Star Wars VII - The Force Awakens, on BluRay and Dvd April 5th, 2016

[Mommar]

... Isn't hate a little strong? The differences are barely noticeable.

But it's different, and different is scary.

[Chronocidal]

Until the wings open, it looks fine really. Then it just looks awkwardly off balance for no really practical reason.

[Mommar]

Until the wings open, it looks fine really. Then it just looks awkwardly off balance for no really practical reason.

It doesn't look awkward or off balance at all to me. I like the staggered look of the wings.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Mommar

[Dobber]

It doesn't look awkward or off balance at all to me. I like the staggered look of the wings.

Ditto, I really like the new X-wing. The original is still a classic, and will always have a special place in my heart, but I'm really liking the new one.

Chris

[Black Valkyrie]

I still hate Star Wars in general.

Let it go, it`ll lead to hate and suffering.

[Black Valkyrie]

I love the new X-wings.

[Dobber]

Let it go, it`ll lead to hate and suffering.

"Let it go" lol

Of all the people here he should get that.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Dobber

[reddsun1]

Is Oscar Isaac's character piloting a black X-Wing?

*snip*

I dunno; I like the colors, but just not feeling the "new" X-Wing design. I guess the original will always be a sentimental fav.

Is it flawed? Sure. I mean, there's the whole just-how-are-squared-wings-supposed-to-generate-any-kind-of-lift-in-atmosphere thing, blah, blah. But it just holds a special place, ya know?

But hey, after 30+ years, I suppose any military design must evolve or become irrelevant, right? After all, would anyone want to fly into a modern combat zone in say, an F-105 Thud or F-4 Phantom?

[peter]

I'm never going to look at Ewoks the same way!

[Knight26]

I was looking at the new X-wing and I realized what it is about hte new wings that bugs me. Yes I have some issues with the fact that they didn't improve pilot visibility but the wings are biggest issue here.

The way they split halves the chord of the wing and they still placed the same sized laser at the wing tips. If the lasers were shorter it wouldn't bug me as much. However, putting a long cylindrical moment arm out there like that is just begging for a bad wing torsion effects. It's worse then whey they first pit AMRAAMS on F-16 wingtips, and why you still don't see AMRAAMS wingtip mounted on any other platform. Even the F-16 has issues when carrying AMRAAMs out there, G limits, wing torsion stresses, etc...

The original X-Wing, even with its flaws always looked solid. By changing the wings like this, making them shorter like that, it makes them appear spindly by comparison.

[jenius]

Hmmm, sounds like you want hard sci-fi in your soft sci-fi.

[Knight26]

Hmmm, sounds like you want hard sci-fi in your soft sci-fi.

Not so much, I realize that SW is space fantasy more than anything else. However, in the original trilogy there was very little that upon looking at it made you think, no way, that couldn't be built, or that couldn't be real, in terms of design. The X-Wing always looked solid, even the wing split had that massive pivot point holding it together. While the new one appears to have that as well, hard to tell from the trailer images, but it appears to share the common pivot, but has panels that close up the gap left in the fuselage. It's the laser cannons and moreso the upper one that ruin the design. The lower one at least appears balanced, attached to the at or near the weapon's CG. The upper one however grips the weapon far too aft for that.

This once again shows my beef with movie designers who have never worked outside of a computer. They don't understand any of the physical forces involved in the design of their craft. I think all of us can relate to having old X-wing models with sagging laser barrels. Or how many of us tried to make our own only to see the paper, cardboard, or wooden wings twist because our laser cannons were too heavy past the leading edge? That is what this design invites, any physical model with the wings open will have wing twisting of the rear upper wing, not just because of the laser placement but because of the tiny wing root where it meets the engine.

ANd don't go saying, but they build full scale mockups. Yes they did, with the wings closed, let's see those with the wings open and watch the wing twist under load, assuming they don't beef up the wooden mockup with a steel frame to prevent just that.

[anime52k8]

This once again shows my beef with movie designers who have never worked outside of a computer. They don't understand any of the physical forces involved in the design of their craft. I think all of us can relate to having old X-wing models with sagging laser barrels. Or how many of us tried to make our own only to see the paper, cardboard, or wooden wings twist because our laser cannons were too heavy past the leading edge? That is what this design invites, any physical model with the wings open will have wing twisting of the rear upper wing, not just because of the laser placement but because of the tiny wing root where it meets the engine.

nope, I can't say I can relate to any of that.

[SchizophrenicMC]

I dunno; I like the colors, but just not feeling the "new" X-Wing design. I guess the original will always be a sentimental fav.

Is it flawed? Sure. I mean, there's the whole just-how-are-squared-wings-supposed-to-generate-any-kind-of-lift-in-atmosphere thing, blah, blah. But it just holds a special place, ya know?

But hey, after 30+ years, I suppose any military design must evolve or become irrelevant, right? After all, would anyone want to fly into a modern combat zone in say, an F-105 Thud or F-4 Phantom?

