On the ventral side there looks to be 6 hatch looking things, are they hatches? Landing gear or what?
Guest
KurdtLives
Yeah they are deployed in the pic [at that angle it’s not hard to miss while scrolling by].
Guest
Hecatomb
Does this vessel have any sort of name or designation beyond Assault Transport? If not, perhaps it deserves one.
Guest
Anonymous
ATR-6 Gamma Assault Transport. Its from the 90s Star Wars combat flight simulator games X-Wing, TIE Fighter, X-Wing Vs TIE Fighter Rogue Squadron X-Wing Alliance Etc. There was a variant that was called the Beta ETR something or other…
Beastly-looking brick with snazzy upper hatches, punchy-looking thrusters, punchier-looking guns, and just enough radiator stub-fins to flow as a sci-fi craft. Not sure why it needs dorsal & ventral airlocks-one for cargo, one for deployment?
Fractal I just now realise that this Assault Transport is a mix of two gamma ships have the ATR-6’s weapons and a Assault shuttle’s size (Being 30 meters in length) and Spacetroopers complement.
Guest
Arbite
Yeah it’s definitely a combo of the two, also I didn’t even realize the Assault Shuttle and Assault Transports were different lengths. I feel like keeping the larger 45 meter total size would make the turrets seem better scaled to the rest of the ship.
Guest
Jason
Very cool! I have always wanted to do a physical model of this ship since the X-Wing/TIE games. This version looks very original Battlestar Galactica-y in these shots!
Right then i’l talk about the 4 vehicle designs and roles in Solo: A Star Wars Story. 1: TIE/rb heavy starfighter (Also known as the TIE Brute or Heavy TIE Fighter) just the less stupid, more boring version of the TIE Bizarro and meant to be well a heavy fighter. 2: AT-DT (All Terrain Defense Turret) look like a weird hybrid between the AT-ST and the AT-DP. Although this could be the predecessor to these two walkers and it was a self propelled artillery. 3: Y-45 Armored Transport Hauler (AT-Hauler) meant to carry light walkers or 2-M Hover Tank and… Read more »
Guest
Valoren
the Arrestor design is based (or rather completely copied) from a very early star destroyer concept art.
It’s from Cantwell’s earliest Star Destroyer concepts for ANH.
Guest
Anonymous
And the guy who designed it is a part of my group on Facebook Preserve the Expanded Universe.
Guest
Anonymous
Same here. He was pissed. I think Disney used it and didn’t credit him.
Guest
Anonymous
From what I know Cantwell who made the concept art for the Arrestor back in a new hope concept art actually signed up for one of the Legends group on Facebook. He was really mad Disney didn’t credit him. No I’m not making this up. How do I know, well I was in that group but it kinda went nowhere.
So Fractal since you done this I wonder if you could do this your were working on last year:
Guest
Winter eclipse
You should create some sort of imperial prison ship
Guest
Gruma
Oh man, X-Wing Alliance memories are commung up. Those were tough oponents, without a blindspot. It looks so good fractal, that I want a new X-Wing game to play
Right although Fractal I think those hatches could also be use for placing E-Web heavy repeating blaster cannons for a powerful broadside surprise attack. Do you think that a good idea or at least plausible?
Guest
Chris Bradshaw
That’s like saying a C-130 with firing ports for a few dozen .50 caliber HMGs on the sides would be an effective air combat platform in a theatre full of F-18s and SU-27s.
Guest
Dusk Raven
Well, Star Wars combat isn’t really analogous to real-life airplane combat – “beyond visual range” combat doesn’t seem to be as much of a thing in Star Wars as it is in real life, not with starfighters anyway. A better response would be to answer the question of, “Would E-Webs actually have an effect on (for example) other craft the size of the ATR-6 or even starfighters?”
Guest
gorkmalork
Eh, even if the hypothetical Flankers & Hornets were operating under some ‘IR missiles & cannons only’ rule of engagement, doorgunner-style mounts were never intended for targets that fast. Toss in the question of E-webs even scratching your average fighter, and I’d say that analogy holds well enough.
