Ok, I'm sorry to open this can of worms again, but . . . I have to. I love the A-wings (original and prequel), and I want to see them done right. I seem to remember (though I can't find it now) some kind of hint that the A-wing will now have a rear firing arc (reflecting it's ability to rotate it's laser canons). If that's the case, I expect that the models will be updated to have rotating guns. And, if the models are being updated, it seems like a prime opportunity to revisit the question of A-wing scale. Now, the canonical size of the original RZ-1 A-wing from RotJ is 9.6 meters, but numerous comparisons of the on-screen A-wing to other ships like the Millenium Falcon and X-wing show that the A-wing is probably closer to 7 meters in length. I've always preferred the smaller size since the A-wing is supposed to be a small, zippy interceptor, and I'd hoped that the inclusion of new RZ-2 A-wings in TLJ would help clear up this misunderstanding. Unfortunately, it seems to only have exacerbated the problem. The TLJ cross-sections book (which is canon) lists the length of the RZ-2 A-wing as 7.68 m, which is a much better size. However, it also states that the RZ-2 is LONGER than the RZ-1. How can a 7.68 m ship be longer than a 9.6 m ship? It can't. Something needs to be fixed.

Anyways, all that I'm really trying to say is that I hope we get a new model for the RZ-1 A-wing that is smaller (scale = 7 m), and that the RZ-2 A-wing is also small, like it should be.

Do you guys think there's a chance this'll happen?

Okay.. here is the thing about movies and scale. Often, they don't consider comparative sizes because, especially in the original movies, the ships were kitbashed together. There are often times where scenes are filmed one way in the Falcon that don't make sense.

Remember these movies were made before the internet and nerds with way too much time on out hands trying to figure comparative scales out.

This is what had happened with the a-wing. Officially, the a-wing is a pretty big ship. Fairly roomy. There are even some a-wings that have a second seat for a flight instructor/passenger. This is canon, whether you like it or not, as per Star Wars Rebels.

3d animation is easier to set up a correct scale for vehicles, and even the newer movies probably take consistincy into account more than the old.

The new a-wing is smaller, but the older is larger (and can sometimes have someone in the back - the RZ-1T or a-wing trainer)

I don't see them doing anything with the original A-Wing sculpt, and I certainly don't see them giving it a rear arc.

I doubt it, considering that 9.6m is the official figure FFG got from Lucasfilm, and that 9.6 is in every canon source.

It's... unfortunate that the A-wings look larger than they should be based on RotJ, but I personally like the Thicc-Wing better.

Think what A-wing is and can do. It's not just a lightweight interceptor like TIE/in, it's a long range scout ship. A-wing has:

- an advanced navicomputer

- advanced sensor and jamming suite

- targeting computer for missiles

- 12 (!) concussion missiles

- life support system for long missions

All of this should take up a lot of space!

I actually did suggest RZ-2 pilots already through official FFG channels/communications. I will admit that creating the ideas was difficult because of the very things posted here. The lore wasn't correct in certain areas. Hard to figure out what was the true number. The computer systems was more than a Navicomputer. That much I was able to see. Apparently the HUD and computer system, was almost as advanced as the Stealth X (the Jedi X-Wing)

Regardless of numbers.. I do hope the RZ-2 becomes it's own ship in 2.0. It would give the game a Resistance A-Wing, and provide unique gameplay. I did see in lore the RZ-2 is a Hit and Run ship. That is what the Resistance used it for, when they wern't escorts

2 hours ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

Okay.. here is the thing about movies and scale. Often, they don't consider comparative sizes because, especially in the original movies, the ships were kitbashed together. There are often times where scenes are filmed one way in the Falcon that don't make sense.

Remember these movies were made before the internet and nerds with way too much time on out hands trying to figure comparative scales out.

This is what had happened with the a-wing. Officially, the a-wing is a pretty big ship. Fairly roomy. There are even some a-wings that have a second seat for a flight instructor/passenger. This is canon, whether you like it or not, as per Star Wars Rebels.

3d animation is easier to set up a correct scale for vehicles, and even the newer movies probably take consistincy into account more than the old.

