what if tie but hyperdrive

the Z95 headhunter meets the Y wing

I think it would be much better in universe if the perfect multi role fighter didn’t already exist in the x wing.

personally i like to think of the ARC-170 and Y-wing to be similar star fighters but being targeted at different markets. ARC-170 is like the M1 Abrams while the Y-wing is like the Leopard 2 tank. Both have very similar capabilities and mission but the Abrams has better performance but much higher cost due to its turbine engine while the Leopard's standard Diesel is cheaper. Thus the Leopard is MUCH more common with more countries using them. ARC-170 was also exclusively used by the Republic while the Y-wing was in service with many worlds of the Galactic republic. Thus the Rebelion started out with lots of Y-wings from planetary militias who joined the Rebelion- while the only ARC-170s they had in service were once they salvaged from scrap yards of found as relics from the Clone wars. Of course everyone needs to remember that Fighter Sized Hyperdrives are new technology that was developed around the Clone wars since we see the Jedi using Hyperdrive Rings to travel long distances and we don't see true Hyper drives in service until Revenge of the Sith. my guess would be Hyperdrives were only present on custom built Star fighters that were too pricey for mass production and the ARC-170 was the First Generation of Hyperdrive Snub fighters to enter full service making it a trail blazer- but like many trail blazers they have lots of faults and technical issue to overcome. The Empire fighter line was dominated by Sienar Fleet Systems which was why the ARC-170 was retired from service gradually. the TIE ADVANCED and TIE DEFENDER were intended as replacements for the ARC-170 in Imperial service.

the 170 is the best of both worlds, it just doesn't do them well enough to warrant it's cost of a 3 man crew and an astromech droid.

Yeah it has the battle cruiser problem. Talking real world not sci-fi, battle cruiser were basically just cruisers with battleship sized weapons and anything it couldn’t kill it could run away from. However, Admirals saw it had enough firepower to be in the line of battle so they kept on putting it in the line where they got chewed up quickly.

@@Mike5Brown Like the Alaskas, little ANGRY sisters of the Iowas..

@@CidVeldoril The Alaskas were...weird. Not quite battlecruisers in the British/German/Japanese sense, and not designated as such by the US.

Agreed

@@benjaminbrockway5998 Perhaps, but they were cool as heck. Sadly none are preserved, it would've been really cool to see one berthed next to an Iowa.

I think the E-wing fills that role well. Even has a similar nose

retrofit one and it'd be a far better ship for Din Djarin as well. Remove the rear gunner and copilot seats to be a tiny habitation area, slap an ion cannon on it for disabling targets, stuff like that. Far better than a Naboo starfighter IMO.

What is the second Pilotes role anyway? Looking targets for the torpedos? Giveing more situational awarness for the Pilot as he can concentrate on other stuff?

@@larslaufer301 to work In shifts on long missions

@@Restilia_ch yeah

so essentially an A-10 being used by the typical Ace Combat protagonist

So.....basically it was the 'A-10' of the Star Wars universe?

Also in canon ARC170 was actually broadly used by both Rebels and Empire, but intended role as heavy reconnaissance fighter.

@@madisonatteberry9720 No the K-Wing in legends is the A-10 of star wars that thing had enough weaponry on it to make a a-10 blush.

@@phoenixx913 Oh.

Yeah, like 90% of all casualties in SW dogfights are preceded by some variant of "there's a bogey on my tail". The fact that they can't just do a quick 180nlike in Battlestar Galactica is a huge weakness.

Going by the "WWII _in space"_ theme for _Star Wars_ starfighters, most of the time a tail gunner does more to make you a sitting duck than it helps. Unless you're already so slow/unmaneuverable it doesn't matter.