Guest
Vons Barador
Star Wars combat is completely analogous to real-life airplane combat, just not modern combat. It’s all based mainly off of World War II aviation– a spirit revived, albeit in a different form, for the intro battle in The Last Jedi. It’s very heavily based on aerial combat from that era– long-range missile interceptions isn’t…. as much of a thing, at all.
Guest
gorkmalork
Dunno how well that analogy holds when you factor in the setting’s use of fairly sophisticated missiles from the prequel trilogy onward. Granted, homing weaponry was in use near the end of WWII, but talk about teething stages.
Guest
Steve Bannon
Even in WW2, a C-47 filled with machine gunners would be relatively easy pickings for a few BF-109s or A6Ms. Sure, they might be able to get an occasional few hits on a particularly stupid Axis pilot, but your kill/loss rate relative to cost of airframe and trained personnel would be abysmal. There’s a reason that daylight bombing raids over Nazi Germany even in ludicrously well armed B-17s were considered unsustainable before long range fighter escort was possible. The ability to maneuver with the best keeps you alive, which is why the Empire deploys TIEs and not gunship conversions of… Read more »
Guest
Xeno
There’s a reason the defenses are there, but they aren’t for space superiority, I agree. Still, larger volume = larger reactor complement, it’s possible with computer-guided targeting and shielding a larger Gunboat-type ship could give fighters a run for their money. But not a transport. The issue with B-17s is that their guns were very inaccurate, firing at much smaller, faster targets, and that the .50 caliber guns they used had comparable range and punch to the 20mm-30mm autocannon and 7.92mm MMG pair used by German and Japanese fighters. A Star Wars gunboat will have heavier, longer-ranged, harder-hitting firepower than… Read more »
Guest
gorkmalork
True enough: ships with an Assault Transport’s commitment to troop carriage could certainly defend themselves against most fighter attack ala the games, but actively *catching* such fast targets might be another story, and a bunch of tripod infantry pieces firing from viewports wouldn’t help one bit.
Guest
Steve Bannon
This boat having a temporary defense against small numbers of light fighters like Nimbus, Eta, and TIE/ln? Sure, why not. At this point on the scale, you become pretty vulnerable to concussion missiles from TIE/Sa or Y-Wings, the heavy lasers on something meaty like the ARC-170, and of course anything with LTL. Tradeoffs.
I think we get an extraordinarily swayed impression of small craft durability from the extended period of time the camera spends on the Falcon taking what look to be substantial hits from destroyers and fighters…. under explicit orders to not try and kill it.
Guest
gorkmalork
Fair points re: missiles & punchier light guns, though I presume the ‘tender ’em up for capture’ orders were well & truly null as of ROTJ & TLJ’s respective finales (granted, that second one had Rey, so Acts of Force again). Plus, it seems like every other ST (and now Solo) Falcon setpiece was a promo reel for YT-series (particle?)deflectors/tensors/compensators (though terrain/collision avoidance was a *whole* ‘nother story). CEC must be raking in those kickbacks to sit on that plot-shielding patent.
Guest
Steve Bannon
The Empire Strikes Back: The greatest CEC marketing campaign ever told. I can understand the Falcon being highly survivable in the opening fighter engagement, when it was screened by large numbers of elite Rebel pilots, while fighting unsupported Imperial light fighters in the comforting embrace of nearby Rebel capital ship point defense, jamming, and ECM. The Death Star II chase in ROTJ was suspicious. There was a TIE interceptor only a few dozen meters behind the Falcon at all times, and it spent the whole chase doing….. absolutely nothing of note. My personal theory was that the pilot was hampered… Read more »
Guest
gorkmalork
One extra factor on Team Lando’s side in ROTJ: that might’ve been the only engagement in any film involving a fully-crewed Falcon bent on its very best gunboat impression (even Solo’s nu-canon Kessel run lacked enough bodies for both turrets, what with that volatile hyperfuel issue). As for the reactor run’s perplexing paucity of squint fire…frankly, your theory’s as close as anything gets to making sense, though one also wonders how the Falcon’s gunners missed ’em in such tight quarters. Everything shunted into thrust & deflectors in case Lando & Nunb clipped a wall?
