#askecks what if the empire instead of super weapons increased their Navy and army allowing upgrades to happen to imperial vehicles such as tie defender as main fighter how would the start wats Galaxy look
"They're supposed to do that, you see? That's the sign of a well-built bomber, there, son. Believe you me, if you buy this bomber, you won't live to regret it."
@@thebighurt2495 At least other light armored vehicles in Star Wars usually make up for this handicap by packing a decent amount of speed and firepower. These flying abominations though don't have any of that. They don't seem to have any additional blaster cannons as a means of defence and they move at the pace of a slug making his way through a lake of syrup while being on a half lethal dose of tranquilizers. All you need to do is shoot them once.
@@jangounchained5279 Agreed. Moron Johnson just created the bombers cause it looked cool and it served the SJW's with the asian bombardier with Rose Tiko. Also making one starfighter such as Poe Dameron to take out a whole dreadnought. Just...too Overpowered and he's like Rey, practically no weaknesses.
Guys, chill. Episode 8 is canon. That said, where it stands in the canon is debatable. Personally, I think it's some fanfiction a guy wrote from his apartment on Coruscant that somehow got adapted into a bad move in-setting.
Resistance Officer: We need more bombers! We're desperate! Ship Manufacturer: Sorry, we're all out. Resistance Officer: What about those? Ship Manufacturer: You don't want those. Those are prototypes that turned out to be shit. Resistance Officer: We'll take all of them! At least that's the only way it can even begin to make sense to me.
I think that the close formation is a clever move because: _the bombers can defend ourselfes better with the anti aircraft turret _the few fighters can be concentrate in one point for ingaging the enemy and protect ourselves. Obviously this tactic has a lot of flaws but it were inevitable to lose these s*itty bombers
Actually it's just like tie bombers that should be use for clean up. Dropping payload against the enemy ground target. I think thats how the new republic used it
There is a situation in which the bomber is viable: the enemy is blind, deaf, incompetent and crippled, ie. there are no starfighters, only capital size ships with knocked out point defense systems who have already taken a beating.
@@DealerofDeathCharon Yeah, just like how the enola gay was destroyed when it bombed Hiroshima, you can drop bombs from any altitude with that thing...
First of all Why didn't the resistance (who in the evacuation of d qar. Was going to have to face of first order dregnought and star destroyers. Now the first order was not like the imperial fleets.who would have a better anti star fighter power) so the residents didn't have to worry about losing many fighters (though the first order ties was indeed better than the empire) and the resurgent-class did have laser cannons. But you have so many A wings and X wings. Escort and learn from the new republic! Use Y wings. Use B wings. Use K wings! You have the republic resources before. Why wouldn't you get their fighters.or even bombers...........now cus obviously the resistance. If they'd wanna go with the bombers. Use something else. Like supramecy the first order dregnought.with so many tactics why didn't the resistance make good fleets out of the resource they have before the hosnian cataclysm. They have the republic sort of backing them up. So B wings and Y wings and K wings,E wings, new V wings. Were all....., AVAILABLE! . And if you wanted to talk about how the resistance had not much pilots.....hello! They were an entire new republic pilot academy.....why wouldn't you just recruit pilots from them
Come for the lore, stay for the outro. I think those bombers, after being grounded and disarmed, would make some nice homes for all of those slave kids they left behind on the casino planet. Way more efficient use of those things.
"Is there a niche which this ship excels in?" Yes, 1942. In all seriousness, it's a dated and silly design. The designers were clearly trying to create some kind of association or link with WW2. The star fortress is even similarly named to the B17 aka the flying fortress. It was a silly thing to do, I don't think there is any way to make the star fortress make sense.
a b17 has WAY better armament, WAY more nimble, and MUCH better survivability. if the reason it was so facking slow was becasue it was a near indestructable ship with point defeces (but can still be shot down by heavy missiles and turbolasers), THEN it would make sense.
@Lady Wanderer If you actually watch the scene you see the bomber itself basically falls into the explosion, the explosion doesn't just move up, the bomber falls into it. The trajectory wasn't locked in, after the pilot died the ship just kept moving in the direction it was already on, until losing it's momentum.
@Lady Wanderer Four things. 1. If you watch the scene you can see the bomber falling from quite a height into the explosion, it wasn't a minor fall. This happens after the pilot has been taken out and the bomber has become uncontrolable. So before the explosion and the death of the pilot the bomber was well above the point of impact. In the same shot we see the explosion reach little higher than the border of the frame, the same border the bomber dropped from. Therefore we can conclude that the explosion did not reach much higher than the bombers original course minus the loss from lacking a pilot. With that info we can conclude that the Bomber could have easily pitched up in order to not be caught in the fireball. Furthermore, it is debatable if that fireball in itself would have destroyed the bomber. Sure, it would have been singed, but we've seen the Millenium Falcon be engulfed by the flames of the Death Star 2's explosion and it escaped fine. 2. So is it now forbidden to introduce new things into the SW Canon? Does everything have to be a version of a previous ship? Does every future bomber have to act like the Y-wing, B-wing or TIE Bomber? Not every single bomber has to work like a Y-wing, even in real life we have tactical bombers and strategic bombers. Furthermore, if you look up what purpose this bomber originally had, it becomes quite clear that ship-to-ship combat in space was not it's primary function nor one intended. The Resistance simply used whatever they could get in whatever way it was needed. 3. Applying real-world physics to Star Wars is one of the dumbest things you can do. I used the word momentum because that best decribes what we saw happen in the film, and because momentum or some other mechanism that looks like it in Star Wars space battles seems to be an actual thing. Otherwise not a single space battle since ANH would be correct or physically possible. 4. Look up the test of the Tsar Bomba when talking about bombers not or barely being able to escape the blastzone. Not a common occurance at all, but enough to disprove the claim that no actual bombers like that. Besides, 'work like what' is irrelevant, since this was not what the bomber was designed for. It's like using a bicycle to try and outrun a train and afterwards blaming the bicycle for failing.
It's okay to introduce new things to Star Wars canon. But not when it goes against basic concepts of scifi/reality; because that breaks the suspension of disbelief(though it's far from the only sin committed by Ruin Johnson). That's just bad writing and, although Lucas wasn't perfect, hasn't happened nearly as badly in the past. Just goes to show how Ruin Johnson isn't a Star Wars fan until force-fed a bunch of "canon" books after disney acquisition, and that anyone defending him is just another shill who are afraid of being called "misogynist" on internet.
@@EcchiRevenge Nothing goes against the basics of Star Wars Canon in TLJ. That's just an excuse you people use to avoid having to argue actual things that matter. The exact same can be said for things the Prequels introduced like Midi-chlorians and Force superpowers. Basically you're saying: "Well, Lucas pretty much fucked up the entire mythos of the Force and contradicted everything Yoda said in ESB, but that's fine. What really brought my blood to a boil was when Rian Johnson introduced a new ship that I don't like" Furthermore, saying it goes against the basics of scifi and reality is stupid on two levels. 1. Star Wars is more Fantasy than Science Fiction, it's a fairytale in space. 2. Comparing Star Wars to reality is retarded, doing it means every single Star Wars film is awful. Also, calling him Ruin Johnson and calling other people shills just goes to show you are not interested in discussion, but that you just want to insult people that don't agree with your point of view. Congratulations, you've just shown yourself to be part of a toxic fanbase.
Theres a reason that the Resistance Heavy Bombers are shaped that way, actually--their shape is similar to that of a coffin, and if you are flying in one of them under any circumstances you are guaranteed to die.
The bombers were meant to engage and destroy old Imperial holdouts away from any significant fire at high altitudes. It goes to show how desperate the Resistance is because that's all they got.
I feel like the Starfortress was made far more for planetary sieges at high altitude, beyond the ranges of most ground-based AA, and with an escort of fighters. Similar to the Superfortress it was based off of. Edit: This is my most liked comment so far. Thank you all!
The Superfortress, and other similar bombers, could hit naval vessels, but this required surprise and very high attitude, as well as air Superiority. Look up the destruction of force z as a good example, the Japanese sunk the HMS Prince of Wales, and invincible I believe. But those ships had little to no fighter cover, it would have been suicide strike otherwise.
And I believe it was stated in the cross-section reference book for TLJ, that the Resistance Bombers were often used for aid relief missions by the Resistance, dropping food stuff and other supplies. I think it is best to stay that they were never intended for Space Combat.
Ditto. The Star Fortress only makes sense if it's supported by other craft. It's as if it was made to tackle a problem for the least cost the NR faced... How to bring enough of a payload to a relatively stationary target, to destroy it outright. If one can kill a ship, then, considering they were likely built with the idea that they all go out and come back, I'd say they were intended for planetary installations with greater power and shield capability. But outside of that mission profile, it's not a good craft. Effective at the one thing it can do... But highly unlikely to ever reach it's destination to carry out it's function. And considering how easyily the Tie's shot them down, I'd go further to say, they were either made to not get involved in Dog Fights, or involved in Dog Fights that don't involve military grade ships, like pirates or smuggler's.
The part that truly aggravates me about that battle is that Poe gets blamed. See it starts with all the resistance units in position to attack. They must have spent hours prepping for the assault, time they could have been using to evacuate. There's no way Leia didnt know the plan and sign off on it. For her to pull the plug half way through makes no sense! But it gets worse: Leia is in command. She could have called those bombers back with one order. Poe doesn't have the authority to override her. Leia allowed the attack to proceed and then dumped the blame on Poe. Poe Did Nothing Wrong.
To be honest I could see a lot of the pilots simply following Poe's lead because he is beloved by the fleet. He's considered an ace pilot that truly cares about the cause. He did contribute to taking down Starkiller Base which to them was an hour ago. But I agree I don't believe Leia pushed hard enough to call the bombers back(it's been a long time since I've seen this film). At some point, Leia conceded that sacrificing the bombers was the best movie(with deep regrets). It sounded like she reprimanded Poe to save face(I'm sure some of the fleet disagreed with Poe and expected some backlash). Demoting Poe imo was a step gone too far.
While Star Wars space combat has always been inspired by WW2 aerial/naval warfare, the Resistance bomber has a way too blatant WW2-y appearance. It's so WW2-y that it breaks immersion. I mean even the turreted laser cannons look like WW2 MGs and they even have iron sights! That ship would fit into Wolfenstein or something but it just is so out of place in Star Wars.
I agree. I think they could have done it much better while still maintaining that WW2 feel. Cause obviously dogfights look much more exciting than just watching missiles flying.
@@CliffuckingBooth In retrospect, it's closer to WWI Zeppelin bombers if anything, there's a reason those didn't make it to part 2. It would've been far more fun if they decided to actually look at WW2 naval combat rather than Doolittle raid a moving target without air superiority. At this point i even have to wonder why they didn't simply "skip (slide?) bomb" or turn the bomber bottom to face a target and drop payload considering range is near infinite in space.
The tactics in the fighter roles in Return would be more closely to the Cold War. Mainly US naval vs the Soviet Union. Watch how the rebel fighter fly in a loose deuce formation, while the Empire flew in a welded wing formation.
When I first saw the trailer I thought they were going to be some mass produced successor to the Nebulon-b frigate, and was really excited for a kickass space battle. There was no kickass space battle.
I see one use for the bomber. Use it as a high atmosphere or orbital ordinance for planetary bombardment. Have it stay out of range of planetary defence weapons and deal a ton of damage without dedicating a much larger ship. Kinda niche but thats the best I got.
Yeah, I think it would belong to a planetary militia, used to conduct bombings from high altitude against insurgents or enemy targets on the ground. But the fact we have to come up with logical explanations to make this thing fit in the Star Wars universe shows that it’s bad design and poor writing.
They would work alright as a long range guided torpedo bomber. They drop fat torpedoes out of their fat bays, but hang back from the action. Maybe have a bomber or two in the back loaded with anti-fighter Missiles instead of torps to cover its buddies in case some enemy fighters try something.
Won't the bombs burn in the atmosphere? And AA would obliterate those. So I'll narrow it down even further, Low altitude, to use on unarmed enemies, or to bust some weird ass bunker.
@@MR_Foffe proper construction would prevent the bombs from burning on entry. And point defence systems would be hard pressed to destroy that much ordinance and alot could still get through.
Thomas Yap truth! Why has there not been a hyperspace bomb? Strap a hyperdrive to an explosive payload and navigate it to a set distance and watch the destruction.
They could use a droid to activate the lightspeed, heck get rid of the spaceship and just leave the hyperdrive with something heavy. Make it a hyperspeed missile
Imagine this, you make a missile with a hyperdrive and some heavy metal say like tungsten, shot it at lightspeed and you shoot down a star destroyer. Instead you have a squad of X-wings, bombers and more (some with hyperdrive), a pilot and ammunition for each one, to take one star destroyer and not all will come back.It simply can't compare on with each other.
6:10 That actually makes a lot of sense. Perhaps they weren't actually ordered and built as star-fighters. Maybe the Resistance came across a dozen or so medium-sized unwieldy cargo ships and thought "Let's turn these into bombers?" And they ended up more awkward and incompetent than the techs thought they would be.
You do realize the New Republic had a dedicated military right? That they probably fought against the Vong and other hostile, even remnant empires right? They even set up military outposts in the outer rim like the Empire did. I doubt the Resistance only had three cruisers and a handful of garbage bombers to their name. Clearly they knew where that military base that got obliterated by the Dreadnought was. I fail to believe that after the First Order arrived, the entire New Republic military was wiped out. It'd be equivalent to the capital of the US getting nuke, damn sure the entire world is going to mobilize to find who is responsible. Where in the fook is the New Republic military?
@@trotfox1138 Yeah if we're talking the new Disney canon I give zero shits about because it literally killed off legends; no thanks. If that's the case the New Republic deserved to be destroyed because they literally repeated the same mistake that destroyed the first Republic in the Prequels. Disallowing any military force whatsoever is the stupidest concept I can think of, it worked in the Prequels because that Republic stood for so long unopposed. Here there were so many warlords left over and criminal syndicates that took over the galaxy, not to mention the lack of authority and order causing most of the crimes we see anyway. Nothing against you, but the new Canon sucks. I don't care how many sequel fans say it's the new shit, Disney literally nuked Legends and tried to copy cat the Originals and Prequels for a quick buck. I have zero respect for that and I'll admit that all day.
,@@kamieaston3016 I lost interest after the second sequel movie, but unless it was retconned, there was no new republic military. Leia was either on thin ice or kicked out of government for being a war monger because she talked about there being imperial remnants left and wanted to get a military to defend the new republic. It kind of became a cross of a Churchhill and original trilogy situation. The resistance existed off of the goodwill of companies and the common man saw them as warmongers at worst and loons at best. If they had any military it was likely the equivalent of the Naboo military back in phantom menace, entirely ceremonial and never seeing use. Again this stuff might have gotten retconned, the majority of my knowledge came from the force awakens vehicle cross-section book. More specifically the resistance transport and the resistance x-wing if you want to look yourself.
I thought it would work better as a high altitude drop vessel, for something like jetpack armed airborne troopers. That way the design works, and it's speed/durability don't affect it. That or a Droid dropship
I had assumed, when I saw these things, that they weren't intended to be used in combat at all. I thought that, much like a lot of the rebellion's assets, that they were ordinary ships used for commercial use that were simply used militarily out of necessity. Kind of like the GR-75s, the use of which was extremely limited in actual combat. When I heard that they were in fact dedicated bombers designed to do this kind of job, I just had to wonder what the hell was going on.
@@insertmemorableusernameher6795 Still. You can tell just by looking, that it is a horribly designed bomber. If that was shown off to an actual military, they would strip it apart, and use its parts for an actual bomber.
They really wanted a ww2 style bombing run in space, so they made the bombers really slow so the star fighters can zoom around and pick them off while they take a while to get to the ship.
When I first saw those dumb Heavy Bombers, I thought, "Oh, they must have a big hatch along the front so they can fire off a huge volley of torpedoes all at once." I was expecting a fireworks show of missiles coming down on the Dreadnought like a hailstorm of fire and brimstone. Then I saw the bombs they were transporting and and how they were deployed and thought, "Wait, this is a joke, right? I know the Resistance isn't exactly on par with the First Order in terms of technology, but there's no way they would use something like this! Heck, no company in their right mind would try to sell something that atrocious because they'd be laughed out of the market! Did they refit a bunch of garbage haulers or something? Because that's all a ship like this would be good for - moving garbage to a different site and dumping it!" There was so much space on the Heavy Bombers to attach turrets, too! If they'd been designed like that, if they'd been these miniature fortresses the wade into a battle and just blast anything that comes into their firing range, I could see them being VERY effective, but, no, they're glorified garbage haulers! Worthless!
Dude, that would be awesome if they were launching guided missiles out the front. With a crew of 3, the pilot, gunner, and guided missile operator. That would be an interesting ship design to see.
Yeah, I'd have to agree with you here. Turn that massive bomb bay into a missile rack, and you'd get something that could fling dozens of missiles downrange, a true missile boat. But no, bombs. Bombs make sense against a space target.
Hammers are even better because they are cheaper and you can have even more of them! Replace bombs with cheaper hammers & it's possible to buy twice as much Heavy Bombers!
@@JamesMDavis1 Uh... Empire Strikes Back? Hoth rebel base? The entire reason why the Empire deployed the AT-ATs in a ground assault instead of obliterating them from orbit?
