Talk:Home One/Archive1

Saxton's >3 km length is not "fan conjecture." It's a measurement taken from the canon movies, which override the length from WEG. If it's fan conjecture, then so is the Executor being more than 8 km long all these years until recently, with that made-up 12.8 km stuff, and the real length being allowed in Inside the Worlds of the Star Wars Trilogy. JimRaynor55 09:29, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * agree--Eion 14:38, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Saxton is no more than a fan when he is not writing Star Wars books. He can make as many measurements as he wants, but until his measurements are supported by a published material, it is fanon. How can we employ Earth measurements in the Star Wars galaxy? How do you know he measured the depth of the shot correctly to tell the proper scale of other ships? The point is, if LFL supported his view, it would do so in sources. His views of Executor's size have been supported in ItW, but that doesn't automatically confirm every other conjecture he has put forth. --SparqMan 15:20, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I say we look at the facts, rather than guess at who has the right to measure what.

Fact: The three most common ideas for the Home One's lengths are 1200 meters, 3800 meters, and 1800 meters.

Fact: Once starfighters are out of their mothership's hangar bay, it doesn't matter what ship they came from, as long as they blow TIEs to shreds. Besides, many or all of the fighters that arrived at Endor arrivedoutside of their hangars.

Fact: Because of the previous fact, Admrial Ackbar must've decided to use Home One as his flagship for a different reason than its 10 squadron fighter capacity.

Fact: The Liberty was the first ship to be destroyed by the Death Star.

Fact: The Liberty is 1200 meters long.

Fact: The average Imperial Commander (and even the average person) has enough strategic sense to destroy the largest ships first, if they can destroy a ship of their choice every few minutes. After all, if you were in charge of the Death Star's superlaser, would you go after the largest Mon Cal Cruisers first, or waste time on the Nebulon-B Escort Frigates?


 * FACT: The emperor knew, or thought he knew, that they had nothing to fear, period, from the Rebel fleet. The shields would remain intact.  So, he could take his time and pick off the non-critical ships first.  Since he feared nothing at all, why would he take out the main ship?  He wanted to prolong the battle and annihilate everything and cause the most despair possible.  So this point and the next are null, and that probably also nullifies your conclusion.  Jhbartlett 02:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Fact: Because of the previous fact, Home One and her sister ships are NOT 3800 meters, because if they were, the Liberty, which would be less than 1/3 the size of any 3800 meter ship, would not have been targeted.

Fact: Home One is NOT 1200 meters, because if she was, she would have a smaller hull than of a winged Liberty-type cruiser, making her of smaller size and therefore a poorer flagship. Even without the side wings, the Liberty-type would be bigger. A somewhat smaller ship than the liberty type could not serve as a flagship, carry over three times the fighters, and still have 65 gun emplacements(Liberty types have 68, only three more.)

Fact: The only length left to give to Home One that is large enough to make her of proper flagship size, carry ten squadrons of fighters, and still have room for sixty five guns, yet small enough to keep an Imperial Commander from going, "Oh My God that thing is huge! Destroy it at once!" is 1800 meters.

He measured it by comparing Star Destroyers and the like, too. As I've said before, if an 'official' source had Vader's height as 4 feet tall, yet all other measurements in the films proved otherwise, what are you going to go by? It's direct observation of the film (which is G-canon), and no more speculative than saying that Endor's moon has lots of trees, even if a canon source said it was desert. --Fade 16:35, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it's a lot more speculative. Saxton has no means of precisely measuring the depth of a shot, and so he casually guesses at the depth and then uses the Corellian Corvette as a measuring stick. And the Vader example is not the same: it is easy to assess his height given his surroundings. Curtis' comparisons of the ship against other items in the shot using his technique. I don't hold that the WEG length is correct, but his measurements are simply his own assessment, and nothing more than that. LFL has, and continues to have, ample opportunities to correct WEG through WOTC, EG books, ITW prints, novels, comics, etc., but it has not. So until then, there is no reason to assume Saxton's accuracy. --SparqMan 20:50, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Let's not bring this argument here. Yes, the official measurements seem wacky. Yes, Saxton's may be better. Yes, they will probably make it into canon publications. For now, since we made a decision to use canon sources, we have to use the *current* official figure. If it is ever changed (or correct, depending on your view) we can change this page. The magic of wikis! QuentinGeorge 22:14, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Retirement
Do we know for a fact that Home One was retired? Or maybe it was destroyed when the New Republic was driven off Coruscant? -- SFH 04:06, 6 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I was thinking that too -SWF
 * One must also ask the question: Could they afford to decomission ships at the time? The New Republic had just been driven from Coruscant, and vital shipyard worlds such as Duro and Mon Calamari were under threat (though I imagine that Kuat and the Tapani Sector went back to the Empire of their own free will). Also, Home One was working just fine during the Thrawn campaign, but then they decide to retire it? Does anyone else find some sort of flaws in this logic? -- SFH 19:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Home One was still active following the defeat of reborn Palpy, 11 ABY. It is in the book I, Jedi. It was no longer Ackbar's flagship but it still saw service at that point. AdmiralNick22 02:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