Guest
Steve Bannon
There are actually some nifty deleted scenes from ROTJ featuring those extra Alliance Falcon crew running around inside the Falcon and getting jolted during the battle while running to the guns. I understand why those scenes were deleted though, as they weren’t really adding anything. Canonically, the guys behind Lando are Lieutenant Blount, the Z-95 pilot from the X-Wing minature game, and Colonel Airen Cracken. Yeah, that Cracken from the threat dossier. Lando must be pretty good at pulling strings to get someone that senior assigned as his turret gunner. The full shielding and deflectors power allocation idea makes sense.… Read more »
A platoon (40) of infantry, probably not enough internal volume for any repulsorlift armor.
Guest
KurdtLives
Fractal you’re work is great and this is made my evening.
As to the debate to length, I always imagined that they were based on the Assault Shuttle and would be the same rough dimensions.
Guest
Alex
Thank you, it is awesome to see classic x-wing designs!
I wasn’t expecting to see this one Fractal but it is great nonetheless to see the ATR-6 like this. But there are 2 things I want to ask you about. 1. There no WIPs for the ATR-6 and I want to know why didn’t you include them? I think it is nice to some some WIPS because it show progress, how the details was created and to give the idea on how to created the model properly. 2. The size of the ATR-6 last time I check this transport was 45 meters in length but you version is smaller at… Read more »
1) Too lazy 🙂 2) Meh, I scaled it based on how I wanted to look, rather than from some fixed initial point. I also think the old numbers were quite inconsistent with how the old details were arranged (I would’ve guessed from various the game models that the ship was a lot smaller than 30m). For example, that side hatch would’ve been absolutely enormous if the game model were scaled to 45m length (remember the game depiction is a lot deeper relative to length than my version). 3) ETR-3 is just the ATR with a pod right? I never… Read more »
Oh ok then as for the ETR-3 I guess you most likely not going to make one unless you do but with different changes that you want it to be. (Like the VSD)
Also Fractal I forgot to mention that the ETR-3 have the same weapons of the ATR-6 but it also have the foward laser cannons of the DX-9 but only 2 instead of 8.
It also mention it have stronger armour and shields than the ATR-6 but that it mostly fluff execute to try to make the ETR-3 the upgraded ATR-6.
Guest
gejemica
I seem to remember the XWA flavor text saying it housed speeder bikes.
Guest
Gruma
About the size, it´s highly debatable in many ways anyway. Like we had with the executor, that was way to small in the beginning (8km) and what we have with MC80 cruisers aswell, it´s said that they are only 1200m long, but you can clearly see in RotJ that they are much bigger, even dwarfing ISDs. With the Movie Rogue One, we have even more proof that MC80s are bigger. The Profundity is 1200m long and there are scenes where you can compare Y-Wings flying close to the Profundity and a Y-Wing flying close to a Liberty type MC80 in… Read more »
Guest
Chris Bradshaw
Nice work, but I think the fins might look more Imperial if they were textured as TIE-style radiators.
I considered that, but it didn’t make sense aesthetically to me for the thickness of the fins. I assume that’s what the fins are for anyway, but just not directly exposed.
Guest
Shaun
And GonKar Ship Works probably wasn’t willing to pay the licensing fees…
Five thumbs up for doing another design from the classic X-wing games! I remember these transports as tough opponents. Looks like this is still valid.
Just for nostalgic reasons: could you one day do a panel showing all your designs from those games side by side?
MC80s have appeared anywhere between 1.2 and 1.5 km long. Home One is a whole other matter. The Profundity appears about right, looking at the docking bay on the FFG model.
