10 FLAWS with the ARC 170 Starfighter (Aggressive ReCon)
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 12. 2018
- Today we take a look at the Republic Arc 170 Aggressive Reconnaissance fighter and break down its 10 biggest flaws.
10 FLAWS SERIES
1. Separatist Droids: • 10 Flaws Star Wars - S...
2. Imperial Class Star Destroyer: • 10 Flaws Star Wars - I...
3. Stormtroopers: • 10 FLAWS with the Stor...
4. Tiefighters: bit.ly/2N77rG5
5. Death Star: • 10 FLAWS with the Deat...
6. Rebel Trooper: • 10 Flaws With the Rebe...
7: X wing: • 10 Flaws Star Wars - X...
8: ATAT: • 10 Flaws With the ATAT...
9. AAT: • 10 FLAWS with the AAT ...
10. Laat: • 10 Features that made ...
11. ATTE • 10 Features that made ...
12. Venator • 10 Features that made ...
13. ARC 170 • 10 FLAWS with the ARC...
14. Eta Actis 2 • 10 FLAWS with the ETA ...
Get Generation Tech Gear HERE!: teespring.com/stores/generati...
Subscribe to Generation Tech: bit.ly/SubGenerationTech
Please help our channel by becoming a Patron: bit.ly/GTPatreon
Follow Generation Tech on Facebook: bit.ly/GenerationTechFB
Check out what we're reading and playing:
www.amazon.com/shop/generatio...
Watch More Generation Tech:
Latest Videos: bit.ly/LatestGT
Popular Videos: bit.ly/GTPopular
More Star Wars Videos: bit.ly/GTStarWars
Follow our Hosts
ALLEN XIE
CZcams / @thebeardedasianman
INSTAGRAM AXIEFILMS
FACEBOOK / axiefilms
Ben Hedges
CZcams / @thecreditshifu
CZcams
/ benhedgesntd
EQUIPMENT USED
CAMERA: SONY A6300 amzn.to/2q4wN8n
LENS: MITAKON 35MM F0.95 amzn.to/2pUnzz6
TRIPOD: amzn.to/2pUnzz6
MIC: amzn.to/2oWktJF
EDITING SOFTWARE: amzn.to/2pqOcvV
#10Flaws #humanityfirst #clones - Zábava
Smashed the like at "BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTT"
same lol
Same here. One of the best sounds in the world.
Also before you make fun of how bad my piloting is you guys didn't even see the footage of me chasing a ywing around for 5 minutes before figuring it out it was a friendly
Lol
NICE!
Generation Tech Love the Lead in the morning, GOOD ONE!
hahaha, what!? how. it may just be because im pretty good at piloting in that game but that doesnt make sense how that happened. your a great youtuber,terrible pilot.
Generation Tech do you like cats?
Flaw number 1: *IT HAS NONE DON'T BE BULLYING MY BABY*
YES
Republic Inferior, Separatist Superior!
@@DonaldWWitt I love CIS droid fighters but don't mess with the ARC
Hehe ok fine it’s perfect
Sounds like a star wars equivalent to a foxbat fighter which handles like a tank. Love the video.
When I was in Desert Storm, I saw what the cannon on an A10 does to armored vehicles. It's not for the faint of heart.
thanks for protecting our oil!
dronemasters fuck off
Stephen M. Stouter thank you for saying something about that crap.
It's a mean aircraft
Most of the kills the A10 got were due to missiles
The thought behind "Agressive Reconnaissance" might be the fitting for Search&Destroy-Missions. Seems to be a perfect fit for this role in my opinion.
Sure, you can not attack an enemy fleet or any capital ship, but for smaller facilities, like a listening-post or cruiser-sized single ships it should work quite well
Actually, I believe the ARC 170 is based on the P-61 Black Widow.
Just look at it and tell me it doesn't look like the ARC
Agreed. However the P61 is not very well known. It was a BEAST though.
too bad the p61 didn't get much use; by the time all it's issues were ironed out, smaller radar modules had been invented and there was no use for a big, heavy, vulnerable nightfighter
or a TBF Avenger it looks nothing like a A-10
Wow. I play Warthunder and am a fan of WW2 war machines, but this never dawned on me. The more you know, I guess.
I guess the cockpit is similar however the rear of the ship is very different
The Republic vehicles were 10 good things, not 10 flaws!
ARC-170 looks so awesome
NEED MORE TERRANS OF EARTH (aka SOL 3 Resistance) VS STAR WARS VIDEOS!
Peter Yim or videos like Earth in different time periods versus Star Wars after they run out of Star Wars factions
@@indianajones4321 Still I wish there will be more.
Relatable
That's the problem with Star Wars. Does it look cool, rather than does it make sense?
I actually think the ARC 170 is the best designed star fighter in galactic history... due to its rear facing laser cannon
It's too big and not agile enough to be an effective fighter. A fighter shouldn't need a rear gunner. Just look at ww2 medium and heavy fighters. They were abandoned pretty early on in the war due to them getting shot down by smaller, faster, more maneuverable fighters like the bf. 109 or spitfire.
Geoff Rogers There are other fighters that can fill that role such as the V19 Torrent or the Z95 Headhunter, while the ARC is a more heavy space superiority fighter which can do everything.
Edit: and ships in Sat Wars fill more roles such as capital-ship killers, I know that the Y-wing filled that role but I didn’t do anything else well enough. Plus due to its large size it had pretty decent shielding and heavy guns
@@geoffrogers7590 It's a starfighter, not a fighter. Starfighter just describes any small-crew vessel of limited endurance. Calling the ARC-170 a fighter is like calling the EF-111 Raven a fighter. It's not a proper analogy for obvious reasons.
If you're too slow, its not that hard for a fighter to fly around it and hit you anyways.