I never saw this thing as a bomber. This thing reminds me of something that you would use to transport grain; it loads up, flys to a location, hovers over a container, and then drops off its payload. But with the alliance being desperate they retrofitted these things as “bombers”. As a transport vessel this thing doesn’t have to be super fast or durable, it just needs to have capacity.
That would type of explanation would make a lot of sense. It doesn't even need to be for just grain either, dirt, rocks, water, etc... basically anything that could just be poured out, the basic design would work perfectly for. I am going to say that's going to be my personal head cannon.
@@williamnelson5549 well that depends on the abilities of the ground based AA, especially as one hit bomber could endanger the whole squadron. And you would need air superiority as well, even with a wing of fighters
Jakob Schöning that is true. Either way a lot of them are going to get shot down. If only they had shields then maybe they could stand a better chance at what they’re thrown in to
Resistance heavy bomber: exist Y-Wing: *Laughs in viability* TIE Bomber: *Laughs in compactness* B-Wing: *Laughs in superiority* Hyena Droid Bomber: *Laughs in maneuverability*
Bombers in space shouldn't follow the design logic of the WWII Boeing classes (Flying Fortress, liberator, Mitchell, etc.) but rather that of the Dauntless or Swordfish Torpedo bombers. With the exception of the sinking of the Tirpitz, in naval warfare do we rarely see squadrons of heavy bombers being used to attack ships, they're better suited for use against ground targets like bunkers and even entire cities. Torpedo bombers are small lighter craft that are meant to swoop in and deploy their ordinance and immediately withdraw to their mothership to reload and attack again. In the case of Star Wars, bombers should be essentially fighters but equipped with heavy anti ship ordinance, like a Y-Wing equipped with one, two, or four, high yield torpedoes in special launchers that it would fly in close to an enemy ship quickly, fire off its load with little margin for error, and then pull out.
The Design makes sense, the way they were used didn't. Like they never even heard of flanking. If you're fighting an enemy like the FO which relies on slow moving, heavily armored capital ships you'll need to weaken or destroy them swiftly before they get in range because the Restistance frigates and even the Calamari Cruisers can't take on Insurgent class star destroyers point blank. Rearming fighters while engaged in battle is risky, especially if you rely on every single one to make it. Also guided amminutions like self propelling torpedos and such can be shot down by point defense systems while a fuckton of bombs can't.
What you just described was Cygnus Spaceworks' Missile Boat from the X-Wing games - it dropped out of hyperspace, used it's Sub-Light Amplification Module overdrive system to boost in towards its target, drop a heavy payload at point-blank range and then used the rest of the overdrive charge to get the heck out of there. However, it also had a large secondary warhead launcher that was carrying 40 Advanced Concussion Missiles and utilized a tractor beam system, meaning it could easily engage and take out enemy starfighters with minimal effort. its drawbacks were lighter armor and shielding than the Assault Gunboat it was initially based on, only a single laser cannon (most often used to feed energy into the overdrive instead of actual dogfighting) and nos econdary weapons like ion cannons, so it wasn't without its drawbacks.
i just made a comment that where i said the only thing i could see them useful for was high altitude planetary bombers, like the Flying fortress, glad I'm not the only one that saw the similarities.
@@sebastianleff6466 you actually need to achieve air superiority to use these slowpokes. Heck, orbital bombardment from capital ship is actually a thing and more effective.
I love how they are slower than a b 52 bomber, and their payload has to be dropped significantly closer because in star wars they fogot about homing missils/bombs.
I know they wanted to get the full authentic experience of a bomber(in a stupid, suicidal way) but couldn't the bombs only need the target to be in range and then released? Like maybe there's a range limit for the target lock-on to be operable. Since supporters of this questionable sequence say the bombs are "magnetic", there's no need to be perfectly on top of the target like this. The bombers could have attempted circling/surrounding the target and let the bombs loose in multiple directions. It just doesn't make sense to require the bombers to use outdated technology limits when these bombers should be suitably more advanced than their WW2 counterparts.
As a former EVE player, all of EVE's ships have a role whether it is considered a trash ship or not. This bomber both looks and feelss like a cargo freighter.
Interesting analysis. The bomb "bay" if you could call it that makes sense if it was to be loaded with stacked shipping containers. They would just load straight out of the bottom one after the other like the battle droids in Ep 1. This is definitely a retrofitted light cargo ship. Head canon accepted.
@@drballsworth4612 Eve is Adam's wife. lol jk You prob already look it up. If not then it's an online spaceship game with clans, empire, nation, economy, and stuff.
It still gets me that people still try to defend tr he Starfortress over the Y-wing by just saying, "Oh well it has over a thousand bomb, you'd need 50 Y-wings to equal that firepower." All the firepower in the galaxy doesn't mean any thing if you can't get into range to use it.
Duncan McOkiner when did they invent that? Though the resistance did also have field generators protecting their HQ, so they clearly have a lot of advanced tech
The magnetic acceleration tech is what allows the bombs to "drop" from the bomber as if there was gravity. Although, I wouldn't equate it to a railgun at all. It seems way too underpowered.
@Yap Jin missiles are self propelled, they, in theory aren't meant to be used as railgun munition. but if the resistance upscaled the "railgun" they would get a galaxy gun
@@apollon5205 Fire it with a railgun for speed and have its thrusters guide it, congratulations, you've made a SMART railgun. Why even put it on a Bomber? Put the torpedo tubes on capital ships. It is a railgun by all accounts so just put more power behind it and you have something capable of ripping apart dreadnoughts.
I'm with you, man. I keep rubbing my chin and thinking "But, why?". A former military man, myself, I just don't really see anyway these ships could work effectively, unless they're completely cheap as dirt. Even an out-of-date X-Wing has torpedoes, shields, decent speed, et cetera. Plus, if you lose an X-Wing, you're down a pilot and a droid - not a small crew. The only thing I can think is that these bombers must have been some kind of re-purposed civilian vessels. They've got a crap profile which makes them big, easy targets, no real shielding, main weapons fixed downward instead of shotgun-forward, they're slow, and they don't even have any kind of real stealth advantage. The Leia of my youth would never employ such vessels. She'd have them broken down and made into something better. Or at least used with droid crews, so you're not losing any living sapient resistance members.
Can I ask how long have you been thinking about this, because it took me ten seconds to figure out why you use these instead of more snub fighters? One of these carries a payload to knock out a dreadnaught, think about that. A freighter sized vessel can knock out a vessel a thousand times its mass. Poe misused them, he deployed too many, in too tight a formation with too few fighters to escort them. Had he sent half of them more would have survived, the chances they all died in a chain reaction would have been reduced, because the fighters would have had an easier job protecting them, all that would likely mean that the lead bomber would have destroyed the dreadnaught on its own. These things have a four-man crew the Rebels lost more pilots in the battle of Scariff in one man fighters than the Resistance lost in that entire bomber wing.
@@Gibbons3457 You've got some good points, but the debate here isn't how they were deployed, but instead what a crappy design they were. And they're a crappy design. Maybe they'd be better for an atmospheric engagement, but I really don't think so. Cutting their payload down by two-thirds would make them faster and harder to hit due to a smaller profile, as well as still being capable of incredible destruction. As a commander, I wouldn't hedge my bets on just one of them making it through for a single fatal attack. I'd want half of them to break through, accomplish the same thing, and have the survivability to come home to nest, repair, and re-arm. Something as huge as a dreadnaught would also have a wicked-huge target signature, easy for guided torps to lock onto. Heck, if the bombs had been deployed as direct-fire weapons, instead of gravity or magnetic guidance, you can hardly miss something that big - even from a huge distance. The bombers just aren't designed well. Not for this engagement. Not for any close engagement, really. Maybe orbital strikes against ground targets whom can't reach out to shoot back, but that's all I can really think of.
Now that I think about it, had I been a commander in this battle, I would have just scattered all of the bombs behind me into a makeshift minefield. The capital ships would either have to take damage or take a detour, or simply be happy with throwing out fighters. I think that would have been a way better option than charging an obviously superior opponent. The tactical thinking behind this battle was a total mess. They need to hire some folks with actual combat experience, or at least some folks with theoretical combat experience.
They profile's a lot better if it's high above the target, as it's vertical profile is comparable to that of a y-wing, being a bit longer but also a bit narrower and its vital system being a lot narrower.
Oh I see how it is! “Let’s just throw some B1 Battledroids in the cockpit of this coffin and have them fly it on a suicide mission”. What did those droids ever do to you? #DroidLivesMatter
It’s just a crapily designed bomber. Not just in universe, but out. Whoever came up with the idea was obviously inspired by World War II bombers (b-17),But doesn’t need to be. Supriseingly , no-one said ‘no Steve, this is poorly inspired,designed and executed, just use Y-wings in this scene’. It’s just another symptom of the last Jedi’s poor understanding of military strategy.
Not to mention b-17's could actually survive multiple passes by enemy gunfire, being shredded to hell and still able to fly home, compared to these dumb powderkegs where a single laser blows the whole thing.
@ItburnswhenI Pee Very good point. But my guess is that such nonsense is what happens when the person in charge doesn't give a wet f*** about pre-existing lore and just wants to jam their own nonsensical ideas into an existing franchise...
If anything I think you're being too nice to the RHB (resistance heavy bomber) The things aren't just slow, they're ridiculously slow, I've said it before, I think ACTUAL WWII era bombers could outperform these things. IN SPACE! And that actually defies the laws of physics.
I would rather have a fuck ton of b wings than the heavy bomber because the b wing requires skill and competence which is something that the rebellion and first order clearly lack.
It shouldn't be a triangle, it should be a square. The fourth point should be production effort. It will do no good to have a perfect star fighter if you can only produce a handful of them.
An amazing point. It's why the b wing never hit mass production and was so rare. It was an amazingly powerful ship but was ridiculously expensive per unit. That's why the TIE bomber is arguably better: for every 1 b wing you can make, you can make 5 TIE bombers and therefore carry more firepower
Even still, with such a massive ship and so much ordnance, this would still probably be more expensive than producing a bunch more trusty Y-Wings. Hell, even getting a bunch of surplus Tie-bombers and upgrading them would probably be cheaper.
Let’s be honest, this bomber makes little to no sense in the Star Wars universe because it isn’t from the Star Wars universe. Someone wanted a WWII bombing run, but in space, and they put it in a Star Wars movie. The only role this ship makes sense in is in-atmosphere bombing, just like WWII bombers.
In-universe, that is what they were designed for. The only reason the Resistance used them in space is because they were all they had. When you're an underfunded, understaffed Rebellion, prepetually short on everything, you take what you can get and be thankful. Same deal with the GR-75s and the original Rebellion. It's a Watsonian flaw, but not a Doylist one.
@Glaydson Coelho Easy answer. They didn't have any left? How do we know? because they didn't have any. A very easy line of logic. Also just look at the comment he's replying to, Y-wings don't carry the firepower to cripple a dreadnaught. How many Torps Ion or Proton would you need to knock out that Dreadnaught we don't know but it took 10+ to ion a Star Destroyer so a lto is what I can say.
If you’re complaining, “no thought was put into this, someone just wanted WWII dogfights in space,” I’ve got some bad news about George Lucas...literally using WWII fighter footage to show his special effects guys what he wanted the combat to look like.
thejanusproject32 he’s following in some familiar footsteps. George Lucas would use WWII dogfight footage in his story reels so the special effects guys knew what he wanted the fights to look like. You’re very late to this party.
I don't think you see the pure genius of this ship. While its massive payload and power is worthless, the fact that it moves so slowly is brilliant. The First Order aren't use to taking on people as stupid as they are, as such they're more likely to sympathise with those in the ship and let them through. The worthless durability is also symbolic of how everyone in the sequel trilogy are not just slow in mind and body, but also weak as waterboarded tofu unless their names are Rey or Rey or potentially Rey. I think the ship is perfect because it manages to summarise the entirety of the trilogy in one ship. Slow, easily ripped apart, but it sure does like to assault the fanbase.
all alone AND I FEEEL SO ALL ALOOONE(doodoodoootdoootdootdootdoodoodoo) NO ONES GONNA FIX ME WHEN IM BROKE WOAOAOH HOW DO YOU CRY WITH INANIMATE EYES YOURE NEVER GONNA FLY WITH THE WAY THAT YOU ARE AND I FEEEL SO ALL ALOOONE (doodoodootdootdootdootdoodoodoo)
I actually always thought that these were really ancient ships, made and used for some small planetary revolt in the Outer Rim, and they really were the only thing the Resistance could afford.
Build Y wings, or the Naval Tactical Bombers the Republic had, with the split wing design similar to the ARC 170 and later the X wing. While you're at it, make the job cannons on the Y wings more durable.
Resistance pilot: Don't worry guys, we got this! Fly in a tight formation and nothing bad will happen! (A few seconds later) Resistance pilot: OH MY GOD!!!!
**bombers fly in tight formation** Resistance Bomber Pilot: "I am a genius!!" **bombers get shredded by TIE Fighters** Resistance Bomber Pilot: OHHHH NOOOOO!!!!
Hopefully. If that beast was my design I would want to be dead. That said technology can tend to move backward for a losing faction. Lack of funding, constant losing and outright desperation can be the only reason to use these bombers.
They are likely still around, they were just making spaceships for the New Republic working with big companies like Incom or CEC. Government contracts are where the big credits are at, helping out the plucky freedom fighters don't satisfy the shareholders. The Resistance is operating using handouts, military surplus, and salvage. The fact they got a batch of newer model X-Wings is likely a fluke, or a bit of (from the NR's government's perspective) corruption with some General selling a squadron off the books.
They've been sent to Gulags by SJW New Republic for cooperating with Empire. New Republic hired new ones based on skin colour and sex instead of skill.
@@williammagoffin9324 t70 was already a prototype by the time of Jakku. T85 were considered new and plucky,and they couldn't spare any even for Poe dameron
I love the concept of turning the Heavy bomber into a super-heavy space dive bomber. Have the craft have an engine that can be safely overcharged (or boosted to some degree). The speed afforded by the booster will allow the bomber to rapidly close the distance to its target, deploy its bombs at speed (no true torpedo launchers allows to maybe carry even more bombs), and then break away and engage the booster again. It could be supremely effective when coordinated well with friendly capital ships and fighters, but is prone to several weaknesses, as it would still be vulnerable before and after the maneuver. As an added interesting worldbuilding balance element, constraint the powerplant so the craft can't boost and have shields at the same time. This adds significant danger to the bombing maneuver, as it would be vulnerable for brief moments before the shields get reactivated. This means the bomber will have to be protected while it lines up towards its target, and will still be vulnerable after and before the approach and break away maneuvers, respectively. It maintains the highly focused nature of the ship, makes it viable, while still being vulnerable. I think it would also support a rare "aggressive" bomber strategy that would be an interesting tactic that the NR/Resistance developed against the First Order.
The bomber was designed as an homage to WW2 bombers such as the B-17 ( which had a terrible mortality rate ). The problem is that the Allies in WW2 had no better option than to carpet bomb Axis facilities. Whereas in Star Wars, this tactic seems stupid and unnecessary with the spacecraft at hand ( no Y-Wings? no B-Wings? ). So, the point of the entire sequence in the film was to elicit an emotion from the audience without any thought to logic or military strategy. The whole film is full of these "moments" where characters do really stupid things for no logical reason just to subvert the audience expectations are draw an emotion.
Well B-17's took a beating because they underestimated the Luftwaffe's ability to offer daylight raid resistance or their tactics dealing with large formations of slow targets. When the Allies started to roll out longer range escorts like the P-51's, the B-17's got the job done with less casualties. Too bad the Resistance didn't subscribe to fighter escorts for bombers.... whoops!
if it actually looked like a B-17 it would be better, lower target silhouette and probably would be faster... not to mention the homage would have been easier to spot...
the B-17 was designed as a Strategic Bomber, something that it did surprisingly well against industrial centres, with successes rating to hitting the factory, but leaving the preschool next door untouched. Bomber Command with the RAF conducted carpet bombing raids during the night where they had the advantage of numbers and cover. the thing about the B-17 was the fact that there were 250-1000+ bombers taking place in each raid. not 15 with no escorts
The carpet bombing tactic is made obsolete by the existence of guided weapons. I could still see the bad guys do it for the terror factor, but this bomber, aside from being one of the worst design ever, simply doesn't fit into the Resistance war doctrine.
That being said, if we want to speculate what this craft could have been designed to do, carpet bombing fits rather well. I found this rather disturbing in the context of the universe as the only place this would be useful would be if you had a large low density area of targets without any credible threat to the craft itself. No anti-aircraft weapons. No interceptors. At most moderately small arms. The only scenario I can think of that fits the design well is the suppression of lightly if not unarmed large scale populations. This craft was a tool of oppression to be used against people who can't fight back. Either this was surplus stock from a deal with the empire that didn't go through, or I have to seriously wonder what kind of people the resistance had to deal with to acquire their armaments.
Wait a second, the Resistance could have easily oriented the vessels to make the bombs fall from afar, but in the direction of the weak spot, like a long range cannon or something. The electromagnetic launchers only launch the bombs in the direction or the port, which can be oriented anywhere! All the vessels could have easily manuevered out of the bomb barrage. Heck, since the First Law of Motion always applies, you could have it from any direction they wished for! Clearly, the Resistance could have abused the launching system to their advantage, if they thought laterally. Remember, the enemy's gate is down.
