Talk:Y-85 Titan dropship

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

Move to "Y-85 Titan"? --SparqMan 04:49, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

• Y-85 Titan seemed like the most appropriate place. Or maybe expand the name to "Y-85 Titan dropship" or the like. JSarek

Contents 1 Empire at War 2 Other barges 3 Empire At War 4 Primary bay

[edit] Empire at War

I changed this, but it was reverted. There's no way that these are the ones that are in Empire at War. The ones in that game carry only one AT-AT and are not very large. They also are called 'AT-AT barges'. Therefore, I concluded that they were the same vessel with different coloring that was featured in Force Commander. Trucidar 15:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

• Could it be the Theta-class AT-AT barge? Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 19:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
• That is what I was thinking, with a different color variation.
  • That's probably it. Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 11:24, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
    • it is.--Grand Moff Wilhuff Tarkin 22:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other barges

• Early Expanded Universe sources claimed that an Imperial-class Star Destroyer carried 12 "landing barges" of unspecified class. It was stated that these barges were capable of holding 4 AT-ATs or 8 AT-STs, as well as 1,000 troops

Out of interest, where is this reference from?

• The nonfiction book Star Wars Incredible Cross Sections, by David West Reynolds, portrayed a single-walker barge inside Devastator's hangars.

Um... I can't see a "single-walker barge" in either of the ICS images in the linked page at SWTC. [1] [2] Also, Saxton notes and illustrates the "folding" barge carried by the ISD-II Reckoning from Mandatory Retirement. [3] In other words, an ISD does have the facility to launch at least one AT-AT platoon - just not in the Y-85.

• This book... confirmed that Imperial-class Star Destroyers only have hangars large enough for single-walker landing barges.

And, can anyone tell me what the exact quote here? I do take Saxton's underlying point at SWTC, which is that the ISD's bay isn't really big enough to launch multiple large barges simultaneously, but I think it's misleading to suggest that they can't launch any large barges.

Thanks! --McEwok 16:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

---

• From the Incredible Cross Sections, on the Devastator page, it shows about two clearly visible AT-ATs, I believe, which would mean about one Y-85. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 21:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

• That's somewhere else on the page, not in the pics linked to at SWTC, or am I just going blind? And, either way, I don't see how you get from "two clearly visible AT-ATs" to "a single-walker barge", unless we get a good look at whatever's above/below/behind the main hangar? --McEwok 19:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Well, there are AT-ATs in there somewhere—I'm sure of it. As for the barges, how else would the AT-ATs get planetside? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 21:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Okay, at least one AT-AT is visible in the first shot behind the Sentinel-class landing craft. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 21:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • There's one AT-AT partially visible and the rear of two landing barges to the left of it: [4] Barely enough to clear the hangar door. How they get the AT-ATs inside, I have no idea, the main cross-section doesn't show it well, except for the main reactor taking up most of the space behind the hangar, and the TIE hangars using up space right above this level, so it can't be big. I guess they put the vehicles on elevators, lower them one level, glide the barge above them and raise the elevator again. Somewhat similar to the elevators on Trade Federation C-9979 landing craft. VT-16 22:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
    • That's the AT-AT I was talking about. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 00:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Maybe I'm still not looking at this right, but that doesn't look like Theta-class barges to me, front or back: too vertical. Alternatively, it could be something that "unpacks" in the main bay, like we see in X-wing, or something with a door in the bow or stern that the AT-AT simply walks into. If we're being nitpicky, "landing barge" doesn't even have to mean AT-AT carriers, and there's no absolute indication of what's barge and what's part of Devastator - though I see the logic of barge - stanchion - barge - stanchion, which I assume is how VT-16 is reading it?
• Also, at the risk of repeating myself: anyone got the direct quote from ItW on the Y-85 and the Theta? --McEwok 13:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• True, "landing barge" doesn't have to mean AT-AT carriers, but how do the AT-ATs get down to a planet's surface, then? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 17:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Presumably via some sort of landing barge or dropship, yes, but not necessarily using whatever it is we see in that shot in ICS. What I'm trying to do is find out what the various canon statements actually say - that's why I'm trying to discover the precise words used in ItW, and where the reference to large barges aboard ISDs comes from. --McEwok 19:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• And I've just found the large-barge reference: ... each Star Destroyer also carries 12 landing barges for crew and cargo transfer and for ground assault. Landing barges are shielded and armed, and carry up to four AT-AT's [sic!] (or eight AT-STs) and 1,000 troops each (Star Wars Sourcebook, 2nd. edition, p. 35 - anyone know if it's any different in the original?); that might mean there's only one multi-purpose barge type aboard an ISD, although it doesn't actually say so explicitly. --McEwok 20:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Exactly, so let's not assume. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 20:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• IW:OT and SW:CL has this description of the Y-85 Titan dropship: "Used begrudingly by the Empire because it was manufactured by the same company that provided the reviled X-wing starfighter to the Rebels, Incom's Y-85 Titan dropship was essential to the rapid deployment of the Executor's prefabricated garrison bases. The landing barge employs a standard cockpit module and can accommodate four 22.5 meter (74-feet)-tall AT-ATs, in addition to four AT-STs. Larger Imperial ships possess hangar apetures of sufficient size to deploy the four-walker dropships, while smaller ships, such as Star Destroyers, deploy single-walker barges." VT-16 06:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, there you go, McEwok. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 11:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
  • The larger barges would be accommedated for with the externally loaded transports, like the one in the X-wing comic mentioned above. VT-16 18:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Sounds good to me. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 19:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
      • couldn't thes things fly through deep space without need of larger ship?--Grand Moff Wilhuff Tarkin 22:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Empire At War

Just to dissuade any future reversions of my changes: These are not the vessels in Empire at war.

Comparison:

AT-AT Barges contain 1 AT-AT and are small. Y-85s contain 4 AT-ATs and numerous AT-STs and are quite large.

In Empire at war, the barges carry 1 AT-AT and are small. They are also called "AT-AT Barges" if you click on them, so I'm not sure what more proof is needed. So to conclude, there are no Y-85s in Empire at war.

• It's called gameplay. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax ^{(Imperial Holovision)} 12:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Primary bay

The barges may not be able to fit into the hangar bays themselves but what about the main holding bay (the one that the Devastator captures the Tantive IV in.SargeLIVES 01:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)