Star Wars: Complete Vehicles - Incredible Cross-Sections Canon Reference Book listed on Amazon (UK) for release on November 5th, 2020

Includes exclusive cross-sections for this book.

I am sure @KCDodger will like the cover.

15 minutes ago, Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun said:

Star Wars: Complete Vehicles - Incredible Cross-Sections Canon Reference Book listed on Amazon (UK) for release on November 5th, 2020

So do the Y-Wing has a gunner or not? I can't stand another retcon right now.

11 minutes ago, Odanan said:

So do the Y-Wing has a gunner or not? I can't stand another retcon right now.

Some versions did, others don’t; it had a lot of sub-models

12 minutes ago, Innese said:

Some versions did, others don’t; it had a lot of sub-models

Yep. I hope the book clarifies something about that.

Sweet! I love these books!!

7 hours ago, Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun said:

Star Wars: Complete Vehicles - Incredible Cross-Sections Canon Reference Book listed on Amazon (UK) for release on November 5th, 2020

Includes exclusive cross-sections for this book.

I am sure @KCDodger will like the cover.

I do, quite a bit. This bettter shed some damned info on the newer B-Wing or I'm losing my frakkin' mind.

6 hours ago, Odanan said:

So do the Y-Wing has a gunner or not? I can't stand another retcon right now.

No Y-Wing Gunner has ever appeared in any film material, only in TCW. Not even Rebels did it.

So there's no retcon to be had in the first place. This is a BTA-NR2 anyway, which never seemed to have a gunner at all.

Y-Wing guns have essentially always been automated or controlled by the pilot. It is an invention of the Expanded Universe and nothing else that Y-Wings have ever had gunners outside of The Clone Wars.

3 hours ago, KCDodger said:

No Y-Wing Gunner has ever appeared in any film material, only in TCW. Not even Rebels did it.

So there's no retcon to be had in the first place. This is a BTA-NR2 anyway, which never seemed to have a gunner at all.

Y-Wing guns have essentially always been automated or controlled by the pilot. It is an invention of the Expanded Universe and nothing else that Y-Wings have ever had gunners outside of The Clone Wars.

Interesting...

5 hours ago, Odanan said:

Interesting...

Yeah, it is isn't it? It's amazing what happens when one understands what is and never was canon. They get a LOT less angry!

14 hours ago, Odanan said:

So do the Y-Wing has a gunner or not? I can't stand another retcon right now.

Much to learn you still have about Disney @Odanan

14 hours ago, KCDodger said:

It is an invention of the Expanded Universe and nothing else that Y-Wings have ever had gunners outside of The Clone Wars.

I mean, the idea comes from the McQuarrie concept art for the original film.

There's an argument Y-Wings were supposed to have gunners in the films. I think it's missing hugely important context to say it was just an invention of the EU.

Then you have the two seater Y-Wing in the Holiday Special

Which came out in 1978.

The BTL-S3 Y-Wing was 'invented', as you put it, by the EU to explain why Luke's Y-Wing in the Holiday Special had two seats - it's the gunner position for the turret.

It's not like they just made this up on a whim as you seem to be implying.

8 hours ago, KCDodger said:

Yeah, it is isn't it? It's amazing what happens when one understands what is and never was canon. They get a LOT less angry!

Passive aggressive elitism aside, this is a potentially dangerous prompt for an argument.

So I'll just say simply that the Holiday Special was a George Lucas produced piece and that everything in it was, for better or worse, treated as basically movie canon until the Disney buy out and canon reset. Including two seat Y-Wings with gunners.

So I'd be really careful about throwing the 'canon' argument around.

The old Incredible Cross-sections (best books ever) already did talk about our classic 1/2 seater Y-Wings 😛

12 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

I mean, the idea comes from the McQuarrie concept art for the original film.

There's an argument Y-Wings were supposed to have gunners in the films. I think it's missing hugely important context to say it was just an invention of the EU.

Then you have the two seater Y-Wing in the Holiday Special

Which came out in 1978.

The BTL-S3 Y-Wing was 'invented', as you put it, by the EU to explain why Luke's Y-Wing in the Holiday Special had two seats - it's the gunner position for the turret.