Geoff Rogers If the Millenium Falcon or the Twilight etc can mix it up with small fighters, I’m sure the ARC-170 can hold it’s own to make it worthwhile
lol, there are two number 9s, and no number 10 in your video XD great points were made throughout tho, like the series, hope you keep it up
The ARC-170 reminds me of the WW2 tank-killers with their huge 30mm to 75mm cannons like the german Ju-87G or the Henshel Hs-129...they should be classified as close support craft
The ARC-170 has no pre-jet age equivalent. It's more akin to a strike bomber such as the F-111 platform (specifically the Australian F-111C Pig) than to any WWII era fighter. As specified by their role -- reconnaissance -- they're a multicrew heavy starfighter of medium endurance. Keep in mind that the Star Wars use of starfighter refers to any small craft used in carrier-based operations; think something as small as the Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero to as large as the Grumman E-2 Hawkeye
@@dylanwight5764 thanks bud, but I wasn´t making a comparison, i was just saying it reminds me of said aircraft because of its massive guns, cheers
It was based off the WWII P-61 Black Widow. It’s very similar in design and mission. The ARC-170 seems like it would’ve made a much better assault fighter than a recon.
Yea it looks like a P 61, and has the heavy cannons on the wings like the Ju 87 G2 kanonvogel (cannon bird).
@@wylandnares8642 yes
That clip from TLJ where the rebel bombers are lining up and it's only after the TIE fighters start shooting at them that their air cover arrives always makes me groan. The A-Wing's are a hell of a lot faster than the bombers, they should of been out in front as a fighter screen for them rather than, for some reason, hanging back letting them get shot to pieces.
its best to forget that that scene even happened, there was just so much wrong with it. (military wise)
@@Grenadier- Yes, totally agree, still makes my teeth grind, LOL.
Militarily it makes no sense, but for a movie I do find it visually beautiful. There's a reason it made it into the trailers!
@@Bramble451 It was a spectacular visual for sure ... of how stupid the Rebellion and Poe was. We have had amazing visuals in all the other SW movies, but none to my memory that show such ridiculous lack of military strategy during war time.
UK Media Warrior it’s not even Poe’s fault really. Most of the casualties came from not either evacuating the space around the planet sooner than they should have instead of fighting, or using the bombers that they did that led to needless time wasted and lives lost.
I’ll also add that in (current year argument), having a movie with beautiful graphics and visuals shouldn’t excuse for bad EVERYTHING ELSE. Your essentially saying that you compare your experience with seeing the film with a 1 yr old seeing their parent’s jingling keys.
3:21
"Hey, his legs are sticking out." Crow T. Robot
The Arc 170 looks beautiful
It reminds me of the BF110 heavy fighter / fighter-bomber flown by Germany in WW2. It too had powerful weapons and a rear facing gunner, but it was it's lack of agility and speed when compared to a pure fighter aircraft like the Hurricane or Spitfire during the Battle of Britain that showed it's shortcomings. It worked incredibly well as a night fighter though, but when up against a fighter aircraft it failed.
In mission and design its more of a TBF torpedo bomber, I think. Sure it is a little vulnerable to fighters, but it is death incarnate against your capital ships.
@@L0stEngineer I can see that, but the TBF was designed as a bomber, not a fighter- bomber or a fighter. The ARC 170 was supposed to be able to hold it's own against a Separatist droid fighter in a dog fight That said I see what you mean on the design of it, but a Y-Wing would be more in line with a TBF I think.
The ARC-170 is actually modeled off of the P-61 Black Widow. If you look it up, you'll definitely see the resemblance
cannons, Torpedos(rockets), rear gunner, tons of armor.... guys.. that thing is an IL-2 Sturmovik in space
The big part is the display of the 170 is similar to the P-61 Blackwidow. That Fighter is really Agile for a big plane. Sheesh
Hey Generation Tech please make a video of the best infantry and the worsed infantry in the starwarsverse and its equivalent to our worlds infantries.
The arc-170 seems to take a lot of inspiration from the ww2 Black widow stealth plane. That plane,however struck from stealth and used its ability to hide at night as well as the element of surprise, totally different from the frontline role of the 170.
How dare you talk shit about my favorite Star Wars fighter. Lol
Hi sometimes we have to critique the thing we love
I personally prefer the k-wing. Now that baby really reminds me of the a-10 with all that ordnance under its wings
@@GenerationTech cant you just make two videos about how bad the tie fighter's design is. jokes aside i love your videos, keep up the great work:)
It’s my favourite ship to but you need to be open to criticism.
@@casperthodsen5881 sorry for the confusion, i was just joking that why i put the lol at the end. great channel eh
Looks like it would be a decent and cheap patrol craft for a large galactic republic, capable of patrolling systems on peace keeping and anti-pirate missions. A squadron of 5 or 6 of these would be a lot more efficient than even a single corvette. Much like the P-3 Orion, assuming it has some decent sensors.
The ARC-170 is my favorite prequel star fighter! It looks like a combination between an A-10 (like you said in the video) and the P-61! Seriously, the canopies are practically identical!
Alan, I love your delivery if this material. Fresh, informative, and entertaining. Keep'em coming!
It's actually based on the P-61 Black Widow. It was a night fighter with a limited radar. It was fairly advanced for it's time.
Despite its limitations as a dogfighter, I think the ARC-170 would make a great fighter-bomber, using its heavy cannons and any missiles or torpedoes it might carry to take down a capital ship's point-defense weapons or broadside guns to clear the way for bombers or other capital ships to finish it off.
This series has gone out of control we now have 12 episodes one for each day of Xmas!