@@boobah5643 why is that? Genuinely curious here

@@commandercody2980 Because the faster, more maneuverable plane gets to choose the fight, and you can (to simplify a bit) always make a faster, more maneuverable fighter by removing the tailguns and gunner and shortening the fuselage. Because a tailgunner probably only had a couple .30 cal MGs while six .50 cals is an average forward armament; even ignoring the problems caused by the pilot's maneuvering and the limited firing arcs for the tailgun the pursuing plane is throwing a _lot_ more lead. Which isn't to say that no one tried it; both the RAF and Luftwaffe fielded fighters with tailguns at the beginning of WWII. The German plane was more useful as close air support or a night fighter (big plane could carry bombs, rockets, radar) while the British was so bad they were removing them from service during the Battle of Britain.

@@boobah5643 that actually makes sense. Thank you for the information.

*Hey there!* I saw your comment, like the idea, and posted one that I had, along similar lines and wondering what you thought of it, anyways, you don't have to read it, but if you are interested, then here's the 'copy and pasted' comment I made, if you do, then I thank you for your time; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My issue with the Republic air forces was that they had too many classes, bringing up the cost. I actually like the concept of the ARC-170, but was probably poorly used in battle, similar to how later the Empire misused their Super Star Destroyers. The ARC-170 should have been a 'special opt only' fighter. How I would have built and used it, was give it a buoyant hull (more on that in a moment), increase the crew number to either four or six, give it bombing abilities.....which I think the ARC-170 could, in some models, already do- Anyways; Lets go with the crew of 'six' and each members themselves have multiple skills of engineers and medical training, of course combat training from saboteur to sniper or even recovery missions for data or some intel on a certain vessel or experiment, which training alone would be expensive, but being a 'special ops' is to be expected, as well not used in large numbers anyways. When this ARC-170 goes on a mission, one crew stays behind as a pilot to get out and go if need be, or using the automated gunners and astromech, give support. Five of the crew go out on the mission to do what is needed, if the world is a water world, like Mon Cal, and a base is underwater, then this ARC-170 is buoyant (told you I was coming back to this) and close to the water line, possibly even colored to look like the surrounding water itself so to not make it standout. The five team members go into an area, recover what they were sent to recover, or scout out, or destroy, then go back to the ARC and get the Hell out. I would love to make a show about something like this, maybe not an 'ARC-170' but a variant or updated version, 'ARC-180' or something like that.

You need to start writing these Star Wars shows man

The ship would need a catchy name, which in turn could be the name of said show

@@thesolarhunter "The Last Arc"?

that sounds like it could be good so Disney would never go for it.

Not exactly. The F-14 was faster than its successor, the F/A-18 Super Hornet, while the ARC-170 was slower than an X-Wing. The F/A-18F is a tandem seat fighter. Not sure regarding the ranges of the X-Wing and ARC-170, but the F-14 had the longer range. The F-14 carried more ordinance than the Super Hornet, while the ARC-170 and X-Wing carried about the same. Too bad the F-14 couldn't be a cropped-delta wing, or some other more contemporary design.

@@pepperedash4424 would the arc be similar to the F35?

@@KarimAlKharsa I've seen the ARC-170 be described as a multi-role fighter. So in a way, yes. But I've also seen them be compared to heavy fighters of ww2.

@@KarimAlKharsa yeah but the f-35 is successful while the arc 170 wasn’t

isn't arc 170 just basically the B-Wing.

Alternatively, scrap the sucker and build 3 X Wings out of that.

@@thebighurt2495 The ARC-170 only costs 50% more (in credits) than an X-wing, and has correspondingly more firepower, armor, and shields. In other words, you are definitely getting what you are paying for. Also, the X-wing was not available for sale in the same era the ARC-170 was in use.

@@Madwand99 Eh, it's not worth the loss of 3 trained crew to one. That having been said, fair point about the timing.

@@thebighurt2495 Gair point about the crew, but the uses for the two ships are different, honestly if the Rebels used ARC's for their intended use, Aggressive Reconnaissance, I think it would've fared very well. In fact the same could be said of the Republic. It was just used in the wrong role, as a short range heavy fighter, instead of the long range hit and run capabilities it was built for. It's damn near the perfect ship for the Rebels, who use hit and run tactics quite often

@@thotpatrol9885 Generation Tech did a whole video on the A-Wing (and it's predecessor, the R22 Spearhead) and basically pointed out they're a superior scout to the ARC. Faster, stealthy, dodgy and with better sensors. That having been said, they weren't available until around Yavin.