Nice to the see the ATR-6 again. I guess the hatch COULD maybe be for moving heavy equipment into a boarding action?
On the ventral side there looks to be 6 hatch looking things, are they hatches? Landing gear or what?
Yeah they are deployed in the pic
[at that angle it’s not hard to miss while scrolling by].
Does this vessel have any sort of name or designation beyond Assault Transport? If not, perhaps it deserves one.
ATR-6 Gamma Assault Transport. Its from the 90s Star Wars combat flight simulator games X-Wing, TIE Fighter, X-Wing Vs TIE Fighter Rogue Squadron X-Wing Alliance Etc. There was a variant that was called the Beta ETR something or other…
Beta class ETR-3 escort transport.
Beastly-looking brick with snazzy upper hatches, punchy-looking thrusters, punchier-looking guns, and just enough radiator stub-fins to flow as a sci-fi craft. Not sure why it needs dorsal & ventral airlocks-one for cargo, one for deployment?
Cutting docks – easier to match artificial gravity.
Good point WRT up-for-down transitions potentially hampering a boarding action.
Fractal I just now realise that this Assault Transport is a mix of two gamma ships have the ATR-6’s weapons and a Assault shuttle’s size (Being 30 meters in length) and Spacetroopers complement.
Yeah it’s definitely a combo of the two, also I didn’t even realize the Assault Shuttle and Assault Transports were different lengths. I feel like keeping the larger 45 meter total size would make the turrets seem better scaled to the rest of the ship.
Very cool! I have always wanted to do a physical model of this ship since the X-Wing/TIE games. This version looks very original Battlestar Galactica-y in these shots!
Gamma Class Assault Transport, iirc.
Right then i’l talk about the 4 vehicle designs and roles in Solo: A Star Wars Story. 1: TIE/rb heavy starfighter (Also known as the TIE Brute or Heavy TIE Fighter) just the less stupid, more boring version of the TIE Bizarro and meant to be well a heavy fighter. 2: AT-DT (All Terrain Defense Turret) look like a weird hybrid between the AT-ST and the AT-DP. Although this could be the predecessor to these two walkers and it was a self propelled artillery. 3: Y-45 Armored Transport Hauler (AT-Hauler) meant to carry light walkers or 2-M Hover Tank and… Read more »
the Arrestor design is based (or rather completely copied) from a very early star destroyer concept art.
Huh did not know that. Where did you get that reference?
It’s from Cantwell’s earliest Star Destroyer concepts for ANH.
And the guy who designed it is a part of my group on Facebook Preserve the Expanded Universe.
Same here. He was pissed. I think Disney used it and didn’t credit him.
From what I know Cantwell who made the concept art for the Arrestor back in a new hope concept art actually signed up for one of the Legends group on Facebook. He was really mad Disney didn’t credit him. No I’m not making this up. How do I know, well I was in that group but it kinda went nowhere.
So Fractal since you done this I wonder if you could do this your were working on last year:
You should create some sort of imperial prison ship
Oh man, X-Wing Alliance memories are commung up. Those were tough oponents, without a blindspot. It looks so good fractal, that I want a new X-Wing game to play
So Fractal what are those 8 small doors above the main door on each side of the ATR-6?
Spacetrooper hatches.
Right although Fractal I think those hatches could also be use for placing E-Web heavy repeating blaster cannons for a powerful broadside surprise attack. Do you think that a good idea or at least plausible?
That’s like saying a C-130 with firing ports for a few dozen .50 caliber HMGs on the sides would be an effective air combat platform in a theatre full of F-18s and SU-27s.
Well, Star Wars combat isn’t really analogous to real-life airplane combat – “beyond visual range” combat doesn’t seem to be as much of a thing in Star Wars as it is in real life, not with starfighters anyway. A better response would be to answer the question of, “Would E-Webs actually have an effect on (for example) other craft the size of the ATR-6 or even starfighters?”
