What does the "heavy fighter" look like?

[marginaleye]

Is there a canonical image of the 50 dton "heavy fighter" described (but not depicted) on page 26 of CT's Supplement 9: Fighting Ships?

It's designed to be tube-launched, which suggests that it's probably cylindrical, and it might have stubby semi-retractable wings for atmospheric flight (like the fighters carried aboard Lightning-class cruisers).

On the other hand, the heavy fighter's High Guard USP configuration is "Needle/Wedge" (1), not "Conical" (2), so it can't resemble the standard 50 dton cutter too closely.

I'm tentatively inclined to think it's probably spindle-shape, tapering both fore and aft, like a larger version of the 10 dton Rampart-class fighter depicted on page 77 of MT's Rebellion Sourcebook. If so, its maximum diameter could the same as that of the 50 dton cutter (6 meters, or 4 x 1.5 meter deck plan squares), but its overall length would have to be greater, to have the same tonnage with a more streamlined cross-section.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Check p39. The Tigress has Heavy Fighter so reasonably those are depicted entering the battleship?

 

[marginaleye]

Oh, I didn't think of that!

It looks like a slightly pointy version of the cutter (right down to the narrow "waist" between the main hull and the aft drive section).

I suppose the High Guard "Configuration" can't be taken too seriously, however, since the ubiquitous scout/courier is described as "conical," when it's quite obviously wedge-shaped (the same might be said of the Gionetti-class light cruiser, which is also described as "conical" despite looking like a miniature Imperial Star Destroyer knock-off).

 

[flykiller]

the ubiquitous scout/courier is described as "conical," when it's quite obviously wedge-shaped

actually it is more conical than wedge. don't think I've seen a single wedge-shaped ship yet.

 

[kilemall]

Legend of t he Galactic Heroes has the Alliance with a small agile fighter.

https://gineipaedia.com/wiki/Spartanian

The Empire gets a big blocky thing. So maybe something like that.

https://gineipaedia.com/wiki/Walküre

Also, they don't launch down tubes, but had a refit/repair deck with a sealing box and direct ejection into space.

 

[Supplement Four]

Legend of t he Galactic Heroes has the Alliance with a small agile fighter.

They look like pliers...or a staple gun...or some tool...but, but, I like 'em!

 

[mike wightman]

There is a cutaway view of the 50t heavy fighter in GT Starships.

It looks a little bit like a 50t cutter that has been flattened a bit.

There is a similar illustration in MgT HG2e.

 

[GypsyComet]

I took that contraption on the cover of Shattered Ships to be a Heavy Fighter of some sort.

 

[Condottiere]

It's not a Viper.

It also depends on whether it's multiroled or specialized.

If it's ground attack, it would be streamlined and probably have aerofoils.

If you're going to squeeze it out of a tube, ye cylindrical modular cutter 's torpedo aesthetic should be default.

 

[Hemdian]

There are, no doubt, many designs. But I've always thought, if a heavy fighter and a modular cutter are the same size, and taking some inspiration from Space:1999 ... if the Eagle is a modular cutter (albeit optimised for wilderness use), then the Hawk is a heavy fighter. Remember it has a 2-man bridge and a small stateroom.

 

[blair]

Is there a canonical image of the 50 dton "heavy fighter" described (but not depicted) on page 26 of CT's Supplement 9: Fighting Ships?

It's designed to be tube-launched, (snip)

On the other hand, the heavy fighter's High Guard USP configuration is "Needle/Wedge" (1), not "Conical" (2), so it can't resemble the standard 50 dton cutter too closely.

There's bonus evidence in the description of the Troop Transport on p.20, which does have a full pic, where it's described as "compatible with standard 50-ton launch tubes."

The TT is described as a cone, too, though, so this may just tell us that launch tubes are tolerant about dimensions but not displacement.

 

[marginaleye]

That picture of the troop transport in CT's "Supplement 9: Fighting Ships" actually muddies the waters even further, since it's obviously much shorter and fatter than the standard cutter. The cutter is 30 meters long and about 6 meters in diameter, so its length-to-diameter ratio is about 5:1. That troop transport's length-to-diameter ratio is somewhere between 2:1 or 3:1, so if its volume is the same as the cutter, its diameter should be much greater.

The box-shaped central section of the troop transport's hull makes launch tube compatibility even more questionable.

Of course, it's possible that the heavy fighter's length-to-diameter ratio is actually more like that of the troop transport than the standard cutter, but (for purely aesthetic reasons) the words "squat" and "starfighter" just don't go together well.

 

[mike wightman]

The B5 Starfury was pretty squat...

and who says launch 'tubes' can't have a square cross section

 

[Carlobrand]

...The TT is described as a cone, too, though, so this may just tell us that launch tubes are tolerant about dimensions but not displacement.

25 times the tonnage does give a lot of wiggle room for width and height, and presumably there's machinery involved in launching and recovering 40 craft in 20 minutes, machinery which could be made tolerant within a certain range as well, so you're probably right.

 

[ady]

I have always assumed it is the same dimensions and shape as the 50 ton cutter, allowing the two craft to use each others launch facilities. A lot of the smaller warships (Sloane, Midu Agasham, etc) carry a few cutters, allowing them to be swapped with fighters when needed to boost firepower.