Destroyers and frigates

[Death]

On a mailing list I participate on, a discussion on the HMS Sheffield came up, about its damage from the Argentine-fired Exocet missile it took during the Falkland Islands campaign. The old saw about "the aluminum superstructure was the problem" came up, so I did some digging to make sure my memory wasn't playing tricks on me.

Anyhow, in looking up an online reference, I found something else.

What does this have to do with WC? Good question.

For the longest time, there's been some head-scratching about WC frigates being larger than WC destroyers, even though in real life modern navies (especially USN) the reverse is true.

It turns out that prior to 1975, it was the case that figs were bigger than destroyers. However, in 1975 the classifications were shuffled around to straighten things out, and bring USN practice more into line with other navies, as well as to eliminate a perceived "cruiser gap" caused by the designation confusion.

Anyway, I just thought it was interesting that WC wasn't quite pulling something out of its ass.

(And yeah, maybe a bit of "look at me, I'm so S-M-R-T smart!" )

 

[Farbourne]

Heh, I'm too into Wing Commander. I just read "HMS Sheffield" as "TSC Sheffield", one of the TCS Victory's escorts. I was wondering for a second "I don't remember there being a Falkland system in Wing Commander 3..."

I was always under the impression that, in Wing Commander at least (and Star Wars, for that matter, which ripped off WC, at least as far as the X-wing/TIE fighter games go) that the difference between a frigate and a destroyer was functional, and had little to do with size. A frigate was intended to provide anti-fighter support, and hence was primarily lightly armored (and hence faster), but bristling with flak guns, while a destroyer was mainly intended for capship-to-capship battles and heavy assault, and hence, while they still have fighter defenses, they carry heavier armor and bigger guns or capship missiles.

I can imagine in many cases that the need to carry bigger guns and more armor would cause you to build a bigger ship, but there's no reason why a frigate couldn't be bigger than a destroyer.

 

[Dyret]

and Star Wars, for that matter, which ripped off WC, at least as far as the X-wing/TIE fighter games go

Nah, not really.

 

[Bandit LOAF]

Nah, not really.

The story goes that it did. Way back in 1989 when Origin had worked out the proof-of-concept stuff they approached Lucas to see about licensing the Star Wars setting for their game. Lucasarts wasn't especially interested in licensing or even doing a Star Wars title at the time and turned them down.

Months later, Origin showed Squadron/Wingleader/whatever at a trade show, which prompted the attending Lucas delegation to go back to their room and put together the announcement for 'X-Wing'. No details, no ETA, no development team -- just that it'd compete with Wing Commander. The game didn't exist before that moment and they ended up having to bribe Larry Holland with his dream project (SWOTL) to attach him to the development...

Or, so the story goes, anyway. To Holland-rather-than-Lucas' credit, X-Wing (when it came out, three years after the announcement) did a truly exceptional job of *not* being Wing Commander -- which is especially impressive since Wing Commander was trying to emulate the speed and storytelling of Star Wars in the first place. X-Wing is a much more tactical and mission-oriented game than Wing Commander that makes space combat into more of a slow dance than a fast melee... and pretty much disregards story entirely. It's an interesting comparison.

 

[ELTEE]

On a mailing list I participate on, a discussion on the HMS Sheffield came up, about its damage from the Argentine-fired Exocet missile it took during the Falkland Islands campaign. The old saw about "the aluminum superstructure was the problem" came up, so I did some digging to make sure my memory wasn't playing tricks on me.

Do you think the warhead actually detonated, or that the rocket engine and fuel were the culprits behind the ensuing fire? As I understand it, the Exocet is a pretty substantial anti-ship weapon. I feel like if the warhead had properly detonated, the damage to the Sheffield would have been greater initially and would have occured much more quickly.

 

[Jason_Ryock]

Or, so the story goes, anyway. To Holland-rather-than-Lucas' credit, X-Wing (when it came out, three years after the announcement) did a truly exceptional job of *not* being Wing Commander -- which is especially impressive since Wing Commander was trying to emulate the speed and storytelling of Star Wars in the first place. X-Wing is a much more tactical and mission-oriented game than Wing Commander that makes space combat into more of a slow dance than a fast melee... and pretty much disregards story entirely. It's an interesting comparison.

I really have to strongly agree with this. While I know none of the points made above are about only being able to play and enjoy one or the other, I play both and enjoy both regularly - but as noted above, for different reasons. And the flight and fighting style for both games is extremely different. To me the two are apples and oranges... but they're still both good-tasting fruit.

 

[Dyret]

The story goes that it did. Way back in 1989 when Origin had worked out the proof-of-concept stuff they approached Lucas to see about licensing the Star Wars setting for their game. Lucasarts wasn't especially interested in licensing or even doing a Star Wars title at the time and turned them down.

