[Retsof]

Just something that I was wondering about.  Do FS2 ships have landing gear? (Just fighters and such, landing a Feneris would be quite difficult.)

[blowfish]

Just something that I was wondering about.  Do FS2 ships have landing gear? (Just fighters and such, landing a Feneris would be quite difficult.)

It doesn't look like it.  In the Bastion main hall, most of the ships are just sitting on the hangar deck or sitting on shelves, and it looks like they are moved around by big cranes.  Anyway, a bunch of the ships have big fins jutting out from their bottom sides, and it would be difficult to make landing gear that was taller than those fins.

[Aardwolf]

If you are referring to planetary landing gear, no, they are not capable of atmospheric flight. If you are referring to docking-bay landing gear... what he said.

[Gamma_Draconis]

You can see a Vasudan fighter landing in the Vasudan hall menu. The ships are probably just moved by platforms and cranes which would explain why it takes so friggin long for a single wing to launch from a destroyer. They really need somekind of fast deployment, like the Viper tubes on BSG. I suppose they could jump out from the Destroyer and into the combat zone, but I suppose there's also a minimum range for that because whenever a destroyer is nearby, fighters tend to launch from it rather than jump out from it.

[blowfish]

If you are referring to planetary landing gear, no, they are not capable of atmospheric flight. If you are referring to docking-bay landing gear... what he said.

Actually I think some fighters are designed to operate in atmosphere.  Why else would the Perseus and Valkyrie have wings?

[Flipside]

Probably for aesthetic value, and the fact that wings always make such a nice way of providing somewhere to put the guns. Humans don't like to let go of an idea once it is ingrained, even now the B-Wing fighter looks a little bit 'odd' because it is asymmetrical and 'lop sided' to our perception, it's a perfectly functional shape for space-flight, but we tend to refer back to the concept that anything that flies should resemble a bird.

[Aardwolf]

You can see a Vasudan fighter landing in the Vasudan hall menu.

Yes, and that ship didn't have landing gear!

[IceyJones]

here you can see, that no ship has any landing gear. the big ones are just sitting on the ground and the fighters are set on some kind of variable mounts....

[NGTM-1R]

Probably for aesthetic value, and the fact that wings always make such a nice way of providing somewhere to put the guns. Humans don't like to let go of an idea once it is ingrained, even now the B-Wing fighter looks a little bit 'odd' because it is asymmetrical and 'lop sided' to our perception, it's a perfectly functional shape for space-flight, but we tend to refer back to the concept that anything that flies should resemble a bird.

It spaces out the manuvering thrusters pretty good too, provides better manuverablity. B5's StarFury is a fairly rational design.

But the Herc is capable of atmospheric flight if the FS2 intro is to be believed, and if it can fly, then I think you'll have a hard time saying most of them can't.


As for landing gear: It needs to be remembered that these are the ships which can get hit by tac nukes and laugh. The weakest missile we know of, the Fury, has a three kiloton yield. Landing gear would be a pointless addition to them, they're not going to get damaged by landing without gear. (I wouldn't put it past a Herc or anything tougher to be able to survive atmospheric reentry, and at a considerably steeper angle then anything we normally think of, for that matter.) Considering their size and probable weight, it might even be the case that they can't make landing gear strong enough to support them.

[terran_emperor]

NASA actually asked JMS if they could use the Starfury Design for future Spacecraft. JMS (AKA God) agreed on the condition that they called them Starfuries

[IceyJones]

NASA actually asked JMS if they could use the Starfury Design for future Spacecraft. JMS (AKA God) agreed on the condition that they called them Starfuries

any link to this information?

[Thor]

They probably use either some form of antigrav field or small jets for self powered ground travel, and the cranes used to "file" the fighters back into their storage locations when they're powered down to allow for tighter packing.  (i wouldn't let a noobie pilot try to slip a herc into that upper rack of ships...thats just trouble in the making!)

[terran_emperor]

NASA actually asked JMS if they could use the Starfury Design for future Spacecraft. JMS (AKA God) agreed on the condition that they called them Starfuries

any link to this information?

He metions it in one of the Babylon 5 comentry tracks - cant remember the episode though. I think he also mentions somewhere on "The Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5".

Also here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfury

[FreeSpaceFreak]

But the Herc is capable of atmospheric flight if the FS2 intro is to be believed, and if it can fly, then I think you'll have a hard time saying most of them can't.

1. The FS2 intro is full of inconsistencies, as mentioned on the wiki and in this thread.
2. Where exactly does the Herc fly in an atmosphere? I only saw it crash into an atmosphere.

[terran_emperor]

Not only that, but it was pure chance that the Herc Crashed at all. I mean, what are the chances of an out of control Herc suviving re-entry long enough to crash.

Oh I prepared a while back a time table for how i thought the Battle of Deneb occured - it takes into account the missions in the game, and the FS2 intro.

For Example the Legion was using Testbed Ursas, Ie they were at their earliest flyable stage - like the Mercury stage craft to Apollo craft.
Similarly, the Minticores? were a modified varient being tried out.

I'll see if i can find it and post it.

[Dysko]

Maybe FS fighters have vectorable thrust like the Harrier or something that allows them to handle like VTOLs, eliminating the need for a landing gear. Since bombers are "sitting" on the floor, and their shape allows them to do so, they probably use a similar method.

Now, let's get to fighters with ventral fins like the Herc II. The most obvious way of landing would be landing like a VTOL retracting that long fin. However, that fin does not look like it's retractable. The other way would be to hover without landing, and let the fighter be "captured" by a crane, that puts it on its platform.
Or you could use the same method used to land F9C Sparrowhawk fighters on the US Navy airships USS Akron and USS Macon: you mount an hook on the top of the fighter, and you must catch a trapeze with that (if you played Crimson Skies, you know what I mean).

[Commander Zane]

NASA actually asked JMS if they could use the Starfury Design for future Spacecraft. JMS (AKA God) agreed on the condition that they called them Starfuries

I would totally vouch for that.
Where did you manage to get a kick ass Bastion image?

[FreeSpaceFreak]

Where did you manage to get a kick ass Bastion image?

Over here. Loads of FS1 images, art and renderings. Even more unaccessible images, too...

EDIT: In the Aquitaine's main hall, it looks like the Herc II's platform has a hole in it to put the fin through. The myrmidon is carried away by a crane. So...

• We know how Terran fighters are stored, but not how they are launched.
• We know how Vasudan fighters are launched, but not how they are stored.

I guess there is a certain degree of similarity, since we are in the GTVA together? Or maybe not. The Vasudan launch system doesn't seem very (cost-)effective to me, so us Terrans probably launch fighters in another way.

[FSW]

here you can see, that no ship has any landing gear. the big ones are just sitting on the ground and the fighters are set on some kind of variable mounts....

Is there an actual mainhall at that resolution, or just a still image?

[Col. Fishguts]

Just this still render.