It's not like they just made this up on a whim as you seem to be implying.

Passive aggressive elitism aside, this is a potentially dangerous prompt for an argument.

So I'll just say simply that the Holiday Special was a George Lucas produced piece and that everything in it was, for better or worse, treated as basically movie canon until the Disney buy out and canon reset. Including two seat Y-Wings with gunners.

So I'd be really careful about throwing the 'canon' argument around.

The Holiday Special isn't canon though. You don't have to "Educate" me like some conquistador, I know about the originals of the two seater Y-Wing. I still wasn't wrong. Because it was always EU. As for it being treated as Movie Canon - that sure does explain why Lucas basically disavowed the Holiday special at every turn, huh?

I don't have to be careful about what is and isn't canon. I've been monitoring this kinda' stuff for years.

If I seem cross? It's because for some reason you decided to adopt that tone, so. Yeah. By the way I guess it's also or was, canon, that Luke is missing his legs? I wonder how we were going to explain that one, if we treat the Holiday special as gospel.

Money, money money. Move a few hoses around on the x-wing cockpit and you got yourself a y-wing cockpit. The concept art clearly shows a desire to have a two seater with a gunner. That was later realized in Empire on the snow speeder. A New Hope simply didn't have enough budget to even make the movie as intended and Lucas went behind people's back to finish the movie. So in the movie, it was a one seater. The air force has plenty of fighter jets with one seat and two seat variants. So sure, you can have both.

9 hours ago, Mep said:

Money, money money. Move a few hoses around on the x-wing cockpit and you got yourself a y-wing cockpit. The concept art clearly shows a desire to have a two seater with a gunner. That was later realized in Empire on the snow speeder. A New Hope simply didn't have enough budget to even make the movie as intended and Lucas went behind people's back to finish the movie. So in the movie, it was a one seater. The air force has plenty of fighter jets with one seat and two seat variants. So sure, you can have both.

Yeah you definitely can, sure.

We just haven't seen it in the Y-Wing on screen yet. Not saying they don't straight up exist, but calling the on-screen Y-Wings retconned by this book is about as bad as it gets.

20 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

Why is Luke a free-floating torso?

4 hours ago, AceDogbert said:

Why is Luke a free-floating torso?

WEll, it's canon! You can't argue it!

2 hours ago, KCDodger said:

WEll, it's canon! You can't argue it!

My god, that means there is Luke, Bigger Luke, and Floating-Torso Cartoon-Luke in canon!

6 hours ago, AceDogbert said:

Why is Luke a free-floating torso?

5 hours ago, KCDodger said:

WEll, it's canon! You can't argue it!

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/The_Star_Wars_Holiday_Special

That's not canon. It says legends on the top of the page in this link.

11 hours ago, AceDogbert said:

My god, that means there is Luke, Bigger Luke, and Floating-Torso Cartoon-Luke in canon!

Precisely! Bigger Luke is the realest thing, you know. Until that mean 'ol disney wiped him!!! 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠 😠

9 hours ago, jhh3 said:

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/The_Star_Wars_Holiday_Special

That's not canon. It says legends on the top of the page in this link.

Oh honey you really did miss the sarcasm there. Yeah, I know the Holiday Special isn't canon. Thank gods it isn't canon.

17 hours ago, KCDodger said:

Yeah you definitely can, sure.

We just haven't seen it in the Y-Wing on screen yet. Not saying they don't straight up exist, but calling the on-screen Y-Wings retconned by this book is about as bad as it gets.

May I suggest reality when looking at these things. You have the original concept art then you get that actual movie prop. They don't always match. There is what can be drawn and there is what can be made, given budget and skill of the craftsmen. Some times things are changed for artistic reasons and other times it is for practical reasons. Ask yourself this, do you see any curved glass in any of the star wars props? The falcon, ties, x/y wings? Straight glass is easy to come by and cut - curved glass no. Those concept art drawings are pretty and completely not doable given the budget.

