Why the Resistance Heavy Bomber SUCKS! (and how to fix it) | Star Wars Lore
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 11. 2018
- We break down why the Resistance Bomber, used by the Resistance during the Battle of D'qar in the Last Jedi, is garbage.
Music:
Space Echo / Warm / Endless Reflexions - ALISON
#starwars #starwarslore #thelastjedi
***
Check out my second channel: / eckstoo
Follow me on Twitch: / eckhartsladder
Twitter: / eckhartsladder
Want to help the channel out?
Subscribe: goo.gl/vBao71
Become a channel member: goo.gl/XFK2Lw
Join the (superfun!) Discord: / discord
Patreon: / eckhartsladder
Intro/Outro Music: Home - Resonance
Outro meme'd by: / freightmytrain - Zábava
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."
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.
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
"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.
"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
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.
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
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.
Because unlike Leia, Holdo, and Rian Johnson, even the dumbasses in the First Order understand that war means taking casualties in pursuit of a strategic or tactical objective.
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
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.
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.
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.
"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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
I remember watching that scene for the first time and thinking, "are you kidding me? My grandmother could move faster than that!"
Hahaha lol😁
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.slayerenryu5217 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
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
B17 Crews: "we'll have some serious documentation about our missions"
Disney: "nah fam"
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.
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😖🤔
If this was a F-Zero ship, it's stats would be
Body: E
Boost: E
Grip: E
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEÉEEEEEEEEEEE
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.
This “ship” isn’t just terrible. It’s an outright insult to its namesake.
The B-17 Flying Fortress is named that for a reason. It was a very dangerous opponent. And extremely durable, able to take catastrophic damage and still complete its mission and return home. Often armed with a bare minimum of 13-15 browning M2 .50 cals. A German fighter ace one said “Against 20 Russians trying to shoot you down or even 20 Spitfires, it can be exciting, even fun. But curve in towards 40 fortresses and all your past sins flash before your eyes.”
This thing Disney designed. Is an affront the classification of bomber.
hummerskickass “Disney Designed?” I demand you apologize to Doug Chiang. Man’s a legend in his field. He deserves better then you.
The B-17 was of average durability compared to bombers of the time, and had no real armor. While intimidating the guns were useless. Without large escorts they became easy targets, and were effectively just more heavily manned standard bombers. That means more manpower losses.
The idea of B-17s being something truly special is outdated propaganda. Their ease of production was their greatest asset.
Wasn't it also known as a flying coffin? The men who flew them didn't feel exactly at ease while under fire by German fighters.
.50 Cal wasn't much cop except at close range though. Most fighters were mounting a minimum of 20mm rounds at that point, so they were able to engage it at further ranges with greater effect. She was a big girl, but she went down all the same if you took the engines out or got lucky and severed the hydraulics.
They needed massive escort support to have any chance of completing their mission.
Wasn’t there an entire movie about a group of these to going to bomb something and all of the crews where terrified the flak guns where going to easily kill them all.
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 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
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
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.
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
It's appearance and configuration made me think it was built for high altitude planetary bombardment. In that case, deploying them in space against anything was a mistake. I could see a scenario where they jump into a system, skim the atmosphere, drop bombs, and get out.
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
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
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
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.
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.”
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*
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.
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.
easy fix: lay the bomber on its side and "drop" the bombs forward, against the dreadnought
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.
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.
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.
I could see them act as a great killing blow spacecraft, especially from what we’ve seen from the resistance, I could see them using stuff like the Y-Wing and T-70 to disable larger targets similar to what we’ve seen in rogue one, than once the ship is crippled you sent in a few starfortresses to finish it off.
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.
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
The real worst thing is that you have to open the bottom doors and let the entire crew die in a vacuum to drop the payload
After over a year, I think, it's better off as a planetary bomber rather than a star ship bomber. Given the ship's vertical weapon launch system and slow speed, it can probably be a precise planetary bomber that can be used to devastating effect.
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 :/
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 these showed up was my first "uh oh, this is gonna suck" moment for TLJ.
'Dropping apples or giving tours"
Dang Eckshart....... dang....
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
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.
You know how the snowspeeder is a cargo tug?
I think these were for stocking lakes with space salmon.
Lmao! You'll have to be careful not to mix the payloads.
"Sir our bombers have reached the drop zone and...are those trout!?"
Meanwhile at the lake: "What are those, puff fish? *kaboom*"
the line "if you broke wario's legs" really speaks to me
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
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.