Yeah thats a good way to put it.

The point of multi-role is to be the workhorse and you can add specialize craft to a mission as needed to augment the force for the mission’s objectives. And so it’s cheaper without reducing its effectiveness. It can also swap objectives more ably than more specialized craft. The ARC-170, though, is not multi-role. It is a fighter/attacker like the F/A-18.

It is nice to still be able to get Har hitting journalism on which spaceships are the coolest in this day and age.

I feel the same way about a TIE Fighter.

Col Burton

Someone else has seen Pentagon Wars.

@@Mourtzouphlos240 I was thinking the same

no, Col.Burton is from Command and Conquer Generals and Zero Hour, I am not trying to be rude, for all I know he is also from what you said.

“Maybe you should leave a couple of fellows behind! Put the ammo where the men go!” “Sir…..it is a troop….carrier.” “So? Make a couple extra trips, what’s the difference?”

Damn that’s actually a hell of a lot better than the Naboo star fighter in terms of versatility, missed opportunity there, the amount of modifications you could do is insane, it could essentially be a completely different ship

that was my first thought too, it would also help when dealing with heavily defended targets thanks to those massive guns

While I agree on the versitility part and good options for costumization, the question is how well do you get spare parts. If the ARC was allready very little produced during its hight, I have my doubts that getting parts for repairs later on might be even possible. Even when you switch out parts for something that is avaible during Mandos time, the performance might be hampered. Still I would have loved to see a Mando Version of the ARC. Also I think they would had to go in a bit different direction. The Naboo fighter was made faster. Something I don't see with the ARC. Here I would guess that it would become more armored, maybe switching one of the rear turrets for a grabbling hock or some other utility device or make the rear turret even bigger and loosing the torpedos. Attacking capital ships isn't something Bounty Hunters normaly do but giveing a clear signal to persuers that you don't appriciate them with a big rear gun...yah I could imagne that.

In regards to acquiring spare parts seeing as the ship was Encom parts were readily available either in main storage on coruscant or even on decommissioned venators cruisers. Plus given the era being 60 some years in the future it would make sense to upgrade the ship with parts from other Encom ships hence my comment on making it a Ugly with say adding X wing foils to replace the heat sink foils for added power both weapon and added maneuverability even in short bursts to compensate a upgraded dual engine gutted from say a y wing or such. Even the controls can be adjustable as the main flight pod could be wired for one pilot with the secondary pod being modified into a containment tube that could be jettisoned or extracted to make deliveries and bounty collection. Tbh the only reason I believe the naboo star fighter was chosen was because it was wider known with its nostalgia and given the nature of him transitioning from bounty hunter to mandalor him going fast from place to place was needed but impractical for him to make a living.

I completely agree. I always thought of the ARC 170 being a great choice for a Bounty Hunter as a super well rounded ship. So once the Razorcrest got destroyed in the Mandalorian I thought it would make perfect sense as an actual replacement/evolution with the hyperdrive, greatly improved dogfighting, and still some extra capacity. But when they dropped the Naboo Star Fighter I was like - what??? Dope ship but makes 0 sense for his uses. Like basically he can fit a small child (or Grogu) in the retrofitted astromech space but that’s it, so good luck bring a bounty in.. whereas an ARC 170 with some mods to improve its speed/handling (basically it’s only weakness excluding the need for an astromech) it would have been perfect and fit his aesthetic much better.

Hmm, I'll see your list, and presuppose my own; Escort/Interceptor, Heavy Bomber/Transport, Light Transport/Assault Ship, Gunship variants of one or both of the heavier ships, and a close-in Superiority Fighter/Light Interceptor.

It's like everything in StarWars... stupid and fake

@@xephael3485 For the sake of establishing the setting of Star Wars, it has to be stupid and fake at some points.

