BWS status

They stated why they felt that Intrepid was returned to Confed, I pointed out that given that Confed had retired the Durango class 10 years earlier there was no reason for Confed to want it. No one has explained why Confed would want such an outdated ship. I suppose the UBW might have traded Intrepid for Princeton, though I have no idea why Confed would agree to such a lopsided deal.

It's a training carrier. It was blatantly obvious, they were flight instructors at the end!

The Wolverine was used by the US for years as a training ship (same with the Ranger) even though it was horribly outdated. It still had a flight deck and could perform flight operations, that's all that is required for a training ship.

Perhaps the exchange was a result of the agreement between the two sides. Confed would have certainly felt some degree of guilt for Tolwyn's actions. And how says it wasn't a joint training program? Confed and UBW pilots being trained off a ship that was no longer frontline worthy.

Also, you are doing a fair share of speculation on your own without evidence to support it.
 
It's just a twenty-four hour ban in the hopes that he'll sober up. I hate to do it because he's clearly a Wing Commander fan, but the entire thing is just bizarre.
 
I believe I said "true" not "real." True as in when we think of US Aircraft Carriers we think of the CV type of ship: Enterprise, Nimitz, Constellation, JFK, etc. We usually do not include the LHDs: Tarawa, Wasp, and Kearsarge. QUOTE]

You're absolutely right, frosty. Sorry about the language mix up!
 
The Invincible class are Light Carriers, the equivalent of the Ranger class, designed to carry Sea Harrier FRS.1 . Helicopter carrier is their secondary roles. The UK had fighters launch from the class during the Falklands conflict and currently have Harrier GR9 flown by two Fleet Air Arm and two RAF squadrons assigned to them, so more than just helicopters. Please do your research before you make comments like that.

"Do my research." You do realize that most helicopter carriers also have VTOL abilities. Thus i would have thought the helicopter carrier term would have implied. Of course I knew that the Invincible class had fighters take off and land on it. But they only had a smaller number, and those harriers would have been no match for a conventional fighter launched off of a fleet carrier.
 
"Do my research." You do realize that most helicopter carriers also have VTOL abilities. Thus i would have thought the helicopter carrier term would have implied. Of course I knew that the Invincible class had fighters take off and land on it. But they only had a smaller number, and those harriers would have been no match for a conventional fighter launched off of a fleet carrier.

I do have to disagree here. Harriers have acquitted themselves quite nicely against some of the finest aircraft in the world... They are very good dogfighters. They certainly have weaknesses, but every aircraft does.

Just because a fighter is VSTOL doesn't mean it's a dog. They must be examined on a case-by-case basis.
 
"Do my research." You do realize that most helicopter carriers also have VTOL abilities. Thus i would have thought the helicopter carrier term would have implied. Of course I knew that the Invincible class had fighters take off and land on it. But they only had a smaller number, and those harriers would have been no match for a conventional fighter launched off of a fleet carrier.

Yes I did mean your do your research, as the ability to carry helicopters was added *after* the carriers were built and launched. They also *can* launch conventional fighters but the Royal Navy decided that VTOL Fighters were easier to go with, and as ELTEE pointed out, the Harriers proved themselves very nicely in combat, as was shown in the Falklands and during the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

*Gets off his high-horse now*
 
Who gives a shit about modern carriers. We are talking about carriers 600 years in the future.

Maybe it's something about this thread that is seeping into people's minds.
 
Take Japan for example. They are the third largest country in terms of economic growth. They have a strong Gov't and live pretty well... that being said, look over at Yokosuka, Japan. There is a very old U.S. Aircraft Carrier stationed there. USS Kitty Hawk. Which is there for Japan's defense. So are they really independent?

P.S. Personally, I don't know why the US doesn't just give the Japanese that carrier. Its so obselete by todays standards and it barely even puts to sea anymore. They only reason its still in service is because Japan didn't want a Nuclear powered carrier in thier waters.

Japan is prohibited by its constitution (which by the way was imposed by the United States) from owning aircraft carriers or more generically from having the ability to project more than a certain level of force outside of its territory.

