HOME | DD
jollyjack — Abrams Engineering
#abrams #awakens #force #star #wars #xwing
Published: 2015-04-17 16:22:00 +0000 UTC; Views: 87999; Favourites: 1887; Downloads: 743
Redirect to original
Description
I generally don't mind redesigns when there is a clear reason for it (example: ED209 in the new Robocop was developed as a military machine, rather than for domestic policing, so it was made to look more like a tank) but when stuff is overhauled just for the sake of it, throwing logic out the window along the way, it becomes irritating. Like when something that is clearly meant to be a turbine splits down the middle.I'm going to reinforce that last bit for people leaping to the design's defence: film is a VISUAL MEDIUM. If something LOOKS like a turbine, IT'S A F**KING TURBINE.
Related content
Comments: 844
See that is the wonderful thing about opinions, they are not FACT. That means they can be wrong. So instead of trying to convince the world, or in this case Jolly Jack's followers, that he is wrong just make your one comment and hope others agree with you. Otherwise you come off as the lunatic holding the "end is near" sign on the corner of the street.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That is literally the most nitpicky thing I have heard about the new movie. But a fun comic nonetheless.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It looks like Captain Lensflare is going all Michael Bay, it should make for a reasonably Puke Worthy Movie.
If you recall the Kenner Toys from the 70's the turbine did that, all Abrams did was put the Toy on the screen.
The Sad thing is I liked Abrams' reboot of the Star Trek Franchise...that is until I had the Horror to watch the Sequel "Into Darkness" now I see him as just as Big a Hack as that Twit Michael Bay
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
(Reposts what he said to Jacko to you)
You know, I hate to burst your bubble. but that is the actual variant of the X wing. The XJ5 X Wing look it up, it was used after the civil war was done.
It is part of the old lore, It's not a turbine, it's a sleeker engine cowling to signify an upgrade to the venerable StarFighter.
(Now for you)
There is no Turbine in those engines, go look at the trailers again and even the leaked photo. The two engines on the sides are slimmer and sleeker and make it look like one engine when folded, but that is it.
He has literally fabricated a reason to bitch.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Possibly...I gave up on anything SW Related after they destroyed everything in that Universe I loved with that Vong Crap..so I might have missed the Visuals you are referring too. All the same...As much as I would LOVE seriously LOVE to see a New Film in that Genre, I have serious doubts about the Direction and Choices that we've seen thus Far...I shant Argue your Technological prowess in this Issue, but I don't think it is a fabrication just to Bitch. We're all FANS of the Genre and we've all been HURT by how things go from time to time so much so I think Jack can be alittle Critical of Mr. Lensflare's Body of Work...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well look at it this way, The Vong are not considered cannon (which I agree.. was stupid) but they kept the Vong Era x-wing. ..which was the only good thing on that series.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Also i'm going to ask a question: What do you gain from a four winged spaceship? 'It looks cool' doesn't count!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Your guns cover a bigger area and you are manoeuvrable in an atmosphere.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
just because you have more wings doesn't mean you are more maneuverable in air. Afaik it screws up aerodynamics if you angle multiple wings like that ( I'm no expert on that if you have more information pelase share). With the cover a bigger area... well in WWII the planes had fixed MGs mounted into their wings, noses etc. Since you had to basicaly aim the whole plane (and then you would still have a differenc of about 1-2m for wingguns, mroe guns meant more chance to hit the target. Since this is the future I'm pretty sure they can program their guns to fire at a moving target in midflight hell i think they already can today, so it would make no difference at all.
But again... we are bringing logic into the Star wars universe and once you open that door... you can't close it O-O
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I guess it can fly without wings and just needs them for steering.
The guns are probably partially selfaiming, but shooting from different angles is still an advantage.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
the first one yeah but i don't see the second one, it'd make it harder to move around if you tried turning but one of your 2 left wings won't respond
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Still better than having only one wing and it won't respond.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
it'd be more or less like a life or death version of slow internet vs no internet
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
those are actually 2 turbines the other halves are stored in a pocket dimension!
No you are right it'S stupid but if we bring logic into the starwars universe we are all going to die!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
(Reposts what he said to Jacko to you)
You know, I hate to burst your bubble. but that is the actual variant of the X wing. The XJ5 X Wing look it up, it was used after the civil war was done.
It is part of the old lore, It's not a turbine, it's a sleeker engine cowling to signify an upgrade to the venerable StarFighter.
(now for you)
There are no Turbines in those engines, Look at the trailers and leaked photos again. He's making shit up to be mad about.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
noooooooooo D: take you logic somewhere else!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Don't do it man you don't knwo what consequences this will have D:
You should not play god! D:
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What if I play as a little god? Like a Japanese God of Anti Dumbassery?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
bringing logic into starwars is liek dividing through zero... only chuck norris may do that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Entirely okay with you, Jollyjack. That turbine is a fucking shitty idea.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Its called "SCIENCE FANTASY", JJ. XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Yet another movie I won't be seeing...
