Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
Curmudgeon
Well-Known Member
I thought that was interesting too. I always felt uneasy about lumping all of the dark side into the Sith as it was never mentioned in the OT. This isn't an anti PT sentiment, but I was really glad that they drew a distinction between the different eras of dark side manifestation. It makes each seem more unique
Re. TIE ships in TFA:
I think the real motivation why we see kind of a revival of the standard TIE ship (aka "fighter") in the new movie is not because of their proven design, lesser production costs or any other pseudo in-universe reason, but because some dimwit at LFL thought it is a brilliant idea to plant it on its wings when not in flight.
I do not know when or where it was introduced, but I was shocked when I saw the commercials for SW Rebels and all those Imperial fighters standing on their fragile cooling plates (sigh)! Those wings are no undercarriage for heaven's sake!
The TIE ships are not supposed to land "conventionally" (like the Rebel ships are capable of), but are dependent on Imperial infrastructure (like star destroyers or bases with their respective suspension systems) - that is why we see them either flying or hanging under the hangar bay roofs in the Original Trilogy.
And therefore the wings of the TIE Interceptor can be slanted, because they are damn radiators, and not the chassis!
By the way, the proportions (and details) of the "new" TIEs seen in TFA are not the same as of the original TIE fighters... the new wings for example are not as high in relation to the span of the ship compared to the vintage TIE ships, not even talking about all the other stuff visible (thrusters etc.). They have more in common with the toys than with what we saw in the first three movies.
As Dan mentioned - they are easily recognizable as bad-guy fighters to the general viewer... job done. Simple as that!
I think the real motivation why we see kind of a revival of the standard TIE ship (aka "fighter") in the new movie is not because of their proven design, lesser production costs or any other pseudo in-universe reason, but because some dimwit at LFL thought it is a brilliant idea to plant it on its wings when not in flight.
I do not know when or where it was introduced, but I was shocked when I saw the commercials for SW Rebels and all those Imperial fighters standing on their fragile cooling plates (sigh)! Those wings are no undercarriage for heaven's sake!
The TIE ships are not supposed to land "conventionally" (like the Rebel ships are capable of), but are dependent on Imperial infrastructure (like star destroyers or bases with their respective suspension systems) - that is why we see them either flying or hanging under the hangar bay roofs in the Original Trilogy.
And therefore the wings of the TIE Interceptor can be slanted, because they are damn radiators, and not the chassis!
By the way, the proportions (and details) of the "new" TIEs seen in TFA are not the same as of the original TIE fighters... the new wings for example are not as high in relation to the span of the ship compared to the vintage TIE ships, not even talking about all the other stuff visible (thrusters etc.). They have more in common with the toys than with what we saw in the first three movies.
As Dan mentioned - they are easily recognizable as bad-guy fighters to the general viewer... job done. Simple as that!
Riceball
Master Member
Who said that they were repurposing TIE fighters and that the TIEs we see aren't some sort of new production based on the original but updated? Boeing still makes the 747, a design how old, but they are completely new airframes, with new everything from the wheels up. This could easily be the case for these TIEs that we are seeing, a new series of TIE based on the original design but a completely new ship from the ground up. And if the 747 isn't a good enough analogy for you then how about the Super Hornets (F-18E & F) a brand new design that looks sort of like a legacy Hornet but is practically a brand new design.
As far as being able to afford new fighters just because the FO could afford the Star Killer base, no, not necessarily. It's entirely possible, and believable, that the FO spent the majority of what capital and resources they had in building the base, so much so that what was left didn't leave enough to field anything fancier and more expensive than the TIEs we saw. Not to mention, just because they look (superficially) like the TIEs from the OT doesn't necessarily mean that they're the same model, for all we know they could be many times better than any TIE variant from the OT & even the EU.
Last edited:
Riceball
Master Member
There's nothing explicitly stated in any of the movies that the "wings" on the TIEs are too weak and delicate for the TIE to land on. I think that the main reason for the gantries and suspension systems is that it makes it easier for the pilots to get into their fighters given how high off the ground they sit. By boarding them from a gantry means that they don't need to bother with a built in ladder or having a whole bunch of portable ladders that you have to wheel into place.