You might as well ask why the Confederation doesn't just give the TCS Eisen to the Kilrathi Assembly of Clans instead of putting it in Kilrathi space to protect them.
 
Japan is prohibited by its constitution (which by the way was imposed by the United States) from owning aircraft carriers or more generically from having the ability to project more than a certain level of force outside of its territory.

You might as well ask why the Confederation doesn't just give the TCS Eisen to the Kilrathi Assembly of Clans instead of putting it in Kilrathi space to protect them.

True, but they do maintain thier own force, its only a few small ships, but they do have them. The carrier is obselete and hardly posed a threat.
 
I wonder whether Germany still has such restrictions concerning military hardware.

I know that the "Two-plus-Four-Treaty" limits the German armed forces to 370.000 (with a maximum of 345.000 for ground and air forces combined) and that it won't use or develop ABC-weapons.

Germany is fielding submarines but I think it's still restricted to ships/submarines that don't exceed a certain tonnage.
 
Maybe it's something about this thread that is seeping into people's minds.

Yes, there's something about this thread. Please take away from it that if someone is kind enough to debate you then you should respect them and respond in kind rather than piling on passive-aggressive post after post. We address eachother directly at this board and recognize it as a sign of respect; anything else is anything but.

Now that our cooling off period is coming to an end, though, I would like to try to restart *intelligent* debate... and to so do, I will restate some arguments:

The Intrepid is said to be a Confederation ship in the 'Instructor' end game because that was the intent behind the scene. The ship's crew and complement wear Confederation patches and Confederation flight suits. Senator Taggart is aboard. The scene is set (per the published script!) in orbit of Saturn.

This is the entire dramatic point of the dual endings: if you are bad then all you've done is delay conflict between the Border Worlds and the Confederation to some near future (the Hawk/Admiral ending)... if you're good and moral then you've fostered an entirely new relationship between the two groups at the end of the game.

The scene is full of visual cues established to explain this to the viewer: Confederation pilots are flying Border Worlds ships, the Intrepid is in the Sol system, Panther is a Confederation pilot (with a flight suit made for only her two second appearance!), Paladin is aboard the 'rebel' carrier instead of standing in front of the Vesuvius, etc. The purpose - the intent - is clear... can anyone argue with this? If so, do so... but don't repeat over and over that you don't understand the thinking on the subject because that's insulting to everyone involved (most of all yourself.)

I will grant that we are not dealing with strict textual interpretation -- no character says 'the Intrepid is a Confederation ship now' (more on this in a moment...) but it's definately more than an originalist one (and let us be clear that the third approach doesn't fly at all in our fandom - stare decicis is not a reason for insisting fan beliefs be accurate on the future... evidence, argument and all that is required.)

(As an aside, let us be absolutely clear what the sequence we are talking about is, since that's one of the points you've somehow refused to acknowledge (?) several times. Blair, Maniac and Panther are flight instructors on the Intrepid which is orbiting Saturn. This is a decidedly textual interpretation, since all of these things are directly stated. We are not seeing the Intrepid ferrying anyone anywhere - we're seeing Blair being told he is supposed to shake down a group of new pilots but then deciding to go joyriding in a Banshee instead. That's the whole thing.)

Here is another important point, as of yet unmade: despite constant claims to the contrary, there is actually nothing in the Wing Commander IV novel's conclusion that proves the Intrepid is still a Union of Border Worlds carrier. Blair's orders from Paladin are that he "take over the Confed fleet in the Border Worlds" (emphasis mine.) Paladin then says that he will "be taking the Intrepid out to the frontier area, courtesy of captain Garibaldi... We've agreed to fix his plumbing and enough of the quarters to give you your own VIP berth." This is in no way specific - it is equally (or, given the Instructor endgame, more) likely that Garibaldi has joined almost all the other Wing Commander IV characters in resuming his Confederate commission. The simple fact that the Confederation even has a fleet in the Border Worlds after the events of Wing Commander IV seems to suggest that there is some form of defense agreement.

