T-51 Heavy Bomber COMPLETE Breakdown

[@MetaNerdzLore]

Check out the art! www.artstation.com/artwork/wJBWD6

[@pyeitme508]

WOW!

[@maxo.9928]

I really appreciate the greeblys on this model. The MG-42 barrels being used as the light laser cannon turret just *feels* star wars.

[@jonathanmora9398]

Came to the comment that the turret barrels are just unmodified mg-42 barrels

[@dragonblaster-vu8wz]

I love these kinds of fan-made creations. It's great to see them analyzed like this

[@dayton8282]

I love that the quad turrets are just oversized MG42 shrouds literally one for one

[@IvanKinkle]

This bomber actually looks like it's incredibly functional and belongs in Star Wars.

[@geoffreyhebel2438]

I would say a better option for the ordnance loading is making the bomb area detachable so could be replaced rapidly and if necessary dumped to prevent unwanted explosions taking out the entire craft

[@robblincoln2152]

Ooo! Like a futuristic jacked up barrel bomb!

[@tomaskops7119]

Have same idea during watching video.

[@supershot9729]

If the bombs go up it doesn't seem like there's much protection in them to give them time to do this

[@newsboyify]

In the last jedi concept art book they had a similar idea for the resistance bomber, it would be cool if you could change out the bomb bay with one that could fire torpedoes or missiles

[@Ignacio-d1j]

Like the b58 hustler

[@mitwhitgaming7722]

I love the idea of the leaflet drop in Star Wars. Would make for a great story in pretty much any era.

[@crazyjedi5994]

If I’m right, that’s what the Resistance Bombers were doing during the events of TFA.

[@JoaoPedro-ol7sl]

​@@crazyjedi5994 however ships that did bombing runs were smaller and faster, not the suicide and useless thing from the sequels

[@archmageofmetal8883]

I'll take 2,000 of them. I love that the quad lasers are basically 4 mg-42s put together. Rule of cool factor is high with this one.

[@RedXlV]

0:30 The big problem with the StarFortress in TLJ is that Rian Johnson tried to do the usual Star Wars "WW2 air combat in space" theme with an at best surface-level understanding of WW2 air combat. Specifically, that the B-17s it's supposed to be imitating dropped their bombs from about *10 kilometers* above the target, while the StarFortresses in TLJ didn't even have a tenth that much separation from the ship they were bombing.

[@theworkshopwhisperer.5902]

Breaking out the head canon I was hoping the Bombay would be some kind of detachable unit that could be swapped out for different things. I could see lots of uses for something able to deposit a large amount of anything somewhere quickly and generally be able to defend itself. A bulbous fuel tank module the space equivalent of a fuel bladder to meet fighters halfway on long missions. Deposit a whole listening post in a quiet corner of space. I like how the ship uses multiple of smaller components rather than just going for scaled up versions of individual components this would probably make it easier to get spare parts.

[@nickcody7257]

That is a cool idea. Like having a module for deploying Anti-Ship Mines, Sensor Buoys, Sensor Jammers, etc. Alas Star Wars has never really been modular or practical in their designs. Everything seems to be designed for one thing, like their landing pads are always the exact size for the ship landing on it...

[@tlb84gaming5]

The problem with the SF-17 is that it feels too much like an imperial bomber. It’s slow speed and weak shields don’t make sense for its original design purposes as a capital ship destroyer. Especially when the B-Wing was so efficient at destroying Star Destroyers. It’s basically a high altitude carpet bomber like the B-17. Which doesn’t fit the New Republic philosophy as this leads to high collateral damage. You can make three simple changes to the design and no one would doubt that it is more imperial than New Republic. Give it a TIE bomber cockpit, change the ball turrets to TIE cockpits with the larger laser cannons, and add some solar arrays to the winglets. If it only takes 3 small changes to make it look imperial. Then it isn’t the right design. The K-wing is a much better design that could filled the same role. While making for a more action packed scene that didn’t need a McGuffin in the Mandator IV design to destroy it. That is the main problem with the SF-17. There are better designs, and its slow speed made the battle scenes so boring.

[@tvrkm6897]

Exactly. Those things were too slow and fat to do their job at all. At least, not in a way that I would believe anyone would choose them over a flight of Y wings. I remember someone doing a rewrite of the scene in which these were at least tanky to match their speed, and only got taken out because of lucky/suicidal TIE pilots. Other viable changes would be trimming the fat and accelerating the scene a bit, or making it look more like an evolution of B or Y wings and still making things faster paced. The bombers in TLJ were outpaced by the cyberpunks' Power Ranger scooters. Or they are at least comparable, which is disastrous for a ship that is smaller than the Falcon- A FREIGHTER.

[@ironwolfsaber2739]

Have to remember the b wings where notoriously stupid expensive in repairs and for most random pilots was impossible to fly. You where better wasting random pilots in A wings. k wings if they existed would have been wiped out with the first fleet along with most of the e wings as well, k wings would also had possibly been a treaty violation as well as many newer fighters had to remove torpedo launchers the older models had in the case of militarized a wings and x wings new productions.