New entry/Behind the scences
I have completed a major edit to this article. I feel that it was fair to mention both camps of the argument in rgards to Home One and its size. I would like to note that while the stats at the top are those found in WEG, the new behind the scenes section gives fair mention to both camps, in particular to the work of Dr. Curtis Saxton.

While I am inclined to support Saxton's theory on the length, it has yet to be put into canon, despite whatever the films themselves show. In an effort to make the Wookieepedia a site that shows only canon information in its articles, I have removed the stats that came from the Warships of the Mon Calamari page.

Please note that this is in no way a snub to Dr. Saxton. Again, I stress that while I myself personally agree with his size estimate for Home One, the Wookieepedia is only a good source of info for fans if it includes info from canon sources. Should Dr. Saxton ever get his work on Ackbar's cruiser published in a EU sourcebook, like he did for the SSD, I will happily edit this article. But, until then, it is most prudent to include those original WEG stats. AdmiralNick22 18:29, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

A Possible way to judge the correct canon length from the ROTJ
I was reading this and I think there may be a way to judge the actual lenght of Home One. There is a scene where the stolen Imperial Shuttle Tyderium leaves the hanger bay of Home One with it's wings folded. we just have to measure the width of Tyderium with folded wings, compare it to the width of the large starboard hanger and then use that number to get the actual length of Home one from both ROTJ, the actual model and ANY pic showing the right outboard profile of Home one. I'll see if I can figure it out but I'll upload the pic so you all can see it. I took a screen capture direct from the DVD. Enjoy --Lord Tyranneix 00:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * That is what Dr. Saxton has done, IIRC. While this is evidence to some, we cannot officially state the larger length until it becomes part of printed canon. Fans debate the scale of ships in the movies just as strongly. Hopefully one day someone at LFL will settle this debate, but until then it is fair to mention both viewpoints. AdmiralNick22 15:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * If the movies show something to be a certain size, then that size is canon. The Executor would still be 11-12 miles long even if WEG's 5 mile length had never been officially corrected. If the movies show Home One to be 3.8km long, then 3.8km is the canon length. -Vermilion 20:36, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't diagree with you in principle, but the fact remains that the Wiki is only good if it shows the stats that are "official" for each vessel. Even if the movies show Home One to be bigger, the stats that LFL still work with are the smaller set. That is why I compromised- show the small stats, while making a huge behind the scences section that details the debate and tells viewers the two viewpoints.