I swear this channel is way too perfect for me to binge right now, I just got into synth/retrowave recently and just got back into Star Wars.
I love A.L.I.S.O.N and HOME.
The best outro to any video ive ecer seen in my entire life
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.
"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.
I just came up with a Big brain idea!
What if you put a Clocking device on the Resistance Heavy bomber?
Impossible. No ship that small.... you know what... never mind.
The only explanation I could come up with for the Star Fortress was that it's converted civilian gear. As Eck says, the design could be workable as a cargo transport, and it makes sense the desperate Resistance would try to find a use for whatever they could get their hands on.
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
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
Regarding the ending question about carriers and the Luchrehulk, one of its other advantages is that the location of the launch bays protects them from being directly fired upon by enemy vessels. Many other sci fi carriers have the hangar bay facing the front of the ship, exposing it to attack, and pivoting the hangar exit away from enemies increases the size of the ship's profile relative to oncoming fire.
According to Newton's First Law, the bombers could just "drop" the bombs and the bombs would keep on "flying" in the same direction as you have no or negligible gravity or other forces.
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
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.
I think the ship was designed for ground, as a kind of anti-tank/bunker bomber or something.
I read in the visual guide to The Last Jedi that the Resistance Bombers were repurposed from fire fighting ships which may explain all their defects, and even more reason not to use them in war....
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
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.
This thing isn't a glass cannon, it's a nuke strapped to a large tortoise.
Based off of WWII era bombers: enough explosives and fire to make a pyromaniac blush, but stupid slow and has paper thin armor
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
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.
Damnit I love this channel. I can’t be the only one who binges these
Just got to see this and loved it. I thought how it would be used and think it was built to go after Interdictor-class Star Destroyer, bunkers, and a mind layer retriever
. The victors gravity will be used against it as the bomber gets pulled out of cyberspace. It drops his minds they get sucked straight to it. and most likely it would have an escort of probably two A-wings, two Y- wings and 2X wings same goes for going after it bunker busting their wings next wings take out the turret, and then the bomber parks off of the dump and payload.
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.
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.
Great video, very good objective look at the bomber.
The book "the cobalt squadron" is about this bomber squadron and in it the bombers manage to break a first order blockade on their own. They then drop their payload in Form of supplies on the planet and manouver back into hyperspace. They did have 2 casualties during the hole operation(3 flights) but they also had asteroids to hide behind in orbit.
T-65 X-wing: Gets redesigned into the T-70
B-wing: Replaced by a giant, slow moving, space blimp
THANKS DISNEY
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.
I think another way it could be adjusted in order to become somewhat viable is if the bomb bay was the front instead of the bottom, and you put the main thrusters on the top (making them rear thrusters). You could then put secondary thrusters facing the same direction as the bomb bay. Now in order to attack: you get a bunch of these in a square or line formation, open their bomb doors, have them rapidly accelerate, then release the bombs and use the front thrusters to decelerate. Since you’re in space that means there’s no air resistance and for the most part gravity is negligible. This means there’s nothing to slow the bombs so they would keep traveling forward at the speed you released them (if there is a source of gravity just do the same thing but start at the correct angle) affectively creating a rapidly moving minefield. This could also be done to counter swarms of tie fighters. Perhaps the explosive charges have beacons or tags that are only linked to resistance ships to make the minefield more visible.
Here's how I think it can go from horrible to amazing or at the very least good:
-The stuff you suggested.
-Being more maneuverable instead of going in a straight line.
-Be a smaller ship. Even if that means a smaller payload, at least it's a smaller target.
-Have more shields, mainly around the bomb area so there's less big chain explosions.
- Apparently the bombs are electromagnetic which i think means a ship or something metal getting in the way could mess up where it's trying to go (IDK that might be wrong. I don't know anything about electromagnetic things so please correct me if I'm wrong) so if they used targeted missiles like you suggested (I imagine the missiles would do the same if not more damage than those ball bombs) they'd do much better.
-I like that it has lots of blasters and stuff but they seem to only fire in one direction and not move. Keep the blasters but have them able to move around more.
-Have overall better defense against starfighters.
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
Star Wars Director’s: slaps roof of SW Plot
“This thing can hold so much bad logic”
I think like a short range hyper drive system like a jump drive so they could just jump on top the dreadnought drop there bombs and jump away then enter hyperspace. Instead of having to come in at a "safe" distance and fly to the middle of the ship more of a direct jump on top of the target.