10 FLAWS SERIES 1. Separatist Droids:czcams.com/video/CAhqn09IHSg/video.html
2. Imperial Class Star Destroyer: czcams.com/video/wBjy7MQLeLg/video.html
3. Stormtroopers: czcams.com/video/-UmdOlbVCNk/video.html
4. Tiefighters: bit.ly/2N77rG5
5. Death Star: czcams.com/video/znhAX2ImPrg/video.html
6. Rebel Trooper: www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmRvY...
7: X wing: www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PTDO...
8: ATAT: czcams.com/video/Ii7EdWTrejw/video.html
. AAT: czcams.com/video/mBub5n2-qLs/video.html
10. Laat: czcams.com/video/jpYBKsg4xws/video.html
11. ATTE www.youtube.com/watch?v=_isCn...
12. Venator www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcB3Z...
Great vid Gen Tech! Didn't realize just how big the Arc-170 is. Thanks for the scale comparison with real life vehicles.
Comparing the ARC-170 to an F-22 or any other modern multi-role fighter is a huge disservice to the ARC-170. You're comparing apples & oranges... to a coconut. It's not comparable at all to such aircraft. A more accurate comparison would be to the F-111, specifically the EF-111 Raven or the F-111C Pig. That is, a medium strike fighter or interdiction fighter -- you can see the similarities such as the large engines, variable geometry and heavy weapons payload.
The ARC-170 also shares otherfeatures in common with the F-111 platform -- that is its long range, multicrew requirement and large frame. The ARC-170 is more closely related to an interdiction fighter or medium strike bomber than an interceptor or strike fighter.
If the TIE Fighter is the F-16 of the Star Wars universe, then the ARC-170 is the F-111.
Dylan Wight he was comparing size...
Funny. I always tend to think of it along the lines of the F-111's brother, the F-14 Tomcat. If you take the ARC-170's P-61 based design and change a few things, notably the copilot/gunner (as in the P-61) and change him for a RIO while giving control of the guns to the pilot. This gives you an F-14 like fighter that can fly BARCAP for the Venator with the RIO maximising the use of the sensors on board. Then, like a Tomcat with TARPS, it could be used to gather tactical reconnaissance on the battlefield, not strategic reconnaissance like an SR-71, satellites or U-2 (which still is in service).
Finley McGregor oh shit you're right the arc-170 really does look like a p61
In my opinion, the ARC-170 more closely resembles the Grumman TBF Avenger. If you look at the picture of the Avenger, one could see a lot of similarities. Like the fact that the Avenger is one of the largest carrier based American Naval aircraft used in ww2, which is the same as the ARC-170. The Avenger was an aircraft designed for anti ship warfare (armed with heavy guns and torpedoes) which is the same for the ARC-170. The Grumman TBF Avenger has a crew size of 3 same as the ARC-170. American Naval Commanders have used the Avenger as a decoy to attract Japanese aircraft away from the Japanese carrier so a small strike team can sink the ship which was the same strategy Obiwan and Anakin used in the opening scene in Revenge of the Sith. In my opinion, George Lucas literally copied everything about the Grumman TBF Avenger and used it to make the ARC-170.
@@Patrick-tr6cl True but there is a lot of influence of P-61 in the design: twin engined, gunner sits in a raised position behind the pilot, heavy armament and three man crew. Like wise I've always seen it as a heavy fighter, capable of scrapping with CIS fighters or dealing damage to enemy capital ships. This also put it in parallel with the P-61 which, although being a heavy fighter, was manoeuvrable enough to tangle with Fw-190s to He-111 and later on would carry bombs or rockets to attack ground targets.
Have you done the Y-wing yet? People bang on about it so much!
I think if we add some medium repeating laser cannons on the other 4 wings and take away the rear gunner and one pilot and leave those to the astromech, while swapping out it’s 1.5 hyperdrive with a 0.75 hyperdrive, this ship would be even more amazing
love this starfighter so much i agree with the faults it has. when i first saw it i fell in love with how it was a mix between the gunship carrier and the x wing.
You need to start small, Rouge Squadron N64.... we'll get you flying yet
Now do the Z-95 headhunter
It doesn't have an astromech droid, only two lasser cannons, and uses concussion missals instead of proton torpedoes. The X-Wing was the improved version of the Z-95 and ARC-170.
YUUUSSSS
First time I saw it I always loved the Arc170, intelligence and recon, assault and heavy, it seemed to almost fill to many roles to be efficient OR effective but that's why I wanted it, a craft perfect for mod's or ready off the line to deal with most problems that a single pilot would have to deal with, making it better for a aggressive exaple leader or lone wolf bounty hunter
I might try to make it smaller and faster for dog fighting
always pick the middle ground one size fit all machine unless I absolutely must pick something smaller/faster or bigger/stronger
If I need a Corvette, Cargo, Gunship or Interceptor class ship I get the best one for me and the job but the ship for few people possible often as possible I'll get the ARC170, definitely if I was a bounty hunter, turn the copilot seat into a brig, get another droid for the rear guns and repair, use the room in back for more/bigger/better engines/hyperdrive and defense's, more missile launchers and rapid fire guns, faster heavy cannons and then just upgrade everything around as needed
I got a toy one of these when I was a kid and I loved it, it was huge. Always thought it was awesome.
I only ever had 1 pilot so it always had 2 empty cockpits.
I had a tri-fighter and a vulture droid too, when I was playing with them I'd always let the vulture droid shoot down the arc
“I’ll have two #9’s.”😂
Do republican era fighters have disadvantages compared to imperial, like slower speed, maneuverability or firepower?
The Tie Fighter was much faster, but was as manuverable as a flying brick and had no shields/hyperdrive. And their laser cannons were light cannons compared to the ARC's heavy laser cannons.
The only imperial advantage was speed otherwise the tie fighters along with interceptors had basically nothing in the firepower section and shielding was obsolete because Palpatine thought of human lives expendable.