The new a-wing is smaller, but the older is larger (and can sometimes have someone in the back - the RZ-1T or a-wing trainer)

the 10 meter length was a misquote, and once it was printed once it kept getting cited as reference. theres an article where one model maker said they kept getting asked and made up the length on the spot, but were wrong

all you need to do is measure the canopy to see how obviously off 10 meters is

the canopy would be nearly 4 meters long on a 10 meter ship, but on a 7 meter ship its about 2. consider a f14 tomcats 2 person cockpit is 4 meters long, and it is way, way bigger than an Awings.

I fully agree that you cant base everything on a single model from a single shot in film, but theres 35 years of sources now, and they ALL, every single one, show a humanoid pilot of average size in a cockpit that simply is not 12 feet long.

to put it another way, at 10 meters the proportions of an Awing would make it the same dimensions as 2 flat nose school buses parked next to eachother. we all know it isnt that big

I agree. I'd love a smaller A-wing, too.

I wrote a blog post about my argument; too long to cut and paste entirely.

http://tierfoncampaign.blogspot.com/2016/07/a-wing-issues.html?m=1

On 5/7/2018 at 4:18 PM, lkb57 said:

If that's the case, I expect that the models will be updated to have rotating guns.

To manufacture rotating guns on the A-Wing, they would have to make the guns a lot bigger, and probably improve the manufacturing process as well.

I'd like a smaller a-wing, hopefully that does happen. But if it does, it will probably need to be accompanied by a change in the official size of an a-wing (which is long overdue). I doubt it would have rotating guns - that would be way too difficult, for very little benefit.

I mean, can all of those A-Wing Scale Apologists who always trot out the same arguments for why the 1.0 A-Wing is actually the appropriate size (movie materials are always inconsistent, 9.6m is LFL's own number, etc.) explain to me why a 2 Hull super zippy single-seater designed for speed and superiority dogfighting has a fuselage that is as big as an Auzituck's or U-Wing's fuselage. Heck, each of those ships is a two-pilot troop transport with bodies that take up about the same volume as the body of an A-Wing, despite housing all those souls and sporting more than double the Hull Points in game.

Kthx.

The "2 Hull" bit is a game-ism. Other sources suggest it has at least as much "hull" (hit points, etc) as a TIE Fighter, and possibly more.

According to Saxton, the A-wing prop was 60 cm long:

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/exhibit/scale.html

he speculated it was built to 1/12 scale. If whoever did the statting, believed it was built to 1/16 scale, same as the TIE Fighter - then they'd get 9.6m for it. That would neatly explain where the figure came from.

3 minutes ago, Ironlord said:

The "2 Hull" bit is a game-ism. Other sources ...

Pretty much every flight sim I can remember (X-Wing, TIE Fighter, X-Wing vs TIE Fighter, Rogue Squadron) had the A-Wing as a more fragile yet faster and more maneuverable Rebel craft. Neither of those points (more frail, more nimble) make sense when the FFG A-Wing's overall fuselage volume is so much greater than other Rebel craft like X-Wings, Y-Wings, and B-Wings which are supposed to be tougher and slower and more heavily armed.

I have said on many occasions, visuals from films are TERRIBLE sources for determining size on things like this. There will always be inconsistencies and errors. Much, much better to go with whatever official size has been put forth by the creator and accept that the movie props are not wholly accurate.

29 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Pretty much every flight sim I can remember (X-Wing, TIE Fighter, X-Wing vs TIE Fighter, Rogue Squadron) had the A-Wing as a more fragile yet faster and more maneuverable Rebel craft. Neither of those points (more frail, more nimble) make sense when the FFG A-Wing's overall fuselage volume is so much greater than other Rebel craft like X-Wings, Y-Wings, and B-Wings which are supposed to be tougher and slower and more heavily armed.

From TIE Fighter's internal ship stat table. These stats remained consistent during the whole X-wing series.