The timeline is also much more clear than originally suggested in this thread - Tolwyn hangs himself *after* Blair is promoted and ordered to the frontier but *before* he appears as a flight instructor. If the Intrepid is not a Terran Confederation ship at the end of the novel then it is at some unspecified time afterwards. The two scenes are points and not a line - we simply don't know what happens between them...

... which brings me to another point. If the awkward anger present in this thread is a result of dedication to some piece of fanon then remember that we simply DO NOT KNOW THE STORY of what happens to the Intrepid beyond those two specific points. It is not necessarily contradicting Unknown Enemy or the Aces Club stories or any other piece of fan fiction... because it's very, very easy for the Intrepid to change hands again after the game's final cutscene.

Now that's the what -- another problem with this thread is that it's insisting on knowing the whys and wherefores... which we, quite simply, do not have. My fairly simple brain can come up with half a dozen explanations for why the Intrepid *could* be a Confederation ship, but I can not tell you *why*. If that's what you want, it will never happen. The information does not exist.

I don't even want to list easy theories, since you seem so caught up in them... but:

- The Intrepid was always a Confederation ship and it reverted to the Naval Reserve (or some equivalent) when the conflict ended.
- The crew of the Intrepid decided to resume their Confederation commissions and the ship became a defacto part of the Confederation fleet.
- The Intrepid was too crippled or too expensive and the UBW did not want it.
- The Intrepid was given to the Confederation as a goodwill offering.
- The Confederation insisted that the Border Worlds dismantle their force projection capabilities in a peace treaty or in a later defense agreement, which *reasonable to you or not* was something Paladin clearly had an issue with early in the Wing Commander IV novelization.
- The Confederation simply bought the ship to use as a training carrier, similar to the old ships used as training carriers used by the modern USN and the Confederation in Action Stations.
- Blair became an instructor and specifically requested the Intrepid be provided as a training ship, as part of the same 'fence mending' policy we know he applied to bringing Wilford aboard as Captain of the Midway.

... but at the end of the day there is simply no quote that explains that the Border Worlds gave the Intrepid to the Confederation -- nor can we easily argue the virtues of these points since they're all things we've just theorized about now. No evidence suggests for or against any of them.

We also, let us be clear, do not know the *origin* of the Intrepid, we do not know the terms of the treaty with the Border Worlds (if one exists) and we do not know the details of the defense agreement (we can cite both the end of the Wing Commander IV novelization and the Secret Ops materials to prove that one exists.)

And that's that - now can we play nicely about this and have a good chat from this point on?

(And can we please move the 'real carrier' side talk to somewhere else or - ideally - nowhere? 'Guy on the internet does or does not know something about the modern Navy' is somewhat tired when removed from making a point about Wing Commander. :))
 
(And can we please move the 'real carrier' side talk to somewhere else or - ideally - nowhere? 'Guy on the internet does or does not know something about the modern Navy' is somewhat tired when removed from making a point about Wing Commander. :))

I agree with everything but this last piece. I thought that in this case, the way the conversation brought in elements from the 'modern navy' was appropriate as participants attempted to use the information to support a respective theory or comparison about the Intrepid, Victory, etc. That's half the fun, in my opinion, to offer theories and explanations that seem plausible. As Wing Commander undoubtedly draws influence from real history, I felt this part of the conversation supported the original thread topic rather than detracted from it.

Maybe I'm missing something? :)
 
I agree with everything but this last piece. I thought that in this case, the way the conversation brought in elements from the 'modern navy' was appropriate as participants attempted to use the information to support a respective theory or comparison about the Intrepid, Victory, etc. That's half the fun, in my opinion, to offer theories and explanations that seem plausible. As Wing Commander undoubtedly draws influence from real history, I felt this part of the conversation supported the original thread topic rather than detracted from it.

Maybe I'm missing something? :)

I do agree with it and repeat my previous statement.

Dundradal said:
Who gives a shit about modern carriers. We are talking about carriers 600 years in the future.
 
I don't have a problem with the analogy, but all the sub-chatter about whether or not so-and-so knows that X carrier actually has Y type of airplane should probably be moved to off-topic.
 
The whole probelm is that the writers added the scene without explaining how Intrepid went from being the UBW flagship to a Confed training carrier in less then 8 years.