I disagree... Gunships and shuttles aren't fighters. My list: Scout/Long Range Reconnaissance Fighter [X-Wing Variants] Space-Superiority Fighter / Interceptor [A-Wing] Anti-Ship Bomber [Y-Wing] Fighter-Bomber [X-Wing] Heavy Fighter [B-Wing] ARC-170 attempted to be a Heavy Fighter... but the downside of Heavy Fighters is their lack of mobility compared to the rest of the spacefighters.

@@aralornwolf3140 Where do you suggest the Arc-170 role should be compared to your preferred list?

The design influence for the ARC-170 is the P-61 Black Widow, which was also a heavy fighter

@@MichaelCasanovaMusic I could see it.

@@night6724 To be blunt, the ARC-170s would've been shredded by the defensive guns or Vader's X1 and Black Squadron due to their sheer size and lack of the X-Wing's agility, and if you're taking them for defensive guns, why not use two-seat S3 model Y-Wings with their own defensive turrets rather than the one-seater A4s Gold Squadron used? To say nothing of the literal impossibility of actually making the shot without the force.

@@night6724 Cool, the big fat heavy fighters with the 19m wingspan have even less room to maneuver than the X-Wings and Y-Wings then because they're nearly twice the width of an X-Wing. The trench is barely wide enough for two 11m wide X-Wings to fly side by side to act as living shields, ARCs could only fit single file, effectively nullifying any combined defensive fire without presenting a large vertical target for the defensive turbolasers. They'd be eaten alive with even more ease than the Y-Wings or X-Wings who were putting everything into shields and engines.

@@night6724 So you're throwing out an opinion that means nothing. Good job losing the argument.

so brutal, I love it

@@night6724 bro, the thing wound not have even fit in the trench lol

Or just take advantage of basic Newtonian physics and flip over.

Well it was modeled after the P-61 Blackwidow, which had the 2 in the front and a gunner for a turret slapped on top of the fuselage. It's why the 170 is one of my top 3 fighters in SW.

Why? Just like in our world they moved from having gunners to having dedicated air superiority fighters. Look at something like the B52, after I think 3 or 4 models they removed the tail gunner position. Less man power and weight to manage.

@@xXatomic2009Xx WW2 plane?

I think starfighters just need a automatic tail gunner so less crew

As a quick explanation of what was happening: Spaceship go whoosh, pew pew, boom.

@@RorikH Younger me thanks you!

MORE ME 110

@@thelonious2213 P 61 was succefull

True but the Tiger wasn't a late war tank

@@sunil_de6856 Maybe he meant the Tiger’s bigger, badder successor, the King Tiger

I think the co-pilot handled the advanced sensors arrays and some of the weapons systems.

The "copilot" probably functioned more like the RIO (Radar Intercept Officer) in an F-14. He likely ran the sensor suite and could lock up targets beyond visual range, basically extending the effective range of the weapons. Being able to accuratly shoot at your enemy before they can shoot back at you is a significant advantage. That extra pilot was also probably the most important crewmember when the ARC-170 was fulfilling the ReConnaissance portion of its Aggressive ReConnaissance mission profile.

Pilot, sensor / weapon operator, rear gunner

@@tomaskops7119 you’d think they could’ve let the droid handle the rear gun, or the navigator if it really needed human control

It's funny bringing readily comprehensible real-world units like km/h immediately breaks the suspension of disbelief and underscores how broken physics is in SW because 1250 km/h is ridiculously slow in space. For reference the ISS orbits earth at roughly 25,000 km/h

1250 kph? Star Wars space travel is usually measured in the esoteric Megalight/MGLT - are you refering to atmospheric speed?