SHIP | LENGTH | SPEED | CANNON | LAUNCHER | SHIELDS | HULL | JOB
================================================================
T/F     10      100     2LASER   NOT USU.     -       15RU.
T/I     10      111     4L       NOT USU.     -       20
T/B     10      80      2L       2 VARIOUS    -       50
T/A     10      145     4L       2 VAR.     100SBD    20
GUN     15      90      2L,2ION  2 VAR.     100       50

Y-W     20      80      2L, 2I   2 PROTON   75        40
X-W     15      100     4L       2P         50        20
A-W     10      120     2L       2CONCUSS'N 50        15
B-W     15      90      3L, 3I   2P         125       60
Z-95    15      85      2L       2C         20        15

(where GUN stands for the Assault Gunboat or Starwing)
The A-wing has the same amount of hull hitpoints as the TIE Fighter (and the Z-95). But it also has as many shield hitpoints as an X-wing.
FFG chose to weaken the A-wing and many other ships for gameplay reasons. If we take the TIE Fighter as an exact match between the sims and FFG stats, the we can match 5 hitpoints of hull/shields in the X-wing flight sims to one point in this miniature game, and the stats for the main ships would be:

T/F: 3 hull
T/I: 4 hull
T/B: 10 hull
GUN: 20 shield 10 hull
Y-W: 15 shield 8 hull
X-W: 10 shield 4 hull
A-W: 10 shield 3 hull
B-W: 25 shield 12 hull
Z-95: 4 shield 3 hull

The A-wing would be just a bit weaker than an X-wing (that would be almost 3 times stronger than it actually is in FFG's game). That actually makes sense with the canon A-wing dimensions.
However, as you say, according to FFG's stats, the A-wing should be really really tiny or filmsy.

But, in general, you cannot use the sims as a measuring stick for the miniature game, since the stats are heavily modified in order to have games that last 1 hour instead of days.

The more fragile nature of the ship could simply be due to less armour or having to place vital systems in more exposed areas.

Scale is a delicated matter with such a small miniatures, I agree that the current sculpt is not to scale and that the source of 9 metters is definetly wrong, the ship seems to be between 6 and 7 metters.
But remember that when working with miniatures some liberties need to be taken for the miniature to "work". And is not gonna be different in 2.0, just look at the new y-wing sculpt, overall has better quality and proportions but they decided to make the turret stand out from the cockpit so now we will have ridiculously oversided cannons.

Rebels has a the 9.6 metre A-wings in it.

I would buy an Imperial f***-ton of smaller A-Wings (and I already have more than enough A-Wings).

9 minutes ago, mazz0 said:

... an Imperial f***-ton ...

What's that in Metric f***-tonnes?

(I never could work out the conversion rate)

19 minutes ago, ABXY said:

What's that in Metric f***-tonnes?

(I never could work out the conversion rate)

In this context, the alternative to Imperial f***-ton is not Metric f***-ton, but rather Rebel f***-ton

3 hours ago, Azrapse said:

From TIE Fighter's internal ship stat table. These stats remained consistent during the whole X-wing series.

SHIP | LENGTH | SPEED | CANNON | LAUNCHER | SHIELDS | HULL | JOB
================================================================
T/F     10      100     2LASER   NOT USU.     -       15RU.
T/I     10      111     4L       NOT USU.     -       20
T/B     10      80      2L       2 VARIOUS    -       50
T/A     10      145     4L       2 VAR.     100SBD    20
GUN     15      90      2L,2ION  2 VAR.     100       50

Y-W     20      80      2L, 2I   2 PROTON   75        40
X-W     15      100     4L       2P         50        20
A-W     10      120     2L       2CONCUSS'N 50        15
B-W     15      90      3L, 3I   2P         125       60
Z-95    15      85      2L       2C         20        15

But, in general, you cannot use the sims as a measuring stick for the miniature game, since the stats are heavily modified in order to have games that last 1 hour instead of days.

The 2.0 previews show the X-Wing with 4 Hull. Perhaps a step in the right direction - making the point that X-Wings are supposed to have more Hull than TIE Fighters?

3 minutes ago, Ironlord said:

The 2.0 previews show the X-Wing with 4 Hull. Perhaps a step in the right direction - making the point that X-Wings are supposed to have more Hull than TIE Fighters?

At least B-wings should have more durable hulls than TIE Fighters.
Has anyone seen the B-wing stats for 2.0?