Oh if they fell from afar it would have its purposes. Considering a massive buckshot. But that wouldn't get us pretty shots, of course, and so while it's militarily viable it's cinematically uninteresting. If you really start entering the physics department, all of Star Wars equipment is kinds ridiculous. Aerodynamics in space? Do these lasers travel at limited speed and/or limited range? Why can't the computers just near-instantly adjust a laser cannon to hit a target? For that matter, if you can hyper-jump, wouldn't you always have several minutes to annihilate an enemy fleet before its crew is even woken up? And why the fuck does a galactic civilization still requre humanoid pilots on their ships?
@@sorsocksfake a bunch of space shotguns spaming explosive buckshot across a wide area of ship(s) sounds pretty epic in my book. heck its kind of an offensive mine field
Yeah the bombs falling bit sort of makes their whole engagement moot. They're in space, the bombs were launched because they sure as hell didn't fall. Not only that, but it took one payload to down a capital ship. Tell me why they don't orient these things to shit out a cloud of bombs from a safe distance? One ship out of 25 surviving to land its full payload is way worse in every rational metric than having 25 ships land a mere 4% of their payloads and survive. Fuck everyone involved with trying to direct space combat in this new trilogy. It's like they've never encountered space operas before or even watched any of the six previous films which share the name.
@@RadmanTheWise the real question is Why the fuck aren't they putting those bombs into capital grade MACs a and firing them at relativistic velocities? They could be fired from a distance of a few light seconds so that dreadnought would have no way of firing back, and it would have no way to dodge them. Hell, they could pull off something like in ender's game and go through hyperspace above or behind the dreadnought. I bet that engines aren't shielded as well as front armor, and if they are designed similliar to Venator-class, they connect straight to main powerplant.
I get that star wars is WW2 dogfights in space, I can suspend my disbelief that much. Yes these are supposed to be similar to flying fortresses with gunnery equipment and a bomb bay. But when I saw those large things crawling across the screen I was both mad at the stupid first order for not having an adequately protected vessel and the resistance for thinking that this was a viable strategy.
@@dosbrostacozzinc.6856 Yes, but they were raided by fast moving torpedo/dive bombers... Like the X-wing and Y-wing... A B17 could drop hundreds of bombs, and not hit a single target. But a dive bomber's chances of hitting SKYROCKETS compared to a heavy bomber
And WW2 bombers didn't have their bombs setup in such a way that it guarantees the destruction of the bomber. The last bomber died from it's own payload, working as intended.
@@caelodevorago608 The last bomber wasn't shot in it's bomb bay. It dropped it's bombs, and the ensuing explosion destroyed the bomber. It was killed by it's own payload, not enemy fire.
@@tanith117 A barn? Those things looked bigger than a football field. Even stormtroopers flying TIE fighters with beer goggles couldn't miss hitting these bombers.
Pretty much... Just lightspeed a squadron of fighters into capital ships.. Even if the enemy ships aren't fully destroyed, they would cause mass damage.. Cool scene... Too bad it blew a hole in everything star wars now...
Kenny More like Star Wars blew a hole in itself lol, what possible reason is there for NOT doing it? Hell Anakin even does it in the clone wars lmao it’s not a new tactic.
For me here's why they suck: 1. They're too weak and can be easily destroyed (I hate the part when the wrecked tie fighter went to one of those bomber and got triple kills) 2. They're too slow
They keep trying to replace the Y-Wing and they can't do it. The B-Wing, the K-Wing, the H-Wing, now this new disaster with stubby wings, the Y-Wing is just perfect the way it is. Tiny hit box, laser cannons close together, ion cannon turret, astromech and plenty of bombs, give me a Y-Wing any day over another ship. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Nah. Take it from me: Of the starfighters of the Rebellion that I have encountered, only the Z-95 fared worse than the Y-Wing. The B-Wings had enough protection to avoid a turkey-shoot situation to turn things around, and definitely had the raw power to take down capitals.
@@SabinStargem No offense dude but take it from *me* , the Y-Wing is the best starfighter in Star Wars. It's been a fan favorite since it appeared in the very first movie. The only reason the X-Wing is more popular is because Luke flew it and it got all the glory. People started incorrectly attributing the Y-Wing to having low survivability because of this one battle because only one survived, despite that the only other X-Wing to survive other than Luke was the legendary Wedge who Vader literally let get away(costing probably millions of Imperial lives in the future) and the fact that of the 30 Rebel ships to attack the Death Star, only 8 were Y-Wings. Not only that, the only reason more Y-Wings weren't shown is because as Lucas said himself they only had one Y-Wing left because they built four and Vader destroyed 3. That's still a LOT more X-wings vaped. In some of the original source material for the Y, it's described as a "hot rod rebel technicians stripped down for parts." It was a fast ship, hence the massive engines and the fact that Gold Squadron made the attack run first. In the Battle of Endor we see a Y-Wing destroy two TIE Interceptors, most likely this is legendary pilot Horton Salm. By the end of the GCW(Galactic Civil War), the Rebels would lose more Y-Wings than other ships only because they flew them more than the other ships. Both in Legends and DU, we do not see them very often with a lot of A-Wings getting vaped in Rebels. The Y-Wing further gets its reputation as a slow bomber from writers like Michael A. Stackpole, who was pretty much a self-insert author but a damn good one who wasn't shy about letting his favoritism get into his work. The X-Wing novels and the video games in the 90s hammered the point home and to create balance, the Y-Wing became the tortoise bomber it is today. And it's STILL better than the other ships despite all this. Despite being a bit long, the damn thing takes a licking and keeps on kicking. The X-Wing's wing-mounted cannons, while cool, make it ineffective at anything except midrange. The Y-Wing has the best positioning of laser cannons out of every other ship in the franchise. Right on the nose- you're literally leading with the gun, like the A-10. The ship is basically an armory with two engines attached to it. This new Resistance bomber is more like the B-Wing- it's a mistake. The B-Wing is constantly praised as a capital ship killer despite the only point they seem to make is that it "has ion cannons" which other ships already have... and proton torpedoes, which other ships already have. And the fact that it cannot strafe ground targets effectively at all. So, to say the B-Wing is supposed to replace the Y-Wing is completely asinine. So I'm sorry but, you're wrong. The Y-Wing is the best ship in the franchise and the only reason they don't want to bother making a cool Resistance Y-Wing is because they want to focus on more exotic-looking designs that are eye-catching. Of course, with fan demand being so high for the Y, they might reverse that decision and give us a new Koensayr model soon enough.
@@commanderjason7786 Whatever that thing was, it doesn't deserve to be called a starfighter. More like a starfailure. Of course, that pretty much describes TLJ in a nutshell. I think everyone was hoping for more space battles in Episode 8, especially after the space battle treat we got in Rogue One. The better films have longer battles, the worse films have more talking. Episode 4- Lots of major battles, Death Star Escape, Death Star Attack, lots of action. Beautiful. Episode 5- Battle of Hoth and Asteroid Chase. Awesome space action, emotional war and desperation, classic. Episode 6- Death Star 2 battle. Endor, climactic, a thrill from beginning to end. Episode 1- Not a lot of space action. Drastically reduced amount of space battle scenes and screentime. Gungan battle was okay but both took a backseat to the lightsaber fight with Maul. Episode 2- Lots of talking, most of the action comes at the end, not a lot of screentime for the Battle of Geonosis. The gunship chasing Dooku gets more screentime than the battle. Episode 3- Beautiful battle in the beginning that is over wayyyyyy too quickly. Nothing else compares, many think it's the best part of the movie. Episode 7- more battles than Episode 8. Episode 8- Single decent and short space battle in the beginning, disappointment follows. Battle of Crait feels pointless. Rogue One- Loved by fans, 1/3 of the movie is a battle. Conclusion: More WARS = better Star Wars movie.
Yes. I don't care that the X-wing was the one which blew up a Death Star while the Y-Wings were shot down. The Y-Wing is hands-down my favorite Star Wars ship in terms of design and function. It's always been my go-to ship in Star Wars video games just because of its ease of handling,-durability, and astromech compatability. It's just not a ship that is shown its full potential in the movies, except in Rouge One, where 3 of them kick a Destroyer's butt :)
I was just curious if the developers even understood the concept of guerilla warfare. Resistance are much smaller than the First Order. Hell they are even smaller than what Rebe Alliance used to be. That's why they were constantly on the run. They even trashed their base as soon as Starkiller got destroyed. So it's difficult to understand why Resistance would use such a immobile spacecraft in a navy where mobility and maneuverability is key. Only chance Resistance has against the First Order is if they constantly move and run away. It would've made more sense if First Order used MG100 bombers. They could've used them sort of like a clean up ship during the movie's pursuit,taking out Resistance ship which ran out of fuel while the dreadnought and stardestroyers follows the remaining Resistance ships. If that was their purpose,I would've at least understand more
Well of course it sucks they went backwards in time it’s completely useless and impractical any other bombers would have been better not to mention if they are launched with electromagnetic why don’t they just turn the entire fighter on its side and fire them sideways INTO the enemy that would atleast make more sense then moving over them like idiots
If only the First Order would have remembered that escort ships are supposed to PROTECT WHAT THEY ARE ESCORTING! By the force of General Hux had the common sense granted to the average Porg he could have wiped out the Resistance
@@TheObsidianX Why is everyone calling Star Destroyers slow? Did everybody forget it used to keep up with the Millenium Falcon's top non-hyperdrive speed in Empire Strikes Back? Only to lose track of it when the Falcon entered an asteroid field?
I think this ship was originally supposed to be a firefighting ship (with water). It had to be modified for battle, covering it in guns and explosives. It’s like trying to turn a Ford transit van into a main battle tank
...actually, the USAAF did exactly that at Midway. It did no damage though, simply because even a large ship is a small and dodgy target for high-altitude bombing.
@@modernwarfarefilms1 B-25s were NOT meant to do what they did on those raids. They pushed the aircraft to the absolute limit to pull that off. Most naval bombers really resembled heavy fighters in their design, being single-engine planes that seated 2 or 3 crewmen and carried limited ordnance (e.g. Douglas TBF Avenger). Put simply, getting a bomber off the deck of a carrier is hard!
@@modernwarfarefilms1 The B-25 was not designed as a naval aircraft at all, and the Doolittle Raid pilots were Army Air Corps, not Navy. The B-25 WAS used against shipping later in the war, (including a version armed with a 105 mm howitzer!!) but only after the island-hopping campaign captured or built airfields in range of Japanese shipping routes.
@@modernwarfarefilms1 Yes, but you'd usually send in torpedo bombers to deal with ships. such as say an avenger. And that's far closer in size to a fighter than your average bomber. Even the handful of larger designs, such as the Bristol Beaufort are still quite small by the standards of your typical bomber... (it's a light bomber at best, in terms of size). Even the B-25 is only a medium bomber...And the strategies it used against ships were not really all that similar to what the resistance bomber did.
Wait a second, was this ship originally a minelayer? (No defences and very low speed means its a craft for low intensity operations, whether it likes it or not. But it carries a sufficiently large internal bomb bay to give capital ships second thoughts. So it has to be designed with the intention of delivering weapons when a very large enemy is not there to complain. Therefore, mines...)
That actually makes sense; especially given how capital ships like dropping out of lightspeed very close to stations and orbital installations. A few of these could lay a minefield very quickly, if you had some warning of an incoming strike force.
@@udirt Wow, wait wait wait if they are mine layers, why don't they just lay the mines earlier before the damn enemy came. And yeah, the bombs are black in colour, so definitely good for hiding in space.
@@alexwschan185 So for it to work, we'd have to assume the Resistance leadership are utter and complete, irredeemable irrefutable incorregible infinite imbeciles. Done :).
When I first saw these ships I thought the "tower" setup akin to a Nebulon B that it was just a whole rack of launch tubes. They would just fire off a ton of bombs from range that would drift toward their target. Failing that, they'd only really be suited to a carpet bombing mission against ground facilities. I mean hell it's obviously modelled after a WWII strategic bomber, i.e. the SF-17 (B-17).
I could see these things being very powerful with a hyperdrive combined with a Thrawn pincer maneuver. For example the resistance could draw in a first order fleet with a seemingly weak force that would include an interdictor then the bombers hidden in nearby hyperspace lanes would jump in right above and unleash their payload destroying or at least crippling the enemy fleet.
After some consideration, it MIGHT be that this was initially designed as a mine-laying ship with limited self defence capability. Not meant for combat, but just chugging around and laying defensive perimeters around static locations. That could explain why it seems so optimised for the internal carriage of so many small munitions. Could be that they retrofitted them for the purpose of... Doing what they did. Of course, if this theory is correct, we’re still left with the problem of why a dedicated mine-layer was even designed, when most ships of a decent size would probably be able to fill the same role and dump small munitions out the back while following a pre-plotted course. Still, though... It’s a mission it seems like it’s optimised for.
I was having similar thoughts. It may be that the ship was built for orbital bombardment, in which case, you wouldn't necessarily want to have the ship pointed at your target. on that assumption, you would have already achieved space superiority, and you would be way too high for planetary defense weapons to be very effective, and your targets would be city sized instead of airlock sized, so relatively slow attack speed speed and would be beneficial to the mission. but I completely agree on the application theory. I don't think they were intended to attack capital ships, but they were the only thing that could focus enough firepower to take out that ship, and at that point, it was a decision between throwing away a fleet of bombers, or having those cannons in firing range.
Here is the biggest problem with the “Its based on WWII Ariel combat like in the OT” defense. Allied B-52 Super fortress were never ever used in this manner. They had terrible aim and mobility, as such precision strikes were practically impossible to make. That’s why allies used them in carpet bombing campaigns in mass indiscriminate attacks against cities and military targets. Because less then 20% of the payload was guaranteed to hit its target. You know what B-52s were never used for? Attacking aircraft carriers or battleships! And why because the chances of a bomber attacking a much smaller and faster target, with AA defenses and air support, was basically suicidal. They were meant to unleash massive destruction against stationary targets on the ground, not take out heavily armed and defended mobile targets. And even with that, the resistance is still poorly designed. Granted Star Wars weapons are more powerful then bullets so I might be wrong here. But the B-52 could take some damage and dish it out too with numerous AA guns stashed in its hull. Also while they didn’t have a snowball in hell’s chance of outrunning a mustang or zero, even they were never that slow. So yeah a bomber designed on Earth in the 1930s is way better then a high tech, futuristic bomber designed in a galaxy far away a long time ago.
You're thinking of B-17 Flying Fortresses or B-29 Superfortress. The B-52 is the saturation bomber that's still in service, the Stratofortress. Otherwise, you have the right idea. The StarFortress is an air-to-ground strategic bomber that's been shoved into a role that it's not at all useful for, while being pretty much useless at even its given task if the enemy has a good air defence plan.
Actually as far as I know the B-17 WAS at first also designed for attacks against point targets amd even ships (due to the fact the Americans in the time before Pearl Harbour HIGHLY overestimated the way their target-systems could work under less than perfect situations and also highly underestimated the danger fighters could be to even so heavy armed bombers like the B-17). It was a pre-war-designed bomber, so this failures could be excused. The Star Wars terror...erm i mean rebels/New Republic (who as far as I know originally designed but never used the bomber) has not such an easy excuse. They had fought against a enemy who used countless swarms of fast agile fighters and had - despite his failures - even begun to improve his cappacity in countering bombers and fighter-bombers by introducing better fighters (Tie-Interceptor) and specialized anti-starfighter-ships like the Lancer-fregate and the Raider-class into service. This the makers of this ugly piece of banta-podo must have known. So it was a stillborn failure from the start. The Resistance should have simply sell the ships and buy antique Y-wings or old B-wings for the money - I guess THAT would have serve them better.
If I were the designer, I would redesign the bomber to be less smaller, having a shield all around, more faster or maybe having a booster, and some defensive weapons.
It might sound crazy, but what if you take the T-wing (that's what I'm calling it now) and just had it tilt back 90º so the bomb bay is pointing directly at the enemy? You could keep the T-wing away from the battle, the way it launches bombs makes it so it doesn't have to "fall" on the enemy and since you're in space, the bombs don't lose any momentum. You essentially have a space cannon launching space cannon balls
When I first saw the scene that involved these bombers I thought "If the writers were trying to go for an effective battle strategy then they completely missed the mark, but if they were trying to go for a dramatic WWII bombing run scene then they got it spot on."
when I first saw and hear Poe order to bring the bombers I though it was B-wing. On SW Rebels this monster vessel has high mobility and powerful lasers can tear up any Star Destroyer in 1 HIT
My idea: give the StarFortress a fighting chance, with forward and rear racing guns, and have the bomb bay lengthwise rather than height-wise. Imagine how cool it would have been seeing these things haul ass in a traditional B-17 formation and only get picked off from near point-blank to the dreadnought.
@@RNA0ROGER yeah give the Y-wing the same treatment as the x-wing and you have a bomber that dose'nt hamper it's escorts to much because the old x-wing were only 50kph faster which when your at a 1000kph is nothing
"We'll upgrade the X-wing, the A-wing, and the B-wing but scrap those for some reason. But fuck the y-wing, don't upgrade that. Let's make a brand new shitty heavy bomber instead!"
