Took a shortcut, duh
Bonus crossover:
The Reliant Robin was designed by the same people who designed Luke’s XP-34 speeder
The existence of repulsor field tech does have a lot of implications for ship performance near planets.
Actually, even aside from that, I find it odd that they’re assuming it’s the hull shape that would determine aerodynamics, and not the shield envelope shape. The shields, presumably, extend beyond the hull for some distance and are much smoother than the hull. Heck, they could be essentially frictionless or be shaped to provide lift for all we know.
Edit to add: IIRC standard TIE fighters have no shields, and suffer a larger performance & speed penalty in atmosphere than X-wings do.
I mean…the Space Shuttle didn’t fly too well in the atmosphere, either. I’m not sure it actually flew it all. It was more of a very well controlled falling. Even within the atmosphere, planes designed to fly efficiently at supersonic speeds kinda suck at subsonic speeds.
Regardless, Star Wars isn’t science fiction. It’s fantasy. So I just assume everything flies using some form of magic, and I don’t worry about it.
It’s not a fighter, but I am curious how the Naboo Royal Starship would fair.
IIRC, in the lore, the ships had repulsor lift technology that meant it didn’t need actual aerodynamics to create lift.
It is funny the TIE is a flying brick, because it is supposed to be faster and more maneuverable. IRL a starfighter would probably be a literal brick - something that could be armor plated and have thrusters on each face.
I was wondering the same thing It’s worth noting that actual spacecraft don’t generally have particularly low coefficients of drag. While aerodynamics are an issue, it’s more about how to survive heating at hypersonic speeds and have enough drag to slow down.
Call me whimsical, but I feel very strongly that spaceships should have bathtubs.
(Maybe the bed pit in the Alpha 7 can be flooded?)
It has a shower.
But not a toilet, which is an inconvenient oversight.
Which is usually “none at all”.
After a dull day on set, punctuated with fun moments chatting with the art design folks, I was sitting at dinner with the producer and directors from a certain sci-fi film that won’t be named here. I pointed out that, if their fighter spacecraft ever actually went into space, they would just spin like pinwheels.
I was told: “This is not a movie for you…”
Fair enough. The movie did well in IIRC.
I look forward to the video that explains how they move around in space and which would be more ‘nimble’ IRL.
Estes Rocketry came up with a series of Star Wars model rockets back in the 70s which included an X-wing with one of their rocket motors crammed in the back. They did not fly well. One poor kid at a weekend shoot-off, who obviously had spent hours building, painting, etc his X-wing, proudly launched his, only to have it go in almost a perfect circle once clear of the launch pad, pancaking itself into the ground with bits of balsa and painted cardboard schrapnel flying around everywhere. The motor, its work done, then added insult to injury by then popping its chute ejection charge, which scattered the few bits remaining. I believe tears were shed by the creator, but as performance art, it was magnificent.
I’d been playing a fair bit of Elite Dangerous when Star Wars: Squadrons came out and I had friends that wanted me to play because they thought I’d be good at it. The lack of directional thrust meant that I was slamming into things left, right, up, and down. You don’t realize how much you miss laws of physics until you suddenly don’t have them.
Maybe people in the future have evolved beyond the need for toilets?
I, for one, would welcome this.
Absolutely. But according to its own tagline, the events of Star Wars took place “long ago, in a galaxy far away”.
One of the few space video games that did a decent job getting the laws of physics right was also one if the oldest.
And of course it’s PVP father, Space Wars. Although you could opt for negative gravity in that one, which isn’t real physics.