Whoa never seen the sizes compared like that. Yep its huge, and its way waaay bigger than its main rival the Seraph.
Yeah they’re pretty big.
Compare the longsword with the other modern day fighters with shared roles.
> Whoa never seen the sizes compared like that. Yep its huge, and its way waaay bigger than its main rival the Seraph.
That seems like comparing a scorpion to a ghost. Seraphs are recon units, like ghosts, that could fight but dont. I think a prowler is a better example of a human seraph.
You can see why these get shot down all the time. So much surface area waiting to be blown to pieces.
Kinda explains why the UNSC was developing the Sabre.
> You can see why these get shot down all the time. So much surface area waiting to be blown to pieces.
>
> Kinda explains why the UNSC was developing the Sabre.
Well they crashed a lot because they are extremely common in the UNSC and thus will have higher crash numbers due to higher amount of ships, same reason for pelicans. And hey need to be large because they are after all a fighter, interceptor AND bomber both atmospheric and exoatmospheric.
> > You can see why these get shot down all the time. So much surface area waiting to be blown to pieces.
> >
> > Kinda explains why the UNSC was developing the Sabre.
>
> Well they crashed a lot because they are extremely common in the UNSC and thus will have higher crash numbers due to higher amount of ships, same reason for pelicans. And hey need to be large because they are after all a fighter, interceptor AND bomber both atmospheric and exoatmospheric.
I was under the impression that the Longsword handles a fighter role while the Shortsword handles bombing operations… So the Longsword is a fighter-bomber not a air superiority fighter??? I’m confused…
> > > You can see why these get shot down all the time. So much surface area waiting to be blown to pieces.
> > >
> > > Kinda explains why the UNSC was developing the Sabre.
> >
> > Well they crashed a lot because they are extremely common in the UNSC and thus will have higher crash numbers due to higher amount of ships, same reason for pelicans. And hey need to be large because they are after all a fighter, interceptor AND bomber both atmospheric and exoatmospheric.
>
> I was under the impression that the Longsword handles a fighter role while the Shortsword handles bombing operations… So the Longsword is a fighter-bomber not a air superiority fighter??? I’m confused…
http://www.halopedian.com/Longsword
The Longsword is used for a variety of roles, multi-purpose if you will while the Shortsword is specialized in bombing.
> > Whoa never seen the sizes compared like that. Yep its huge, and its way waaay bigger than its main rival the Seraph.
>
> That seems like comparing a scorpion to a ghost. Seraphs are recon units, like ghosts, that could fight but dont. I think a prowler is a better example of a human seraph.
Actually Seraphs are The Covenant’s space primary space fighters also multipurpose fighters. Not scouting, recon units.
Hm I wonder what kind of mods it would take for a longsword to be slipspace compatible.
Going forward in the universe, I see the UNSC Navy adopting the Sabre into widespread adoption within the fleet’s naval air forces in an air-dominance/superiority and strike fighter role. The Longsword would therefore be relegated to long-range interception and more strategic bombing roles considering its just too large and unwieldy to be used effectively in dogfighting with the fleet and in-atmosphere.
I came late to the post, but they’re massive!!
Not surprising from the end cutscene of CE…it has a massive cockpit with 2 seats and plenty of room to move around. Seeing that Longswords are said to have a variety of roles, I am sure all that space helps when refitting for different missions.
> 2533274923762848;13:
> I came late to the post, but they’re massive!!
Late to post? this thread is like 4 years old XD
Holy Necropost Batman!
> 2533274964189700;16:
> Arise thread long since dead!
Damn, beat me to it! I’ve waited so long to use that.
But yes, they are big. And I’ve actually met people on another forum that think a modern F-22 Raptor can fight this thing.
> 2533274926527272;17:
> But yes, they are big. And I’ve actually met people on another forum that think a modern F-22 Raptor can fight this thing.
A Longsword likely combines the attributes of an F-22A, an F-35B, an EA-18G, and the proposed B-1R with truly beyond visual range capability. I wouldn’t even want to go up against it with a Paris-class heavy frigate, let alone a puny little Raptor that might turn out to be a Decepticon.
> 2533274791742477;18:
> > But yes, they are big. And I’ve actually met people on another forum that think a modern F-22 Raptor can fight this thing.
>
>
> A Longsword likely combines the attributes of an F-22A, an F-35B, an EA-18G, and the proposed B-1R with truly <em data-wr_replaced=“true”>beyond visual range* capability. I wouldn’t even want to go up against it with a <em data-wr_replaced=“true”>Paris*-class heavy frigate, let alone a puny little Raptor that might turn out to be a Decepticon.
A heavy frigate could easily deal with a single Longsword.
> 2533274831420277;19:
> A heavy frigate could easily deal with a single Longsword.
Attack aircraft have made mincemeat of escorts, especially one without a detachment of fighter-interceptors for combat air patrol, or one with inadequate defenses. The Second World War proved this, the Falklands War proved that in the early years of the contemporary era, and naval planners predict we’ll learn this all over again in the Pacific. Long-range, high-speed, anti-ship cruise missiles give strike aircraft a stand-off ability that limits the danger they face from a ship’s air defense systems. Electronic warfare aircraft, or at least a strike platform with multi-role capabilities, can jam a ship’s integrated defense system consisting of sensors, guns, and missiles. Assuming aircraft can’t stand toe-to-toe against ships is First World War thinking.