Yes they do. I can give you a very broad answer for them. If you want exact examples between lets say, A TIE Phantom vs a V-Wing Interceptor, I can do that later.
Headhunters vs TIES
* Most Headhunter models are to lightly armed, only have Blaster Cannons and Projectile Launchers.
* Not as nimble as TIEs by a wide margin.
* Tech Difference between TIEs and Headhunters is very extreme.
* Most TIEs have heavier firepower and all post ROTJ TIEs have heavier firepower despite the roles they were designed for.
V-Wing Interceptor vs TIEs
* Tech Difference between TIEs and V-Wings is dramatic. V-Wing had limited capabilities to move its guns, while Rebellion era fighters can manipulate the Laser and Blaster bolts using energy to have a 90 degree X and Y firing arc without moving their weapons.
* TIEs are easier to maintain
*Despite having Shields it is as durable or less so than a TIE Fighter. Thrawn took some out with cords in trees.
* The Acceleration for most TIEs is better, the MGLT for most TIEs are better. A good portion of TIEs should be faster in atmo if they have shields.
* Most TIEs have heavier firepower and all post ROTJ TIEs have heavier firepower despite the roles they were designed for.
* In the End not as nimble as most TIEs made for dogfighting, and or they can do maneuvers the V-Wing cant.
ARC vs TIES
* Tech Difference between TIEs and ARC is dramatic. Arc has had limited capabilities to move its guns, arguable better than the V-Wing, while Rebellion era fighters can manipulate the Laser and Blaster bolts using energy to have a 90 degree X and Y firing arc without moving their weapons.
* Most TIEs are Smaller
* All TIES are Faster in Atmo if they have Shields, the have a higher Acceleration and all the TIEs have a higher MGLT
* Most TIEs have heavier firepower and all post ROTJ TIEs have heavier firepower despite the roles they were designed for.
* Maintenance is a major issue with the ARC to the point only rich Rebels are the only ones using them, the rest are scrapped, take in mind the BTL-A4 is an Imperial era or late end Y-Wing that requires lots and lots of maintenance and yet they do keep that one around.
* The Arc requires more people to use it vs most TIEs.
* Most if not all TIEs are more maneuverable and can do maneuvers it cant.
Jedi Interceptor vs TIEs
* Tech is complicated, what it has is very decent but not as good as the Imperial versions. It however has a heat issue with the guns only force users can compensate for, or someone with lots and lots of practice.
** Jedi Interceptors have ZERO ECM, ZERO ECCM, ZERO Scanners minus the Astromech but it doesn't have the accuracy or range of the same systems built into a TIE, it uses a holographic sight, though on one hand it doesn't have to worry as much about ECM, it handy caps itself, but then again, it was meant to be used by force users.
* It requires a bit more maintenance than TIEs
* Though the guns are powerful, most TIEs and all post ROTJ TIEs have much more heavier firepower despite the role they were built for.
* In atmo if the TIEs have shields they will be faster, Top MGLT is higher for TIEs, acceleration is unknown, maybe better for the Jedi Interceptor?
V-19 vs TIEs
* Tech Difference between TIEs and V-19 are dramatic.
* Bad gun placement and no way to change the direction of Lasers while TIEs can
* Overall the firepower is greater for most TIEs, and post Endor all TIEs have greater firepower despite the roles they were built for.
BTL-B Y-Wing
* Tech Difference between TIEs is very high, though likely least compared to the rest of the Republic fighters depending on how different its avionics are between it and the BTL-A4 and S3.
* The BTL-B, like the A4, requires lots of maintenance and the B varaint was abandoned and scrapped, with parts reused on other vehicles and capital ships.
* Firepower is dramatically higher for most TIEs vs the Y-Wing BTL-B, and all post ROTJ TIEs have heavier firepower despite the roles they are built for. Believe it or not the B variant is listed only having Blaster Cannons, its the A4, the one used by Imperials and Rebels, that has Two Heavy Laser Cannons. We know its not just a name swap because the weapon model name is also different.
* The BTL-B is slower than TIEs in atmo, most TIEs have a higher MGLT and higher acceleration.
* BTL-B Y-Wings are likely very hot running ships if they are anything like the BTL-A4, unless its solely the Heavy Laser Cannons causing this issue.
@@danielshmitka8119 The TIE Interceptor was armed ether with
*Four Blaster Cannons and Two Heavy Laser Cannons
*Four Heavy Laser Cannons, or Assault Laser Cannons, or Turbo Lasers.
*Four Heavy Laser Cannons, or Assault Laser Cannons, or Turbo Lasers AND Two Heavy Laser Cannons.
The reason its questioned if said cannons are assault or even Turbo Lasers is because the Smaller version of the 9.3 Cannon used on the X1 is labeled as a Heavy Laser Cannons, the ones the TIE Interceptor, TIE Avenger, and TIE Defender have take up the whole length of the solar panel or more. Said cannons are depicted easily blasting giant chunks right out of capital ships in single volleys and flat out Vaporizing any Rebel fighter with a single beam despite the armor and shields that fighter has.
Still the fact is, at the least, it has 4 to 6 Heavy Laser Cannons on it vs the Two Medium Laser Cannons an Arc has.