Afterall, the SSD size debate has died off considerably thanks to LFL finally choosing a official length. Hopefully they will do this for Home One as well. AdmiralNick22 15:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You seem to have missed the point. Stats known to be wrong should have no place on the Wiki outside a 'Behind the scenes' section. Repeating mistakes only makes it harder to get them officially fixed. -Vermilion 08:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I guess I view it differently. The movies may in fact show Home One to be larger, which I do not dispute, but LFL still holds to its old length. I do not dispute the fact that the moviews themselves are the ultimate canon, but for whatever reason LFL does nto change the length of Ackbar's flagship. Regardless of how accurate Dr. Saxton's measurements are (which they do appear to be very accurate), the powers at be at LFL have yet to weigh in on the Home One debate. I chose to edit the article into line with their current policy- which has the vessel still at 1200 meters. I did not do this in an attempt to disregard the work of Dr. Saxton, but in an effort to make this article as much in line with official policy as possible. Afterall, the Wookieepedia is only a good resource if we all strive to include what is accepted as canon at the time. I will not edit this again to avoid a edit war, but I do feel that my reason for including the old length was justified. AdmiralNick22 02:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keeping any wrong number or statement around when the opposite is shown in the movies or other high canon source, is plain and simply wrong and should be noted as such in the article. Whether you "feel" differently is not good enough for evidence. If we followed your logic, Luke's yellow lightsabre from the old toyset would be noted in the actual article rather than as a 'goof' in a "behind the scenes"-section. After all, no-one acknowledges it as green in the film, so the possibility is there, right?
 * I also noted that another complaint made about the measurements (that the dimensions of the doorway in the internal mattepainting and the exterior model were too dissimilar), was wrong. The only inconsistency in the two scenes, is the lights on the hangarbay walls, and since they have no bearing on any dimensional measurements, this was a false assumption.
 * There is also another size-indicator in ROTJ. It's alot more rough and imprecise, but it shows how absurd the "1200m" notion is. When the camera first opens up on the fleet in formation, and the starfighters move away from the camera, the Mon Cal cruiser to the right is being overtaken by the camera. Meanwhile, the Home One (or a sister-ship) is in the background throughout the scene, barely budging an inch. Now, whenever we see something like this in real life, it means that if the object of a seemingly same size is not moving (relative to us, the observers), it is further away and much bigger than the one rapidly "moving towards us" (in comparison).
 * A third option is presuming that the engines on the Home One are the same size as the Liberty type's (presuming they were all of the same type, according to some). Even if that was the case, the Home One would still be above 2km in length. VT-16 22:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, we can agree to disagree. I still feel that using the current official length (at least according to LFL- personally I agree with the larger) is the best bet, while putting alot of info into the Behind the Scenes section detailing Dr. Saxton's work and showing how the current LFL policy is in fact incorrect. That way we tell it "how it is" while maintaining the article in close standard to the one currently held by LFL. AdmiralNick22 04:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I really don't want to emphasise Curtis Saxton any more than that he first put forward the notion in an article (unless of course, someone else mentioned the discrepancy even earlier). This isn't an article about him, and I've noticed a tendency of some wookipedians to write somewhat slanted BTS-info whenever Saxton's name is mentioned. The less this article focuses on him, the better.
 * As for the length, well, if you take the 1200m mark, you'd basically forgo a higher source (the movies) for lower ones (secondary factbooks and RPGs). It's like writing that Yoda's skin is blue (an actual fan injoke from around the premiere of AOTC, because of the Dooku lightning scene), when people watching the films clearly see its green. Or writing that the A-wing is bigger than the X-wing. You're not going to get alot of people subscribing to that theory, but the reason it's happened here (and with the Executor) is because of the time involved (decades of the same stats) and because of the overt focus on the people behind the fansites taking precedence.
 * To further complicate things, some of the secondary sources don't always agree. I've seen comics that have the Home One eclipse a Dreadnaught cruiser by at least four times (had it been 1200m, it would only be twice as long). Most comics simply show the Home One dominating the scene anyway (like in ROTJ), so you'd be hard-pressed to find an actual scene where it's shrunk down to the size of the other cruisers. VT-16 09:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


 * My argument has nothing to do with trying to disprove or disagree with the larger length. The whole point of my argument is that the Wookieepedia should be in line with current LFL policy. Since it is mistakenly 1200 meters at the moment, we should include that in the stats box while going into great detail explaining why this is incorrect in the BTS section. That way we maintain the Wookieepedia as closely as possible to the Holocron while still showing people that it has mistakes as well. AdmiralNick22 14:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * "The whole point of my argument is that the Wookieepedia should be in line with current LFL policy."
 * I agree, that's why I'm sceptical to giving the second source figure so much weight. How about stating both lengths in the box, with a disclaimer around the 1200m one? VT-16 18:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I think that is an excellent idea. AdmiralNick22 22:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Who changed it back to 1200 meters? Wasn't it decided that it was 3800 meters? I mean, it was much larger than the other Mon Cal cruisers.
 * I thought we agreed on both, as a solution. Or that the "real" length is bigger, but not specified. VT-16 07:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It does say in the databank that it was twice the length of an ISD, so I like the sound of 3800.Star Destroyer 2500 22:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Where does it say that? I've never seen it being officially described as twice the size of an ISD. VT-16 11:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * In The New Essential Guide to Vehicles & Vessels by W. Haden Blackman, it says the Home One is 1,200 M long. Now, I don't know if that's canon enough or not, but I thought it could help...-Darthvadersnewmaster