[@Arcadia_warlic]

Feel like in-universe this could serve an an inspiration/predecessor to the K-Wing.

[@brokenursa9986]

It’s amazing how Star Wars literally only has one true heavy bomber, the SF-17, and everyone hates it by proxy of the movie it appeared in. The Y-Wing is a torpedo bomber, akin to a TBF Avenger, and the TIE Bomber is something like a medium/tactical bomber, like an A-26 Havoc or B-25 Mitchell. It’s cool to see more heavy bomber designs, even if non-canon.

[@richardpatton6691]

It speaks to the media literacy of some fans that they can't recognize good elements in a movie they don't like. Out of all the ships in the Disney era, the Starfortress is probably one of the most OT-looking ships, and certainly one of the most faithful to Star Wars' WWII inspirations. But they can't see past their blind rage towards that movie. If only there was a series that taught how hate leads to suffering...

[@RedXlV]

@@richardpatton6691 The problem is that the StarFortress was *used* in such a stupid way in the movie that debuted it that it makes people think the bomber itself is stupid by proxy. The idea of a heavy bomber flying in so low to its target that it gets caught in the blast of its own bombs is just weapons-grade stupid, and that ended up ruining what's objectively a solid Star Wars ship design for everybody.

[@richardpatton6691]

@@RedXlV Again, it's not the movie's fault some people are incapable of acknowledging something good in a movie they don't like. That's just mental and emotional immaturity.

[@omega13whitelucario95]

Tbh i think bombing like this makes more sense for planetary stuff vs ship combat for several reasons Also i still think the Star Fortress should have just been artillery corvettes with the bottom section being filled with missiles or torpedoes This ship though is cool looking and would probably do better for planetary stuff rather then space stuff

[@ceilyurie856]

I remmer readjg somewhere that the Star Fortress wasn't meant to e a space bomber.

[@robblincoln2152]

Definitely should have been missiles from a logical standpoint but that wouldn’t work for the narrative

[@omega13whitelucario95]

@@robblincoln2152 in terms of taking out the weirdly specific weak point?

[@robblincoln2152]

@@omega13whitelucario95 no in terms of what the director wanted out of the scene-my take is he wanted to demonstrate the futility of war-like War And Peace

[@omega13whitelucario95]

@@robblincoln2152 ah gotcha That makes sense

[@marsar1775]

i love being shown more artists to adore! its different from what you usually do, but i would be happy to wait and see how these go

[@jcorkill0159]

I would love to see more of these fan made ships

[@AkselGAL]

Great design. Congratulation to Simon Coles. Apart from the "falling bombs", a "pop out" mass driver turret (Millenium Falcon style). Shooting this round bombs would be really nice. With the large box being a "magazine". That could be switched on the carrier as an complete unit or open up do put in the bomb magazine like an large clip.

[@米空軍パイロット]

Agreed. Free fall weapons should only be used on planets. Even IRL bombers primarily use missiles.

[@SamCoulson]

@@米空軍パイロット The only reason I can think why you'd want a ventral bomb deployment in space is to overcome point-defense anti-ordinance guns? Rather than having all the bombs/missiles shot down on approach, the shielded attacker can close in while tanking incoming fire, find or make a hole in the defense, and deliver the ordinance. I can imagine you might want a timer delay on the bombs so you can get out in time.

[@米空軍パイロット]

@@SamCoulson That's another good reason.

[@youtubeisapublisher6407]

@@米空軍パイロット These days even free falling bombs are pretty much gone from modern militaries, most new bombs are some form of guided weapon with limited glide or at least self-steering capabilities, and even old dumb bombs often have steering "kits" that strap onto them to give them similar capabilities. Anybody who can afford it has moved away from carpet bombing because not only does it cause collateral damage but it's immensely expensive and military actions cost more now than ever before.

[@米空軍パイロット]

@@youtubeisapublisher6407 Yes. The cost per flight hour is hardly even worth the inaccuracy of an unguided weapon. Why take the chance of missing when you can spend $20k to hit it the first time?

[@711desmond]

0:15 it’s also just a bad design, both tactically and design wise. There’s a half dozen better options the Resistance could’ve used and many more in the wider universe in general that are better in every way. A K wing is just a better Starfortress in every aspect while having the same premise

[@JoaoPedro-ol7sl]

If it launched missiles and torpedos it would make sense or if it was fast and smaller like the y wing it would justify the bombing run

[@711desmond]

@@JoaoPedro-ol7sl your right, if it was a different ship it would be better

[@JoaoPedro-ol7sl]

@@711desmond don't get me wrong I understand the idea behind the ship, but you can't defend or justify the ship's design in any way

[@711desmond]

@@JoaoPedro-ol7sl you really can’t, it’s laughably impractical

[@reginaldshort8486]

Nice fan ship. Can definitely see this marketed as an escort ship pre clone wars

[@cmedtheuniverseofcmed8775]

I like it. I like the concept of the T-51 and that they were sort of precursors to other heavy bombers. The concept of heavy bombers actually still works in low-gravity environments (bombing a moon base), where a lot of ordinance needs to be deployed against multiple targets or a heavy base. I actually don't think the MG-100s are a terrible craft. It was how the movie implemented them. There needed to be a good briefing scene to let the audience know the limitations of the heavy bombers (Using planetary bombers in a starship attack) and the fact that the Resistance was absolutely desperate to use whatever they had. I think it was mentioned behind the scenes that these were stripped down, so they might not have shields and be reduced to sitting ducks in a role they were never really intended for. Relaying that sort of info to the audience can actually show that the MG-100 crews knew they were most likely never coming back, sacrificing themselves, and that even a single bomber making it to the dreadnought would have been a miracle in itself.