@@lancer737 if we were using old cannon then yes that would be the case but Disney stripped most of everything away including how some captains nodded their ties
Always great vids
I agree that the ARC 170s size and fire power make it unsuitable for dog fighting and reconnaissance, but it would be useful as a bomber and interceptor. The size, crew of 3 and fire power makes it similar to torpedo bombers used in WWII, which also had a crew of 3 and a rear gunner. Since they were bombers, meant to take on ships and attack land targets, this made sense. Also makes more sense for the ARC 170 to be an interceptor, since it has the fire power to take on Capital Ships. Clearly the Republic should've used them that way and had fighter escorts. There's another interceptor that never saw service and was far larger than the ARC 170. It was 23.7 meters long and had a 15 meter wingspan. Since it was a long range interceptor, meant to shoot down bombers, this was why it didn't have any guns. Just missiles. It was called the CF-105 Arrow. Despite it's massive size and not exactly maneuverable, it was fast. Could do Mach 2 easily. The other abilities were a 5 to 1 weight to thrust ratio. 2 G turn at Mach 1.5 without losing altitude. Thrust of a rocket. Bomb bay bigger than a B29. The handling of a 2 seater Cessna and a service ceiling of 22,860 meters. It was developed in the 50s by A.V. Roe Canada and to this day is still considered one of the most advanced Fighter/Interceptors ever built.
so in conclusion, the only flaw was that they called a fighter/bomber a reconnaissance ship
*Adjust glasses and with a snooty nerd voice* Actually, in my opinion the ARC-170 takes its design and role Heavily, from the American WW2 night fighter the Northrop P-61 Black Widow. Since both play the Aggressive Reconnaissance supporting special radar features and long range capability.
agreed. i was saying the arc170 is a heavy fighter like the me110 or p61.
What about the sbd dauntless？
@@maxfine305 that was an extremely specialized fighter plane sized frame. the arc170 is a heavy fighter/light bomber...but remember that using the terms heavy and light is relative, with the world war 2 era being the context because that is what star wars space warfare is based on.
*In a German snooty voice* Vhat does the SBD Dauntless have anyzing to with this comment? @max fine were talking about which aircraft the ARC-170 closely resembles and for all those whom think it looks like the me/He/Bf whatever 110. Look at the Fuselage and tell me, does that look anything like a 170? Compared to the P-61. Und wunderbar, don't flamewar me.
Didn't a picture of a Black Widow come up on the screen when playing one of the behind the scenes extras and the artists were talking about inspirations from old designs (see the Queen's starship and an SR71)?
Arc 170 is like pre-WW2 heavy multirole aircrafts.... And it was ditched ....
Awesome you all always impress me with your research :) 👍
Thing about a fighter is if it was SO big this 170 fighter is unfortunately too unmanuverable and too big a target for space superiority. I'd had them flying escort, raid and ground support duties while faster and slightly smaller and probably more agile craft would be best tasked with the anti fighter space superiority role over these and keeping these 170s safe from enemy fighters to do these new jobs.
yes VERY true it shouldn't be used as a space superiority fighter, that should be left with the Alpha-3 Nimbus V-wings and V-19 Torrents and definitely would be extremely effective with escort rather than being the escort itself XD. But it WAS maneuverable (and that's why it was called fighter). And it was a DEFINITE strike and surface attack craft (that could easily punch holes through defensive lines and hit ground forces or cruisers)
The ARC 170 is amazing. A extremely powerful strike craft/fighter bomber with a large quite of electronic warfare and sensor suites. This is how it is stealthy, it can cool itself to background and use its ewar to make it blend into the sensor background. It is meant to use its cannons to hit ground targets and capital ships in hit in run while creating large blind spots and heavy weapons emplacements in fleets of smaller faster interceptors. It is meant to work as a part of a fleet or, in extreme long range and long patrols in small groups where it can be serviced on the ground and help to take out hardened ground targets or capital ships.
Agressive recon is a 'joke' term. Meant to get it through the senate budget commitee full of peace loving pacifists. This is a main line fighter bomber and absolutely dope at its role.
Ask the clones on the ground who got covering fire from the rear gun at its lowered arc like a spectre gunship while also getting great scans of the enemy around them. Seems like you missed the point more than the ship did alan, like with the ETA-2 and X wing. ...like anakin did when he brought unsupported fighter bombers with just his two interceptors and arrogance as cover.
But we still love you man.
As soon as you said Brrrt, I liked.
The Arc-170 is actually my second favorite (right behind the LAAT). I have also always veiwed it as a fighter-bomber/Heavy strike craft.
Great video. Goes to show that misuse can make even a decent craft inefficient and problematic. I really am enjoying this ten flaws/great features series.
10 features that made the Droid Tri-Fighter the BEST FIGHTER in Star Warts next?
How about 10 flaws with the Millennium Falcon?
This for the flaws in a military vehicles design. Besides, any flaws with the Millennium Falcon are either due to the fact that it's a freighter or something that can be fixed by adding yet another modification to the ship.
The main flaw with the falcon is its cockpit orientation
@@daleford8621 In space. its not really a flaw. Where would you put the cockpit? In front? Then the back sides and rear are invisible. The top, then the underside is invisible. The pilot is always going to have blindspots regardless of where you put the cockpit. Now in gravity? I would agree the cockpit is in a horrible position. Mainly because when it turns. the centrifugal force on the pilot has to be horrendous. But assuming that it isn't, for some "technological reason", then the location of the cockpit is still not as big an issue as one might think. It's going to have blind spots no matter where you put it, unless you arm it with a camera system that shows the pilot all sides, and event hen the location of the cockpit doesn't matter.
@@gwiber it should be centered. As is it's being swung around whenever the ship maneuvers. Not to mention that you can't even see the other side of the ship due to the mandibles being in the way. The falcon has always been one of my all time favorite scifi ships, but the cockpit has always bothered me.
@@gwiber I guess orientation was the wrong term to use, I think position would have stated it better, that's my bad
Great video, but you forgot two things, the ARC-170 had computerized targeting with near flawless calculations on the rear gunner, which was evident in comics, as there were multiple times the rear gunners were dominating. And the pilot had a type of "administrator' feature, that let the pilot give permissions to the co-pilot, so he could take away the weapons control, or he could even give the co-pilot manuevering permissions, to let him steer and control the ship.