Technically f you would rotate the bomber 90 degrees with the bottom facing the front, then all you have to do is release the bombs. if they indeed use the electromagnetic propulsion. Space will just carry the bombs as far as you want. :/
Or some large anti ship laser. Mount it under the ship and large engines for recoil control. Line up and laser away armor until you hit something critical.
I really do not understand why they did not have y-wing bombers. The resistance seem to be mostly using old rebel ships that were in high numbers like the a-wing and x-wing so there is no real reason for the resistance not having some y-wings laying around for space bombardment missions.
The Resistance Bomber is like the B17 Flying Fortress of Star Wars so to speak It was a heavy bomber used for large bombardments. While in a vacuum that's a legitimate strategy, but unlike the B17 it didn't have machine guns all over the plane for defensive armament.
It's entirely possible that any existing Y-Wings to that point were decommissioned and dismantled by that point with relatively few left in existence anywhere. Star Wars canon already had them as old obsolete fighters by the time of A New Hope. They were being outclassed by many of the newer fighters being developed. Not to mention the maintenance issues in having to manufacture any new components more or less by hand.
@@vaelophisnyx9873 With all due respect, I'd say that's absolutely the narrative. No one who calls out the absolute FAILURE of Leia or Holdo as leaders is treated as being in the right. I mean, Poe was right in attacking the dreadnaught, Poe was right in staging a mutanity. The fact that the movie wants to paint him in the wrong, and that Holdo is painted in the right speaks volumes towards Rian and Kathleen's anti-male agenda.
A catapult would have been more effective. literally. the bombs were dropped by a gravity field. why not just physically throw them at the enemy from a distance.... you know... like torpedoes...
Since it had no point-defence, they could've literally aimed the bottom of the ship toward the target and "dropped" them from a distance... instead of the "we have to fly over top of it" nonsense.
@@TheOJDrinker Or even just fly over the top of it from several kilometers *above* the the dreadnought. You know, like how what the B-17s that these were supposed to be reminiscent of did over *their* targets.
When we understand most imperial capital ships being designed with an older (earth) battleship aesthetic in mind, it becomes easy to see this bomber as having been designed to mimic the aesthetic of a B-17. Still poorly designed as a space bomber, but it's imagery is still evocative.
We know ruin johnson sacrificed all logical design to bring his shitty vision to the screen. And that's not all. He also did the space-kamikaze. And he put in the scene with broom kid probably to tie his supposed new trilogy to the main canon.
The main problem that heavy bomber was mostly a terror weapon-using against enemy cities, bases, and other area targets. Even B-52s in Vietnam was used like this. The New Republic really needed a thing that only usable burning Imperial occupied cities to the ground? Killing many innocent civilians? Great guys! And classic heavy bombers are usable only with strong fighter support, in case of total air/space control... Or they needed a fighter-bomber, like F-15E, FB-111, Su-30 that could penetrated the enemy defense, could kill heavy targets(like capital ships) with pinpoint accuracy, and even usable as starfighter? Every real heavy bomber nowadays are capable of precision strike, with long range and ultra-heavy guided missiles... So, instead of idiotic space bombs, fitted this ugly duck bomber with dozens of concussion missile and proton torpedo launchers, (Even one-two capital ship grade launcher)remove the hand-operated turrets(even Millenium Falcon got remote-controlled armament decades ago...) and we got a capable gunboat/missile boat...( Still cheaper than missile armed corvettes and frigates...)
@@janossos8620 Heavy bombers can be used for other tasks too, the B-52 in vietnam was even used for ground support and did very well, it also was used to pound the Ho Chi Minh Trail, where most of the bombs were dropped during the war. Other than that I agree, a heavy bomber would be much more useful for the Empire, the Y wing already fills the role of a fighter bomber and does it very well, or at least did in the old fluff.
The problem with the Resistance Bomber is that it is designed for World War II, but is meant to operate in the Star Wars Galaxy without any real adjustments to compensate. As much as I like the B-Wing and Y-Wing I seriously doubt they would have gotten enough ordinance to sink the dreadnought. I wish that they could. Also bombs and missiles of the same size, means the missile has a smaller warhead because things like targeting computers and propulsion systems take up space. However, I do agree that there is no reason the bomb bay had to be pointed down, and using the electro-magnetic launching system still works: Just keep these things at range and have them fire those bombs out of a mass driver at speeds at least what Poe's booster did.
The thing is they didn't need to blow up the dreadnaught, only disable the main gun. Further, we just saw in R1 how effective y-wings are at disabling a capital ship. It's like the resistance leadership, who are the same people who led the rebellion, forgot how to war properly.
Well, they called the real thing flying FORTRESS for a reason, yet the starFORTRESS just blows up if you look at it the wrong way, due to the oversized bomb magazine. Literally all this is good for would be carpet bombing civilians. Or you just replace the crew with droids and weld the bomb bay doors shut, and throw it at the target.
I definitely like the drive by bomber idea. I think it could have made for an even more suspenseful scene. Imagine the Resistance fleet, fleeing for their lives. Maybe the Dreadnought even gets off a potshot at one of the vessels, blowing it up in one go of its main turret. All seems lost. Then a message comes over the comms. It's Poe! He and his X-wing squad ate bringing in a flight of Starfortesses. They're making a B-line straight for the Dreadnought. The Dreadnought detects the incoming bomber run and scrambles interceptors. No Poe and his squad have to defend these bombers while they maintain the bombing run. Boom. One bomber is taken out. Boom. Their goes another. Poe and his people are doing all they can, but the First Orders numbers are overwhelming. The point defence cannons on the Starfortesses are smashing TIE after TIE, but there's just too many. Finally, only one bomber remains. It's the one with Roses sister. She's sitting at her station, waiting for the orders to drop the payload. The captain of the vessel tells his crew, "Stay on target." They're getting closer now. "Stay on target." Roses sister arms the payload. It's ready for launch as they pass over the ship. Then, DISASTER! A TIE has gotten a lucky shot and damaged their controls. The pilot can barely control the ship. They crew looks at each other, and a resolute grimace passes over their faves. "Stay... on... target..." Roses sister clutches the pendant about her neck. The Starfortess slams into the Dreadnought. It erupts in glorious explosions. The End.
haven't seen the movie but it seems these bombers would be more suited in air raids on ground based targets with a fighter escort, in a battle like it was shown its useless, carpet bombing bases and the like would be its strong points but in a battle where literally the ships you are trying to bomb have its own escorts in forms of smaller cruisers and its own tie fighters, which were more or less designed to swarm their opponents therefore a more defensive type of fighter would easily take these giant hit me signs out quickly
Alexander Greene I believe they would be suited to bomb unprepared enemy positions, for instance, when an enemy is on the offensive, you just call in the bombers and little lasers won’t do much, for instance, you could bomb AT-AT’s with some form of efficiency
To play devil's advocate I'd say its pretty obvious that the ship isn't designed for deep space battles like that. It was just used because they didn't have any other options. But i agree...its still a pretty crappy design. It could've been like a giant shotgun that flung bombs out ahead of itself. Or simply been remote controlled. Its amazing how with all this tech they don't have ships like this controlled by droids or by remote.
The separatists made large use of droid starships, but they had their own problems that could be exploited since they weren't really able to 'think on the fly' or otherwise adapt to a situation.
When did they say they had no other options? And why do they have X-wings and not Y-wings? Why don't they just put all those bombs in a projectile and shoot it at the enemy? No one ever got the idea of suicide bombing those bombers into the first order fleet because those things have FTL capabillities according to the lore.
FOLLOW ON TWITTER PLZ
twitter.com/eckhartsladder
I like the vintor better
#askecks what if the empire instead of super weapons increased their Navy and army allowing upgrades to happen to imperial vehicles such as tie defender as main fighter how would the start wats Galaxy look
Vex (from Destiny) vs Necrons (from WH40K) please?
#askeck what if the venator crashed into the space station in Star Wars the clone wars season 5
hey i like your videos but i never seen any enemies from destiny 1 and 2 just asking if you can look into them in your videos
Used car salesman slaps roof of resistance bomber...
Bomber bursts into flames.
Great meme 😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂
@@kevinwise1997 did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Kevin the Wise?
@@darthtroller no, I have heard of my cousin... PennyWise though😂😂😂😂
"They're supposed to do that, you see? That's the sign of a well-built bomber, there, son. Believe you me, if you buy this bomber, you won't live to regret it."
"Low to Medium Durabilitiy" for the Starfortress? Half a Tie Fighter took out 3 of them... I would go ahead and rule out the "medium part"
I'd rule out "low" too. Durability, none.
Absolute disgrace to the incredibly hardy Flying Fortresses they were clearly aping off of
"there is no armor protection on this vehicle"
"You'll be the first to die in battle, but at least it will take a long time to fly there."
Starfortresses. Suicide and pointless
And the worst about this ship? It's a one-use thing. It drops it's payload and then has to sloooowly crawl away from the fight.
We don't know if it's one-use, maybe in this case they wanted to make sure that the target will be completely destroyed.
@starshipeleven Might as well FTL suicide bomb your target. Those bombers have FTL capabillity according to the canon.
So you mean like most WW2 bombers?
migueeeelet that’s why they send the women on it
@@carbonzo6 I loled
As a WWII history specialist, saying a bomber "might be good for dropping pamphlets" is about the most brutal burn possible for any aircraft XD
AT least the B-17 and Lancaster were both legendarily sturdy and well-armed. The Starfortress has blind spots EVERYWHERE and's made of tissue paper.
@@thebighurt2495 At least other light armored vehicles in Star Wars usually make up for this handicap by packing a decent amount of speed and firepower. These flying abominations though don't have any of that. They don't seem to have any additional blaster cannons as a means of defence and they move at the pace of a slug making his way through a lake of syrup while being on a half lethal dose of tranquilizers. All you need to do is shoot them once.
@@thebighurt2495 Those planes also typically had escort fighters, they also went as high up as they could to stay out of range
ahhh yessim a world war 2 history specialist because i watched a couple youtube videos
Kinda funny because that’s what Britain did in WWII
Both sides are just ridiculously incompetent in eposode 8. It's a joke
Anything star wars made by Disney is a joke
Ruin Johnson is biggest troll there is ! Ahhahaha what an idiot of a human being...And roundhead on top of that... Pathetic...
@@jangounchained5279 Agreed. Moron Johnson just created the bombers cause it looked cool and it served the SJW's with the asian bombardier with Rose Tiko. Also making one starfighter such as Poe Dameron to take out a whole dreadnought. Just...too Overpowered and he's like Rey, practically no weaknesses.
The entire new canon and movies are idiotic and shouldn't exsist
Guys, chill. Episode 8 is canon. That said, where it stands in the canon is debatable. Personally, I think it's some fanfiction a guy wrote from his apartment on Coruscant that somehow got adapted into a bad move in-setting.
Resistance Officer: We need more bombers! We're desperate!
Ship Manufacturer: Sorry, we're all out.
Resistance Officer: What about those?
Ship Manufacturer: You don't want those. Those are prototypes that turned out to be shit.
Resistance Officer: We'll take all of them!
At least that's the only way it can even begin to make sense to me.
When you're the last one to the black Friday sale at the shipyard
@@MrDalisclock And it was either those ships or a shipping container full of Epilady hair removers. - tough call.
Like the gallophrey from Legends no? They were failed designs than weren't up to standard ones.
Rebel officer : IL TAKE YOUR ENTIRE STOCK
They should of been funded by the Republic. But there base did suck.
"Bombers keep that tight formation"
**half a broken tie fighter destroys 3 bombers in a row because of said formation**
I think that tie fighter pilot may have been the smartest person in that battle. He made the entire resistance bomber fleet look like idiots.
@@jakevelasco4072 And he did all this while dying. Now THAT, is some real strong thonk.
@@ab14967 *stronk thonk*
@@jakevelasco4072 a hero on the level of TR-8R
I think that the close formation is a clever move because:
_the bombers can defend ourselfes better with the anti aircraft turret
_the few fighters can be concentrate in one point for ingaging the enemy and protect ourselves.
Obviously this tactic has a lot of flaws but it were inevitable to lose these s*itty bombers
The resistance bomber's role: "[...] dropping pamphlets, transporting apples, or giving guided tours." Savage!
Acting a decoy for better bombers
@@MrDalisclock Someone has to be the decoy.
Laying mines.
Actually it's just like tie bombers that should be use for clean up. Dropping payload against the enemy ground target. I think thats how the new republic used it
Plot Twist - It was just a Tour Ship for Disney in new VR experience.
There is a situation in which the bomber is viable:
the enemy is blind, deaf, incompetent and crippled, ie. there are no starfighters, only capital size ships with knocked out point defense systems who have already taken a beating.
Or on land...
And you still lose all of your bombers because they can't escape the blast radius/
@@DealerofDeathCharon Yeah, just like how the enola gay was destroyed when it bombed Hiroshima, you can drop bombs from any altitude with that thing...
the Enola Gay was never destroyed, it was out of the blast range when the bomb detonated
@@afilleduptaco I think that was a woosh good sir
Let’s not forget the fact that one wrecked tie fighter got a triple after life kill against these bombers
TheAssain88 Yeah. Half a Tie Fighter That is.
Darth Revan that’s for sure
In halo's announcer voice :
"TRIPLE KILL!!!" "FROM THE GRAVE!!!!"
First of all
Why didn't the resistance (who in the evacuation of d qar. Was going to have to face of first order dregnought and star destroyers. Now the first order was not like the imperial fleets.who would have a better anti star fighter power) so the residents didn't have to worry about losing many fighters (though the first order ties was indeed better than the empire) and the resurgent-class did have laser cannons. But you have so many A wings and X wings. Escort and learn from the new republic! Use Y wings. Use B wings. Use K wings! You have the republic resources before. Why wouldn't you get their fighters.or even bombers...........now cus obviously the resistance. If they'd wanna go with the bombers. Use something else. Like supramecy the first order dregnought.with so many tactics why didn't the resistance make good fleets out of the resource they have before the hosnian cataclysm. They have the republic sort of backing them up. So B wings and Y wings and K wings,E wings, new V wings. Were all....., AVAILABLE! . And if you wanted to talk about how the resistance had not much pilots.....hello! They were an entire new republic pilot academy.....why wouldn't you just recruit pilots from them
Half a Tie = 3 Bomber Kills.
“Bombers keep that tight formation.” My a$$.
Come for the lore, stay for the outro.
I think those bombers, after being grounded and disarmed, would make some nice homes for all of those slave kids they left behind on the casino planet. Way more efficient use of those things.
jayjaydeth Kid : *pushes button that sets off bombs and a chain reaction* hmmm yes very good it will only kill them because of one dumbass
Hawkcub did you even read OPs comment?
“After being grounded and disarmed,” key word being DISARMED.
@@Marshcat5 Reading Comprehension: 0
@@battlefieldwaffles chill he was joking lol
"Is there a niche which this ship excels in?"
Yes, 1942. In all seriousness, it's a dated and silly design. The designers were clearly trying to create some kind of association or link with WW2. The star fortress is even similarly named to the B17 aka the flying fortress. It was a silly thing to do, I don't think there is any way to make the star fortress make sense.
Matthew Sellers I’ve seen a lot of other references to world war 2 AKA the frist order is zazi Germany and the resistance are the allies
well in SW universe 1942 is actually a future, as the events in SW happen an unspecified amount of time in the past compared to our timeline
1942? This thing could and would be destroyed by a single 20mm cannon round.
Real life “Flying Fortresses” could take a heavy beating, and still manage to limp back to base. They also flew faster than a snail’s crawl.
a b17 has WAY better armament, WAY more nimble, and MUCH better survivability.
if the reason it was so facking slow was becasue it was a near indestructable ship with point defeces (but can still be shot down by heavy missiles and turbolasers), THEN it would make sense.
Imagine joining the resistence to be a dope X-wing pilot like Poe but then they asinged youto be a Heavy Bomber pilot
Hell even if u were a bomber ace signing up to fly a y wing and u get put in this death trap
@@Thorium_ group burial pilot 👌
Where's me last meal at if I'm going to die I at least wanna do it on a full stomach
Kkkkkk
That would be why they had such a hard time finding new recruits.
The worst part about the ship is that it’s too slow to escape from the explosions it creates.
No it's not. If it drops all it's bombs it will be significantly lighter and faster. But even then it could probably escape the blast.
@Lady Wanderer If you actually watch the scene you see the bomber itself basically falls into the explosion, the explosion doesn't just move up, the bomber falls into it. The trajectory wasn't locked in, after the pilot died the ship just kept moving in the direction it was already on, until losing it's momentum.
@Lady Wanderer Four things.
1. If you watch the scene you can see the bomber falling from quite a height into the explosion, it wasn't a minor fall. This happens after the pilot has been taken out and the bomber has become uncontrolable. So before the explosion and the death of the pilot the bomber was well above the point of impact.
In the same shot we see the explosion reach little higher than the border of the frame, the same border the bomber dropped from. Therefore we can conclude that the explosion did not reach much higher than the bombers original course minus the loss from lacking a pilot.
With that info we can conclude that the Bomber could have easily pitched up in order to not be caught in the fireball.
Furthermore, it is debatable if that fireball in itself would have destroyed the bomber. Sure, it would have been singed, but we've seen the Millenium Falcon be engulfed by the flames of the Death Star 2's explosion and it escaped fine.
2. So is it now forbidden to introduce new things into the SW Canon? Does everything have to be a version of a previous ship? Does every future bomber have to act like the Y-wing, B-wing or TIE Bomber?