[@michaelray3865]

I’ll say this for the starfortress, as long as they give the bombs some kind of initial boost like magrails, then bombs over rockets makes a deal of sense in some ways. If you’re that close anyways, lack of internal propulsion does lend a stealth element, plus every bomb is just casing, fuse and sensors, and warheads, so cheaper that missile/rockets per round delivered.

[@joshk96]

I like this one, I can see them taking off from dedicated runways planetside, gling through hyperspace then striking crtitical CIS facilitates and returning. Like WW II bomber raids

[@LordoftheSwamp1269]

This is an interesting bomber concept. I know what I'm stocking my fleet with next.

[@baru6891]

Thanks For The Video!!!

[@jacobweinstock2180]

As a huge fan of the ARC 170, I appreciate this and see it's best feature, how it can fit into and progress a story WW2 theme or no Like the 170 this should make a great Bounty Hunter ship with the many mods it can have

[@triviszla1536]

Come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Y-wing drop bombs in movies or shows. MAYBE in one sequence during the Umbara arc. They definitely drop bombs in the Rogue Squadron video game series! I think we’ve only seen the TIE bomber drop bombs during the hunt for the Millennium Falcon in the asteroid belt in The Empire Strikes Back as well as the Night of a Thousand Tears scene.

[@米空軍パイロット]

Yeah. They're really torpedo bombers.

[@lockedongamingak]

I like fan made creations, but this is one I take a bit of issue with. There is no reason for that huge of a wingspan. It doesn't have the laser weaponry to justify it, and the engines, while hopefully powerful, don't need that much heat dissipation for such a huge profile. The man weaponry is all in the main fuselage, meaning you'd want more radiators than anything. I think you could justify removing the variable geometry of the wings and add more radiators closer to the lasers to maintain efficiency, have less weight for increased maneuverability. It's a great concept, but needs some serious fine tuning to make sense even in universe in my mind.

[@duckyj7241]

Davis wing for in atmo flight?

[@lockedongamingak]

@@duckyj7241 aerodynamics for ships really only apply to speed and maneuverability. When you're a huge bomber, a delta wing isn't going to give you much of an advantage, and I doubt the S foils will have that drastic of an effect when you'd be mostly relying on shielding and repulsors anyways. In any case, this isn't a strike bomber, it's a heavy bomber, designed for clear skies and hitting surface targets. That's why you don't really see heavy Bombers succeed in space combat, because they are so slow.

[@duckyj7241]

@@lockedongamingak "davis" wing, not "delta". And I'm really only looking at it for the visual clues.

[@austinguthrie5528]

Fan-made is the greatest-made!

[@daanvos194]

these fan designs are the best thing of star wars about this vessel, a beautifull design but difficult to store on cruisers and carries

[@ChristopherPowell-g5y]

I always love your Starwars Infopedia Cannon Videos! Can you please consider doing a video on the top 3 fighters or top 2 that were non Republic, Empire, Rebellion or Alliance from the End of the Clone Wars, up to the invasion of the Vong?

[@Lordonrav1]

Why hasn't Lucasfilms hired Simon Coles, I mean really that ship is 🤩stunning! This is worth buying the toy!

[@spyczech]

I love it when people don't try and explain away aspects of the WW2 in space aesthetic. It's part of its DNA in a watson vs doyleist sort of way where I get its fun to explain the lore and make sense but sometimes you gotta admit its just the series vibe and also what sets it apart from other sci fi. I also think the use of red and green lasers that look very much like tracer rounds strengthens its anti-vietnam war angle too that lucas has mentioned.

[@ClnlBogey]

Hopefully Al Gor Rhythm is merciful. They gotta hire more than one guy in their stats department.

[@DaddyHensei]

I think this bomber should have replaced odd one we saw in Last Jedi.

[@UncleMikeDrop]

I would have liked to have seen more self propelled long range heavy ordinans. Think interstellar ballistic missiles. I actually thought of this when I first saw the Star Trek Voyager episode Dreadnought.

[@classicforreal]

EC Henry has a whole video explaining why any sort of artificial acceleration for the bombs is completely unnecessary.

[@javanpetersen4048]

Love its look wish we got more bombers in lore they just make sense or even gunboats or a torpedo boat like class of ship.

[@Gen-Atari-X]

When you realize the fans have a better feel for Star Wars then the people on the inside. Hats off to the designer. Nailed it. X-Wing B in the future!??