Just listening to the capabilities reminds me of the Imperial Alpha Xg-1 Starwing Gunboat serving more as a long range strike platform than a fighter. Basically as a hit and run fighter-bomber or long range patrol. Basically using the hyperdrive and heavy ordnance for hit and run attacks in comparison to the TIE bomber
DON'T U INSULT THE BEAUTIFUL BEAST
It always bothers me that people consider the ARC170 as a good starfighter; it's just too big, heavy, and bulky. My first reaction on seeing it was that it reminded me of the RAF's Defiant, a fighter designed to engage enemy aircraft with it's rear facing quad turret instead of forward facing guns. However, it was too slow and too cumbersome to match lighter, faster, better armed German aircraft.
A better comparison would be something like the Messerschmitt ME-110, or even better, the Mitchel B-25H. The B-25 was big, heavy, had medium range capabilities, and packed an awful lot of punch. It was highly effective at taking on small and mid sized surface ships like Frigates, Destroyers, surfaced Submarines, and all manner of transport and cargo vessels. That role would be the best use of the ARC170 as well.
I don't really see the ARC170 as a good fit for the A-10 role. It's got firepower, but it's not as maneuverable or as well armored as a Warthog. Again, it's more like a B-25H or an A-26. They're devastating against ground targets, but they're also more susceptible to getting shot down.
Changes I would make:
1. replacing the standard astromech to a specific military model that could control the rear facing weapons (replacing the gunner) and also calibrate the weapons
2. letting the pilot control all forward laser weapons
3. getting rid of the wingtip cannons, instead having one of them on a chin mount
4. put smaller but much faster firing lasers on the wingtips; also mount them on a fully rotatable turret, to allow for rear defense, like on Anakin's twilight freighter
5. allow a belly module to either hold bombs, torpedoes, supplies, long term creature comforts like a bed or something, or even some passive/active cloaking module. if you look at the bottom of the craft, you can see that there is some space there
6. replace the ventral rear turret to a low profile dual turret that could rotate forward, and provide some offensive capability, or air to ground strafing (or just keep it a single weapon if a dualed turret would be too much energy draw)
7. make the wings smaller
8. add a little armor around the engines (mostly for looks tho)
9. add underslung anti fighter missiles, or have them embedded into the wings and drop out of them to reduce atmo drag
10. add a faster hyperdrive (this one's a lil obvious)
If you’re looking for a change up from republic vehicles there’s always the A-wing. Flaws or great features.
A wing is a beauty simple and to the point
So what your saying is it's a terrible fighter, but an amazing fighter bomber, and the Republic should have used more Z-95's for fighters? Either way, its still one of my favorite ships cause BRRRRT
Yes, yes, and yes.
The Z-95 was the real predecessor to the X-Wing, and the role of Space Superiority Fighter.
I know its been 2 years already, but....stop judging the Arc170 as a conventional space-superiority starfighter - it is not. It is a starship / gunboat killer, with its heavy duty canons, long-range capabilities and 3 man-crew that is meant to punch through a light-screen, wreak havoc on enemy squadrons and then punch back out. It can defend itself in a pinch, but its meant to b complemented by v-wings and z-95s.
Merry Christmas Alan and God Bless.
Also I Love the ARC 170
Thanks merry Xmas to you too!
Allen, just by commenting your love of the A-10, you have become my favorite youtuber
Haha Flaws xD And I was flamed for saying the TRI FIGHTER Droid/Drone is the best Fighter in Star Wars. ^^
It is, some people just cant accept reality. Even (or especially)when talking about fictional universes
And that is why both FO ties and Imperial ties get taken down en-mass by ships like X-wings A-wings E-wings and even the Z-95
Edit: whoops my bad i thought you said Tie fighter. Yeah the Tri fighter is the best fighter in star wars.
Everyone deserves to have an opinion. My personal favourite is the TIE Fighter. I don't mean that it was necessarily the best ship, but it was certainly one of the best dogfighting ships.
@@thelonious2213
Really.
Like you said we can have we all have our own opinions but didn't Star wars hammer in how bad a tie fighter is at almost everything?
These things are taken down enmass by the much more effective rebel snub fighters.
@@jonumine6250 yah I have always thought that Imperial fighter doctrine was just a worst CIS fighter doctrine.
Do the V-19 torrent next plz
10 Flaws/great things about Slave I. I think that could be cool. Love your vids, you do great work.
Great review my friend. I have the hasbro arc 170 Starfighter imperial shadow squadron. Fantastic vehicle.
Double down on the weapons payload and stuff that fat lower back end with bombs and you have a great medium strike bomber; call it the BASC-470 fighter and "basc" in its murderous glory!
I honestly think that a refitted ARC-170 would be an amazing bounty hunting ship.
If you play around a bit with the space you've been given, like removing the co-pilot seat, you could get enough space to have some kind of living quarters and space to store your equipment and bounties, after all, this a ship that's as long as a school bus, surely you can make a lot of space inside of it. It's a capable dogfighter with powerful weapons, including photon torpedoes, a long operating range without need to refuel and a pretty great sensor array due to its recon nature, perfect for escort contract missions to any kind of private contractor.
If you have a partner, you keep the rear guns seat and have them man those and also communications and sensor arrays, and also have him trade with the pilot flying if necessary for resting while still flying, if not, you can remove it and add more space inside and just have an astromech man all of it, or, if you're particularly skilled, just do it all on your own and remove the rear guns, since even that would be to much to manage as a single person, instead perhaps increase the amount of space you have even more and increase the energy efficiency of the ship.