Not every single bomber has to work like a Y-wing, even in real life we have tactical bombers and strategic bombers. Furthermore, if you look up what purpose this bomber originally had, it becomes quite clear that ship-to-ship combat in space was not it's primary function nor one intended. The Resistance simply used whatever they could get in whatever way it was needed.
3. Applying real-world physics to Star Wars is one of the dumbest things you can do. I used the word momentum because that best decribes what we saw happen in the film, and because momentum or some other mechanism that looks like it in Star Wars space battles seems to be an actual thing. Otherwise not a single space battle since ANH would be correct or physically possible.
4. Look up the test of the Tsar Bomba when talking about bombers not or barely being able to escape the blastzone. Not a common occurance at all, but enough to disprove the claim that no actual bombers like that. Besides, 'work like what' is irrelevant, since this was not what the bomber was designed for. It's like using a bicycle to try and outrun a train and afterwards blaming the bicycle for failing.
It's okay to introduce new things to Star Wars canon.
But not when it goes against basic concepts of scifi/reality; because that breaks the suspension of disbelief(though it's far from the only sin committed by Ruin Johnson).
That's just bad writing and, although Lucas wasn't perfect, hasn't happened nearly as badly in the past.
Just goes to show how Ruin Johnson isn't a Star Wars fan until force-fed a bunch of "canon" books after disney acquisition, and that anyone defending him is just another shill who are afraid of being called "misogynist" on internet.
@@EcchiRevenge Nothing goes against the basics of Star Wars Canon in TLJ. That's just an excuse you people use to avoid having to argue actual things that matter. The exact same can be said for things the Prequels introduced like Midi-chlorians and Force superpowers.
Basically you're saying: "Well, Lucas pretty much fucked up the entire mythos of the Force and contradicted everything Yoda said in ESB, but that's fine. What really brought my blood to a boil was when Rian Johnson introduced a new ship that I don't like"
Furthermore, saying it goes against the basics of scifi and reality is stupid on two levels. 1. Star Wars is more Fantasy than Science Fiction, it's a fairytale in space. 2. Comparing Star Wars to reality is retarded, doing it means every single Star Wars film is awful.
Also, calling him Ruin Johnson and calling other people shills just goes to show you are not interested in discussion, but that you just want to insult people that don't agree with your point of view. Congratulations, you've just shown yourself to be part of a toxic fanbase.
Make it:
Harder
Better
Faster
Stronger
Believe it or not, the resistance does not have that much money after the new republic was destroyed, and the amount of ships they had constructed
@@MikeJProto I'm seriously hoping you didn't miss that joke.
Our work is never over
Do it
Work it
Make it
Makes us
thats what she said
Theres a reason that the Resistance Heavy Bombers are shaped that way, actually--their shape is similar to that of a coffin, and if you are flying in one of them under any circumstances you are guaranteed to die.
lmao
Too Big
Too Slow
To Squishy
Too Dumb
Too Overcomplicated
The bombers were meant to engage and destroy old Imperial holdouts away from any significant fire at high altitudes. It goes to show how desperate the Resistance is because that's all they got.
@@Bryan-dr5qy It's like using WW II era bombers in modern warfare. Good luck with that.
@@Daimon-X Or using the B-17 to bomb battleships. The B-17 may be a bomber, but you're using it wrong. Same situation in my eyes.
@@Daimon-X When you're desperate, have no resources and literally rely on old leftovers you take what you can get.
I don’t think the system works.
B, K, and Y wings exist for a reason.
K wing doesn't (at least not yet)
The f**king TIE Bomber is 100 times better than this
@@admin.slayerenryu ya at least the tie bomber can't be targeted by turbolasers
@@ryanestes7331 At least the crew have a life expectancy more than 10 minutes
Kennedy yeah, they have a 30 minute life expectancy
I feel like the Starfortress was made far more for planetary sieges at high altitude, beyond the ranges of most ground-based AA, and with an escort of fighters. Similar to the Superfortress it was based off of.
Edit: This is my most liked comment so far. Thank you all!
I agree.
The Superfortress, and other similar bombers, could hit naval vessels, but this required surprise and very high attitude, as well as air Superiority. Look up the destruction of force z as a good example, the Japanese sunk the HMS Prince of Wales, and invincible I believe. But those ships had little to no fighter cover, it would have been suicide strike otherwise.
And I believe it was stated in the cross-section reference book for TLJ, that the Resistance Bombers were often used for aid relief missions by the Resistance, dropping food stuff and other supplies. I think it is best to stay that they were never intended for Space Combat.
I have a better idea. Position a gunship in the planet's orbit and then it's immune to long range AA. You know use normal ships...
Ditto. The Star Fortress only makes sense if it's supported by other craft. It's as if it was made to tackle a problem for the least cost the NR faced... How to bring enough of a payload to a relatively stationary target, to destroy it outright. If one can kill a ship, then, considering they were likely built with the idea that they all go out and come back, I'd say they were intended for planetary installations with greater power and shield capability.
But outside of that mission profile, it's not a good craft. Effective at the one thing it can do... But highly unlikely to ever reach it's destination to carry out it's function. And considering how easyily the Tie's shot them down, I'd go further to say, they were either made to not get involved in Dog Fights, or involved in Dog Fights that don't involve military grade ships, like pirates or smuggler's.
The part that truly aggravates me about that battle is that Poe gets blamed. See it starts with all the resistance units in position to attack. They must have spent hours prepping for the assault, time they could have been using to evacuate. There's no way Leia didnt know the plan and sign off on it. For her to pull the plug half way through makes no sense! But it gets worse: Leia is in command. She could have called those bombers back with one order. Poe doesn't have the authority to override her. Leia allowed the attack to proceed and then dumped the blame on Poe. Poe Did Nothing Wrong.
Fr lol
Poe is a man and, men are wrong
Agree, if they turned they would have been massacred anyways, Poe couldn't take a good choice so he took the least bad.
To be honest I could see a lot of the pilots simply following Poe's lead because he is beloved by the fleet. He's considered an ace pilot that truly cares about the cause. He did contribute to taking down Starkiller Base which to them was an hour ago.
But I agree I don't believe Leia pushed hard enough to call the bombers back(it's been a long time since I've seen this film). At some point, Leia conceded that sacrificing the bombers was the best movie(with deep regrets). It sounded like she reprimanded Poe to save face(I'm sure some of the fleet disagreed with Poe and expected some backlash). Demoting Poe imo was a step gone too far.
Leia as bombers are blowing up: damn haldo for recommending that dealership this is not worth the 30% discount
Leia: Not even the buy one get one free deal would've made this worth it
While Star Wars space combat has always been inspired by WW2 aerial/naval warfare, the Resistance bomber has a way too blatant WW2-y appearance. It's so WW2-y that it breaks immersion. I mean even the turreted laser cannons look like WW2 MGs and they even have iron sights! That ship would fit into Wolfenstein or something but it just is so out of place in Star Wars.
Not really since World War II planes were not that retarded for their time, it's closer to the nutjob projects the Germans had.
I agree. I think they could have done it much better while still maintaining that WW2 feel. Cause obviously dogfights look much more exciting than just watching missiles flying.
@@CliffuckingBooth In retrospect, it's closer to WWI Zeppelin bombers if anything, there's a reason those didn't make it to part 2.
It would've been far more fun if they decided to actually look at WW2 naval combat rather than Doolittle raid a moving target without air superiority.
At this point i even have to wonder why they didn't simply "skip (slide?) bomb" or turn the bomber bottom to face a target and drop payload considering range is near infinite in space.
The tactics in the fighter roles in Return would be more closely to the Cold War. Mainly US naval vs the Soviet Union. Watch how the rebel fighter fly in a loose deuce formation, while the Empire flew in a welded wing formation.
@@essexclass8168 Exactly. Again, poorly written movie :/
When I first saw the trailer I thought they were going to be some mass produced successor to the Nebulon-b frigate, and was really excited for a kickass space battle.
There was no kickass space battle.
Good, just like Force Users...space battles are over-saturated.
@@Clay3613 Please share with me your abundance of interesting and compelling space battles.
I thought same thing. Frankly, the trailers are the only thing about this movie worth watching again.
I thought the same thing. I wanted my big space battle, and instead I got this. It was pretty, but it didn't make sense.
Yeah I thought those things were Assault Frigates.
I see one use for the bomber. Use it as a high atmosphere or orbital ordinance for planetary bombardment. Have it stay out of range of planetary defence weapons and deal a ton of damage without dedicating a much larger ship.
Kinda niche but thats the best I got.
Yeah, I think it would belong to a planetary militia, used to conduct bombings from high altitude against insurgents or enemy targets on the ground.
But the fact we have to come up with logical explanations to make this thing fit in the Star Wars universe shows that it’s bad design and poor writing.
Also assaulting orbital defense stations like the shield gate or a Golan defense platform
They would work alright as a long range guided torpedo bomber. They drop fat torpedoes out of their fat bays, but hang back from the action.
Maybe have a bomber or two in the back loaded with anti-fighter Missiles instead of torps to cover its buddies in case some enemy fighters try something.
Won't the bombs burn in the atmosphere? And AA would obliterate those. So I'll narrow it down even further, Low altitude, to use on unarmed enemies, or to bust some weird ass bunker.
@@MR_Foffe proper construction would prevent the bombs from burning on entry. And point defence systems would be hard pressed to destroy that much ordinance and alot could still get through.
There is a way to increase effectiveness without changing a thing. According to the Vice-Admiral, we can just ram them at hyperspeed.
Thomas Yap truth! Why has there not been a hyperspace bomb? Strap a hyperdrive to an explosive payload and navigate it to a set distance and watch the destruction.
They do have hyperdrives! thats the solution, kamikaze hiperdrive dumbships.
They could use a droid to activate the lightspeed, heck get rid of the spaceship and just leave the hyperdrive with something heavy. Make it a hyperspeed missile
I get the joke, and its hilarious, but arn't hyper space drives Uber exspensive/resource intensive?
Imagine this, you make a missile with a hyperdrive and some heavy metal say like tungsten, shot it at lightspeed and you shoot down a star destroyer. Instead you have a squad of X-wings, bombers and more (some with hyperdrive), a pilot and ammunition for each one, to take one star destroyer and not all will come back.It simply can't compare on with each other.
6:10
That actually makes a lot of sense. Perhaps they weren't actually ordered and built as star-fighters. Maybe the Resistance came across a dozen or so medium-sized unwieldy cargo ships and thought "Let's turn these into bombers?" And they ended up more awkward and incompetent than the techs thought they would be.
The Rebellion used unarmed transports in combat situations, so I could see the Resistance do something similar.
You do realize the New Republic had a dedicated military right? That they probably fought against the Vong and other hostile, even remnant empires right? They even set up military outposts in the outer rim like the Empire did. I doubt the Resistance only had three cruisers and a handful of garbage bombers to their name. Clearly they knew where that military base that got obliterated by the Dreadnought was.
I fail to believe that after the First Order arrived, the entire New Republic military was wiped out. It'd be equivalent to the capital of the US getting nuke, damn sure the entire world is going to mobilize to find who is responsible. Where in the fook is the New Republic military?
@@kamieaston3016 According to Cannon (you're quoting Legends) the new Republic forbade having any serious military in the galaxy
@@trotfox1138 Yeah if we're talking the new Disney canon I give zero shits about because it literally killed off legends; no thanks.
If that's the case the New Republic deserved to be destroyed because they literally repeated the same mistake that destroyed the first Republic in the Prequels. Disallowing any military force whatsoever is the stupidest concept I can think of, it worked in the Prequels because that Republic stood for so long unopposed. Here there were so many warlords left over and criminal syndicates that took over the galaxy, not to mention the lack of authority and order causing most of the crimes we see anyway.
Nothing against you, but the new Canon sucks. I don't care how many sequel fans say it's the new shit, Disney literally nuked Legends and tried to copy cat the Originals and Prequels for a quick buck. I have zero respect for that and I'll admit that all day.
,@@kamieaston3016 I lost interest after the second sequel movie, but unless it was retconned, there was no new republic military. Leia was either on thin ice or kicked out of government for being a war monger because she talked about there being imperial remnants left and wanted to get a military to defend the new republic. It kind of became a cross of a Churchhill and original trilogy situation. The resistance existed off of the goodwill of companies and the common man saw them as warmongers at worst and loons at best. If they had any military it was likely the equivalent of the Naboo military back in phantom menace, entirely ceremonial and never seeing use. Again this stuff might have gotten retconned, the majority of my knowledge came from the force awakens vehicle cross-section book. More specifically the resistance transport and the resistance x-wing if you want to look yourself.
I think that the fortress was definitely a repurposed land based bomber
I always thought that. Something old and obsolete that the resistance repurposed not because it was good but because it was all they had.
It looks like a ship optimised to destroy buildings, like a strategic bomber, but the resistance is using it on a capital ship.
It might have been a low to mid altitude aircraft but was vacuum sealed like the LAAT gunship
I thought it would work better as a high altitude drop vessel, for something like jetpack armed airborne troopers. That way the design works, and it's speed/durability don't affect it. That or a Droid dropship
Sooo why wasn’t it used at Star killer base😖🤔
I had assumed, when I saw these things, that they weren't intended to be used in combat at all. I thought that, much like a lot of the rebellion's assets, that they were ordinary ships used for commercial use that were simply used militarily out of necessity. Kind of like the GR-75s, the use of which was extremely limited in actual combat.
When I heard that they were in fact dedicated bombers designed to do this kind of job, I just had to wonder what the hell was going on.
Yeah. Even watching Last Jedi, I was wondering why the hell this thing existed.
At least it looks cool.
Its because disney has to sell toys
@@insertmemorableusernameher6795 Still. You can tell just by looking, that it is a horribly designed bomber. If that was shown off to an actual military, they would strip it apart, and use its parts for an actual bomber.
That was also peoples reaction to the movie itself.
They really wanted a ww2 style bombing run in space, so they made the bombers really slow so the star fighters can zoom around and pick them off while they take a while to get to the ship.
When I first saw those dumb Heavy Bombers, I thought, "Oh, they must have a big hatch along the front so they can fire off a huge volley of torpedoes all at once." I was expecting a fireworks show of missiles coming down on the Dreadnought like a hailstorm of fire and brimstone.
Then I saw the bombs they were transporting and and how they were deployed and thought, "Wait, this is a joke, right? I know the Resistance isn't exactly on par with the First Order in terms of technology, but there's no way they would use something like this! Heck, no company in their right mind would try to sell something that atrocious because they'd be laughed out of the market! Did they refit a bunch of garbage haulers or something? Because that's all a ship like this would be good for - moving garbage to a different site and dumping it!"
There was so much space on the Heavy Bombers to attach turrets, too! If they'd been designed like that, if they'd been these miniature fortresses the wade into a battle and just blast anything that comes into their firing range, I could see them being VERY effective, but, no, they're glorified garbage haulers! Worthless!
Dude, that would be awesome if they were launching guided missiles out the front. With a crew of 3, the pilot, gunner, and guided missile operator.
That would be an interesting ship design to see.
Yeah, I'd have to agree with you here. Turn that massive bomb bay into a missile rack, and you'd get something that could fling dozens of missiles downrange, a true missile boat. But no, bombs. Bombs make sense against a space target.
Hammers are even better because they are cheaper and you can have even more of them! Replace bombs with cheaper hammers & it's possible to buy twice as much Heavy Bombers!
The Heavy Bombers being re-purposed garbage haulers makes a lot of sense honestly...
Patrick if I got a choice to pick between a crappy slow bomber and a Hyena bomber, I would rather pick the latter.
Hey who remembers when star wars actually acknowledge shielding.
You actually think the resistance has the funding for shields on all their ships?
@@MikeJProto Only the comics and games showed the shields. Shields didn't matter unless they were for capital ships only.
JJ remembered! So much that he made them not work in atmosphere 🤦
@@JamesMDavis1 Uh...
Empire Strikes Back? Hoth rebel base? The entire reason why the Empire deployed the AT-ATs in a ground assault instead of obliterating them from orbit?
Thye poor as shit
I never saw this thing as a bomber. This thing reminds me of something that you would use to transport grain; it loads up, flys to a location, hovers over a container, and then drops off its payload. But with the alliance being desperate they retrofitted these things as “bombers”. As a transport vessel this thing doesn’t have to be super fast or durable, it just needs to have capacity.
But if that was the case, they should have showen that.
That would type of explanation would make a lot of sense. It doesn't even need to be for just grain either, dirt, rocks, water, etc... basically anything that could just be poured out, the basic design would work perfectly for. I am going to say that's going to be my personal head cannon.
They’d probably be better in in-atmosphere bombing missions. Like bombing first order bases. Keeping them completely out of space combat
Yeah but only ones that dont fight back
Jakob Schöning well not unless they’re high enough to where the defenses can’t accurately target them and they’ve got a wing of fighters for defense
@@williamnelson5549 well that depends on the abilities of the ground based AA, especially as one hit bomber could endanger the whole squadron. And you would need air superiority as well, even with a wing of fighters
Jakob Schöning that is true. Either way a lot of them are going to get shot down. If only they had shields then maybe they could stand a better chance at what they’re thrown in to
according to lore, tat was their purpose
Resistance heavy bomber: exist
B-wing: IM I A JOKE TO YOU?????