@@starsilverinfinity yes. A bomber that flies as fast as an interceptor would be quite useful, in my opinion, on a ground base

@@starsilverinfinity Interesting! I don't remember MGLT from the books I've read, but googling it, it looks pretty standard. And then reading the unit conversion for MGLT is even more bonkers! 1 MGLT = 667 times the speed of light??? And this is supposed to be a measure of "sub-light" speed lolol

@@SolWake I wouldnt trust any conversions I dont think there are any official ones out there - but yeah, in space ships use MLGT and in atmosphere they use kph. This is interesting because ships with wildly different MLGT can often have close enough kph measurements due to the limits put in place by an atmosphere - anyways, slapping ARC engines on a Y-wings sounds fun, I wonder how it'd hold up long term tho lol

Basically a F-4 phantom

Actually if you know our worlds military history - it actually makes sense still to see the ARC-170's. When new planes are introduced, it's exceedingly rare it's completely phased out, especially in WW1/2 (Which Clone Wars is closer to WW1 with a bit of 2 thrown in). More often than not they find their ways to the rear lines/defense and training squadrons as production allows squadrons to trade up to the new aircraft. The Z-95's in Clone Wars are the new frontline fighters and seen everywhere in Clone Wars. Other than the one shot during order 66 (not sure where that is) the only real time we see ARC-170's is the battle of Coruscant - not someplace there was expected to be fighting, so more likely all units near Coruscant, and actually there, were equipped with the older ARC-170's that had been pulled from the front lines since they didn't need the newest and best where fighting wouldn't happen - and could settle on the former frontline unit till production reached a point they too could be equipped without denying frontline units of ships and replacements. Which is either a great coincidence that it can actually work still logically - or someone really knowing there stuff though more likely I'd say it's the first option.

@@anthony7697 cool that makes sense

@@anthony7697 As new ships are introduced older ships can change roles as well. Again going back to WWII, The P-47 was originally designed to be a high altitude fighter/bomber escort until the P-51 replaced it. The P-47 then switched roles and became a low altitude close air support/light bomber, a role which it was probably better suited for than a high altitude fighter. I imagine the ARC-170 fell more into a bomber support role near the end of the war, probably escorting Y-Wings on bombing runs. The Republic seemed to have very few shielded fighters and having something that could survive within a capital ship's point defense range during a bombing run and engage fighters while the dedicated bombers hit their target would have been an invaluable asset.

@@TheSuperhomosapien Nice. Lots of info in the replies👍

@@TheSuperhomosapien I would personally place ARC-170 as ground support fighters like the A10 instead of escorting bombers since they already are going to be the main target to rank hits and I would want something fast enough to deal with other fighters

Was replacing it with the TIE fighter really progress though?

@@RorikH for the purposes of maintaining military power over a galaxy of systems as a tyrannical galactic empire? Honestly, yeah. But for fighting an actual enemy? Hell no.

I'd use the X-Wing

@@EckhartsLadder Agreed.

Remove the need for a gunner, commit to being 2 classes of fighter at once, best of both worlds. ATM it's trying to be 5 different ships at once with no compromise and ends up being mid af

@@EckhartsLadder Didn't you say that the Arc could beat the Xwing?

I agree. The z95 is a great multi-purpose fighter with great flexibility. The arc 170 seemed to be made with the idea of being able to destroy gunships, light and medium corvettes, and assist in bombing runs by destroying gun fortifications with it's medium laser cannon and it's torpedoes. Not exactly good at dealing with the absurd number of fighters the cis had that's for sure.

Or 10 v-wings

@@alaskanbullworm5500 Umm, don't follow. A single ARC 170 requires a crew of 3 to operate, so 3 potential pilots. Where do you get 10 from? Who pilots the other 7 v-wings?

@@Cornel101 sorry, didn’t realize we were doing exact math, I thought we were talking about more effective interceptors.

But would you trade 3 ARCs for 3 Z-95s? I assume you can't fit three Z-95s in the same hanger space as one ARC

That same problem would have probably effect the rebellion, though in a different way. I doubt many of the smaller cells would be able to use them simply because if they didn't have a hanger big enough to hold it, then the moment it is damaged it becomes useless. I don't think that to many small ships or hide bases could really hold enough of them to justify getting whatever specific parts/tools needed.

Between the hunchbacked shape, rear gunner, and heavy armor, my guess is the IL-2.