Months later, Origin showed Squadron/Wingleader/whatever at a trade show, which prompted the attending Lucas delegation to go back to their room and put together the announcement for 'X-Wing'. No details, no ETA, no development team -- just that it'd compete with Wing Commander. The game didn't exist before that moment and they ended up having to bribe Larry Holland with his dream project (SWOTL) to attach him to the development...

Or, so the story goes, anyway. To Holland-rather-than-Lucas' credit, X-Wing (when it came out, three years after the announcement) did a truly exceptional job of *not* being Wing Commander -- which is especially impressive since Wing Commander was trying to emulate the speed and storytelling of Star Wars in the first place. X-Wing is a much more tactical and mission-oriented game than Wing Commander that makes space combat into more of a slow dance than a fast melee... and pretty much disregards story entirely. It's an interesting comparison.

Yeah, that's how I've heard the story. But wouldn't it ultimately being so different from WC as it ended up being prevent it from being a "rip off" alltogether. It might be the Norwegian kid's problems with the English language at work here, but I've always thought that at rip off would basically be Wing Commander with Star Wars bitmaps thrown in. I'm pretty sure Lucasarts would have had good sales either way, with the SW brand and all, so it's great that they made an original and different space sim instead, I enjoy both games a lot.

 

[ELTEE]

I absolutely agree. My initial foray into space 'sims' went something like this (written to preserve the feel of being young :

-played WC1 with no sound on friends Zeos. I was 6. It was awesome! We couldn't pronounce 'scimitar' correctly. We called it a "Shmikter!" Wanted my own copy.

-finally got my own pc. Was also a Zeos. looked for WC, couldn't find it anywhere. Saw X-wing in a store. Thought I would try it. Initially hated it because it wasn't like WC, then decided it was awesome once I learned how to play better.

-Found WC2, got that, loved it... still wanted the original.

-Found a WC1 cd. Didn't work right away - couldn't figure out how to install it properly. Finally got things up and running 6 mos later.

In short, both are great games that spawned great sequels. Tie Fighter might just be my favorite of the Star Wars sims...

 

[Nomad Terror]

-played WC1 with no sound on friends Zeos. I was 6. It was awesome! We couldn't pronounce 'scimitar' correctly. We called it a "Shmikter!" Wanted my own copy.

That reminds me of how I would call the Rapier in Wing Commander the Raper until my older cousin corrected me one time.

 

[Max Gene]

Both terms are perfectly accurate if a skilled pilot is at the stick. (Potential pun intended.)

 

[AD]

Yeah, that's how I've heard the story. But wouldn't it ultimately being so different from WC as it ended up being prevent it from being a "rip off" alltogether. It might be the Norwegian kid's problems with the English language at work here, but I've always thought that at rip off would basically be Wing Commander with Star Wars bitmaps thrown in. I'm pretty sure Lucasarts would have had good sales either way, with the SW brand and all, so it's great that they made an original and different space sim instead, I enjoy both games a lot.

There's a story (don't know how true) that Lucasarts sent origin a copy of WC with all the art files replaced with Star Wars ships etc...

 

[Jason_Ryock]

There's a story (don't know how true) that Lucasarts sent origin a copy of WC with all the art files replaced with Star Wars ships etc...

At one point Warthog pitched an idea to LucasArts for a Star Wars simulator using the Starlancer engine. I found some of the files still stuck in the Starlancer files at one time, and was trading emails with the guy who was going to release the Mission editor for Starlancer, and when I asked him about the files he sent me a note about it, I'll have to see if I can find it in my email archives somewhere...

 

[Death]

Do you think the warhead actually detonated, or that the rocket engine and fuel were the culprits behind the ensuing fire? As I understand it, the Exocet is a pretty substantial anti-ship weapon. I feel like if the warhead had properly detonated, the damage to the Sheffield would have been greater initially and would have occured much more quickly.

I haven't looked too deep into it, but I don't know of any reason to disbelieve the Ministry of Defense report on the incident that stated the warhead didn't detonate.

That said, I don't know if I'd consider one warhead with 384lb of high explosives "pretty substantial", even against a frigate.

(Now, the 5 bombs [IIRC] that detonated in the Ardent, that would pretty much ruin any frigate's day, regardless of construction...)

 

[ELTEE]

(Now, the 5 bombs [IIRC] that detonated in the Ardent, that would pretty much ruin any frigate's day, regardless of construction...)

I remember being pretty impressed with the Argentinian pilots who flew the A-4's which attacked the Ardent and the Antelope. Using an A-4 to accurately attack a maneuvering ship with free-fall ordnance is pretty difficult, especially with the avionics they were employing at the time. I remember reading a lot of criticism of the Argentine Air Force, and while they did get roughed up in the air, I think all things considered, they definitely had some streaks of success.

Really, both sides achieved tremendous victories in the air. What the Sea Harriers accomplished was incredible, given the fact that prior to that engagement, Harrier aircraft weren't given a whole lot of recognition in the air to air arena.