30

Is there visual evidence in any of the original three films that deflector shields do anything on any small fighter craft? There are plenty of scenes with the Millennium Falcon or Star Destroyers shrugging off weapon fire with a brief flash from the shields but it seems every time they show a fighter getting hit, it destroys the vehicle (except when R2 gets hit).

SDH
  • 2,336
  • 1
  • 17
  • 26
  • 6
    Hm, quite interesting! I seem to remember in the trench run of A New Hope it took a few shots from the TIE Fighters to bring down an X-Wing It is worth noting that some starfighters have no deflector shields at all, such as the A-Wing or the TIE Fighter. – DBPriGuy Sep 14 '16 at 16:51
  • 1
    This also raises the question whether there was any example of a storm-trooper's armor protecting him from anything at all. – vsz Sep 14 '16 at 20:56
  • ... I couldn't resist: http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/140670/is-there-any-indication-in-the-star-wars-universe-that-stormtrooper-armor-protec – vsz Sep 14 '16 at 21:08
  • 1
    TIE fighters, interceptors and bombers have no shields. A few models of Imperial fighters (like Darth Vader's Advanced TIE or the TIE Defender) have. Mostly all other fighters and ships have shields. A-wings used to have shields in Legends. – Neow Sep 15 '16 at 06:41
  • I always thought that the scene in Phantom Menace where, after crashing into the Trade federation hangar, Anakin just barely enables the shields on his fighter (with visible "bubble" effect), was a way to confirm that fighters do have shields in the Star Wars universe, since the original films weren't that explicit. – Oskuro Sep 15 '16 at 08:57

2 Answers2

41

In Star Wars: A New Hope, Wedge's X-Wing takes a direct hit to the rear quarter. Some of the energy seems to have been taken by his shields

enter image description here

This ties up nicely with the description in the film's junior novelisation. Evidently the blast damaged his controls and shield generator.

The three TIE fighters swooped into the trench. Luke focused on his targeting scope, which had just marked off the distance to the target. The TIE fighters zoomed closer to the X-wings. Darth Vader fired.

“I’m hit!” Wedge shouted as his ship was blasted from behind. Although his ship was still intact, his deflector shields were lost. Realizing he wouldn’t stand a chance against another attack, he said, “I can’t stay with you.”

Valorum
  • 689,072
  • 162
  • 4,636
  • 4,873
  • Yes, that is what I was asking about. I asked because shielding was such an integral part of the video games and it seems to have been rarely shown as helpful in the movies (except for Wedge). Thanks. – SDH Sep 14 '16 at 17:21
  • 16
    @SDH - Shielding is much more integral to video games because getting shot to pieces like you're flying a paper plane really sucks, whereas it's much more dramatic and moving to watch other people get shot. – Radhil Sep 14 '16 at 17:39
  • @Radhil unless you are playing a bullet hell game and then you are a glass cannon by definition :P – SPArcheon Sep 14 '16 at 17:47
  • @SPArchaeologist - IIRC TIE Fighter had a training mission that fit that case. TIE Fighter or Interceptor and no wingmen versus up to squads of 12 of every model in the Rebel fleet. – Freiheit Sep 14 '16 at 20:01
  • How do shield generators even get hit? It seems like an oxymoron. It always bothered me in the Phantom Menace. Especially when the gungan shield clearly has no borders. Does the shield generator have a hole where the shield begins? This seems like an awfully big oversight by the engineer who designed it. – EvSunWoodard Sep 14 '16 at 20:45
  • 1
    @EvSunWoodard - Because the shield generators stick out from the ship. Once the shield is breached, the generators are quite vulnerable (http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b242/terryburke/fine%20moulds%20X%20wing/X-Wingfinemoulds001.jpg) – Valorum Sep 14 '16 at 20:51
  • 8
    Also remember that earlier in the trench run, the lead fighter instructed the rest of the squadron to switch the deflectors to "double front". They weren't expecting (much) fire to come from the rear or sides, instead focusing on the very heavy fire coming from the front. They reinforced the forward-facing shields at the expense of severely weakening the other shield facings. – Irishpanda Sep 14 '16 at 20:54
  • 4
    @Irishpanda - Indeed. There are multiple mentions of shields, but relatively few examples of those shields actually being seen to do anything. – Valorum Sep 14 '16 at 20:57
  • Now that I think of it, weren't their depictions of blaster fire impacting the shields on the snowspeeders at Hoth? – Irishpanda Sep 14 '16 at 21:00
  • 1
    @EvSunWoodard In Star Wars, shields aren't one bubble that either holds or doesn't - depending on the ship, there may be many overlapping shields that form the full shielding of the ship. When one of those shields fails, most of the ship is still protected - but it might very well be that the part that becomes vulnerable is critical to the working of the ship or its shielding systems (as we've seen in RotJ). I'm not sure what's weird about the Gungan shield - they shot at it from the inside, where the generator wasn't protected anymore. The Gungan shield clearly has borders. – Luaan Sep 15 '16 at 09:26
  • @Luaan I was not very clear. The shield generator that gets hit that annoyed me is the Queen's cruiser while they are escaping Naboo. That shield appears to be uniform around the ship, because they get hit multiple times, yet the only hit that seems to land is the one that knocks out the shield generator, which generates the shield for the entire ship. I mentioned the gungan shield because it is the only fully visualised shield, which has no breaks in it. – EvSunWoodard Sep 15 '16 at 13:14
  • @EvSunWoodard Ah, okay, that makes more sense. Though I'd note that the Queen's yacht was no military vessel - it was just a personal spaceship. Having military-grade shielding on such a ship would be kind of like expecting an S-class Mercedes to have bulletproof glass and frame and RPG-protection. I suspect that the shield was designed more against navigational hazards than military engagement (note that the ship didn't have any weapons either). And if conservation of momentum is a thing in SW, the shield must absorb the momentum of the shot even at full strength, which might cause damage. – Luaan Sep 15 '16 at 13:20
  • Having lost shields because of an attack doesn't necessarily mean a shield generator was directly hit. Maybe keeping the shields up has burnt out or exhausted something in the generator. – armb Sep 15 '16 at 14:26
  • @Luaan - if an S-class Mercedes is being used by royalty, or senior diplomats, I would expect it to be bullet-proof. http://www.topgear.com/car-news/modified/meet-bullet-proof-merc-s-class (or http://www.topgear.com/car-news/its-armoured-mercedes-maybach-s600) (Not RPG proof, I admit.) – armb Sep 15 '16 at 14:30
  • @armb The suspicious part is that the shield generator was back online with just a bit of fiddling by a maintenance droid - so it did suggest that there was something trivial that broke it (like a disturbed power conduit, or a loose plug coming out). And yeah, I noted bullet-proofing and RPG-proofing separately exactly to point out the escalation - even the bullet-proofing is rarely military-grade (e.g. against an anti-materiel rifle). Padmé wasn't especially important, she was just a senator. I expect Palpatine was driving around in a Venator or something instead :D – Luaan Sep 15 '16 at 14:42
  • She was (elected) queen of an entire planet, I think that counts as more than "just a senator", even in a galaxy with lots of inhabited planets. (I don't know if the the US presidential car will withstand an RPG, but it's allegedly equipped with them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_state_car_(United_States)#Current_model) – armb Sep 15 '16 at 15:33
2