Also, if the ship were to be upgraded with newer technology, like a 1.0 hyperdrive and some rapid fire smaller laser weapons mounted either in the center, a better energy source to support all this upgrades and a few adjustments were made to increase its maneuverability, then you got a fast bomber fightercraft with dogfighting capabilities and weapons capable of piercing a capital ship, either with its torpedoes or its main guns (however the main guns are, in my opinion, better fitted to target large guns and point defense weapons on a capital ship, as these powerful weapons have quite a bit of range).
Add that to the fact that it's capable of going supersonic in atmosphere, both thanks to its usage of its front shields to withstand the heat generated from air attrition, but also because it's quite aerodynamic, and you got the perfect ship to travel fast, for long distances, versatile and capable of challenging a couple of patrolling X-wings or an handful of TIE fighters if needed, especially if you keep the rear guns. A true jack-of-all-trades, that masters no particular category but also has no true particular weakness (I'm not counting the droid starfighter and interceptor philosophy, that was more of a counter to kind all human/alien piloted starfighers rather than a flaw of the ARC 170 in specific). Even its stealth capabilities could be greatly improved if the engine ducts were revamped to have a smaller signature and the ship alternated between stealth mode and attack mode, with its wing folded and the radiators hidden, or open and helping disperse the heat from the weapons.
And this is why I believe the ARC-170 is the true perfect multirole starfighter for the both the civilian and military market, its biggest flaw was always being used in the wrong environment agaisnt the wrong type of opponents, a.k.a. the droid army in the Clone Wars. If the Republic had truly adopted the same philosophy they did regarding having a flexible ground force capable of reacting in a lot of different ways to varying environments, then maybe we wouldn't have seen so many ARC-170s being destroyed after being forced into an air superiority role that didn't fit them.
Great video Generation, love all that facts you gave and lost it when your realized that the Arc 170 was more of a strike bomber than a recon fighter. I think you are the only person i know who has made that connection.
Can we do a 10 things great about the droid Tri fighter?
Please, it's a Small, Fast and Heavy armed Drone.
It pretty much has everything going for it. About the only thing that could make it more deadly would be to make it remotely controlled by an organic pilot on its carrier.
@@daleford8621 Or seimic charges
I think the only thing wrong about the Tri Fighter is that it lacked shields.
@@adambielen8996 maybe, but it's so tiny and nimble that they aren't really that important. Those tri fighters are smaller than the bulb of a tie and have twice the guns, and buzz missiles.
Why 10 flaws?! The arc-170 is fantastic
it is objectively not fantastic. unless used properly i suppose, with escorts, as a bomber, since it has a theoretically high payload but is slower and not as maneuverable as the fighters it went up against. use it like a fighter and it gets its ass handed to it.
@@theangryMD I was just giving my opinion. The look of the arc-170 is amazing and I love the amount of armaments it has. Everything has flaws, anything is perfect
I think it and the Headhunter were the design inspiration for the X-wing
The ARC-170 always reminds me of the irl Soviet IL-2 attack aircraft. Capable of fielding heavy weapons and taking a serious beating. It was also known as a flying tank.
You fool , the ARC 170 has no flaws
The best tool in the world used for the wrong purpose will appear to have flaws.
@@MrShadowpanther3 thats well said
@@MrShadowpanther3 You got that right.
NOOOOOOO I SAID THE BEST THINGS NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Its Treason Then....
i need "I love the sound of brrrraatttttttt in the morning'' on a shirt
In Star Wars Galaxies, the ARC was maybe one of my favorite ships to fly alongside the V-wing. She was painted red, had big ol Trando repeater canons that flashed red, and was fast. Never really had gunners though. The turrets were kinda useless when you flew it in dogfights.
I love how Alan just parrots whatever the predominate opinion of the lore is (down to terminology) as opposed to actually interpreting the lore.
The ARC-170 is probably the best fighter ever designed.
Every war in modern history has shown that tactics, logistics, and numbers trumps any advantage of an individual aircraftin a 1 on 1 engagement. Maneuverability wins dogfights. It doesn't win furballs, and it doesn't win wars.
No, the ARC - 170 isn't small. But compare a P-47 to the Bf-109. It's actually closer in size to a medium bomber. But damn did it take a beating, damn was it well armed, and damn was it effective.
The sensor package would allow it to detect enemy capital ships out of range of their own sensors against such a fighter sized target. It's (for the time) average speed doesn't matter in a reconnaissance role.
The large laser cannons allow it to engage targets that (per his own Videos and existing lore) are highly effective anti-fighter platforms such as gunboats and frigates, without expending heavy ordnance that can then be kept in reserve for use against the capital ships.
Basically the ARC-170 finds you, chases you down, blows up your air defense frigates, fights off your fighters with better tactics and training, torpedos your cruiser, and then struts on home.
Agreed, he should do a 10 Features followup on the ARC-170.
You know, now I'm starting to wonder why there weren't upward and downward thrusters on all the star fighters; you could quickly turn upside down and shoot whatever's tailing you. It wouldn't be fighting your momentum because it's in the vacuum of space.
the ARC-170 reminds me of the IL-2 "flying tank" with its armaments and armor, as well as it being a fighter bomber/strikefighter
Great job with the series!! However I have some issues with how you broke down the ARC-170
1. sometimes you have to make assumptions with how a fighter is used and what modifications are done to the fighter
2. the ARC-170 was the FIRST fighter to have a hyperdrive in the Clone Wars and was thus mainly a guinea pig for some tech that was fully realized in the X-Wing when combined with the Z-95 Headhunter from the Clone Wars
Hey Alan and Ben. You guys should totally make a video explaining the science behind exactly how Admiral Holdo (purple haired lady in TLJ for those who dont know) managed to cripple the Supremacy with that hyperspace ram.
