Moderator: Vympel
Do any of you have a picture of the Republic-class destroyer used by the navy of the New Republic?? Curtis Saxon's SWTC is reluctant to post the only existing illustration of a Republic-class....
I don't see why it would be. These thing have ranges of tens of thousands of kilometers (and that's being generous) and thousand-G acceleration ratings. Flying in an atmosphere would be utterly pointless.From what I've heard, it's much more aerodynamic than previous Star Destroyers, perhaps it is intended for atmospheric flight??
Reactor bulbs?? You mean those weird out-bulges on the hull of an Immobiliser-class??Cpt_Frank wrote:I've seen a mesh of it somewhere, but I don't find it anymore....
Basically, it looked like a VSD with three reactor bulbs, 3 heavy turrets sitting near the 'wings' and the tower was ISD-style without the VSD's antennas and such. They are said to be manufactured by Rendilli and are 1,2 km long, yet have more firepower and shielding than an ISD 2.
This, in my opinion, is a gross exagaration, typical NR propaganda.
Reactor bulb = the bulb on the ventral surface of every SD design.Simon H.Johansen wrote: Reactor bulbs?? You mean those weird out-bulges on the hull of an Immobiliser-class??
That page is from Saxman, someone I personally know. He frequently posts at Rob Brown's SW message board and the X-Wing Alliance community message board.SPOOFE wrote:Well, I searched around the web, and I found this page with some (really cheap) Republic-class SD pics on the bottom... although the author admits that he pretty much pulled it out of his ass.
I continued searching Google for about an hour and a half, and while I found a million people mention Republic-Class Star Destroyers (and, amazingly, most cites were consistent, with only a handful of people succumbing to the "bigger is better" mindset and assuming that the RSD's are 3000 meters long or more), I didn't find any actual images or meshes. Sorry.
It is this which I speculate myself, that some of the chief designers of the Republic-class might have been Mon Calamari themselves. (or maybe Quarren*)Jim Raynor wrote: Maybe Blissex worked with several Mon Calamari, since they seem to be prominent shipbuilders for the Rebellian/New Republic.
Because, the illustrations of canon ships in from the same source are distorted. The artwork is widely agreed to be of generally poor quality. They hired an artist rather than a techincal illustrator or drafter. The artist's style skewed the ship designs, essentially.I have never understood why every technical SW website refuses to accept the picture of the Republic SD.
I thought the rule was that if an official source contradicts a canon source on a certain point, it is deemed invalid on that point only. Many of the EU novels contain inconsistencies with canon, but almost no one believes that the entire books themselves should be disregarded. In the case of the RSD, there are no canon sources, or even other official sources that show a contradictory image of the ship. With no other sources to compare it to, it should be accepted. Also, poor quality is no reason to throw something out. We'd all like to forget the Holiday Special and anything by KJA, but we still have to live with them.[/i]Stormbringer wrote:Because, the illustrations of canon ships in from the same source are distorted. The artwork is widely agreed to be of generally poor quality. They hired an artist rather than a techincal illustrator or drafter. The artist's style skewed the ship designs, essentially.I have never understood why every technical SW website refuses to accept the picture of the Republic SD.
Since I think it's quite hard to find English books here in Denmark, I would like to know what the Danish title for that book is... if any of you know!!Ender wrote:Find a copy of "Cracken's Threat Dossier" for the pic
It is the rule, however, the whole book is riddled with the same errors. It's the same problem for EVERYTHING canon and most official as well. Hence, most people regard it as a very very suspect source.I thought the rule was that if an official source contradicts a canon source on a certain point, it is deemed invalid on that point only. Many of the EU novels contain inconsistencies with canon, but almost no one believes that the entire books themselves should be disregarded. In the case of the RSD, there are no canon sources, or even other official sources that show a contradictory image of the ship. With no other sources to compare it to, it should be accepted.
So what exacly does a reactor bulb do? Is this the equivilant of a reactor chamber in nuclear submarines?Cpt_Frank wrote:Reactor bulb = the bulb on the ventral surface of every SD design.Simon H.Johansen wrote: Reactor bulbs?? You mean those weird out-bulges on the hull of an Immobiliser-class??
But, the RSD could hold fewer troops, fewer fighters, and fewer supplies than the great ISD!Cpt_Frank wrote:I've seen a mesh of it somewhere, but I don't find it anymore....
Basically, it looked like a VSD with three reactor bulbs, 3 heavy turrets sitting near the 'wings' and the tower was ISD-style without the VSD's antennas and such. They are said to be manufactured by Rendilli and are 1,2 km long, yet have more firepower and shielding than an ISD 2.
This, in my opinion, is a gross exagaration, typical NR propaganda.
Not to mention that they also have a shorter range of operations and can hold fewer armour plates, side-mounted auxiliary batteries, etc....But, the RSD could hold fewer troops, fewer fighters, and fewer supplies than the great ISD!
http://www.wizards.com/starwars/article ... lery&c=rpgCpt_Frank wrote:I already conceded with that. Btw, anyone know where to find pics of the Defender class SD?