In Rebels it works because there's only a small number of TIEs stationed on Lothal and it's not a major outpost so it's probably not worth it for them to build a more complicated system for housing the TIEs. As for TFA, I don't remember if all of them were on the ground or not, but I remember that at least some were hanging off of the wall in the hangar.
Wolfsburg
Master Member
Yeah I definitely think they are newly built fighters. There are numerous smaller differences and I think the ion engines on the spec ops version are noticeably different. It's already said the TIE/fo has shields and the spec ops version has shields and hyperdrive, so they are improved over what we had before. Poe was able was able to pack quite a punch against the Finalizer's turbolasers so I wouldn't be surprised if they have heavier firepower too. I'm beginning to believe that the old thinking that the interceptor was a replacement of the standard fighter is erroneous. I think it's simply suited for a different mission profile.
And regarding the Sith, I never thought the Sith represented the darkside exclusively. All Sith are darksiders but not all darksiders are Sith. I always assumed the Sith were just one particular school of thought and for all we know, there could've been many other lesser known disciplines that embraced the darker side of the Force.
And regarding the Sith, I never thought the Sith represented the darkside exclusively. All Sith are darksiders but not all darksiders are Sith. I always assumed the Sith were just one particular school of thought and for all we know, there could've been many other lesser known disciplines that embraced the darker side of the Force.
astroboy
Master Member
annanake
Sr Member
some are already shown in the clone wars cartoon like the nightsisters .I believe that is what they are called.
astroboy
Master Member
And then we had Barriss offey. A fallen jedi who believed that the jedi were being used as tools for the dark side.
Considering that she was right, we're does she fall in the force spectrum?
Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk
glunark
Sr Member
Just because we never saw a TIE fighter land, doesn't mean they couldn't.
I seem to remember a long time ago, shortly after the marvel adaptation of the film finished, a story where Luke had to pilot a captured TIE fighter to save the base at Yavin, and that was sat on the ground.
I seem to remember a long time ago, shortly after the marvel adaptation of the film finished, a story where Luke had to pilot a captured TIE fighter to save the base at Yavin, and that was sat on the ground.
Wolfsburg
Master Member
I'm not sure what the problem is with TIEs landing as they do. As far as I know, there's nothing to indicate any reason why they couldn't. I think the only logistical hurdle is how the pilot embarks/disembarks, with the cockpit so high off the ground. I don't really recall how Rebels handles it.
joshvanrad
Sr Member
The problem is that people make up their own canon and decide what is and is not capable in Star Wars without ever seeing any evidence of it.
annanake
Sr Member
she used to be a Jedi so she cant be bad. she is not " capable " of it . so sayith Mace Windu LOL.
annanake
Sr Member
or the opposite LOL
which reminds me, are what were referred to as sentinel Jedi canon ?
basically the same question I asked before because they are talked about in the Jedi hand book thingy that seems tied to the Clone wars cartoon as it has Ahsoka's notes in it .
I always liked the idea of them .
Yellow sabers for one.
and lived in the outer rim areas and the like .
living pretty much like Yoda and Obi Wan did after the fall of the Jedi, blending in with locals and living regular folk.
it could be a cool origin for Rey as well . even so I would love to see some old Jedi show up in the next movie one who was way out and got the call to return to the temple in ROTS and then got the new message Obi Wan replaced it with so went into hiding . I mean that was why he replaced the message right ?
I would love to see some 95 year old Jedi pop out of the wood work who has been looking for Rey because he is her grandpa or something.
Riceball
Master Member
I think that they cheat it in Rebels and simply never show anybody getting in or out of them. What I imagine they do is that they have a bunch of those rolling stairways type things that airports used to use all the time and you see the President use for Air Force One. Either that or TIE pilots are all trained in doing Force jumps and simply leap into the cockpits Jedi/anime style.
cboath
Master Member
Go to Europe - specifically Frankfort. They still use those staircases pretty much primarily. Only things i saw not using them were A300-800's and 747's.
Zombie_61
Master Member
I'm hoping they'll make Snoke seem to be more evil than Palpatine, then at the end of Episode IX we find out he's actually a benevolent overlord who wants peace and prosperity throughout the universe.
Okay, not really, but nobody would see that coming.
robn1
Master Member
The Visual Dictionary explicitly states Kylo is not a Sith.
Similar threads