During the clone wars series the arc-170 grew on me as the best looking starfighter. I think it wouldve been best used as an anti capital ship and anti tank vehicle. One of my favorite scenes from the clone wars on the opening battle of the zillo beast episode where the arc-170s were introduced and we saw them dropping down on the massive line of AATs
Hehehe the kamikaze bit... at least you're honest. Tora Tora Tora. Also, the B-52 weirdly had a tail gun emplacement originally. Kept way past it's usefulness, up until the 80s if I remember right.
aye keep up the videos but one question Can you do flaws on weapons ?
The way you said it is perfect and flawless I love the top 10 of you explaining the flaws of the Starfighter, Battleship, Tanks and even of the more but the question needs to be asked?! [Dose the Y-wing bombers also too have their own floss?🤔]
P.s. you doing a great work & your doing amazing job, keep it up your goal is glowing Brighter like a shining Star🌟. 😎😊🥇🏅🎖
The robot hitting on padme joke killed me XD
Great video! If you really look closely at the ARC 170 it really resembles a P 61 Black Widow which was a night fighter in WW ll. I thing that with the heavy cannons like a Junkers Stuka (Stukas did carry 30mm external cannons on the Eastern Front in a tank killing roll) or a A 10 is accurate. But seriously this is a Black Widow.
Other aircraft comparisons would be an F 105 Thunderchief or an F 4E Phantom. These should be more of an attack role then a recon ship. I can see six of these in three paired flights doing a lot of damage to ground forces or capital ships.
5:36 I let out such a loud "HA!" that I almost got a noise complaint
I LOVE the ARC-170!
However like you said the presence of an astromech makes having 2 more crew pointless. By removing the 2 pointless crew they could have made the ARC smaller and automatize the rear gun (because its real purpose is to make following the ARC harder, not really to kill things).
I also believe that the ARC could have had its heavy weapons closer to its body with small guns positioned on the wings.
A fan of the A-10. I see you are a man of fine tastes.
I get the feeling that the size difference of the ARC 170 was meant to evoke the comparisons of the F-4 Phantom vs the Migs it faced.
That would be very interesting and actually a great comparison those mugs gave the f4 a lot of problems completely derailed the air forces mindset at the time. Lucas did grow up during nam so who knows
OMG I'm so fricking impressed that you finally covered the fact that there is no heat transference in a vacuum. I've been wanting to give you a ration of shit for a long time now about that.
Good job
Where do you get the ship outline or mechanical map?
I love those, when you show them.
Great job
I agree with a lot of You're assessment with the craft. The ways we could easily fix this would be a shorter wingspan, medium instead of heavy laser cannons on the Wings, or maybe a couple more hard points for missiles. But that's mostly maybe.
Keep the back firing gun Or make the wing mounted guns able to swivel to the rear.
Reduce the crew complement to two for fur recon version, and a single pilot for combat missions. Obviously keeping the astromech for assistance in flight operations.
The only other thing I can think of is since there's anyone space in the airframe from its earlier large configuration is to experiment with a pair of single loaded proton torpedo launchers aimed from the rear against attacking pursuers on the 6 o'clock.
Any thoughts?
Do a video on the Tie reaper and strikers
I'd argue that the ARC-170 does fulfill its reconnaissance role albeit in a different way. Yes reconnaissance does mean that you need to gather information but I'd argue that it doesn't strictly mean the you have to be hidden for as long as possible. See while you can still gather info while hiding there will be some aspects and resources of the enemy that can be missed. There's also the fact that hidden reconnaissance takes awhile to gather information and there are times when you can't wait for your recce units to get done with their mission. This is where the ARC-170 comes in, it fights for its information and gets it immediately. It sounds counter productive but this kind of reconnaissance forces the enemy to expose its positions and capabilities by responding to the ARCs intrusion or forcing the enemy to fall back, giving the commander more control over the battlefield. It basically forces the enemy to reveal their hand. It's riskier but it'll allow for more information to be gathered by its armed reconnaissance before making its get away. If that's really how it gets info then the rear turret makes sense as it'll buy the ARC-170 time to get away from intercepting craft.
Yes, armed reconnaissance vehicles do exist in real life. One example that comes to mind is the British FV101 Scorpion tank which does exactly that. Fight for its information.
The ARC-170 seems to take a lot of design cues from WWII torpedo and dive bombers. If I remember correctly, the cross section book you used in your video actually mentions a variant that swapped out the sensor package in the nose for a number of torpedo launchers.
you guys should do the z95 headhunter the delta 7 and the v wing
This video broke my heart
Possibly do a video on the hailfire tank or snail Droid tank
I'd like to see a 10 feature/flaw video covering the eta2 actis interceptor.
I thought of the whole convergence issue with wing mounted guns, but then, I'd like to think by that point it'd be automatically calibrated when you aim at a target. I'd say a bigger issue is that they're more susceptible to being disabled.
This is my favorite starfighter
One of my favorite fighters in the original battlefront ll.
Aggressive recon means that the ship or a wing of arc 170 arrive in the system before the main forces, scans the area to see if predicted vector of approach from hyperspace is safe or if there are better routes of approach.
I'm guessing they have on-board communitcation systems to beacon their mothership, maybe some of the ships make a jump back to transfer information.
Aggressive means that stealth isn't needed, this craft can engage enemies from afar and disable smaller capital ships if it jumps from hyperspace into a trap.
It reminds me of my favourite ship ever, GTF Loki from Freespace games, it was a heavily armed reconnaissance fighter, that boasted high speed next to the best booster speed in the game, which allowed it to land in a trap when coming out of the hyperspace and quickly escape from it.
Arc-170 probably goes for a similar idea, but instead of being quick, nimble and having a low target profile it goes for the kill, hence aggressive.
And when fighting in unknown systems aggressive approach might be better than pure stealth, at least in a trap scenario