[@majesticmsfc]

Please do more fan designs. I am a low poly modeller than have designed a model or two like the D-wing. So I love seeing what others do.

[@Quetzalcoatl_Feathered_Serpent]

The MG-100 from the sequels is essentially a heavy bomber as well but its design choices makes only useful for heavy strikes and with lots of escort it didn't seem to have much in the way of any options other than hit in groups and tank its way to the target. I count seven gun emplacements on the heavy bomber so it is indeed a flying fortress. I can also see its connections to the Clone war fighter that was at the early stages of the war the V-19 and of course the B-wing assault fighter. The MG-100 supposed to have a modular bomb bay clip meaning that it likely could have smaller bomb bays similar to the T-51 in size, and that would likely improve or limit performance. At most the MG-100 was just a heavy armored box with guns and bombs on it. That bomber is not designed at all to fly alone or in small groups. For the resistance and its poor performance in the sequels this makes sense, as its role could have been better performed by more agile Y-wings and or B-wings which didn't require that much heavy escort and could support themselves to the target. The resistance simply didn't have the resources to properly support the MG-100. Had the resistance had a proper fleet and resources, its likely the MG-100 coming in large formations is a fearsome terrifying sight to behold. This makes sense. The Resistance was basically the old rebels forces once more, but one that barely had anything to work with well the rebel alliance decades earlier at least had a growing support of donated capital ships, support vessels, pre-war ships, captured imperial ships, its own industrial base to build more, and thousands of individuals with a chip on their shoulder against the empire. The resistance had nothing other than a few old designed ships and being led by a disgraced senator who happened to have lost a lot of political clout when people found it she was Vaders daughter and a few hold outs here and there that would willingly support them well the government basically ignored them. No surprise the donated MG-100s fared so badly. If the MG-100's turn up in the Mandalorian series leading to Thrawn as new vessels. I think they would likely be performing much better. Given that they would have the support of the Alliance fleet and able to perform as intended. The T-51 appears more aggressive, no surprise given its design profile matches that of Incoms Z-95 the ARC-170 and the T-65 X-Wing. Its gun layout is lighter but heavier at the same time four guns in the turret in front and four in the turret in the back, more aggressive design, smaller bomb bay which doesn't appear modular but appears to be part of the design and obvious better flight and maneuverability gives the impression of a aggressive bomber that's willing to hop into a bombing run and decimate anything in front of it then pull away quickly , more importantly the bomber looks like it can handle itself if it gets into trouble so not relying on as much heavy escort compared to the MG-100s. This is the type of bomber I would want for raiding and or gunship work. I would actually re-classify it as a medium bomber. The B-25 would be the best analogy to the T-51. The B-25 which ironically enough shares a little resemblance to the T-51 was a medium bomber that was able to take a tremendous amount of punishment, did bombing missions like the B-17 but also was agile enough to be used in gunship actions, and some pilots had a tendency after bombing a target to go hunt for targets using the guns in front of the bomber and that also included the turret on top. These bombers were used aggressively when opportunity allowed. Either in strafing targets with the main guns, or low level fast bombing not unlike what the Y-wings would do or traditional high level bombing.

[@nickolasturner]

Love the design and think it needs just a couple of tweaks. For ease of reloading and a few other things, I’d have the bomb section as removable to allow a make faster reloading. So the bomber lands with an empty bomb pod, it’s removed and a new full pod attached, the bomber reloaded takes off again. This would also allow for different possibilities in payload- possible transport options or weapon system options ie a forward firing heavy ion rocket pod for engaging slow capital ships or a multi-launch tube concession missile pod for one pass anti fighter/light vessel attacks, you could even have it carrying light vehicles (speeder bikes/airspeeder etc) for spec ops team insertions. A larger access ramp/hatch could be located in the attachment section to allow for larger materials/supplies/equipment to loaded for repairs etc. lastly I’d make the landing gear adjustable for height for when no pod is attached the ship height is lowered to allow for easier maintenance.

[@rodneykelly8768]

There is enough space under neath the pod to get a trolley in there to grab it and pull it out.

[@macwelch8599]

Awesome design

[@ThePrecipice66]

This is awesome. I love the pseudo WW2 aesthetic of classic Star Wars spaceships.

[@rashiqspencer6925]

great addition to the Meta Nerdz Empire

[@rayramsey6711]

The T-51 is an amazing ship. Thank you for the video.

[@clintonpatton1691]

Would you ever do a full-life video on Mace Windu? Would love to hear about this incredibly powerful character that was created almost last minute.

[@youtubeisapublisher6407]

Considering the Rebellion's established penchant for using missile and torpedo weapons in good Star Wars movies, I would think that instead of the cartoon bombs that payload section is essentially a very large anti-capital torpedo magazine. With the arrangement of the guns these ships seem like they're meant to pierce through enemy fighter screens with the guns infront, protect themselves long enough to vomit up a swarm of torpedos and then break directly away again, using the rear gun this time to ward off pursuing fighters.