Resistance heavy bomber: exist
Y-Wing: *Laughs in viability*
TIE Bomber: *Laughs in compactness*
B-Wing: *Laughs in superiority*
Hyena Droid Bomber: *Laughs in maneuverability*
Resistance Bomber: You guys always act like your better than me!
Y-wing:...
TIE Bomber:...
B-wing:...
Hyena Droid Bomber:...
@@jeremychicken3339 K-Wing: "Oh, that is the least fancy thing I have ever heard."
Resistance Bomber: SEE!?!? Why do you do this?
@@homingninja2037 *b-17*
Bombers in space shouldn't follow the design logic of the WWII Boeing classes (Flying Fortress, liberator, Mitchell, etc.) but rather that of the Dauntless or Swordfish Torpedo bombers. With the exception of the sinking of the Tirpitz, in naval warfare do we rarely see squadrons of heavy bombers being used to attack ships, they're better suited for use against ground targets like bunkers and even entire cities. Torpedo bombers are small lighter craft that are meant to swoop in and deploy their ordinance and immediately withdraw to their mothership to reload and attack again. In the case of Star Wars, bombers should be essentially fighters but equipped with heavy anti ship ordinance, like a Y-Wing equipped with one, two, or four, high yield torpedoes in special launchers that it would fly in close to an enemy ship quickly, fire off its load with little margin for error, and then pull out.
The Design makes sense, the way they were used didn't. Like they never even heard of flanking.
If you're fighting an enemy like the FO which relies on slow moving, heavily armored capital ships you'll need to weaken or destroy them swiftly before they get in range because the Restistance frigates and even the Calamari Cruisers can't take on Insurgent class star destroyers point blank.
Rearming fighters while engaged in battle is risky, especially if you rely on every single one to make it. Also guided amminutions like self propelling torpedos and such can be shot down by point defense systems while a fuckton of bombs can't.
What you just described was Cygnus Spaceworks' Missile Boat from the X-Wing games - it dropped out of hyperspace, used it's Sub-Light Amplification Module overdrive system to boost in towards its target, drop a heavy payload at point-blank range and then used the rest of the overdrive charge to get the heck out of there. However, it also had a large secondary warhead launcher that was carrying 40 Advanced Concussion Missiles and utilized a tractor beam system, meaning it could easily engage and take out enemy starfighters with minimal effort. its drawbacks were lighter armor and shielding than the Assault Gunboat it was initially based on, only a single laser cannon (most often used to feed energy into the overdrive instead of actual dogfighting) and nos econdary weapons like ion cannons, so it wasn't without its drawbacks.
i just made a comment that where i said the only thing i could see them useful for was high altitude planetary bombers, like the Flying fortress, glad I'm not the only one that saw the similarities.
@@sebastianleff6466 you actually need to achieve air superiority to use these slowpokes. Heck, orbital bombardment from capital ship is actually a thing and more effective.
@@afkbeto true but there is something to be said for precision strikes but yeah with the rest of star wars tech they do become rather useless
I love how they are slower than a b 52 bomber, and their payload has to be dropped significantly closer because in star wars they fogot about homing missils/bombs.
I know they wanted to get the full authentic experience of a bomber(in a stupid, suicidal way) but couldn't the bombs only need the target to be in range and then released? Like maybe there's a range limit for the target lock-on to be operable. Since supporters of this questionable sequence say the bombs are "magnetic", there's no need to be perfectly on top of the target like this. The bombers could have attempted circling/surrounding the target and let the bombs loose in multiple directions. It just doesn't make sense to require the bombers to use outdated technology limits when these bombers should be suitably more advanced than their WW2 counterparts.
As a former EVE player, all of EVE's ships have a role whether it is considered a trash ship or not.
This bomber both looks and feelss like a cargo freighter.
Ouch
0of
sorry im dumb but what is EVE
Interesting analysis. The bomb "bay" if you could call it that makes sense if it was to be loaded with stacked shipping containers. They would just load straight out of the bottom one after the other like the battle droids in Ep 1. This is definitely a retrofitted light cargo ship. Head canon accepted.
@@drballsworth4612 Eve is Adam's wife. lol jk
You prob already look it up. If not then it's an online spaceship game with clans, empire, nation, economy, and stuff.
It still gets me that people still try to defend tr he Starfortress over the Y-wing by just saying, "Oh well it has over a thousand bomb, you'd need 50 Y-wings to equal that firepower." All the firepower in the galaxy doesn't mean any thing if you can't get into range to use it.
Phillip Gouthier yes but flying in 52 Y-wings requires 52-104 people (depending on Y-wing variant) compared to 4 on a Starfortress.
And?
The Y Wing is wildly better in every way, especially 50 of them
ItsSpecialHands it’s also how you kill 52 people over 30 minutes
@@Ty-yt3lj as opposed to the heavy bombers that had absolutely zero survivors whilst attacking an already semi disabled ship
Resistance: Invents railgun that can destroy dreadnoughts
Also Resistance: Wastes it on slow bombers that fire down for no reason
Duncan McOkiner when did they invent that? Though the resistance did also have field generators protecting their HQ, so they clearly have a lot of advanced tech
The magnetic acceleration tech is what allows the bombs to "drop" from the bomber as if there was gravity. Although, I wouldn't equate it to a railgun at all. It seems way too underpowered.
@Yap Jin missiles are self propelled, they, in theory aren't meant to be used as railgun munition. but if the resistance upscaled the "railgun" they would get a galaxy gun
@@apollon5205 Fire it with a railgun for speed and have its thrusters guide it, congratulations, you've made a SMART railgun.
Why even put it on a Bomber? Put the torpedo tubes on capital ships.
It is a railgun by all accounts so just put more power behind it and you have something capable of ripping apart dreadnoughts.
proton torpedos maybe rail assisted already etc
I remember watching that scene for the first time and thinking, "are you kidding me? My grandmother could move faster than that!"
Hahaha lol😁
Your grandma in a triplane would effortlessly fly rings around the terrorist barges and wipe out the Resistance
I'm with you, man. I keep rubbing my chin and thinking "But, why?". A former military man, myself, I just don't really see anyway these ships could work effectively, unless they're completely cheap as dirt. Even an out-of-date X-Wing has torpedoes, shields, decent speed, et cetera. Plus, if you lose an X-Wing, you're down a pilot and a droid - not a small crew. The only thing I can think is that these bombers must have been some kind of re-purposed civilian vessels. They've got a crap profile which makes them big, easy targets, no real shielding, main weapons fixed downward instead of shotgun-forward, they're slow, and they don't even have any kind of real stealth advantage. The Leia of my youth would never employ such vessels. She'd have them broken down and made into something better. Or at least used with droid crews, so you're not losing any living sapient resistance members.
Can I ask how long have you been thinking about this, because it took me ten seconds to figure out why you use these instead of more snub fighters? One of these carries a payload to knock out a dreadnaught, think about that. A freighter sized vessel can knock out a vessel a thousand times its mass. Poe misused them, he deployed too many, in too tight a formation with too few fighters to escort them. Had he sent half of them more would have survived, the chances they all died in a chain reaction would have been reduced, because the fighters would have had an easier job protecting them, all that would likely mean that the lead bomber would have destroyed the dreadnaught on its own. These things have a four-man crew the Rebels lost more pilots in the battle of Scariff in one man fighters than the Resistance lost in that entire bomber wing.
@@Gibbons3457 You've got some good points, but the debate here isn't how they were deployed, but instead what a crappy design they were. And they're a crappy design. Maybe they'd be better for an atmospheric engagement, but I really don't think so. Cutting their payload down by two-thirds would make them faster and harder to hit due to a smaller profile, as well as still being capable of incredible destruction. As a commander, I wouldn't hedge my bets on just one of them making it through for a single fatal attack. I'd want half of them to break through, accomplish the same thing, and have the survivability to come home to nest, repair, and re-arm. Something as huge as a dreadnaught would also have a wicked-huge target signature, easy for guided torps to lock onto. Heck, if the bombs had been deployed as direct-fire weapons, instead of gravity or magnetic guidance, you can hardly miss something that big - even from a huge distance. The bombers just aren't designed well. Not for this engagement. Not for any close engagement, really. Maybe orbital strikes against ground targets whom can't reach out to shoot back, but that's all I can really think of.
Now that I think about it, had I been a commander in this battle, I would have just scattered all of the bombs behind me into a makeshift minefield. The capital ships would either have to take damage or take a detour, or simply be happy with throwing out fighters. I think that would have been a way better option than charging an obviously superior opponent. The tactical thinking behind this battle was a total mess. They need to hire some folks with actual combat experience, or at least some folks with theoretical combat experience.
They profile's a lot better if it's high above the target, as it's vertical profile is comparable to that of a y-wing, being a bit longer but also a bit narrower and its vital system being a lot narrower.
Oh I see how it is! “Let’s just throw some B1 Battledroids in the cockpit of this coffin and have them fly it on a suicide mission”. What did those droids ever do to you? #DroidLivesMatter
It’s just a crapily designed bomber. Not just in universe, but out. Whoever came up with the idea was obviously inspired by World War II bombers (b-17),But doesn’t need to be. Supriseingly , no-one said ‘no Steve, this is poorly inspired,designed and executed, just use Y-wings in this scene’. It’s just another symptom of the last Jedi’s poor understanding of military strategy.
Not to mention b-17's could actually survive multiple passes by enemy gunfire, being shredded to hell and still able to fly home, compared to these dumb powderkegs where a single laser blows the whole thing.
Rian Johnson wanted a WWII Bomber and that's what he got.
B-17s in real life never sank a battleship. There were several tries (including the Battle of Midway) but never any hits.
@ItburnswhenI Pee Very good point. But my guess is that such nonsense is what happens when the person in charge doesn't give a wet f*** about pre-existing lore and just wants to jam their own nonsensical ideas into an existing franchise...
Ranek Eisenkralle exactly
If anything I think you're being too nice to the RHB (resistance heavy bomber) The things aren't just slow, they're ridiculously slow, I've said it before, I think ACTUAL WWII era bombers could outperform these things. IN SPACE! And that actually defies the laws of physics.
Not if you use Doctor Who Gravity Bubbles.
I would rather have a fuck ton of b wings than the heavy bomber because the b wing requires skill and competence which is something that the rebellion and first order clearly lack.
@@tomtheconqerur Resistance mate, the Rebellion would make short work of the both of them even at there weakest
Yes, exactly. Give me B-Wings, Y-Wings, X-Wings with torpedo launchers. Hell give me transport's laden with explosives. ANYTHING but the RHB.
I mean, if you detonated the bombs in a safe range/close you could propel the bomber in space, but you might blow yourself up.
It shouldn't be a triangle, it should be a square. The fourth point should be production effort.
It will do no good to have a perfect star fighter if you can only produce a handful of them.
An amazing point. It's why the b wing never hit mass production and was so rare. It was an amazingly powerful ship but was ridiculously expensive per unit. That's why the TIE bomber is arguably better: for every 1 b wing you can make, you can make 5 TIE bombers and therefore carry more firepower
Even still, with such a massive ship and so much ordnance, this would still probably be more expensive than producing a bunch more trusty Y-Wings. Hell, even getting a bunch of surplus Tie-bombers and upgrading them would probably be cheaper.
Let’s be honest, this bomber makes little to no sense in the Star Wars universe because it isn’t from the Star Wars universe.
Someone wanted a WWII bombing run, but in space, and they put it in a Star Wars movie. The only role this ship makes sense in is in-atmosphere bombing, just like WWII bombers.
In-universe, that is what they were designed for. The only reason the Resistance used them in space is because they were all they had. When you're an underfunded, understaffed Rebellion, prepetually short on everything, you take what you can get and be thankful. Same deal with the GR-75s and the original Rebellion. It's a Watsonian flaw, but not a Doylist one.
@Glaydson Coelho Easy answer. They didn't have any left? How do we know? because they didn't have any. A very easy line of logic. Also just look at the comment he's replying to, Y-wings don't carry the firepower to cripple a dreadnaught. How many Torps Ion or Proton would you need to knock out that Dreadnaught we don't know but it took 10+ to ion a Star Destroyer so a lto is what I can say.
If you’re complaining, “no thought was put into this, someone just wanted WWII dogfights in space,” I’ve got some bad news about George Lucas...literally using WWII fighter footage to show his special effects guys what he wanted the combat to look like.
Because Moron Johnson said so, he just put it in there without any regard for space and etc. That's it. There is no other explanation
thejanusproject32 he’s following in some familiar footsteps. George Lucas would use WWII dogfight footage in his story reels so the special effects guys knew what he wanted the fights to look like. You’re very late to this party.
I don't think you see the pure genius of this ship. While its massive payload and power is worthless, the fact that it moves so slowly is brilliant. The First Order aren't use to taking on people as stupid as they are, as such they're more likely to sympathise with those in the ship and let them through. The worthless durability is also symbolic of how everyone in the sequel trilogy are not just slow in mind and body, but also weak as waterboarded tofu unless their names are Rey or Rey or potentially Rey. I think the ship is perfect because it manages to summarise the entirety of the trilogy in one ship. Slow, easily ripped apart, but it sure does like to assault the fanbase.
You're the first person to use the brain at 100% capacity
Nemesis Bloodryche You, Sir, are a true artist.
Couldn't have put it any better. 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
This is the best summary I've read in a while. Poetry!
Beautiful
The resistance heavy bomber looks and acts like a boot leg B-wing. Am I alone on this.
No
B Wing could at least do the job well without fucking itself up. B Wing was an incredible machine. This isn't
No, I am alone.
all alone AND I FEEEL SO ALL ALOOONE(doodoodoootdoootdootdootdoodoodoo) NO ONES GONNA FIX ME WHEN IM BROKE WOAOAOH HOW DO YOU CRY WITH INANIMATE EYES YOURE NEVER GONNA FLY WITH THE WAY THAT YOU ARE AND I FEEEL SO ALL ALOOONE (doodoodootdootdootdootdoodoodoo)
Low-rent knockoff, without the powerful engines or fantastic weapon loadout lol
I actually always thought that these were really ancient ships, made and used for some small planetary revolt in the Outer Rim, and they really were the only thing the Resistance could afford.
"How do we fix this?"
You replace this with a Y-wing.
With A LOT of Y-wings then (and giving that they still can fly..)
Build Y wings, or the Naval Tactical Bombers the Republic had, with the split wing design similar to the ARC 170 and later the X wing. While you're at it, make the job cannons on the Y wings more durable.
Or B wings
Or K wings.
Resistance pilot: Don't worry guys, we got this! Fly in a tight formation and nothing bad will happen!
(A few seconds later)
Resistance pilot: OH MY GOD!!!!
**bombers fly in tight formation**
Resistance Bomber Pilot: "I am a genius!!"
**bombers get shredded by TIE Fighters**
Resistance Bomber Pilot: OHHHH NOOOOO!!!!
Poe: Should have just fly under the dreadnought and shoot those cannons instead.
BB-8: Swears in Droid.
What happened with the old ship designers? Did they die in the Galactic Civil war?
Hopefully. If that beast was my design I would want to be dead. That said technology can tend to move backward for a losing faction. Lack of funding, constant losing and outright desperation can be the only reason to use these bombers.
They are likely still around, they were just making spaceships for the New Republic working with big companies like Incom or CEC. Government contracts are where the big credits are at, helping out the plucky freedom fighters don't satisfy the shareholders. The Resistance is operating using handouts, military surplus, and salvage. The fact they got a batch of newer model X-Wings is likely a fluke, or a bit of (from the NR's government's perspective) corruption with some General selling a squadron off the books.
They've been sent to Gulags by SJW New Republic for cooperating with Empire. New Republic hired new ones based on skin colour and sex instead of skill.
@@williammagoffin9324 t70 was already a prototype by the time of Jakku. T85 were considered new and plucky,and they couldn't spare any even for Poe dameron
J Melius but they weren’t the losing faction when these were made unless the made them in the like week between the two movies
I love the concept of turning the Heavy bomber into a super-heavy space dive bomber. Have the craft have an engine that can be safely overcharged (or boosted to some degree). The speed afforded by the booster will allow the bomber to rapidly close the distance to its target, deploy its bombs at speed (no true torpedo launchers allows to maybe carry even more bombs), and then break away and engage the booster again. It could be supremely effective when coordinated well with friendly capital ships and fighters, but is prone to several weaknesses, as it would still be vulnerable before and after the maneuver. As an added interesting worldbuilding balance element, constraint the powerplant so the craft can't boost and have shields at the same time. This adds significant danger to the bombing maneuver, as it would be vulnerable for brief moments before the shields get reactivated. This means the bomber will have to be protected while it lines up towards its target, and will still be vulnerable after and before the approach and break away maneuvers, respectively. It maintains the highly focused nature of the ship, makes it viable, while still being vulnerable. I think it would also support a rare "aggressive" bomber strategy that would be an interesting tactic that the NR/Resistance developed against the First Order.
The bomber was designed as an homage to WW2 bombers such as the B-17 ( which had a terrible mortality rate ). The problem is that the Allies in WW2 had no better option than to carpet bomb Axis facilities. Whereas in Star Wars, this tactic seems stupid and unnecessary with the spacecraft at hand ( no Y-Wings? no B-Wings? ). So, the point of the entire sequence in the film was to elicit an emotion from the audience without any thought to logic or military strategy. The whole film is full of these "moments" where characters do really stupid things for no logical reason just to subvert the audience expectations are draw an emotion.