I've always accepted the hand-wave that the wings don't generate lift, and instead it uses repulsorlifts to maintain atmospheric flight- the wings serve primarily as radiators. (which is why they open to attack position; it increases radiator surface area)

There's just a certain solidity to the original X-Wing design. It feels like it's a solid piece of machinery that's weathered a galactic civil war for a couple decades, and still has life left in it. It still feels like it could take on a squadron of brand-new TIE fighters and win, because it's sturdy and chunky.

This new X-Wing design changes a lot for the sake of change. It doesn't give a reason for why a given aspect is changed. And you can imagine a number of things that are technically wrong with it. Like, the engines and S-foils now present larger profiles, but the S-foils' overall surface area is considerably reduced over the original, and considering that they were radiators, how is that useful? And that's just the nerdy over-analysis. Really, I just think it looks different for no other reason than to look different. Which would be fine if it weren't something so ingrained into the sci-fi culture. Even people who haven't seen Star Wars can point out an X-Wing when they see one.

I'm just not a big fan of change for the sake of change. Change something for valid reasons, don't just do it because you think you have a better sense of art direction than the well-loved original art direction. This is a problem I have with JJ Abrams in general.

Also, I just want to say: The Z-95 Headhunter, which preceded both the ARC-170 and T-65 X-Wing, in the pre-Disney canon anyway, remained in use from at least 35BBY to well after the end of the Galactic Civil War. In the pre-Disney canon, the X-Wing remained one of the leading space superiority fighters for over 40 years with minimal changes. For that matter, the YT-1300 freighter was in production for over 100 years. Technology is weird in Star Wars. It's like it's so far ahead of what we know, progress has finally plateaued in a lot of areas. Which is fine by me, it allows us to keep our icons into the future.

[anime52k8]

I'm just not a big fan of change for the sake of change. Change something for valid reasons, don't just do it because you think you have a better sense of art direction than the well-loved original art direction. This is a problem I have with JJ Abrams in general.

well, if they're right, that would be a pretty valid reason.

Edited December 17, 2014 by anime52k8

[reddsun1]

I've always accepted the hand-wave that the wings don't generate lift, and instead it uses repulsorlifts to maintain atmospheric flight- the wings serve primarily as radiators. (which is why they open to attack position; it increases radiator surface area)

There's just a certain solidity to the original X-Wing design. It feels like it's a solid piece of machinery that's weathered a galactic civil war for a couple decades, and still has life left in it. It still feels like it could take on a squadron of brand-new TIE fighters and win, because it's sturdy and chunky.

I'm with you on that note. My willing suspension of disbelief--especially as a kid--was way easier to engage when it came to the originals. Much easier to accept the hand-wave, as it were...

Hehe, kinda funny when you look back at the space battle in A New Hope, though; all the fighters--Imperial and Rebel alike--seem pretty frail in hindsight. They all suffered Ronson lighter syndrome, 1 or 2 shots and poof, they lit right up.

I know, I know: it was about creating an exciting battle scene, not "tactical realism." You can put yer correction pens down, dammit.

[renegadeleader1]

Also, I just want to say: The Z-95 Headhunter, which preceded both the ARC-170 and T-65 X-Wing, in the pre-Disney canon anyway, remained in use from at least 35BBY to well after the end of the Galactic Civil War. In the pre-Disney canon, the X-Wing remained one of the leading space superiority fighters for over 40 years with minimal changes. For that matter, the YT-1300 freighter was in production for over 100 years. Technology is weird in Star Wars. It's like it's so far ahead of what we know, progress has finally plateaued in a lot of areas. Which is fine by me, it allows us to keep our icons into the future.

Its not all that odd and there are actually quite a few real life examples of military aircraft having long service lifes. The C-130, B-52, and Russian TU-95 have all been in service since the fifties, with the B-52 not due to be retired untill the late 2030's. Its not just cargo or bomber craft either, the F-16 will 40 years old in 4 years.

[reddsun1]

I'm just not a big fan of change for the sake of change. Change something for valid reasons, don't just do it because you think you have a better sense of art direction than the well-loved original art direction. This is a problem I have with JJ Abrams in general.

Hear, Hear!

[Kelsain]

Hehe, kinda funny when you look back at the space battle in A New Hope, though; all the fighters--Imperial and Rebel alike--seem pretty frail in hindsight. They all suffered Ronson lighter syndrome, 1 or 2 shots and poof, they lit right up.

For that matter, I always thought TIE Fighters got a raw deal in games & RPG stats. THey didn't fare much worse than X-wings or Y-wings. I think Wedge, Luke and Gold Leader were the only ones to survive a single hit from a TIE. Even then, Gold Leader only lived long enough to order Red squadron's attack before he crashed.

Somehow, that turned into TIE's having no shields and hardly better than flying in an agile tissue box - compared to the tank of the X-wing.

[Chronocidal]

Problem is, seeing is believing, and they never had a reason to show the ties dodging, or taking minor hits. People just assumed they were soggy tissue paper cannons, and it stuck. They also didn't have the special effects ability to really show any kind of deflector shields, so we had to take everything from the dialogue. Given that a lot of SW combat was based on WWII air battles though, it definitely can be related to the air combat in the Pacific. Ties and X-wings may as well be Zeroes and Hellcats, with the Y-wings replaced by Dauntlesses.