[@darthmaxson3022]

The T-51 power armor is pretty cool too

[@otminealnamer1385]

I think the reason bombers aren't used is because any ship with a few turbolasers and torpedo tubes can accomplish the same thing from orbit. Anything that needs precision can just have a snub fighter do the same. Narratively it's just hard to work in heavy bombers, albeit there have been ancient sith 'capital' ships that looked like twin engine bombers(Tetan assault ships.)

[@ChristopherPowell-g5y]

Thanks!

[@MetaNerdzLore]

Thanks for this I will keep making more vids like this for sure!

[@feralprocessor9853]

Right off the bat, a mandator's final momments.

[@JakeBaldwin1]

It would be interesting if the bomb bay section was detachable so you could just swap out the entire bay and load the bombs separate from the bomber.

[@casbot71]

The frame could make the basis of a effective gunship. Remove the entire bomb bay module and instead have powerful medium quad laser cannon turrets top and bottom. Prehaps even a pair of turrets each top and bottom, towards the front and nearer the rear.

[@calebadmiracalebthreestrik240]

Nice Video, will there be some Videos on Imperial Class Star Destroyers and Venators

[@andrewmalinowski6673]

Comparing it to the Star Fortress and the ARC-170 while blending the two ships makes it look far better than just the Star Fortress from Episode VIII. The internal swchematics used almost remind me of the B-17 Flying Fortress and B-24 Lancaster with the turrets almost giving the bomber a better defensive role and wouldn't require as many fighter escorts.

[@1LEgGOdt]

Hmm… I think like the New Republic B Wings, this Heavy Bomber could swap out that bottom bomb bay with other other modules depending on the mission type. Maybe this can be used as a long range reconnaissance or even a heavily Armored Troop Transport that could dock to any Imp’s Ship and allow the Raiding party to force their way onto the ship.

[@daverage4729]

The ship looks great. Could definitely use a ventral and dorsal turret though.

[@Aurik-Kal-Durin]

This ship reminds me of the K-Wing, but more streamlined. Honestly, I like this design better.

[@engiturtle65]

really cool design, only thing i would criticize is that there is no turret on top, the turrets look like they can only shoot front and back, which isn't too good for defense

[@JP_RS6]

My problem with the ryan johnson movie aside, the bomber design was a good callback to WW2 and bonbers in general, but considering the Y wing was an effective bomber that had near fighter speeds although less manoeuvrable, and an older design. It made no sense for them to move as slowly as they did or be so helpless. Flying fortresses, which they were obviously based on, were called so for a reason and this is something johnson seems to have forgotten. So even if they had an in lore reason for it to be so slow it should of been able to take a beating. So it was a good idea poorly executed. Which is more than i can say for the movie and its "plot".

[@JP_RS6]

@@omarbaba9892 I'm not arguing the reason for it's need or role. It just didn't make sense to move as slowly as it did and perform so poorly defensively. It's either slow and takes a beating or fast and manoeuvrable to compensate for the lack of defense. Otherwise its a paper tiger, as it was in the movie. I'll take a look at the videos. Still doesn't change my opinion above or of the movie 😂

[@jesusvalencia2839]

It's giving me B-25 vibes. I love it.

[@CrashCraftLabs]

like it, logical use of the techs

[@jhonseagull5127]

no-one would have complained about that bomber scene if the bombers looked that cool

[@truebluetom2]

Incredible! More Of this

[@KaliumKraehe]

The critique on the bombers from the last jedi was not about the way the bombs work, but about the delivery method in relation to the ships characteristics. They are not very durable and very very slow. These features make a delivery system that relies on being vertically above the target on very close range Extremely unsuited to the role of bomber in Star wars.

[@vincentgregory1470]

Great ship, great vid. Thank you!

[@sgttord]

Really cool design and i want a model kit on it

[@Guardian-Productions]

i would say the T-51 would of been a prototype bomber meant to replace the Y-wing but not many entered service due to order 66 (Fan Lore Wise) Seemed to work in my head.

[@shahidvermont4001]

This is a fan ship? Huh. Pretty cool.😎

[@Gravedigger933]

3:18 True of us all.

[@Joeseph113]

really cool b25 vibes here

[@The_Lucent_Archangel]

The Starfortress critique isn't just dislike for the film bleeding over. It's a legitimately terrible design in that it lumbers along with barely any defense in the form of shielding or armor. The size of its payload is irrelevant if none of them can even reach the target, which is why the Y-wing is still a superior bomber platform.

[@snipersl270]

I agree. There is no reason they couldnt have rigged up bomb bays on freighters or even Corvettes to do their bombing run. Disney thought they had a cool idea and were wrong.

[@Imdrunkontea]

It's kind of weird how slow it was, since we've seen capital ships and transports fly way faster

[@richardpatton6691]

Except it did reach the target, and was still functional enough to deliver the payload even with its cockpit destroyed and most of the upper fuselage in tatters. As for how the First Order TIEs could punch through their armor and shields, well, it's almost like interceptors are *designed* to do that. The whole scene is taken straight from WWII, which is about as on-brand for Star Wars as you can get.