Well B-17's took a beating because they underestimated the Luftwaffe's ability to offer daylight raid resistance or their tactics dealing with large formations of slow targets. When the Allies started to roll out longer range escorts like the P-51's, the B-17's got the job done with less casualties. Too bad the Resistance didn't subscribe to fighter escorts for bombers.... whoops!
if it actually looked like a B-17 it would be better, lower target silhouette and probably would be faster... not to mention the homage would have been easier to spot...
the B-17 was designed as a Strategic Bomber, something that it did surprisingly well against industrial centres, with successes rating to hitting the factory, but leaving the preschool next door untouched. Bomber Command with the RAF conducted carpet bombing raids during the night where they had the advantage of numbers and cover.
the thing about the B-17 was the fact that there were 250-1000+ bombers taking place in each raid. not 15 with no escorts
The carpet bombing tactic is made obsolete by the existence of guided weapons. I could still see the bad guys do it for the terror factor, but this bomber, aside from being one of the worst design ever, simply doesn't fit into the Resistance war doctrine.
That being said, if we want to speculate what this craft could have been designed to do, carpet bombing fits rather well. I found this rather disturbing in the context of the universe as the only place this would be useful would be if you had a large low density area of targets without any credible threat to the craft itself. No anti-aircraft weapons. No interceptors. At most moderately small arms. The only scenario I can think of that fits the design well is the suppression of lightly if not unarmed large scale populations. This craft was a tool of oppression to be used against people who can't fight back. Either this was surplus stock from a deal with the empire that didn't go through, or I have to seriously wonder what kind of people the resistance had to deal with to acquire their armaments.
Working nine hour shifts in a factory is boring. Thanks for the relaxing video!!! Such a stress relief
Try 27
@@zaab-yaoh9302 I usually run around sixty hour weeks bro
A 60 hour week is like working in a war economy- how did that happen
21, at a distribution center, and another 13 and half the day after
@@kevinwise1997 that's nothing. I work sixty to seventy hour weeks
Wait a second, the Resistance could have easily oriented the vessels to make the bombs fall from afar, but in the direction of the weak spot, like a long range cannon or something. The electromagnetic launchers only launch the bombs in the direction or the port, which can be oriented anywhere! All the vessels could have easily manuevered out of the bomb barrage. Heck, since the First Law of Motion always applies, you could have it from any direction they wished for!
Clearly, the Resistance could have abused the launching system to their advantage, if they thought laterally. Remember, the enemy's gate is down.
Oh if they fell from afar it would have its purposes. Considering a massive buckshot. But that wouldn't get us pretty shots, of course, and so while it's militarily viable it's cinematically uninteresting.
If you really start entering the physics department, all of Star Wars equipment is kinds ridiculous. Aerodynamics in space? Do these lasers travel at limited speed and/or limited range? Why can't the computers just near-instantly adjust a laser cannon to hit a target? For that matter, if you can hyper-jump, wouldn't you always have several minutes to annihilate an enemy fleet before its crew is even woken up? And why the fuck does a galactic civilization still requre humanoid pilots on their ships?
@@sorsocksfake a bunch of space shotguns spaming explosive buckshot across a wide area of ship(s) sounds pretty epic in my book. heck its kind of an offensive mine field
Yeah the bombs falling bit sort of makes their whole engagement moot. They're in space, the bombs were launched because they sure as hell didn't fall. Not only that, but it took one payload to down a capital ship. Tell me why they don't orient these things to shit out a cloud of bombs from a safe distance? One ship out of 25 surviving to land its full payload is way worse in every rational metric than having 25 ships land a mere 4% of their payloads and survive.
Fuck everyone involved with trying to direct space combat in this new trilogy. It's like they've never encountered space operas before or even watched any of the six previous films which share the name.
All I can think of is Star Trek the wrath of Khan.....
@@RadmanTheWise the real question is Why the fuck aren't they putting those bombs into capital grade MACs a and firing them at relativistic velocities? They could be fired from a distance of a few light seconds so that dreadnought would have no way of firing back, and it would have no way to dodge them. Hell, they could pull off something like in ender's game and go through hyperspace above or behind the dreadnought. I bet that engines aren't shielded as well as front armor, and if they are designed similliar to Venator-class, they connect straight to main powerplant.
B17 Crews: "we'll have some serious documentation about our missions"
Disney: "nah fam"
I get that star wars is WW2 dogfights in space, I can suspend my disbelief that much. Yes these are supposed to be similar to flying fortresses with gunnery equipment and a bomb bay.
But when I saw those large things crawling across the screen I was both mad at the stupid first order for not having an adequately protected vessel and the resistance for thinking that this was a viable strategy.
Well look at the Capital ships off WW2, no amount of AAA saved them to air raids. Just slowed down the attack.
@@dosbrostacozzinc.6856 Yes, but they were raided by fast moving torpedo/dive bombers... Like the X-wing and Y-wing...
A B17 could drop hundreds of bombs, and not hit a single target. But a dive bomber's chances of hitting SKYROCKETS compared to a heavy bomber
And WW2 bombers didn't have their bombs setup in such a way that it guarantees the destruction of the bomber.
The last bomber died from it's own payload, working as intended.
@@happydemon3038 To be fair, a German 20mm to your bomb bay would probably detonate all the bombs.
There weren't safeties...
@@caelodevorago608 The last bomber wasn't shot in it's bomb bay. It dropped it's bombs, and the ensuing explosion destroyed the bomber. It was killed by it's own payload, not enemy fire.
Why fly these things when you still have Y- and B-wings, hell I'd rather fly a Tie-Bomber.
Id rather fly an actual B17... At least it has a smaller Profile rather than Literally broadside of a Barn.
@@tanith117 A barn? Those things looked bigger than a football field. Even stormtroopers flying TIE fighters with beer goggles couldn't miss hitting these bombers.
I would rather fly in a spacesuit with a portable Rocketlouncher than this Thing.
Just crash with lightspeed at anything now
FTL Missiles FTW
Pretty much... Just lightspeed a squadron of fighters into capital ships.. Even if the enemy ships aren't fully destroyed, they would cause mass damage..
Cool scene... Too bad it blew a hole in everything star wars now...
The best part is.
An all-out kamikaze attack would loose less personnel than the actual attack we saw
@@Victor-Baxter Even more so when you can easily put droids in the seat assuming there isn't auto pilot feature that could do the same thing.
Kenny More like Star Wars blew a hole in itself lol, what possible reason is there for NOT doing it? Hell Anakin even does it in the clone wars lmao it’s not a new tactic.
For me here's why they suck:
1. They're too weak and can be easily destroyed (I hate the part when the wrecked tie fighter went to one of those bomber and got triple kills)
2. They're too slow
im pretty sure most of its guns are on the back of it aswell
Star Wars Director’s: slaps roof of SW Plot
“This thing can hold so much bad logic”
How to fix anything: Don't design based on pure emotion.
*dont design based on plot
Lol I doubt the problem was emotion it just seems stupid.
@@leonardocaicedo1273 i think he means that rian johnson has a thing for ww2 bombers and wanted the reference in his movie no matter what.
As opposed to the laser sword wielding space monks. Those are certainly practical.
@@asator0505 then he should have a bombing run planetside, bombs in zero-g is just plane stupid.
They keep trying to replace the Y-Wing and they can't do it. The B-Wing, the K-Wing, the H-Wing, now this new disaster with stubby wings, the Y-Wing is just perfect the way it is. Tiny hit box, laser cannons close together, ion cannon turret, astromech and plenty of bombs, give me a Y-Wing any day over another ship. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Nah. Take it from me: Of the starfighters of the Rebellion that I have encountered, only the Z-95 fared worse than the Y-Wing. The B-Wings had enough protection to avoid a turkey-shoot situation to turn things around, and definitely had the raw power to take down capitals.
@@SabinStargem No offense dude but take it from *me* , the Y-Wing is the best starfighter in Star Wars. It's been a fan favorite since it appeared in the very first movie. The only reason the X-Wing is more popular is because Luke flew it and it got all the glory. People started incorrectly attributing the Y-Wing to having low survivability because of this one battle because only one survived, despite that the only other X-Wing to survive other than Luke was the legendary Wedge who Vader literally let get away(costing probably millions of Imperial lives in the future) and the fact that of the 30 Rebel ships to attack the Death Star, only 8 were Y-Wings. Not only that, the only reason more Y-Wings weren't shown is because as Lucas said himself they only had one Y-Wing left because they built four and Vader destroyed 3. That's still a LOT more X-wings vaped.
In some of the original source material for the Y, it's described as a "hot rod rebel technicians stripped down for parts." It was a fast ship, hence the massive engines and the fact that Gold Squadron made the attack run first. In the Battle of Endor we see a Y-Wing destroy two TIE Interceptors, most likely this is legendary pilot Horton Salm. By the end of the GCW(Galactic Civil War), the Rebels would lose more Y-Wings than other ships only because they flew them more than the other ships. Both in Legends and DU, we do not see them very often with a lot of A-Wings getting vaped in Rebels.
The Y-Wing further gets its reputation as a slow bomber from writers like Michael A. Stackpole, who was pretty much a self-insert author but a damn good one who wasn't shy about letting his favoritism get into his work. The X-Wing novels and the video games in the 90s hammered the point home and to create balance, the Y-Wing became the tortoise bomber it is today. And it's STILL better than the other ships despite all this.
Despite being a bit long, the damn thing takes a licking and keeps on kicking. The X-Wing's wing-mounted cannons, while cool, make it ineffective at anything except midrange. The Y-Wing has the best positioning of laser cannons out of every other ship in the franchise. Right on the nose- you're literally leading with the gun, like the A-10. The ship is basically an armory with two engines attached to it. This new Resistance bomber is more like the B-Wing- it's a mistake. The B-Wing is constantly praised as a capital ship killer despite the only point they seem to make is that it "has ion cannons" which other ships already have... and proton torpedoes, which other ships already have. And the fact that it cannot strafe ground targets effectively at all. So, to say the B-Wing is supposed to replace the Y-Wing is completely asinine.
So I'm sorry but, you're wrong. The Y-Wing is the best ship in the franchise and the only reason they don't want to bother making a cool Resistance Y-Wing is because they want to focus on more exotic-looking designs that are eye-catching. Of course, with fan demand being so high for the Y, they might reverse that decision and give us a new Koensayr model soon enough.
Gotta agree with Barro. The Y-Wing IS superior, especially in comparison with the stupid hunk of scrap that was shown in T.L.J. .
@@commanderjason7786 Whatever that thing was, it doesn't deserve to be called a starfighter. More like a starfailure. Of course, that pretty much describes TLJ in a nutshell. I think everyone was hoping for more space battles in Episode 8, especially after the space battle treat we got in Rogue One. The better films have longer battles, the worse films have more talking.
Episode 4- Lots of major battles, Death Star Escape, Death Star Attack, lots of action. Beautiful.
Episode 5- Battle of Hoth and Asteroid Chase. Awesome space action, emotional war and desperation, classic.
Episode 6- Death Star 2 battle. Endor, climactic, a thrill from beginning to end.
Episode 1- Not a lot of space action. Drastically reduced amount of space battle scenes and screentime. Gungan battle was okay but both took a backseat to the lightsaber fight with Maul.
Episode 2- Lots of talking, most of the action comes at the end, not a lot of screentime for the Battle of Geonosis. The gunship chasing Dooku gets more screentime than the battle.
Episode 3- Beautiful battle in the beginning that is over wayyyyyy too quickly. Nothing else compares, many think it's the best part of the movie.
Episode 7- more battles than Episode 8.
Episode 8- Single decent and short space battle in the beginning, disappointment follows. Battle of Crait feels pointless.
Rogue One- Loved by fans, 1/3 of the movie is a battle.
Conclusion: More WARS = better Star Wars movie.
Yes. I don't care that the X-wing was the one which blew up a Death Star while the Y-Wings were shot down. The Y-Wing is hands-down my favorite Star Wars ship in terms of design and function. It's always been my go-to ship in Star Wars video games just because of its ease of handling,-durability, and astromech compatability. It's just not a ship that is shown its full potential in the movies, except in Rouge One, where 3 of them kick a Destroyer's butt :)
Eck: “The Last Jedi introduced us to the MG-100 StarFortress SF-17 or as I’ll call em for this video...”
Me: “...useless piles of junk.”
I was just curious if the developers even understood the concept of guerilla warfare. Resistance are much smaller than the First Order. Hell they are even smaller than what Rebe Alliance used to be. That's why they were constantly on the run. They even trashed their base as soon as Starkiller got destroyed. So it's difficult to understand why Resistance would use such a immobile spacecraft in a navy where mobility and maneuverability is key. Only chance Resistance has against the First Order is if they constantly move and run away. It would've made more sense if First Order used MG100 bombers. They could've used them sort of like a clean up ship during the movie's pursuit,taking out Resistance ship which ran out of fuel while the dreadnought and stardestroyers follows the remaining Resistance ships. If that was their purpose,I would've at least understand more
I agree. I like to study guerrilla warfare for a hobby, and the biggest thing Is "hit fast, hit hard, then RUN!!!
If you have a chance to take a VIP out you have to take it and you got to use everything
@@lelandbacon1253 like converting spare ships into hyper speed missiles? That would do it.
Chris P Video game Warrior the resistance had exactly 1 Y-wing and no B-wings. You take what you can get.
I just finished a 4 hour project I’m so glad I could come here to relax thank you👌
Well of course it sucks they went backwards in time it’s completely useless and impractical any other bombers would have been better not to mention if they are launched with electromagnetic why don’t they just turn the entire fighter on its side and fire them sideways INTO the enemy that would atleast make more sense then moving over them like idiots
Hell they could've taken out that Mandator with just X-Wings, since Poe's singlehandedly crippled it
They literally made a rapid firing railgun that can destroy a dreadnought and they used it on *THAT* thing.
If only the First Order would have remembered that escort ships are supposed to PROTECT WHAT THEY ARE ESCORTING! By the force of General Hux had the common sense granted to the average Porg he could have wiped out the Resistance
Duncan McOkiner just imagine these mounted on capital ships knocking out star destroyers in seconds, sure the rounds are slow but the targets are too.
@@TheObsidianX
Why is everyone calling Star Destroyers slow? Did everybody forget it used to keep up with the Millenium Falcon's top non-hyperdrive speed in Empire Strikes Back? Only to lose track of it when the Falcon entered an asteroid field?
I think this ship was originally supposed to be a firefighting ship (with water). It had to be modified for battle, covering it in guns and explosives. It’s like trying to turn a Ford transit van into a main battle tank
You don't send a B-17 to fight a battleship
There were bombers designed for sea combat. For example the B-25 Mitchell was a navy bomber and utilized in the Doolittle raids. But I see your point
...actually, the USAAF did exactly that at Midway. It did no damage though, simply because even a large ship is a small and dodgy target for high-altitude bombing.
@@modernwarfarefilms1 B-25s were NOT meant to do what they did on those raids. They pushed the aircraft to the absolute limit to pull that off. Most naval bombers really resembled heavy fighters in their design, being single-engine planes that seated 2 or 3 crewmen and carried limited ordnance (e.g. Douglas TBF Avenger). Put simply, getting a bomber off the deck of a carrier is hard!
@@modernwarfarefilms1 The B-25 was not designed as a naval aircraft at all, and the Doolittle Raid pilots were Army Air Corps, not Navy.
The B-25 WAS used against shipping later in the war, (including a version armed with a 105 mm howitzer!!) but only after the island-hopping campaign captured or built airfields in range of Japanese shipping routes.
@@modernwarfarefilms1 Yes, but you'd usually send in torpedo bombers to deal with ships. such as say an avenger. And that's far closer in size to a fighter than your average bomber. Even the handful of larger designs, such as the Bristol Beaufort are still quite small by the standards of your typical bomber... (it's a light bomber at best, in terms of size). Even the B-25 is only a medium bomber...And the strategies it used against ships were not really all that similar to what the resistance bomber did.
Wait a second, was this ship originally a minelayer?
(No defences and very low speed means its a craft for low intensity operations, whether it likes it or not. But it carries a sufficiently large internal bomb bay to give capital ships second thoughts. So it has to be designed with the intention of delivering weapons when a very large enemy is not there to complain. Therefore, mines...)
Either that or high-altitude planetary bomber for destroying heavily shielded ground bases.
That actually makes sense; especially given how capital ships like dropping out of lightspeed very close to stations and orbital installations.
A few of these could lay a minefield very quickly, if you had some warning of an incoming strike force.
makes a lot of sense
@@udirt Wow, wait wait wait if they are mine layers, why don't they just lay the mines earlier before the damn enemy came.
And yeah, the bombs are black in colour, so definitely good for hiding in space.
@@alexwschan185
So for it to work, we'd have to assume the Resistance leadership are utter and complete, irredeemable irrefutable incorregible infinite imbeciles.
Done :).
When I first saw these ships I thought the "tower" setup akin to a Nebulon B that it was just a whole rack of launch tubes. They would just fire off a ton of bombs from range that would drift toward their target.
Failing that, they'd only really be suited to a carpet bombing mission against ground facilities. I mean hell it's obviously modelled after a WWII strategic bomber, i.e. the SF-17 (B-17).
