

The pilots usually do not have much space to move around, or even a windo to look out. How the hell do they cope with that?

[Sionnach Glic]

Real pilots have virtualy no room, as well.

[shran]

At least they usually have a window to loom out of. These pilots only have a screen to look at. Doesn't sound nice to me, even though I am not claustrophobic. Not only that, on long range missions, the lack of movement and perhaps the lack of gravity (do fighters have artificial fravity?) should really wear one down, I think.

[Mikey]

These are all ship-borne fighters. GK can answer better, of course, but I was under the impression that these were never intended for true long-range missions.

And the desire for a window is probably a culturally-induced bias, and might not be a consideration for Coalition pilots.

[Graham Kennedy]

First off, yes, I use photoshop for my designs. Everything I post here was drawn in it, and every picture on DITL was cropped and sized in it. All the button graphics on DITL were made in it too.

One of the primary rules of operating within the Coalition universe is functionality. Ships are designed to do a job, and pretty much nothing else. As for how they look... well aesthetics is always subjective of course, but put it this way. The A-10 is a plane designed for its job. It's not sleek, it doesn't look pretty at all... yet I am far from alone in finding a sort of beauty in its pure functionality. Functionality has a beauty of its own sort, and that's the sort of beauty I think my designs have.

But of course your mileage may vary, and I have no problems with that.