[@tvrkm6897]

@@richardpatton6691 One reached the target out of a dozen. And we see that kind of punching happen to every starfighter. One would expect a little more durability of something that flies slower than the mopeds of BoBF. As I recall, about half of them blew up in a chain reaction because they were flying a tight formation in which they apparently forgot they were flying paper mache with a self destruct button on the inside. By the name, these Starfortresses are supposed to evoke the image of the same kind of plane that dropped nukes. A high altitude bomber for taking on land bases, not flying low and slow over the target. When I say high altitude, I mean the limits of antiair flak cannons and Japanese planes, so that was very much their defense against fighters. Move that to space, and you have to work other things out to make it make sense, or just feed a slow, lumbering bomber to a faction that has their basic fighter defined by high speed and maneuverability. Things needed to change around the scene to make me accept that they would choose those over literally anything else, including proton torpedoes, seeing as one payload was a lot more than was necessary- I'd say less than a fourth of it hits the target before the chain reaction starts. A dozen fighters with torps could have easily targeted the weak point, each let off a shot or four, and all returned since they could run, not just crawl with all the agility of an arthritic sloth.

[@The_Lucent_Archangel]

@@richardpatton6691 If you want a far better rendition of a comparable scene, see "Memphis Belle". Which I'll add, saw a lead B-17 and its fellows get shot up to tatters the entire way to a target then turn around and re-try the bomb run even though that was considered suicidal. This was at the point they no longer had a fighter escort, which meant their bombers had the defense and durability to make not one but two runs at a heavily-defended target. It's also a damning indictment of how awful a job Johnson did framing his shot at such a scene, since the numbering of the Starfortress is a direct reference to the WWII B-17. From a narrative standpoint, it was a BS scene that did nothing except give an excuse for Poe to get knocked around and treated like the "silly male" by Vice Admiral Gender Studies. And added nothing to Rose's character, either. Back to the point, though. Those awful bombers were conceived, designed, and CGI-ed into existence purely for a badly-planned sequence that built up a whole lot of fake unnecessary tension that could have easily been avoided for in-universe reasons. Such as, if the "Resistance" is so under the table and reliant on hand-me-down craft how are they flying late-model X- and A-wings and using a bomber which was built post-Endor but can't swing a squadron of Y-wings? Those are Clone Wars era fighter/bombers that the Rebels used to steal from junkyards en masse. None of it makes sense and defending it is just sad.

[@simon2493]

Four Mg 42 barrels sticking at the rear made me crack.

[@shadowslayer205]

Both the rear AND front, I might add.

[@simon2493]

@@shadowslayer205 Ah yes at front too lol.

[@daanvos194]

I like to think koensayer took over incom after the galactic civil war, and all ships that came after were under the incom lable while other systems were labeled koensayer

[@keonisan]

The problem with the bomber from the sequels, is that they A. Were not heavily shielded and B. Lacked strong anti-fighter defenses.

[@nonyabisness6306]

dedicated bombers, or heavy bombers make no sense if you have the same range and survivability as a fighter-bomber.

[@omega13whitelucario95]

Technically bombers and heavy bombers do have better survivability but it's not as drastic as others But dedicated Bombers are still not a common thing in Star Wars compared to the variety of fighters and interceptors

[@chrisheitstuman6360]

How big a weapon can you stick on a fighter bomber? What if instead a bomber could deliver a weapon the size of the starfighter? A assault concussion missile is roughly 7m in diameter and a guess at 70m long 1:10. Basically a narrow corvette. If capital ships are capable of firing more mass than a couple starfighter squadrons combined it would stand to reason that fighter bombers actually can't deliver enough firepower to punch through shields and armor. An example of this being in Episode I when the entire fighter force of Naboo couldn't carry ordinance large enough (proton torpedoes) to get through the droid control ships shields. Another example is Episode 6 when the entirety of the Rebel fleet didn't have the firepower to break/punch through the shield protecting thr Death Star, and that projector was covering more than 180 km diameter shield from nearly a 1000 kilometers away. A huge generator to be fair but it illustrates the point. Another way to look at it is that a direct size comparison looks like this. If an ISD was an Iowa class battleship, an X-wing would be 3 feet long, and a 2000 lbs bomb (way bigger than a proton torpedo in size) would be the size of a hand grenade. A hand grenade, even 72 of them from an entire squadron, might cause a couple hours of repair work, and never have a chance to really damage or threaten the ship.

[@omega13whitelucario95]

@chrisheitstuman6360 tbh the shield thing still bugs me from Episode one but there is also the fact that Lucrehulks are very well armored in spite of that and depending on where you are aiming you can do more Damage but yeah more or less it's just Fighters even with ordinance are more so meant to attack weak points or disable stuff with them rather then take out large ships, bombers being able to do more damage Also thinking about it I think the fleet could take out the shielding, however, the time it would take would be too long and the Empire would have called in reinforcements to counter the Rebels Not to mention any weaponry on the DS2 that was operational and all

[@clpfox470]

Rule of cool

[@grimjoker5572]

You're leaving out cargo capacity, ordinance classification, and speed. Bombers usually have more space for bigger booms and as such less speed.