 * can this page be unprotected please. Altough I'm also a supporter of the 3.800m length, the official length for now ís 1.200m. There's a lot of info in the BTS section on the 3.800m thing. let's leave it at that. I would like to see the protection on this page removed. --BaldFett 11:30, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Just passing through and having had a look at all this, I ask, what is your protocol for dealing with conflicting canon? As best as I can tell, 'canon' says Home One is a particular model of ship, which in ROTJ, it is clearly much larger than. If canon says that ship a and ship b are the same size, when they aren't portrayed as such in the film, then surely at least one of the statements in text must be disregarded.  If what is written down is contradicting itself, surely you can't say it is all correct. 144.137.9.1 06:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Not only does it conflict with the movie, it also conflicts with other EU sources. If the ship is only 1200m long, the 20m+ tall shuttle won't be able to pass through the hangarbay doors, as I showed at the bottom of this thread. I still think we should have an "official but not accurate" tag. :) VT-16 17:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I just want to get rid of the protection on this page. 1,200 or 3,800, thing is that 3,800 is "fanon" at the moment, so... --BaldFett 20:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, I haven't seen any canon that says it's any longer, so we should just go by the book... - The New Master of Darth Vader
 * Well, if we add the disclaimer above, that's fine with me. I also see Empire at War:FOC appears to have the Home One at more than twice the length of the normal mon cal cruisers. I don't think they had it like that in the original game, so this must be a new decision. I'd like to hear an official statement before writing anything on it, though. :) VT-16 12:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess you also found this image from IGN? (thing is: if the Liberty's are supposed to be 1,200m, that would make that Home One still no 3,800m --BaldFett 14:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I know. Still, it's a beginning. :p
 * Another problem is, the game has different settings for scale. I don't know if this frame shows the most "realistic" depiction of the vehicles that the game can offer, so that's another thing. Tried to ask on the board where most of the programmers comment, but I didn't get an answer from one of them. I'll wait until we know more. VT-16 17:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keeping a number that you know to be wrong is just silly. The supporters of the 1.2 km length say they want to be consistent with LFL's policy, but LFL's stated policy is that G-canon overrules C-canon. Just because it hasn't been updated in some books (and you know this is probably because of poor research and/or not even realizing there's a problem) doesn't mean it's right. Change it to the G-canon ~3.8 km length. JimRaynor55 08:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Isn't part of the problem that we're not sure it's exactly 3.8 km? That there's room for slightly different sizes? This isn't like the Executor, which had many comparison scenes, and where most shots had it consistently 11 times an ISD with only one or two deviations. The Home One doesn't have quite the same good comparison shots. I do see some C-canon sources which doesn't follow the 1.2 km line. I think it was WOTC's Starships of the Galaxy which had a picture showing a HO-type vessel with two Marauder corvettes in front of it, and they were smaller than one of its engines. Taking their lengths and adding alongside it, would come up with something much longer than 1.2 km. There's also EaW:FoC above, which has a longer HO than in the original game. Whether this is on the "most realistic scale" (it can be changed according to how realistic comparisons gamers want) or not, I don't know. But that's two C-canon sources supporting a G-canon source.
 * At least free up the article and put >1,200 meters in the length slot. Putting in a C-canon source that contradicts a G-canon source does not follow the official LFL guidelines but neither does 3.8 km. The only sure thing is that the HO is longer than 1.2 km and that's that. VT-16 09:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, I've read through the shooting script for ROTJ, and it says quite clearly that the Home One was the largest of the Rebel Star Cruisers. If it was the same size as all the others, this would be a pointless description. Please unblock the article now, so we can note this at least. VT-16 11:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, it's unlocked: the evidence seems to be to indicate "over 1.2 km". VT-16, you mentioned a Leland Chee quote: could you link to it as well in the BtS section?  Thanks. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 15:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I linked to the Chee quote in the sources section, need to find a good place for it in bts. He just replies that nothing is planned as far as officially addressing the HO size issue, or any other "official dimensions vs. onscreen dimensions" issue. Which I thought was interesting, as that seems to separate the films (G-canon) from written sources (C-canon)...
 * Also added the stuff from the ROTJ script to external links, I'm also trying to find what the novelization says, as I think it quoted stuff from the script. VT-16 16:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * "In a remote and midnight vacuum beyond the edge of the galaxy, the vast Rebel fleet stretched, from its vanguard to its rear echelon, past the range of human vision. Corellian battleships, cruisers, destroyers, carriers, bombers, Sullustian cargo freighters, Calamarian tankers, Alderaanian gunships, Kesselian blockade runners, Bestinian skyhoppers, X-wing, Y-wing, and A-wing fighters, shuttles, transport vehicles, manowars. Every Rebel in the galaxy, soldier and civilian alike, waited tensely in these ships for instructions. They were led by the largest of the Rebel Star Cruisers, the Headquarters Frigate.
 * Hundreds of Rebel commanders, of all species and lifeforms, assembled in the war room of the giant Star Cruiser, awaiting orders from the High Command." ROTJ novelization, page 71. --Vermilion 06:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks alot! That's going in the article. :D VT-16 09:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Very Minor Issue
But possibly relevant, all other captial ship names have their title in standard text, yet Home One is in italics, is this intended? or should it be changed? 95 Headhunter
 * They're all meant to use italics thanks to the new template. &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 20:05, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Conflict

