[rubixcube]

So here's something odd about the supposed fighter complements of various capital ships

Canonically, we know the complements of the following destroyers
Orion: 8 squadrons = 96 craft
Typhon: 10 squadrons = 120 craft
Hecate: 150 craft
colly: 240 craft
Demon: 2 squadrons = 24 craft
Lucifer: 4 squadrons = 48 craft

Why do shivan warships have such small fighter complements compared to their terran/vasudan counterparts?

[The E]

Because shivans.

[rubixcube]

funny you should reply, I was actually curious if you guys ever made official stats for craft complements of bp capital ships such as the erebus, titan, or solaris class.

[The E]

The Solaris class is designed to carry 16 squadrons, or 192 fighters. The Erebus carries more fighters than an Orion, but less than a Hecate. Titans can support more fighters than Hecates.

[procdrone]

Keep in mind that Shivan ships were never meant to be carriers. They are fully fledged warships.

For example, Put a Hecate, or Orion against the Ravana. So well... GTVA Power is in fighters, Shivans... in warships...

[The E]

Keep in mind that Shivan ships were never meant to be carriers. They are fully fledged warships.

Or ice-cream trucks, for all we know.

[wardog300k]

If Shivan ships are not meant to be carriers,what's with the massive spacecraft deployment then?The way they're deployed it would drain their ship's fighter reserves really rather quickly,especially if Alpha 1 is on the field.

[The E]

Something to consider: The mechanics of the subspace drive make carriers less important than they would be in real life. As far as we know, fighters have a huge endurance and can stay on-station for a very long time; with intersystem subspace drives, they can be deployed all over the place in very short order. In other words, carriers are more convenient to use in that they can be deployed to the front and thus shorten turnaround times, but they aren't vital in the same way that RL carriers are. Given that we do not know the logistical constraints of shivan craft (or even if they have any), there are any number of explanations for the amount of shivan strikecraft seen in-game.

[karajorma]

It's also worth bearing in mind that for all we know, all Shivan fighters might have inter-system jump drives. We've definitely seen ones that do but they could be standard.

[Phantom Hoover]

The simplest answer to this seems to be that Shivan ships don't have much of a carrying capacity because their fighters are fairly autonomous and only a fraction of them would be in a hangar at any given time.

[StarSlayer]

Perhaps Shivan capitals gestate stikecraft

[rubixcube]

Perhaps Shivan capitals gestate stikecraft

Does that mean shivan capital ships have sex? 

[Mikes]

Perhaps Shivan capitals gestate stikecraft

Does that mean shivan capital ships have sex? 

Does that mean we have been killing little Shivan Babies all the time!?!?!?! WE MONSTERS!!!!!

[Cyborg17]

It's also worth noting that the vast majority of species probably never manage to deal with shivan craft effectively before they are effectively defeated.  They simply don't need a lot of strike craft since a small complement will do everything they need. 

Additionally many of the squadrons on Terran and Vasudan ships will probably end up defending installations and positions, while the shivans hold jump nodes and simply attack.

My guess is that shivan ships are probably also able to produce strike craft extremely rapidly, which would explain the way that their strike craft attack in waves and also explain their repair cruisers mentioned in FS1, which would maintain craft that no longer have a place aboard their Destroyers.

Edit: I just realized that that means that shivan strike craft are basically either the best assignment ever or suicide craft, depending on the species you're up against.

[NGTM-1R]

Also it's likely that Shivan capital craft have their estimates of fighter numbers simply wrong. They're probably based on observed numbers; the GTA, PVE, and GTVA have never captured a Shivan capital ship to our knowledge and given the trouble they had with mere freighters and transports during the the Great War it seems unlikely they could.

The GTA and PVE did not have effective stealth tech at the time of the Great War and the Shivans were not shy about engaging any possible observers, so nobody sat there and watched them and counted flights either. By the time such observation would have been truly feasible in FS2 things were coming down around the GTVA's ears and they had better things to do.

Thus, it seems likely that their fighter counts are based on what they were actually seen to launch while under attack and probably do not reflect anything that was elsewhere at the moment or jumped in to defend them or didn't get off the flight deck before the attackers retreated/the ship went kablooie.

[Su-tehp]

So while I was editing an update for a major mod, I needed to calculate capital ship complements for a basis of comparison. I was gonna post my stuff on a brand new thread, but I saw this one and figured it was prolly best to necro it rather than start from scratch. As much as I really wanted to make a new thread with the title "Extrapolated Capital ship fighter complement; or 'Su-tehp talks out of his ass for the first time since returning from his 17 year absence from HLP,'" I figured I'd go for efficiency rather than try to go blue just to satisfy my ego.

Anyway, here's what I came up with:

Starting from the Colossus FS2 cutscene as my initial basis of comparison, we know that the fighter complement of the Colossus is 60 wings, with each wing consisting of 4 fighters each. So the Colossus has 240 fighters and bombers, which translates to 20 squadrons of 12 each. Using a 12-member squadron as my base multiple (12 is the traditional number of craft to a squadron and it makes no sense to have 4 member wings that are squadron-less), I was able to extrapolate the fighter complements of a few Terran and Vasudan canon ships:

GTVA Colossus: 60 wings (4 fighters to a wing) = 240 fighters = 20 squadrons (of 12 fighters in each squadron)
GTD Hecate: "over 150 combat craft" meaning 150+ so which multiple of 12 gets us over 150? 12 times 13 = 156, so the Hecate carries 13 squadrons or 156 fighters and bombers.
GVD Typhon: "up to 30 wings" so 30 x 4 = 120 fighters = 10 squadrons
GTD Orion: "more than 2 dozen (or 24+) wings" so at least 8 squadrons, but if Typhon has 120, then Orion can have the equivalent since 30 wings is also "over 24 wings" so 120 fighters = 10 squadrons
GVD Hatshepsut: doesn't make a direct mention of its fighter complement, but we can assume equivalent to the Hecate, so 13 squadrons or 156 fighters and bombers.

Forget trying to extrapolate Shivan fighter complements because their techroom descriptions aren't anywhere near precise enough if they're even directly mentioned. I'm also not going to consider the SCv Moloch's multiplayer fighterbay canon since it never appears in singleplayer mode.

Anyway, if you need canon fighter complements to use as a basis of comparison for your own mods, here you go. I hope you find it useful.

[Colt]

This is a neat thing to reference from. Beats having to check each ship's wiki page. Great work!

[Mongoose]

I would theorize that the Hatshepsut's complement might be a bit less than a Hecate's, since it's much more of an offensive-minded design. The Orion/Typhon is probably far more of a toss-up.

[Su-tehp]

Ok, it just occurred to me to look at the very first command briefing from Training 1 where the squad leader of the 53rd Hammerheads is briefing you and explains that the 53rd were based on the GTD Bastion during the Great War. Remember that nice list of the squadrons on the Bastion  that highlights the Hammerheads? I counted up all the individual squadrons and they do indeed add up to exactly 10. So double-confirmed: an Orion carries 10 squadrons or 120 fighters and bombers, the exact same as the Vasudan Typhon.

[Nightmare]

Wikification pls~