[@AgentPrimus]

bro, in empire at war remake, clonewars holdout faction, you get these on valiant star destroyers, one squadron of these can absolutely destroy mid-sized ships

[@MetaNerdzLore]

That is crazy didn't know that

[@barnettmcgowan8978]

Dumping on the Sequel Trilogy for the B/SF-17 is entirely justified. One of my general critiques of the Sequels, is that all of the attempts to capture the Star Wars spirit were form over substance. They didn't understand the substance, so they aped the form. This is a great example. The type of WW2 heavy bomber the B/SF-17 was based on were land based bombers, used for attacking targets on land. The Naval bombers used to attack ships would be more analogous to the Y-Wing. They got it all wrong here; and that's why it just feels wrong and just kind of stupid to so many long time fans. Had they used the B/SF-17 to attack Star Killer Base, that would have been fine. Instead, they made a sci-fi analogue of the wrong type of vehicle. Star Wars is supposed to rhyme and it doesn't rhyme when you use the wrong analogue.

[@MetaNerdzLore]

They were attacked and evacuating and felt they should throw everything at the main First Order ship to allow the main resistance ship to escape. Even in the story they admit they are using it not as intended I think. I think the sequels were bad, this one the worst, and even seeing how they were used has nothing to do with the ship design itself. People keep tacking on extra things to my points. Straw men to take down or just share their WW2 knowledge. All I am saying is that the ship design and idea of bombers are fine. Even showing how it worked with the plot doesn't work as a critique of the ship, all things are easily defeated when the plot needs it or for cool visuals even in the original movies. X-Wings supposedly had great shields but will blow up with a few shots for cool factor.

[@barnettmcgowan8978]

@@MetaNerdzLore First of all, just because you're ignorant of WW2 basic knowledge, don't accuse others of showing off when they correctly explain the problem, using the minimum facts necessary. Your ignorance isn't my problem. Second, your ignorance has caused you to miss the point entirely. For a WW2 analogue, those ships should not have been with them at all. Star Ships are analogous to Naval ships. Space combat is analogous to Naval combat. Those bomber should have been on a planet, not a ship. It's simply the wrong WW2 analogue. They would have made perfect sense to have been found on Crait. They could have then used them in the defense, for example. For the Space battle, they could have thrown some out of date Y-Wings to through everything at it. They fundamentally didn't understand the logic of how Lucas used the past, and so they got it wrong. They simply took something from the past and made a cool ship, that didn't fit. The should have picked the appropriate ship from the past, and made a cool new ship from it. You also need to learn what a straw man is, because you don't. Fortunately your whole last paragraph is a great example. You offer arguments that have literally nothing to do with anything I said or implied, then patted yourself on the back for making a good counter argument. That would be a straw man.

[@manuelmelchizedek4309]

I will love a model of it

[@somthingbrutal]

the "bombers" from the sequels are possibly the silliest star wars design

[@Justanotherconsumer]

People hate on the SF-17 but if’s a lightly defended bomb truck, likely an Imperial design used to attack planets with minimal defenses. It’s basically a bomb bay with engines and it makes sense for a niche role of bombardment after space superiority has been achieved, a common situation for Imperial forces. What is the combat role of a heavily armed bomber? As Ep8 demonstrated bombers were marginal at best in anti-capital ship roles - easily destroyed by even point defense weapons. The Y-wing, especially the stripped down Rebel version, did not rely on heavy defensive armament but instead on speed that let it keep up and be deployed with space superiority fighters, ideal for the Rebel strategy of hit and run attacks. How does this design solve the SF-17’s problems? It’s still a sitting duck to capital ship defenses and it’s comparatively complicated and expensive (like the ARC-170) so cannot be used efficiently in low threat environments.

[@goufr3540]

No doubt that bomber is a clearly a far superior version to what we got in TLJ with those worthless bombers, still one of my most hated starship designs to this day. Although moving forward from this style, you could see a heavy ordnance Y-Wing, at least for those who know what a Y-Wing is. Although for that, it would probably require four engines, a bigger bomb bay and maybe a 3 person crew.

[@markshaw431]

It's beautiful

[@pyeitme508]

AYO I wish for Stargate vids!

[@slothfulcobra]

The problems with the Last Jedi bombers are more cinematographic; the movie gives a very poor impression of the bombers, not really looking like they have any durability, and barely even move as they just dissolve under fire. Tonally it's a really weird feeling to start a movie on, and the movie doesn't really earn the audience's attention beforehand as it demands you be gripped by the pathos of the hopeless bombers right up front. Having a million tiny bombs also feels kinda silly; the bombs being deployed don't really look great, and the fact that the entire sequence depicts the bombers as inefficient death traps seems to indicate that they could do with lightening their load, like this ship. There's also something that doesn't seem right when a ship is seemingly maximizing its profile, which the Resistance Transport also had issues with, but that's more abstract design aesthetics.