I think the real answer is "it depends". On what? Dramatic license.

It's not uncommon in such films that the hero's ship can take several hits, yet destroy its opponent with a single shot. This is done to build up tension.

Similar to the example above, Star Trek has shown ships being physically damaged, before cutting to a crew-member claiming that the shields are down to 30% (or other arbitrary number).

In most cases, the writer has some idea of a shields/forcefields effectiveness, but will succumb to dramatic license as needed.

Tim
  • 6,227
  • 3
  • 29
  • 46
  • 3
    It amazes me how fast the bridge consoles blow up, even when the "shields are holding". Seems like a bit of a design flaw :) – Jane S Sep 15 '16 at 04:54
  • 2
    @JaneS: There are just too many idiotic engineers insisting on installing the wrong LEDs for warning lights. They blow up once activated. – Mario Sep 15 '16 at 05:00
  • 2
    Crewman 1: "Captain! The dilithium crystals are destablizing, shields are down to some arbitrary percentage, and we're surrounded! Death is imminent!!!" Captain: "No worries. Engage narrative causality!" Crewman 2: "Narrative causality - ENGAGED!" Crewman 1: "Captain! All the enemy ships have spontaneously detonated! The Federation is saved!" Captain: "Yes, for now. But there is a greater threat to peace and freedom which we must seek out...and destroy!" COMING SOON: STAR TREK 27 - DEATH TO THE WRITERS!!! :-) – Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні Sep 15 '16 at 11:52
  • @Mario: but you gotta admit, they get your attention. Crewman: "Captain! My console has just exploded!" Captain: "And when your console explodes in a shower of sparks..?" Crewman: "...uh...it means...uh...critical facility overload!" Captain (annoyed): "Which means....???" Crewman: "...uh...the toilet is running..?" Captain: "Exactly! And how do we fix that, Crewman?" Crewman: "...uh..." Captain: "You jiggle the handle, right?!" Crewman: "Yessir! So I'll just go down to the head and, uh..." Captain: "JIGGLE THE GODDAM HANDLE!! Jeesus kay-ryst, where does StarFleet FIND these people..?" – Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні Sep 15 '16 at 12:01
  • 3
    You guys should read John Scalzi's Redshirts. – anaximander Sep 15 '16 at 12:21
  • 1
    Redshirts was pretty good, though I thought he should've stopped writing it sooner. The last bit dragged it down a bit I thought. Like when my daughter tells the same joke for the 47th time. – Paul Sep 15 '16 at 13:41
  • 1
    @JaneS: I keep waiting for some non-ST show to have a scene where a ship is under attack and some visitor on the bridge sort of edges away from a console. It catches the attention of one of the crew who says "What are you doing?" Visitor: "I'm moving away from the console. It could short out or blow up or something if we get hit, couldn't it?" Crewman (disgusted): "Of course not, there are something like five fuses and converters between the power source and the panel. Even if the designers were stupid enough not to do that from the start, they'd have added them in battle testing." – T.J. Crowder Sep 15 '16 at 15:54
  • @T.J.Crowder - but in the heat of battle you don't want your fuses to blow and knock out some critical system so you engage the battleshorts. So that visitor has the right idea. – Johnny Sep 15 '16 at 16:16
  • @Johnny: You might have those to short the fuses that protect equipment (like gun turret rotation motors), but in a fly-by-wire environment (modern current equipment, much less SciFi) there's no reason to allow fatal overloads to head up to control panels. :-) – T.J. Crowder Sep 15 '16 at 16:23
  • 1
    @Johnny: But that would be a fun scene later! Same crewman and visitor are in the depths of the ship and the crewman pulls the visitor away from something just before it explodes. Visitor: "I thought you said there were fuses!" Crewman: "For consoles, sure. That was the technobabble of the technobabble. You always disable fuses to those in battle, using a battleshort. You don't want it not working when it could have worked just because it's a bit overjuiced." Totally stronger pair of scenes for the battleshort addition, nice one. – T.J. Crowder Sep 15 '16 at 16:54
  • 1
    @JaneS: unfortunately bridge consoles are powered by nitroglycerin. – SDH Sep 15 '16 at 17:16