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
(Reposts what he said to Jacko to you)
You know, I hate to burst your bubble. but that is the actual variant of the X wing. The XJ5 X Wing look it up, it was used after the civil war was done.
It is part of the old lore, It's not a turbine, it's a sleeker engine cowling to signify an upgrade to the venerable StarFighter.
You're a fool and an idiot if "DAH ENJINS DUN MAKE SENSE CUS JJ SAID SOO" is a reason you won't be seeing it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Nope! The 'Last' of the films came out in 1983, more than three decades ago. I only saw one of the prequels, and only because I went with a whole gaggle of friends when we ran out of munchies and booze. The story ended. Finito! The tale of redemption and discovery has come full circle. Everything after the first three films, in my opinion, is strangling the golden goose to get more eggs. I'm sorry, but I'm not falling for the hype. You can go see it if you want, that's your choice. But I'd rather reward a film maker for doing something original and fresh, rather than beating a dead horse.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
*tiny voice* I don't think they're turbines and these all have 4 whole ones...
www.google.co.uk/search?q=x+wi…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Actually, look more closely at Ep. 7's X-Wings, they do in fact have two "turbines' on their engines. But they also aren't turbines, they're just air intake vents for when X-Wings are flying in an atmosphere to assist with aerodynamics. If they required turbines to fly, the X-Wings would never make it in space.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Actually I did say I didn't think they were turbines, and Google images shows 4. That's what I said.
Point is that the consensus is that JJ is talking out of his pooper.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, the turbine part of my comment was directed towards JJ. I just didn't want to make two comments for one thing. Sorry about the confusion.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Confusion was had by all, yes. No worries.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Fascinating, tell me more about turbines.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Plus if it requires a turbine for use, how can it fly without an atmosphere?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Sorry to say, but you lost me on this one. Yes, film IS a visual medium, but it shouldn't suggest that we take EVERYTHING at face value. Besides, you can't lay the blame solely on J.J. Abram's feet on this one. Ralph McQuarrie's original concept paintings of the X-Wings had the "turbines" split down the middle.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The whole X-wing design is flawed from the start. :> A bulky fighter like that would be a easy target to spot. Especially when it opens it's wing. Also [in atmospheric battles] why would you want to go slower by making the aircraft less aerodynamic?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Look at the venerable and feared f-14, it ws a huge girl, but it was nimble as hell and was built for missile attacks and dog fighting.
Also, typically, the slower you go, the more maneuverable you are, thus are able to turn sharper. Something very important in dog fighting.
The wider spread on the lasers from opening the wing also mean that there is a bigger spread for the lasers, ww2 fighters that had a larger spread on there guns found themselves to be more effective then those all concentrated in the nose.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You fail to notice the difference here, that the F-14's wings goes back and forth. The X-wing opens up, which would make it more like a ww1 bi-plane to fly, which were very immarurvble and slow.
And what the hell does wepon spread means when you can't move out of the way when a AA can just blast you off with ease?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thrusters, Air resistance nullifying shields and the like. It's all in the tech, Also farther spaced thrusters would let it turn faster as well (which it does have on the edges of the wings, they just never show the effects.
And AA of the time, which Star Wars is based off of, Good ol WW2 flavor, where employed en mass, A wide spread where they threw up walls of bullets hoping the enemy would run into them.
If you are talking about Modern AA, the CWIS and other systems do the same thing only from a big minigun looken autocannon. If you are referring to missiles, well you're comparing Socks to boots at that point.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then the whole military system of the Star Wars universe is flawed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, you are just woefully ignorant of the tech in the universe, besides it was a space fighter, its main job wasn't air combat.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Really?
A turbine. In F**KING SPACE.
What the FCUK does it suck in... SPACEBALLS?
Give me PhotonProp and GravLev anyday. I believe Guy Fieri says it best, when he says, "Shut The Front Door".
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
well in space a turbine is pointless, but in atmosphere the turbine's probably a necessity
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You know, I hate to burst your bubble. but that is the actual variant of the X wing. The XJ5 X Wing look it up, it was used after the civil war was done.
It is part of the old lore, It's not a turbine, it's a sleeker engine cowling to signify an upgrade to the venerable StarFighter.
Quit your uneducated bitching, You sound like a typical American.
👍: 0 ⏩: 4
>that awkward moment when JJ is from the UK
>that awkward moment when you copy-paste the exact same comment to a dozen people for "educational purposes"
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That awkward moment when I know he is from the UK and I directly said he sounded like an American to make a point.
That awkward moment when people don't actually READ comments before posting about crap they don't know.. so they need to be told directly.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Hey buddy, you might wanna double check the description. "I'm going to reinforce that last bit for people leaping to the design's defence: film is a VISUAL MEDIUM. If something LOOKS like a turbine: IT'S A F**KING TURBINE."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>