[@danielneufield1605]

I think the starfortress would have been fine with torpedos or missles. Or even as a multi role missle boat/ mine layer

[@AGuyNamedRicky]

Even if you want to explain a bomber not using gravity but rather magnetically propelled bombs it still doesn’t make sense to make it a “bomber” cause if you’re just going to propel the bombs using magnets in a zero gravity environment you don’t have to place the firing tube on the bottom of the craft or fly directly over the target. You could shoot them from anywhere and they’d travel unabated

[@dustybricks113]

Nice looking bomber😊

[@chrisheitstuman6360]

Again its a size thing. Beautiful work dont get me wrong. If an ISD was an Iowa class battleship, an X-wing would be 3 feet long and if an X-wing could carry a 2000 lbs bunker buster, it would be the size of a hand grenade. Bigger ships need bigger weapons to hurt them. Bigger bombers are needed to carry bigger weapons. If an ISD were the size of a Fletcher class destroyer (sticking with a destroyer), a bomber would beed to be about 75m to be the size of a TBF Avenger from WW2. Say a uprated engine Gozanti for example could carry shorter Assault concussion missiles, 1-3 or so, that could actually threaten to take down an ISD. The Assault Concussion missiles on a Vic I are roughly 7m in diameter to give an idea.

[@snipersl270]

You are forgetting that the destructive power of a proton torpedo is much higher than our current conventional explosives and that the Rebellion used swarm tactics to maximize the damage snub fighters payloads would do. Capital scale missiles in SW are no joke though.

[@chrisheitstuman6360]

@snipersl270 That logic goes both ways though. More powerful weapons requires stronger armor and shields to counter it. It's literally an arms race. How powerful is a turbolaser that you can stand up in and walk down the barrel?

[@snipersl270]

@@chrisheitstuman6360 Power levels in SW are very high. I'd imagine a turbolaser that big would be on the level of a nuke.

[@chrisheitstuman6360]

@@snipersl270 I tend to agree with you.

[@cameronpearce5943]

Ooooo, brilliant!!

[@hades1890]

The front nose should be shorter, would give it more appeal.

[@katarn999]

Defending Episode 7-9? Yikes... I love your content... but this... let's just say we don't see eye to eye on that one. Still getting a "like", though! 😉

[@Director_Orson_Krennic]

Oh, it's beautiful. I'll take 2700.

[@rodneykelly8768]

First I'd take 100 for utilization studies, then by them in blocks of 2,000.

[@alexincobra7379]

The problem with those bombers from The Last Jedi is that they didn't make sense even for a WWII perspective. Heavy bombers were used to attack stationary ground targets, not ships at sea, and when they fly, they try to stay above flack gun range. Specialized dive bombers armed with bombs were meant to be dropped from high altitude to make bombs supersonic or bombers armed with torpedos attack ships. In the stupid sequel trilogy, bombers get right into sight of the enemy's view port to drop cartoonist black round bombs onto target. Ryan Johnson didn't know how to write the movie, period.

[@MetaNerdzLore]

Again, just talking about the ship itself and that bombs can be "dropped" in a sense even in space. Of course the movie had tons of silliness.

[@alexincobra7379]

@@MetaNerdzLore💯

[@taggartmumford8737]

Heavy bombers did see use in the pacific against moving targets and saw success against capital ships and some transports, Guadalcanal, and Bismarck sea.

[@SirRulean1223]

Counterargument: You can definitely use a heavy bomber on an aircraft carrier. That ship was absolutely huge and they had a bunch of weird bombers lying around. They had escort fighters and bombs, not the worst plan when you want to blow up the enemy while people escape 👉

[@crazyjedi5994]

@@SirRulean1223 also they didn’t send the bombers in until after Poe had taken out the dreadnought’s turrets.

[@soulravengaming6433]

will you do a video on the Mitth'raw'nuruodo Class Star Destroyer?

[@phoenixx913]

Sorry but no one is ever going to convince me that the star fortress is a good bomber for space for all the weaponry it had it did for little to protect it, it has weak shields it's armor does nothing to protect it's ordinance bay which is extremely exposed to enemy fire and it moves so slow that it can't even outrun the very explosions it causes.

[@neves5083]

Thats awesome

[@jeffreycarman2185]

Great ship

[@duckyj7241]

so, essentially the B24 analog the B/SF17?

[@The_Real_Mr_Al]

Me I absolutely loved the heavy bomber in ep8, to the point i even bought the Lego set after exiting the cinema. And I say that as someone who felt AWFUL watching them off Luke. At the time I thought there was no way they'd flush down all that money and would only dare to have Luke make some heroic sacrifice at the climax of ep9. Oh well, the sequels, as horribly executed as they were, still had far better ideas and concepts than most of "Legends" did. Back then Palpatine's final defeat came from a crippled old Order 66 survivor crashing his weelchair into him as Sheev was trying to body hop into one of Leia's babies... I dunno about you, but at least on paper, a force-less strandcast of Sheev being discarded only to flee and have a daughter that seeks training by Luke and have him and all the big name Jedi spirits before him give her a force boost to finally stop her "grandfather" in a climactic showdown seems like a far better and more poetically fitting idea to me by comparison. The problem was in the execution thanks to all of KK's meddling IMO...