I could see these things being very powerful with a hyperdrive combined with a Thrawn pincer maneuver. For example the resistance could draw in a first order fleet with a seemingly weak force that would include an interdictor then the bombers hidden in nearby hyperspace lanes would jump in right above and unleash their payload destroying or at least crippling the enemy fleet.
Unfortunately the Resistance Command is a joke when it comes to battle strategy
@@sodreir.8666 the terrorists had most of their competent leaders vaporized in General Hux’s Hyperspace Shotgun Jamboree
*Clearly* they were designed as an industrial cargo loader-A space forklift.
After some consideration, it MIGHT be that this was initially designed as a mine-laying ship with limited self defence capability. Not meant for combat, but just chugging around and laying defensive perimeters around static locations. That could explain why it seems so optimised for the internal carriage of so many small munitions.
Could be that they retrofitted them for the purpose of... Doing what they did.
Of course, if this theory is correct, we’re still left with the problem of why a dedicated mine-layer was even designed, when most ships of a decent size would probably be able to fill the same role and dump small munitions out the back while following a pre-plotted course. Still, though... It’s a mission it seems like it’s optimised for.
I was having similar thoughts. It may be that the ship was built for orbital bombardment, in which case, you wouldn't necessarily want to have the ship pointed at your target. on that assumption, you would have already achieved space superiority, and you would be way too high for planetary defense weapons to be very effective, and your targets would be city sized instead of airlock sized, so relatively slow attack speed speed and would be beneficial to the mission.
but I completely agree on the application theory. I don't think they were intended to attack capital ships, but they were the only thing that could focus enough firepower to take out that ship, and at that point, it was a decision between throwing away a fleet of bombers, or having those cannons in firing range.
Here is the biggest problem with the “Its based on WWII Ariel combat like in the OT” defense.
Allied B-52 Super fortress were never ever used in this manner. They had terrible aim and mobility, as such precision strikes were practically impossible to make. That’s why allies used them in carpet bombing campaigns in mass indiscriminate attacks against cities and military targets. Because less then 20% of the payload was guaranteed to hit its target.
You know what B-52s were never used for?
Attacking aircraft carriers or battleships!
And why because the chances of a bomber attacking a much smaller and faster target, with AA defenses and air support, was basically suicidal. They were meant to unleash massive destruction against stationary targets on the ground, not take out heavily armed and defended mobile targets.
And even with that, the resistance is still poorly designed. Granted Star Wars weapons are more powerful then bullets so I might be wrong here. But the B-52 could take some damage and dish it out too with numerous AA guns stashed in its hull. Also while they didn’t have a snowball in hell’s chance of outrunning a mustang or zero, even they were never that slow.
So yeah a bomber designed on Earth in the 1930s is way better then a high tech, futuristic bomber designed in a galaxy far away a long time ago.
You're thinking of B-17 Flying Fortresses or B-29 Superfortress. The B-52 is the saturation bomber that's still in service, the Stratofortress. Otherwise, you have the right idea. The StarFortress is an air-to-ground strategic bomber that's been shoved into a role that it's not at all useful for, while being pretty much useless at even its given task if the enemy has a good air defence plan.
You’re right. I don’t know what I was thinking about.
Well I guess I wasn’t thinking.
@@nunouno001 Eh, there are three American bombers with -fortress names, not all that surprising that you got a little mixed up, I think!
Actually as far as I know the B-17 WAS at first also designed for attacks against point targets amd even ships (due to the fact the Americans in the time before Pearl Harbour HIGHLY overestimated the way their target-systems could work under less than perfect situations and also highly underestimated the danger fighters could be to even so heavy armed bombers like the B-17). It was a pre-war-designed bomber, so this failures could be excused.
The Star Wars terror...erm i mean rebels/New Republic (who as far as I know originally designed but never used the bomber) has not such an easy excuse. They had fought against a enemy who used countless swarms of fast agile fighters and had - despite his failures - even begun to improve his cappacity in countering bombers and fighter-bombers by introducing better fighters (Tie-Interceptor) and specialized anti-starfighter-ships like the Lancer-fregate and the Raider-class into service. This the makers of this ugly piece of banta-podo must have known. So it was a stillborn failure from the start. The Resistance should have simply sell the ships and buy antique Y-wings or old B-wings for the money - I guess THAT would have serve them better.
@@andymac4883 The B17 was used in an anti-ship capacity though- www.angelfire.com/fm/odyssey/2-b17.htm
If I were the designer, I would redesign the bomber to be less smaller, having a shield all around, more faster or maybe having a booster, and some defensive weapons.
It might sound crazy, but what if you take the T-wing (that's what I'm calling it now) and just had it tilt back 90º so the bomb bay is pointing directly at the enemy? You could keep the T-wing away from the battle, the way it launches bombs makes it so it doesn't have to "fall" on the enemy and since you're in space, the bombs don't lose any momentum. You essentially have a space cannon launching space cannon balls
Indigo Azai maybe a well placed shot will just blow them all up if they’re unleashed from a distance
@@alant8721 Well, at least you need a well placed shot instead of any shot when they drop their bombs (or try to, at least)
Minus the slow speed of the bombs and that they may/may not have tracking, could be a cool idea.
@@hartianx1698 So... regular missiles?
@@sbeveroni2048 Missiles usually imply a propulsion system built into the ordinance.
T-65 X-wing: Gets redesigned into the T-70
B-wing: Replaced by a giant, slow moving, space blimp
THANKS DISNEY
When I first saw the scene that involved these bombers I thought "If the writers were trying to go for an effective battle strategy then they completely missed the mark, but if they were trying to go for a dramatic WWII bombing run scene then they got it spot on."
Yeah, pretty much what I thought too.
True.
these bombers would have made sense in the battle on crait instead of going for a void engagement
I just posted then seen this XD
when I first saw and hear Poe order to bring the bombers I though it was B-wing. On SW Rebels this monster vessel has high mobility and powerful lasers can tear up any Star Destroyer in 1 HIT
My idea: give the StarFortress a fighting chance, with forward and rear racing guns, and have the bomb bay lengthwise rather than height-wise. Imagine how cool it would have been seeing these things haul ass in a traditional B-17 formation and only get picked off from near point-blank to the dreadnought.
How to fix this bomber: Replace them with Y wings or B wings. Done.
The y wing with upgraded engines would be a death machine.
What if these bombers were meant for ground targets: bombing cities, enemy bases etc.
@@artiomleoncenko2994 why do that when you have frigates with nukes that can also act as a fleet escort
@@RNA0ROGER yeah give the Y-wing the same treatment as the x-wing and you have a bomber that dose'nt hamper it's escorts to much because the old x-wing were only 50kph faster which when your at a 1000kph is nothing
"We'll upgrade the X-wing, the A-wing, and the B-wing but scrap those for some reason. But fuck the y-wing, don't upgrade that. Let's make a brand new shitty heavy bomber instead!"
Technically f you would rotate the bomber 90 degrees with the bottom facing the front, then all you have to do is release the bombs. if they indeed use the electromagnetic propulsion. Space will just carry the bombs as far as you want.
:/
IvYeKs or just pulled up on the stick 😅
That is what I thought of!
So a rail gun XD
Flop the bomb bay, make the launching mechanism more powerful, and you have a good enough ship.
Or some large anti ship laser. Mount it under the ship and large engines for recoil control.
Line up and laser away armor until you hit something critical.
I really do not understand why they did not have y-wing bombers. The resistance seem to be mostly using old rebel ships that were in high numbers like the a-wing and x-wing so there is no real reason for the resistance not having some y-wings laying around for space bombardment missions.
The Resistance Bomber is like the B17 Flying Fortress of Star Wars so to speak
It was a heavy bomber used for large bombardments. While in a vacuum that's a legitimate strategy, but unlike the B17 it didn't have machine guns all over the plane for defensive armament.
why not use B-wings? a squadron of 12 of them could have done the same job with far fewer casualties.
@@erickalkbrenner7037 Good point, plus they would had a couple of them laying around from the previous war too.
Agreed, I was so bummed to see no Y-wings in The Last Jedi. I really want to see a Resistance Y-wing or a First Order TIE Bomber.
It's entirely possible that any existing Y-Wings to that point were decommissioned and dismantled by that point with relatively few left in existence anywhere. Star Wars canon already had them as old obsolete fighters by the time of A New Hope. They were being outclassed by many of the newer fighters being developed. Not to mention the maintenance issues in having to manufacture any new components more or less by hand.
easy fix: lay the bomber on its side and "drop" the bombs forward, against the dreadnought
Y-Wings:
*"AM I A JOKE TO YOU?"*
Well it did carry 52 y wings worth of bombs
@@cccaaawww8685 probably lost 52 y-wings worth of pilots too
Why was it as slow as a sloth with a hip replacement?
Because Rose's sister HAD to die a hero to justify Rose's entire character arc.
@@benrussell-gough1201 And so Poe's actions can be seen as wrong so that the "strong women" can save the resistance from his man actions
@@SuperSwordman1 :/
not the narrative at all, but go off
@@vaelophisnyx9873 With all due respect, I'd say that's absolutely the narrative. No one who calls out the absolute FAILURE of Leia or Holdo as leaders is treated as being in the right. I mean, Poe was right in attacking the dreadnaught, Poe was right in staging a mutanity. The fact that the movie wants to paint him in the wrong, and that Holdo is painted in the right speaks volumes towards Rian and Kathleen's anti-male agenda.
KlunkerRider more like snails if you ask me
How to fix:
Make it a tie defender
When these showed up was my first "uh oh, this is gonna suck" moment for TLJ.
It's representative of all of Disney Star Wars - slow, clunky, and basically useless.
Add to that incompetent and poorly designed.
and recycled nonsense
The mandalorian would like to disagree
AyyUltra the mandaloreian is an exception
Ugly and obsolete.
A catapult would have been more effective. literally. the bombs were dropped by a gravity field. why not just physically throw them at the enemy from a distance.... you know... like torpedoes...
Since it had no point-defence, they could've literally aimed the bottom of the ship toward the target and "dropped" them from a distance... instead of the "we have to fly over top of it" nonsense.
Torpedoes are more expensive and can be shot down.
But this bomber is worse than kamzikaze…
@@TheOJDrinker Or even just fly over the top of it from several kilometers *above* the the dreadnought. You know, like how what the B-17s that these were supposed to be reminiscent of did over *their* targets.
When we understand most imperial capital ships being designed with an older (earth) battleship aesthetic in mind, it becomes easy to see this bomber as having been designed to mimic the aesthetic of a B-17. Still poorly designed as a space bomber, but it's imagery is still evocative.
We know ruin johnson sacrificed all logical design to bring his shitty vision to the screen.
And that's not all.
He also did the space-kamikaze.
And he put in the scene with broom kid probably to tie his supposed new trilogy to the main canon.
The main problem that heavy bomber was mostly a terror weapon-using against enemy cities, bases, and other area targets. Even B-52s in Vietnam was used like this.
The New Republic really needed a thing that only usable burning Imperial occupied cities to the ground? Killing many innocent civilians? Great guys! And classic heavy bombers are usable only with strong fighter support, in case of total air/space control...
Or they needed a fighter-bomber, like F-15E, FB-111, Su-30 that could penetrated the enemy defense, could kill heavy targets(like capital ships) with pinpoint accuracy, and even usable as starfighter?
Every real heavy bomber nowadays are capable of precision strike, with long range and ultra-heavy guided missiles...
So, instead of idiotic space bombs, fitted this ugly duck bomber with dozens of concussion missile and proton torpedo launchers, (Even one-two capital ship grade launcher)remove the hand-operated turrets(even Millenium Falcon got remote-controlled armament decades ago...) and we got a capable gunboat/missile boat...( Still cheaper than missile armed corvettes and frigates...)
@@janossos8620 Heavy bombers can be used for other tasks too, the B-52 in vietnam was even used for ground support and did very well, it also was used to pound the Ho Chi Minh Trail, where most of the bombs were dropped during the war. Other than that I agree, a heavy bomber would be much more useful for the Empire, the Y wing already fills the role of a fighter bomber and does it very well, or at least did in the old fluff.
MyNameIsMud plus ion torpedoes are already so effective rebel forces really have no need to drop that much ordnance.
Comparing this thing to a B-17 is a huge insult to B-17s, even if the function is similar.
'Dropping apples or giving tours"
Dang Eckshart....... dang....
Also I think that at the battle of dqar, The resistance should have sent the Ninka with starfighter escort to take out the dreadnought.
And if admiral holdo was on board..........well we can see where this is going.
Honestly they could just executed the Holdo maneuver with one of them and boom. Plot point useless
"Transporting apples"
Oof
space apples
The problem with the Resistance Bomber is that it is designed for World War II, but is meant to operate in the Star Wars Galaxy without any real adjustments to compensate. As much as I like the B-Wing and Y-Wing I seriously doubt they would have gotten enough ordinance to sink the dreadnought. I wish that they could. Also bombs and missiles of the same size, means the missile has a smaller warhead because things like targeting computers and propulsion systems take up space. However, I do agree that there is no reason the bomb bay had to be pointed down, and using the electro-magnetic launching system still works: Just keep these things at range and have them fire those bombs out of a mass driver at speeds at least what Poe's booster did.
The thing is they didn't need to blow up the dreadnaught, only disable the main gun. Further, we just saw in R1 how effective y-wings are at disabling a capital ship. It's like the resistance leadership, who are the same people who led the rebellion, forgot how to war properly.
Just take not a single B-Wing, instead a Squadron. Problem solved.
Well, they called the real thing flying FORTRESS for a reason, yet the starFORTRESS just blows up if you look at it the wrong way, due to the oversized bomb magazine. Literally all this is good for would be carpet bombing civilians. Or you just replace the crew with droids and weld the bomb bay doors shut, and throw it at the target.
I definitely like the drive by bomber idea. I think it could have made for an even more suspenseful scene. Imagine the Resistance fleet, fleeing for their lives. Maybe the Dreadnought even gets off a potshot at one of the vessels, blowing it up in one go of its main turret. All seems lost. Then a message comes over the comms. It's Poe! He and his X-wing squad ate bringing in a flight of Starfortesses. They're making a B-line straight for the Dreadnought. The Dreadnought detects the incoming bomber run and scrambles interceptors. No Poe and his squad have to defend these bombers while they maintain the bombing run. Boom. One bomber is taken out. Boom. Their goes another. Poe and his people are doing all they can, but the First Orders numbers are overwhelming. The point defence cannons on the Starfortesses are smashing TIE after TIE, but there's just too many. Finally, only one bomber remains. It's the one with Roses sister. She's sitting at her station, waiting for the orders to drop the payload. The captain of the vessel tells his crew,
"Stay on target."
They're getting closer now.
"Stay on target."
Roses sister arms the payload. It's ready for launch as they pass over the ship. Then, DISASTER! A TIE has gotten a lucky shot and damaged their controls. The pilot can barely control the ship. They crew looks at each other, and a resolute grimace passes over their faves.
"Stay... on... target..."
Roses sister clutches the pendant about her neck.
The Starfortess slams into the Dreadnought. It erupts in glorious explosions.
The End.
the star fortress is a Star wars B-17E when evryone flys F-22 raptors and SU-35s.
its useless , old technology which makes no sense to produce.
they didnt even bother changing the name much. "Star Fortress SF-17" really? you want to jack off history anymore or ya done?
The B-17 can take a punch from even modern weaponry...I would not compare the B-17 to much of anything they design lol
@@Kolonol1 Sorry the B17 would not survive a direct impact from a SAM or any modern air-to-air missile. A near miss maybe but not a direct hit.
@@erikjohnson9075 you underestimate their strength I believe...
B-17s have flown home with their tails almost ripped off so this "Sf-17" is A POOOP
haven't seen the movie but it seems these bombers would be more suited in air raids on ground based targets with a fighter escort, in a battle like it was shown its useless, carpet bombing bases and the like would be its strong points but in a battle where literally the ships you are trying to bomb have its own escorts in forms of smaller cruisers and its own tie fighters, which were more or less designed to swarm their opponents therefore a more defensive type of fighter would easily take these giant hit me signs out quickly
Alexander Greene I believe they would be suited to bomb unprepared enemy positions, for instance, when an enemy is on the offensive, you just call in the bombers and little lasers won’t do much, for instance, you could bomb AT-AT’s with some form of efficiency
@@alexandergreene461 Why would AT-ATs be used for anti air?
But that you can do using Capital ships
To play devil's advocate I'd say its pretty obvious that the ship isn't designed for deep space battles like that. It was just used because they didn't have any other options.
But i agree...its still a pretty crappy design. It could've been like a giant shotgun that flung bombs out ahead of itself.
Or simply been remote controlled.
Its amazing how with all this tech they don't have ships like this controlled by droids or by remote.
Broken Wave There we’re droid-controlled ships during the Clone Wars, and in the old EU there was even a droid-controller Tie Fighter.
But what is it designed for? There is literally no combat role it would be good for, so there was no reason to ever use it for anything.
@@austinhinton3944 Slave-rigging
The separatists made large use of droid starships, but they had their own problems that could be exploited since they weren't really able to 'think on the fly' or otherwise adapt to a situation.
When did they say they had no other options? And why do they have X-wings and not Y-wings? Why don't they just put all those bombs in a projectile and shoot it at the enemy? No one ever got the idea of suicide bombing those bombers into the first order fleet because those things have FTL capabillities according to the lore.