 * I'm not sure which source stated the ship was decommissioned, but it shows up again in I, Jedi, so it shouldn't be listed as decommissioned until later. Atarumaster88  Jedi_Order.svg ( Audience Chamber ) 05:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Size
Back to size issues again.
 * Do the FactFiles really give a length of 1.3km?
 * Is the 1.4km type in X-wing: Alliance really the Home One type?
 * Calling the Headquarters Frigate the "largest" Rebel Star Cruiser is a strong argument, if a vague one; but this assumes that the entire fleet has assembled by this point.
 * The re-scaling widely known to fans is extrapolated from the hangar aperture. This is, I would argue, unreliable because of the visual difference between the hangar doors in the matte painting (interior), from which a scale in metres is derived, and on the FX model (exterior), from which a length for the ship is worked out: this is not "only related to the positioning of some internal lights", as defenders of the calculation claim. On the interior view, the flight deck protrudes out into space, the upper section of the exit with the four lighting strips is much wider than the lower parts, and the lights continue round the top of the exit; whereas on the exterior, the flight deck doesn't protrude, the upper section is no wider than the lower parts, and the lights don't continue round the top of the exit. There are also questions of whether the interior walls, or the aparatus hanging from the ceiling, match up - and no guarantee that the interior and exterior views have even the same ratio of height to width.
 * There's also a problem with the scaling of the A-wing that's the basis for this entire calculation&mdash;the size of the doors is extrapolated from the size of an A-wing parked nearby. If you insist on a G-canon override, then you have to scale the A-wing from the size of the pilot, not from the "official" length. This gives ~4.8 meters, and if we accepted the rest of the SWTC hangar-aperture calcs as valid, this would slash all the figures by half, and resize Home One at something like 1.8km....
 * In case anyone's not noticed yet, the "corvette" alongside Home One is actually a 90m Braha'tok-class gunship, not a 150m CR90. Working from the photomosaic, this gives a minimum length of just under 2km, not 3.15km as suggested at SWTC. And this is, of course, based on the databank length for the Braha'tok, not a G-canon figure.
 * Of course, there may be other scaling indicators as well, and if so, I'd be keen to hear about them; but from the evidence I know, the situation is as follows: there is no G-canon evidence that would rescale Home One above ~2km, and all the available figures are of questionable validity as "overrides", anyway, due to the inferences, ambiguities, and straightforward C-canon scaling figures used in them. We could equally argue that Home One rescales the Braha'tok. --McEwok 14:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

The 1,400 meter model seen in X-wing Alliance is identified with the Home One in the game, IIRC.

As for the scaling, on the contrary, the model used has the same kind of opening as the one seen on the internal matte painting. You are confusing a side-view with a view at an angle, which is what we see in the film. The only difference is the lights seen beyond the opening, which are different, and these have no relation to the dimensions of the opening. As for "protruding into space", this is not verifiable when looking at this angle since the walls on each side are shown extending out from the inner section as well, it is not clear and certainly not verifiable which section protrudes the most. And it is definitely not verifiable in the exterior shot, the way the camera is positioned when the shuttle takes off. The deck and the portion below it are not seen since the camera is beneath this part of the model. Even if this is not enough, there exists the possibility that a) the flight deck can be extended IU, b) the hangar shown is actually one of the two made on the other side of the model, which are smaller. But this is just conjecture for a case which is claimed by some to be "verifiably" smaller.