Eh, even if the hypothetical Flankers & Hornets were operating under some ‘IR missiles & cannons only’ rule of engagement, doorgunner-style mounts were never intended for targets that fast. Toss in the question of E-webs even scratching your average fighter, and I’d say that analogy holds well enough.
Star Wars combat is completely analogous to real-life airplane combat, just not modern combat. It’s all based mainly off of World War II aviation– a spirit revived, albeit in a different form, for the intro battle in The Last Jedi. It’s very heavily based on aerial combat from that era– long-range missile interceptions isn’t…. as much of a thing, at all.
Dunno how well that analogy holds when you factor in the setting’s use of fairly sophisticated missiles from the prequel trilogy onward. Granted, homing weaponry was in use near the end of WWII, but talk about teething stages.
Even in WW2, a C-47 filled with machine gunners would be relatively easy pickings for a few BF-109s or A6Ms. Sure, they might be able to get an occasional few hits on a particularly stupid Axis pilot, but your kill/loss rate relative to cost of airframe and trained personnel would be abysmal. There’s a reason that daylight bombing raids over Nazi Germany even in ludicrously well armed B-17s were considered unsustainable before long range fighter escort was possible. The ability to maneuver with the best keeps you alive, which is why the Empire deploys TIEs and not gunship conversions of… Read more »
There’s a reason the defenses are there, but they aren’t for space superiority, I agree. Still, larger volume = larger reactor complement, it’s possible with computer-guided targeting and shielding a larger Gunboat-type ship could give fighters a run for their money. But not a transport. The issue with B-17s is that their guns were very inaccurate, firing at much smaller, faster targets, and that the .50 caliber guns they used had comparable range and punch to the 20mm-30mm autocannon and 7.92mm MMG pair used by German and Japanese fighters. A Star Wars gunboat will have heavier, longer-ranged, harder-hitting firepower than… Read more »
True enough: ships with an Assault Transport’s commitment to troop carriage could certainly defend themselves against most fighter attack ala the games, but actively *catching* such fast targets might be another story, and a bunch of tripod infantry pieces firing from viewports wouldn’t help one bit.
This boat having a temporary defense against small numbers of light fighters like Nimbus, Eta, and TIE/ln? Sure, why not. At this point on the scale, you become pretty vulnerable to concussion missiles from TIE/Sa or Y-Wings, the heavy lasers on something meaty like the ARC-170, and of course anything with LTL. Tradeoffs.
I think we get an extraordinarily swayed impression of small craft durability from the extended period of time the camera spends on the Falcon taking what look to be substantial hits from destroyers and fighters…. under explicit orders to not try and kill it.
Fair points re: missiles & punchier light guns, though I presume the ‘tender ’em up for capture’ orders were well & truly null as of ROTJ & TLJ’s respective finales (granted, that second one had Rey, so Acts of Force again). Plus, it seems like every other ST (and now Solo) Falcon setpiece was a promo reel for YT-series (particle?)deflectors/tensors/compensators (though terrain/collision avoidance was a *whole* ‘nother story). CEC must be raking in those kickbacks to sit on that plot-shielding patent.
The Empire Strikes Back: The greatest CEC marketing campaign ever told. I can understand the Falcon being highly survivable in the opening fighter engagement, when it was screened by large numbers of elite Rebel pilots, while fighting unsupported Imperial light fighters in the comforting embrace of nearby Rebel capital ship point defense, jamming, and ECM. The Death Star II chase in ROTJ was suspicious. There was a TIE interceptor only a few dozen meters behind the Falcon at all times, and it spent the whole chase doing….. absolutely nothing of note. My personal theory was that the pilot was hampered… Read more »
One extra factor on Team Lando’s side in ROTJ: that might’ve been the only engagement in any film involving a fully-crewed Falcon bent on its very best gunboat impression (even Solo’s nu-canon Kessel run lacked enough bodies for both turrets, what with that volatile hyperfuel issue). As for the reactor run’s perplexing paucity of squint fire…frankly, your theory’s as close as anything gets to making sense, though one also wonders how the Falcon’s gunners missed ’em in such tight quarters. Everything shunted into thrust & deflectors in case Lando & Nunb clipped a wall?