Also it seems like an improvised carrier like Intrepid would be more likely to have malfunctons, and a ship prone to malfuncton would be the last ship you would want as a training ship.

And when did Paladin have a probelm with the UBW having carriers? I remember Tolwyn telling him that Blair had been flying off of a BW carrier when Blair torpedoed Lexington, and Paladin asking for confirmation that it was a BW carrier, but I don't remember anything about him saying that the BW shouldn't be allowed to have carriers?.

And is there any confirmation that Garibaldi ever had a Confed commission?
 
And is there any confirmation that Garibaldi ever had a Confed commission?
What other option is there...? And again, you seem to ignore most of everyone else's points and base your argument on things like "it seems the Intrepid would be likely to have malfunctions, so it would be the last ship you want as a training ship" - can you honestly not see how there is nothing in that sentence that has anything to do with the bits and pieces that we DO see or read about this issue?

Seriously, compare these:
You: "it seems the Intrepid would be likely to have malfunctions, so it would be the last ship you want as a training ship"
Not you: "WC4 shows us a lot of people wearing Confed uniforms, as well as a Confed senator, onboard the Intrepid, in the Sol sector, where pilots are getting training".

Do you see what I'm saying? While we may never know the full story, the second sentence is a pretty strong evidence in favor of "Intrepid was returned to Confed as a training ship", while the first sentence does not present any evidence to the contrary at all...

"We are not given a full explanation, therefore I choose to make up a theory that disregards the one scene which we do see" is not a good way to present your theory. The problem, as you say, is not the lack of a full explanation, it's your finding it easier to come up with an alternate explanation on your own than to consider that what little info we do have is perfectly compatible with the idea that the Intrepid is, at some point after WC4, a Confed ship.
 
The whole probelm is that the writers added the scene without explaining how Intrepid went from being the UBW flagship to a Confed training carrier in less then 8 years.

There's a circuit misfiring somewhere in your brain. The Wing Commander IV game is the *source* material -- it's not adapted from the book and it's not some series of historical vignettes put together without reason. It's a single narrative -- nobody "added" a scene in the sense that you're implying and it certainly wasn't some terrible error that 'contradicts' a small reference in a novel published more than a year later.

The 'Outerworlds Fleet' you reference isn't some spectacular holy organization -- it's a bunch of relics and spit-and-glue transports organized in a matter of days to provide a desparate defense should the Confederation not allow the Border Worlds to secede. The novel you keep referencing makes this very clear - it's a last ditch grouping of whatever anyone could find, not some amazing crystal salad that the Confederation has somehow offensivly-only-to-you plucked the strawberry from.

Also it seems like an improvised carrier like Intrepid would be more likely to have malfunctons, and a ship prone to malfuncton would be the last ship you would want as a training ship.

Well, that's grand of you to say but the idea that the Intrepid is being used as a training ship isn't up for debate; it's right there, in the game's dialogue. If it helps you sleep at night then think of the United States Navy relegating their original carrier (a similarly awkward conversion ship) to training duty for new pilots... or of Tolwyn's reference to having practiced landings on the 'old training ship Schweinfurt' in Action Stations.

And when did Paladin have a probelm with the UBW having carriers? I remember Tolwyn telling him that Blair had been flying off of a BW carrier when Blair torpedoed Lexington, and Paladin asking for confirmation that it was a BW carrier, but I don't remember anything about him saying that the BW shouldn't be allowed to have carriers?.

As cited over and over in this thread, it's from a conversation in the Wing Commander IV novel. Upon hearing that the Intrepid exists:

"Is that confirmed, Admiral? An active service Border Worlds ship?", he closed his eyes at Tolwyn's single confirming nod. "Then it'll be war," he said softly. "The senate won't stand for that. Not a bit."

(Note that this is after the systems had declared independance, which was apparently not enough to prompt the senate to vote for war.)

And is there any confirmation that Garibaldi ever had a Confed commission?

Where do you think he came from? There was no other service creating naval officers until the specific weeks in which Wing Commander IV takes place.
 
Back
Top