If you insist on a G-canon override

I find this term amusing, since G-canon does automatically override all conflicts with lower ranked sources. This is something hardly used and that's a shame, since the films are the absolute canon of the entire SW universe. I guess West End Games is more interesting to some people. But, if we insist on C-canon, the A-wings are custom-made at this time and this example could have been made for a giant humanoid. Then again, the deck doesn't even extend to the outer walls of the hangar, so there's plenty of room left to add, if a smaller A-wing is used for scaling. And speaking of scaling, that's a problem caused with WEG derived stats, they contradict each other when used for scaling. For the Lambda-class shuttle to fit through the opening and have extra clearance as seen in the film, the opening needs more height than that available when scaled from WEG's estimate, unless the shuttle has a lower height than official sources say. So if one WEG source contradicts the other, I guess some people have no problem with it.

Also, if the Braha'tok is supposed to make the entire ship smaller when used for scaling, it needs to be as close to the other ship as possible. I see no shadow moving across the Home One from a ship which, if directly next to the vessel and above it, would have a clear shadow showing on the HO hull, since the sun is shining from a high angle. In that case, it is further away from the HO and therefore any estimate will be smaller than the vessel's actual length. There is literally nothing to support as short a length as 1,200m, and I doubt even 1,400m. VT-16 17:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * VT: The 1,400 meter model seen in X-wing Alliance is identified with the Home One in the game, IIRC.
 * It's posisble, certainly. Is anyone able to confirm this? I do have confirmation for the FactFiles size of 1.3km, though.


 * As for the scaling, on the contrary, the model used has the same kind of opening as the one seen on the internal matte painting.
 * Really? Beyond their very general shapes and very broad features like the existence of lighting along the sides and an aparatus suspended from the ceiling, there's no similarity.


 * You are confusing a side-view with a view at an angle, which is what we see in the film.
 * I'm doing nothing of the sort.


 * The only difference is the lights seen beyond the opening, which are different...
 * Seen from inside, the upper section of the exit, with the four lighting strips (which, on this view extend across the roof) is wider than the lower sections. No corresponding difference in width exists in the external view. I'm not talking about the internal lights on the wall (which are a different thing, and also inconsistent), but the light around the edge of the hangar.


 * ...and these have no relation to the dimensions of the opening
 * You're right that the existence of the inconsistencies (which is verifiable) doesn't disprove that the dimensions of the opening on the model and matte match up. However, that's not an argument in support of the consistency of the dimensions, which is a claim I've seen no proof of either way. Even if there is a match here (I'll accept there may be), that doesn't diminish the other problems.


 * As for "protruding into space", this is not verifiable when looking at this angle since the walls on each side are shown extending out from the inner section as well
 * Note that the extended walls don't continue out all the way down to deck level? That's the most glaring inconsistency. Note that there's also open space visible either side of the extended section of the flight-deck, too.


 * Even if this is not enough...
 * It's not, no.


 * ... there exists the possibility that a) the flight deck can be extended IU, b) the hangar shown is actually one of the two made on the other side of the model, which are smaller.
 * Or (c.) the footage is actually of another hangar on another ship entirely; or (d.) it's fake (I'm sure a detailed analysis of the matte would probably discern the brushstrokes); or (e.) it's basically unreliable for scaling figures, due to all the inconsistencies.


 * I find this term amusing, since G-canon does automatically override all conflicts with lower ranked sources
 * I'd disagree, but I know this is your POV, and that's why I'm asking you to apply you own methodology consistently. If you do that, then the A-wing scales at ~4.6m, and Home One is ~1.8km. In short, the SWTC methodology itself, when accurately applied, gives a length of ~1.8km for Home One. I agree that a statement to this effect should appear in at least the Behind the scenes section of this page, but the claim of 3.8km is based on a methodological flaw in the fanboy calcs.


 * ... this example could have been made for a giant humanoid.
 * No, it's the standard movie model. Cockpit scalining from the actual actors playing the pilots reinforces this, I believe.


 * I see no shadow moving across the Home One from a ship which, if directly next to the vessel and above it, would have a clear shadow showing on the HO hull, since the sun is shining from a high angle.
 * Lighting in space FX shots in Star Wars movies is always a problem&mdash;I suspect that we also lack shadows later in the same sequence for the Falcon and the X-wings when as they slalom across the transport; but if you want a rationalization for the Braha'tok, the glow of Home One ' s sublight drives is presumably a factor in the lack of shadow in that part of the hull. --McEwok 18:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm doing nothing of the sort.

McEwok, don't try to bs someone on a subject where evidence is easy to find, it'll just make you look stupid for trying.