There are actually some nifty deleted scenes from ROTJ featuring those extra Alliance Falcon crew running around inside the Falcon and getting jolted during the battle while running to the guns. I understand why those scenes were deleted though, as they weren’t really adding anything. Canonically, the guys behind Lando are Lieutenant Blount, the Z-95 pilot from the X-Wing minature game, and Colonel Airen Cracken. Yeah, that Cracken from the threat dossier. Lando must be pretty good at pulling strings to get someone that senior assigned as his turret gunner. The full shielding and deflectors power allocation idea makes sense.… Read more »
how many troops would this carry?
A platoon (40) of infantry, probably not enough internal volume for any repulsorlift armor.
Fractal you’re work is great and this is made my evening.
As to the debate to length, I always imagined that they were based on the Assault Shuttle and would be the same rough dimensions.
Thank you, it is awesome to see classic x-wing designs!
I wasn’t expecting to see this one Fractal but it is great nonetheless to see the ATR-6 like this. But there are 2 things I want to ask you about. 1. There no WIPs for the ATR-6 and I want to know why didn’t you include them? I think it is nice to some some WIPS because it show progress, how the details was created and to give the idea on how to created the model properly. 2. The size of the ATR-6 last time I check this transport was 45 meters in length but you version is smaller at… Read more »
1) Too lazy 🙂 2) Meh, I scaled it based on how I wanted to look, rather than from some fixed initial point. I also think the old numbers were quite inconsistent with how the old details were arranged (I would’ve guessed from various the game models that the ship was a lot smaller than 30m). For example, that side hatch would’ve been absolutely enormous if the game model were scaled to 45m length (remember the game depiction is a lot deeper relative to length than my version). 3) ETR-3 is just the ATR with a pod right? I never… Read more »
Oh ok then as for the ETR-3 I guess you most likely not going to make one unless you do but with different changes that you want it to be. (Like the VSD)
Also Fractal I forgot to mention that the ETR-3 have the same weapons of the ATR-6 but it also have the foward laser cannons of the DX-9 but only 2 instead of 8.
It also mention it have stronger armour and shields than the ATR-6 but that it mostly fluff execute to try to make the ETR-3 the upgraded ATR-6.
I seem to remember the XWA flavor text saying it housed speeder bikes.
About the size, it´s highly debatable in many ways anyway. Like we had with the executor, that was way to small in the beginning (8km) and what we have with MC80 cruisers aswell, it´s said that they are only 1200m long, but you can clearly see in RotJ that they are much bigger, even dwarfing ISDs. With the Movie Rogue One, we have even more proof that MC80s are bigger. The Profundity is 1200m long and there are scenes where you can compare Y-Wings flying close to the Profundity and a Y-Wing flying close to a Liberty type MC80 in… Read more »
Nice work, but I think the fins might look more Imperial if they were textured as TIE-style radiators.
I considered that, but it didn’t make sense aesthetically to me for the thickness of the fins. I assume that’s what the fins are for anyway, but just not directly exposed.
And GonKar Ship Works probably wasn’t willing to pay the licensing fees…
Oh, hell yes.
These and the Escort Transports were a huge pain.
Five thumbs up for doing another design from the classic X-wing games! I remember these transports as tough opponents. Looks like this is still valid.
Just for nostalgic reasons: could you one day do a panel showing all your designs from those games side by side?
I can do that.
MC80s have appeared anywhere between 1.2 and 1.5 km long. Home One is a whole other matter. The Profundity appears about right, looking at the docking bay on the FFG model.
Nice to the see the ATR-6 again. I guess the hatch COULD maybe be for moving heavy equipment into a boarding action?