And anyway, yeah. It feels exactly like they changed the x-wing just so it would look different, without any consideration to how those structural changes would affect an actual craft, in any universe.

But aside from that? Even ignoring any higher level of engineering principle... it just looks off. I mean, if you're going to change something just for the hell of change, fine, but at least make it look good. All this design does is throw my brain into a horrible fit of OCD because it ruins the 4-way symmetry of the original design for no aparent reason.

[electric indigo]

Let's see what they did to the TIEs...

[Silverstreak]

Anyone who played the old TIE fighter PC game (and related series) will know that the TIEs not having shields or life support systems or hyper drives enabled them to keep their mass down which meant that they could fly circles around X-wings. They had great maneuverability where as the X-wings were tanks.

But anyway, people hating on the new x-wing for its artistic license over real-world physics, while at the same time forgiving the old x-wing for the exact same thing for no valid reason is HIGHLY amusing. Hypocritical, even.

[SchizophrenicMC]

I don't even mind that neither design fits within the bounds of real-world physics. I just think it looks bad, and you could even make the argument. This is not a minor aesthetic change, like the square rectenna on the Falcon in the trailer. It's a set of major structural changes, which completely change the design aesthetic of the X-Wing, in a way that really doesn't feel very Star Wars-y. Like the FIFA droid and the fudgesicle speeder. It looks somehow more generic sci-fi.

[myk]

X Wings are flying tanks? Hardly. If we can continue the World War II analogy, the X Wings are like F6F Hellcats, with a power, speed and armor advantage, whereas the Tie fighters are more like Japanese fighters, with a maneuverability advantage and less physical toughness; I'd wager that they were far easier to produce and maintain as well...

[anime52k8]

I don't even mind that neither design fits within the bounds of real-world physics. I just think it looks bad, and you could even make the argument. This is not a minor aesthetic change, like the square rectenna on the Falcon in the trailer. It's a set of major structural changes, which completely change the design aesthetic of the X-Wing, in a way that really doesn't feel very Star Wars-y. Like the FIFA droid and the fudgesicle speeder. It looks somehow more generic sci-fi.

They seem plenty star wars-y to me. They're brickish, covered in greebles, ungainly and inelegant.

Edited December 18, 2014 by anime52k8

[Dynaman]

> X Wings are flying tanks? Hardly. If we can continue the World War II analogy, the X Wings are like F6F Hellcats

Compared to Japanese planes the best description for an F6F would be "Tank"

As for the changes, they all look fine to me.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Dynaman

[SchizophrenicMC]

They seem plenty star wars-y to me. They're brickish, covered in greebles, ungainly and inelegant.

Fixed it for you.

[dizman]

The millenium falcon has a squareish sensor dish, thats not realistic or artistic!

Seriously though the X-wing would be boring if they just used the same design from the original trilogy. Its nice to see that tech has advanced with little touches like upgraded engines and redesigned s foils.

[Agent ONE]

Wait to nit pick till the movie is out.

[mechaninac]

^This is the Interwebz... reflexive, preemptive nitpicking is a time-tested worldwide sport.

[renegadeleader1]

^This is the Interwebz... reflexive, preemptive nitpicking is a time-tested worldwide sport.

This is true, but I think everyone agrees the pilot helmets look kinda dumb and ill fitting especially compared to the original trilogy.

[Roy Focker]

TIE Fighters got the raw deal in games and the RPGs because the Players are suppose to be the Rebels. Enemies are always made weaker by design to help the player.

[SchizophrenicMC]

TIE Fighters got the raw deal in games and the RPGs because the Players are suppose to be the Rebels. Enemies are always made weaker by design to help the player.

In return, there are many more of them, and allied AI is always useless.

[Chronocidal]

I dunno, TIE Fighter was always the superior game really, and they made up for the weakness the same way the Mitsubishi A6M did. It was light, fast, and could sneak around and kill you really fast if you weren't looking.

Course, then you throw Interceptors, Advanced models, and the Tie Defender in there, and you just might as well go home and let the empire have its fun.

Anyway, there's probably a million structural and aerodynamics arguments you could make for why the new X-Wing is just a bad design, and most of them could probably apply to almost any design in the Star Wars universe anyway.

The thing that will probably continue to bug me though.. they did exactly what the JJ-prise did, whether JJ had anything to do with it or not. They went about changing an established design just to make it look new and revamped, without actually thinking about why the design was the way it was in the first place, or making changes that make any sort of logical improvement on the old one (even within established SW universe design philosophy). They changed it just to make it different, and on top of that, to my eye they just made it ugly. People will like or dislike it for whatever reason they prefer, but it's like this design ticks off all the checkboxes on what I personally would never want to see done to a ship design I like.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Chronocidal

[Kelsain]

Overall, I like the new X-wing. At first, the stubbier nose bothered me, but it looks better now that it's all painted up. The one thing I don't like is the engine ports. Those look a bit goofy, like PVC tubes, or something.

Last comment on the TIEs, since I started that tangent: The PC game TIE Fighter totally made things better. Once you got the hang of flying it, I loved piloting any TIE - except the Bomber.