Here's pictures showing the hangar seen from the inside and the outside, both in the film and in bts footage. You may notice that the sideviews are similar, while the angled footage makes the opening seem more narrow and squared and makes the side lights look longer. Yet, the slanted, inner walls can be seen on the outside model as well, regardless of the positioning of lights, which has no bearing on the dimensions of the walls. Even the walls extending below the deck is also not refuted by this G-canon footage.

As for the shadows, you may notice the Braha'tok is flying beyond the light of the engines. I also like how you try to worm your way out with yet another appeal to OOU inconsistency that has NOTHING to do with what I am specifically referring to.

I think I should have just stopped when I read that you don't believe the films is the highest canon. That's just surreal. VT-16 21:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks similar to Invisible Hand
Home one looks very similar to the Invisible Hand is this made by the same company or is the Home One just a modified Providence cruiser?


 * In a word - No. DarthSeafort (Hello there) 09:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Like DarthSeafort said I dont think so, it was the Rescusant cruiser use by the separatist who ws built by the Mon Calamary Shipyard Oméga 1036 16:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Armament
What part of Starships of the Galaxy says that Home One had 36 turbolaser cannons and 36 ion cannons?190.96.34.201 22:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Anakinskysolo

Length
Since things seem to be going round in circles, could I need a name and Culator please explain their reasoning behind the current round of reverting? DarthSeafort (Hello there) 21:24, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * OR doesn't mean something hasn't been published, it means that something hasn't been published in a canon Star Wars source. SWTC is a fansite and thus isn't canon. Only Saxton's contributions to the published SW books are considered canon, none of which state Home One as having a length of 3000 metres. Extrapolations from RoTJ are OR, since Home One doesn't fly around with a giant measuring tape next to it, nor does anyone walk around saying "Home One, that ship's 3000 metres long". --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 21:40, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

From the OR page: ''Editors may make straightforward mathematical calculations or logical deductions based on fully attributed data that neither change the significance of the data nor require additional assumptions beyond what is in the source. It should be possible for any reader without specialist knowledge to understand the deductions.'' Saxton took the scene of the Falcon flying past HO prior to the jump, including the 150m long CR90, and used that CR90 to calculate a lower limit for the length of Home One. Simple mathematical calculation. DarthSeafort (Hello there) 21:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Not if it overrides already established canon. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 13:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * RotJ is the established canon. I really don't understand this attitude of something not being canon unless it turns up in writing or in dialogue. RotJ is the source of HO being about 4km long.  Therefore HO is 4km long.  If another source contradicts that, then the other source is wrong because G-canon overrides all. DarthSeafort (Hello there) 17:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * People with rulers measuring things on their TV screen isn't G-canon, it's OR. --  I need a name  ( Complain here ) 18:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Why? It's determining what is displayed in G-canon.  Therefore it is G-canon.  Quite apart from the fact that I've not seen anything in the link you posted to state such.  If there is, and I haven't spotted it, then please quote the relevant paragraph, with a link to the section. DarthSeafort (Hello there) 18:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * To be fair, the recent Complete SW Encyclopedia seems to repeat the old novelization's claim that the Home One was the biggest Rebel ship by the time of Endor. 89.105.196.76 18:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * We've typically considered unpublished measurements from SWTC and similar sources to go a bit beyond "straightforward mathematical calculations", especially when they contradict EU material. I will note that one our Han Solo article, there's a footnote in the infobox explaining that Solo's canonical height is a few centimetres less than the height attributed to Harrison Ford (and thus the height careful measurements of the footage might give you): maybe a similar footnote could go into this article? &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 18:30, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * We've typically considered unpublished measurements from SWTC and similar sources to go a bit beyond "straightforward mathematical calculations", especially when they contradict EU material.
 * Why? Home One, as seen from the Falcon's flyby, is about 25 times the length of the CR90 alongside her stern. A CR90 is 150m long.  Therefore Home One is about 3800m long.
 * I will note that one our Han Solo article, there's a footnote in the infobox explaining that Solo's canonical height is a few centimetres less than the height attributed to Harrison Ford (and thus the height careful measurements of the footage might give you)
 * However, as has been mentioned, there's been no published work done on Han Solo's height. There's also the important fact that there's only a 3% difference between Solo's published height and Ford's height - I very much doubt that his height could be determined that accurately from available images.  There's a 300% difference between HO's observed length in RotJ and the length claimed by this article.DarthSeafort (Hello there) 19:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)