Junker Bomber

[Tenacity]

I'm actually pretty proud of this one... first model I've made that somewhat resembles a ship we could use. There's still more to be done to the model, give pointers if you want =P

Anyways, since jinx appears to have given up working on a junker CSV-style bomber, I decided to see what I could whip up tonight. After about two hours this is what I've got:










Now, it is much smoother/sleeker than the CSV/collector, and in general looks "higher tech" - but I did it that way for a reason. To the junkers, a bomber-style ship would be a serious investment of funds, resources, and manpower to construct. It's not something that they would just throw together like the standard salvage ships - bombers would need to use the best material and technology available to the junkers in order to serve as station-defense ships (which would be only one of their roles, of course).

I think I managed to keep the basic shape and design of the CSV rather well, while making it look more advanced and powerful. It has four gun mounts on the sides/bottom of the body, and a single turret mount on top of the tail at the back (firing arc debatable). The two tubes up at the front would hold the torpedoes/cannons/disruptors of course, and I kept the standard CSV cargo bay doors on the bottom (though they wont be able to open/close like all the other non-vanilla models).

So... thoughts?

UPDATE

For those just looking at the thread now, here is the newest model and size comparisons:

---

[Jinx]

looks good - the huge canopy suggests it to be smaller than a CSV though. - maybe you can make it half as big.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[chopper]

It's a CSV with torp tubes. I see no big differences between CSV/Collector and this one.
And yes, I do think there should be more differences.

At the end of the day, there is always a Waran on Trafalgar. It's adorable!

---

It is every Corsair's responsibility to die a beautiful death in defense of Crete, regardless of how OORP or how capwhoring the opposition is. Launch your fighter, joust the battlecruisers and die a beautiful death. Then, drink it down in the bar.

Can't let you bash folks in your sig Chopper-Del

[Tenacity]

It's a CSV with torp tubes. I see no big differences between CSV/Collector and this one.
And yes, I do think there should be more differences.

At the end of the day, there is always a Waran on Trafalgar. It's adorable!

I think you need to whip up a picture of a CSV, not quite the same.

looks good - the huge canopy suggests it to be smaller than a CSV though. - maybe you can make it half as big.

Considering we work in debris fields, I would think we'd want a smaller, more manuverable bomber - at the cost of 'toughness'.

---

[El Nino]

Allright, that's very nifty... Small size should fit the bill for base defending...

Small powercore, rear firing turret, 17000ish armor not to much agility, but still small size to evade capital ship firepower... and we're set. Ideal for base defense...

A mini bomber... so to say, but it should be bigger than collector... and that's hardly small. Perhaps giving it only 3 guns and 2 turrets to contend with smallnes and continue the junker traditions?

---

Donate to the Poor Pilot's Fundation via Sirius Bank /givecash GreenHawk 1000000 now, and support poor pilots sirius wide!
Skype: jure.grbec
My primary char: Jose El Nino - Corsair Elder captain of the SS Greenhawk

Currently Inactive due to pursuit of life long dreams, will be back...*edited* As promised am back.

[Tenacity]

hm... we could drop it down to 2 class 10 guns and a couple class 5 turrets for forward fire, but if you're going to give it lower firepower it needs agility or armor to make up for it.

Small ships tend to have less armor and more agility, so I dont know where you came up with 17000 armor for something as small as the CSV =P



EDIT:

Back when jinx was designing the earlier CSV bombers, I thought about having ours unique from the others - unable to equip a lot of firepower (i.e. not enough powercore to fire a supernova, but very fast power regen). With that we'd be able to use double mini razors or a razor/inferno (debatable, as an outcast weapon) or use standard nova torpedoes rather than the supernova cannons. It makes more sense for junkers, and personally I prefer a double razor setup on a nice agile bomber =P

---

[Tenacity]

Ok, I added a few little details to try and further differentiate it from the standard CSV:








Now, Suggested Stats:

2x Class 10 guns (side mounts on body)
2x Class 5 turrets (bottom mounts on body)
1x Class 5 turret (rear-fire only mount on tail)
2x Torpedo Hardpoints (tubes on front)
1x Cruise Disruptor Hardpoint (mount on center/front/bottom of body)
CM/Mine/Thruster Hardpoints on tail

Now, I know it's possible to put Torp-only and disruptor-only hardpoints on the same model - we did it with the death scythe (another junker ship, funny enough).

The idea with this is that this junker bomber would not have enough energy (new powercore would be needed) to fire a supernova or any of the new snova-mimick cannons that are coming out. It's only equippable armament in the torp slots would be infernos, razors, or standard torpedoes. Let's face it, junkers arent going to have access to superweapons in most situations - and a supernova isnt really needed for us, since we dont have many enemies and those we do have dont tend to have a lot of large capships in the first place.

A double razor + disruptor setup would be fine for taking out gunboats and transports, which is all we need the bomber for 99% of the time. Energy regen on the core would need to be fairly high, so we can keep those razors/infernos/torps firing, however. Something about double/triple what a fighter has (for max power and regen), but just enough that it cant use supernovas.

Size is fairly small, pretty obvious from the shape of the model. It's a single-seater (I hate double-pilot bombers), and probably fairly agile - perhaps a hair slower than the cat/redcat bombers.

---

[Culebra]

I like it. However I would not fly a bomber with low agility and less firepower than the other bombers.

Now with the stats below order me 3 :)

2x Class 10 guns (side mounts on body)
2x Class 5 turrets (bottom mounts on body)
1x Class 5 turret (rear-fire only mount on tail)
2x Torpedo Hardpoints (tubes on front)
1x Cruise Disruptor Hardpoint (mount on center/front/bottom of body)
CM/Mine/Thruster Hardpoints on tail

Size is fairly small, pretty obvious from the shape of the model. It's a single-seater (I hate double-pilot bombers), and probably fairly agile - perhaps a hair slower than the cat/redcat bombers.

[Tenacity]

aye, the intent is to have a fairly manuverable ship but something with low armor and no supernova capability. Two class 10 guns + two class 5 turrets for forward firing weaponry would probably be fine, we could use some tizona turrets and codes or something along those lines for taking down shields, then open up with the razors on the cap's hull.

Of course, there's the chance that it could be pretty powerful against VHF's with that setup - but since our current VHF is pretty lame compared to others I dont think that's such a bad thing =P

---

[Turkish]

I like it. Perhaps a Junker attempt at a light bomber using salvaged equipment and lots of ingenuity?

---

I have a fetish for all things Norse.