@@IncredibleMD Check out the P-61 Black Widow. In many aspects beyond aesthetics, the ARC-170 is as close as one can get to a Black Widow in space.

@@MalfosRanger I definitely see where you're coming from, there.

I agree, escort missions, ground attack and CAS are much better uses for it. I do think it’s not all that bad for long-range, independent scouting missions tho, raw speed doesn’t matter so much for those compared to range, survivability, communications suite, etc. The heavy crew especially is good for that, 3 clones and an astromech is ridiculous if the fighter is in a space superiority role, but for long range reconnaissance you could have one pilot fly while the other sleeps, and you have a second person to handle comms and navigation once you actually make contact with the enemy.

Looks like a. Rebel hit and run Squadron but with better Republic starfighters and planned by designed by thrawn

Maybe a modular Experimental weapons platform like the tie m's

Maybe

Arc 170 matches with the Arc trooper , maybe personal starfighters for arc troopers

Plus, an additional four .50 caliber machine guns in a dorsal turret and wing hard points for bombs and rockets.

The Rebellion favored the X-Wing for several major reasons- it was easier to source parts, it had the same controls as many common 'hoppers' and other craft, and it was overall easier to build and maintain. They may have been 'new' but the overall guts of the ship relied on a lot of stuff that already existed in plenty around the galaxy. The ARC may have performed well, and used similar design principles, but my understanding was it reached that performance by using some much harder to come by materials, and much more complicated manufacturing.

@@chrisblake4198 Source parts? Easier to source parts for a brand new fighter? Somehow I think somebody writing that didnt understand how surplus works. The more readily available parts would've been for old ass stuff like the arc 170.

@@chrisblake4198 Well, the parts for the arc 170 logically had to still be around aswell. At least with the turbo tank they explain that parts for it were hard to find after a while due to the empire scrapping them in favor of something easier to maintain. And by scrapping I mean melting down. Alot of arcs would've been melted down too, but I would say the availbily of something like an arc (mass produced easier than a turbo tank) compared to the turbo tank would be alot higher, given the nature of the complexity behind the way the turbo tank moved. I don't see why the rebels wouldn't have used these.

@@chrisblake4198 Honestly I'm not sure about the lore concerning the ARC's manufacturing process, it was obviously mass produced enough for them to be a somewhat main line fighter in episode 3, which means whatever techniques they used, logically, couldn't have been too complex. I'll have to look up the lore on the manufacturing process, but I could've sworn it wasnt anything too complicated.

@@mr_h831 Because TWENTY YEARS passed between then and the GCW. Most of the surviving ARC-170 parts stocks were either depleted or scrapped well by then due to simple attrition. It's like asking why nobody but minor nations that can't afford anything new fly F-86s by 1980 despite like 10,000 of them having been built That two-decade interval was enough to kill any real Alliance interest in using ARC-170s over the far easier to acquire Z-95 or Y-Wing. And then the X-Wing came along after that two-decade period doing everything the ARC-170 does, and doing it better with less pilot workload, meaning it can be smaller, nimbler, easier to modify, easier to build and repair, and only require a pilot and astromech droid compared to the three-crew ARC-170.

You realize your modified ARC is more-or-less an _Omicron_ class attack shuttle, right?

@@boobah5643 Okay, I never got a notification on your comment, so I am sorry I did not respond when it was first posted. Second off, nope.

I like the idea of the Star Fortress, mostly because it's been bothering me that the Y-Wing doesn't seem to have a bomb/torpedo bay anywhere. (They might just stick them to the hull with magnets, at which point why couldn't you stick them to anything you wanted?) In my ideal scenario, the Star Fortresses would've been mostly for cargo hauling but retrofitted to carry as many bombs as they could to explain why they were so weak, and then in episode 9 (a few years later) we could see that they took the basic design, did a major overhaul to boost the shielding, engines, and turrets, and re-christened it the T-Wing.

Maybe useful against a y wing but the defender or the x wing would outmanouver it very easy.