So when looking at these movies, remember they are exactly that, movies. "Cannon" can be dictated by budget and set builder skills. That is all it is. Books are like drawings, you can make anything up. So no, two seater y wings don't exist, neither do one seaters. There is no such thing as a y-wing. It is silly to argue about fiction. The movie prop is just that, a prop confined to physical restraints. In the end all you are talking about is made up stuff about made up stuff. So sure, you can have an ewok fly an x wing. Why the **** not.

Also cannon, who decides what is and isn't cannon? The guy who first made it up? The next guy that was hired on to do more work by the guy who made it up? The current owner of the IP? You think Disney isn't going to sell off Lucas Films sometime in the future and the new owner won't make more stuff up about made up stuff? Does it really matter that a game makes a ship a two seater while the movie prop only had one seat?

4 hours ago, Mep said:

May I suggest reality when looking at these things. You have the original concept art then you get that actual movie prop. They don't always match. There is what can be drawn and there is what can be made, given budget and skill of the craftsmen. Some times things are changed for artistic reasons and other times it is for practical reasons. Ask yourself this, do you see any curved glass in any of the star wars props? The falcon, ties, x/y wings? Straight glass is easy to come by and cut - curved glass no. Those concept art drawings are pretty and completely not doable given the budget.

So when looking at these movies, remember they are exactly that, movies. "Cannon" can be dictated by budget and set builder skills. That is all it is. Books are like drawings, you can make anything up. So no, two seater y wings don't exist, neither do one seaters. There is no such thing as a y-wing. It is silly to argue about fiction. The movie prop is just that, a prop confined to physical restraints. In the end all you are talking about is made up stuff about made up stuff. So sure, you can have an ewok fly an x wing. Why the **** not.

Also cannon, who decides what is and isn't cannon? The guy who first made it up? The next guy that was hired on to do more work by the guy who made it up? The current owner of the IP? You think Disney isn't going to sell off Lucas Films sometime in the future and the new owner won't make more stuff up about made up stuff? Does it really matter that a game makes a ship a two seater while the movie prop only had one seat?

So if nothing means anything, then why do two seater Y-Wings, which have never appeared anywhere outside of The Clone Wars and categorically not-counted Legends content, matter so much to you?

And no I don't think Disney's keen on selling Star Wars. Y'all Star Wars fans that even see that as a possibility are out of this world. When has Disney ever outright sold a property, especially something so lucrative?

Anyway, your argument is nonexistent, based off your own assertions. Dunno' why you did that to yourself. Two Seater Y-Wings have never appeared in film so Disney isn't retconning anything by saying they weren't a thing / there. Because we have never, ever seen them in categorically canon material.

EDIT: You know Canon has one N in it, right?

14 minutes ago, KCDodger said:

So if nothing means anything, then why do two seater Y-Wings, which have never appeared anywhere outside of The Clone Wars and categorically not-counted Legends content, matter so much to you?

It doesn't. I just find it amusing people want to argue over movie props thinking they are some how real and can't make the connection to the real objects used in films. Also businesses change over time. Disney may be a huge success right now and was in the past but it wasn't always. Could Disney find itself in a situation where it would need to sell off assets? Yes, it really could. No, I don't care about petty spelling errors.

3 hours ago, Mep said:

It doesn't. I just find it amusing people want to argue over movie props thinking they are some how real and can't make the connection to the real objects used in films. Also businesses change over time. Disney may be a huge success right now and was in the past but it wasn't always. Could Disney find itself in a situation where it would need to sell off assets? Yes, it really could. No, I don't care about petty spelling errors.

Believe me, I know they aren't real. I worry much more about the people who believe they have to inform others of such.

Anyway, I'm pretty excited about this book. I wonder if it will have the Razor Crest. Might also have some stuff from TCW season 7 (only things I can really think of that haven't been explored are the Silver Angel and the Pyke fighters).

EDIT: Actually, have we ever had a cross-section of a gauntlet?

Has anyone mentioned yet that the Y-Wing on the cover of that book is a Resistance Y-Wing? The fronts of the engine housings have those black lines/gaps (not characteristic of Rebel ones) and the angle of the edge of the cockpit slopes down (rather than horizontal part into a vertical wall).