Design difference
any reason why in Star Wars Rebels the Tie Fighters Engine Panels are Shorter then normal? And the inaccurate image is now being used on this Wiki. —Unsigned comment by 65.129.196.90 (talk • contribs)
- It's not that the image is inaccurate. Lucasfilm intentionally designed the Star Wars Rebels TIE fighter to look like that. Pablo Hidalgo explained that the Rebels TIE is intended as an earlier model than what is seen in the films. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 02:19, November 5, 2014 (UTC)
- This needs to be clarified in the article. Right now, it says "TIEs produced in Sienar's factories on Lothal had shorter, sturdier wings. This allowed the fighters to make surface landing, a feature not included in the standard TIE." This makes it sound like both the Rebels version and the OT version of the TIE/ln were in production concurrently, but the fact you only see the Rebels version in Rebels seems to clearly imply that the short-wing version is an older model replaced by the long-wing version by the time of ANH. Gonkgonkgonk (talk) 19:00, March 28, 2016 (UTC)
Life Support
Let's not be so hasty with the life support thing. Yes, they did pilot a TIE without a suit, but that doesn't necessarily mean it had a life support system. Presumably, TIE fighters are airtight, which would mean that a pilot could survive in there without a suit until the air inside ran out. I'm removing this sentence from the article, but if anyone comes up with something I've missed, or with new information, feel free to add that information back in. CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 01:54, March 24, 2015 (UTC)
Concept design
Since Vader's Tie Advanced is seen in Rebels with the same style as the Rebels Tie Fighter. Its safe to assume that the Tie Fighters seen in Rebels are not earlier models but actually the same class as we have always seen them, Its just that in Rebels they intentionally designed the Tie Fighters to resemble Ralph McQuarrie's concept paintings, which showed the shortened Tie Fighter. When in actuality if we saw the show in an un animated form the Ties would look as they do in the movies.
- In Ultimate Star Wars, its explained that the TIE fighters produced on Lothal had small and studiers wings to facilitate ground landing. Also, the Advanced doesn't look any different to me. - AV-6R7User talk:AV-6R7 17:59, April 24, 2015 (UTC)
I Saw the Advanced model and it had the enlarged cockpit. Its too confusing to think that there are 2 Tie Fighter Models that have the EXACT SAME Qualities and add to the fact that we have never seen a STANDARD Tie in Rebels.
- Although Pablo Hidalgo has said that there is no actual design difference between the Rebels TIE and the movie-accurate TIE, and that it's just an animation style difference, the actual Canon evidence seems to suggest otherwise. In the Rebels Visual Guide the size and overall proportions of a TIE/ln are very different from the movie-accurate figures, and listed as such: 6.7m x 7.5m x 5.3m (the 7.5m figure refers to the width of the craft, and not to its heigth). Were it a simple aesthetic variation, they would have listed the correct, movie-accurate figures, just as they did with other crafts (Imperial Star Destroyer). The Rebels Visual Guide also specifically states that TIEs don't have ejection systems, while movie-accurate TIEs do. Having a unique Rebels variant is not uncommon: Rebels AT-ATs and A-wings have both been identified as different/prior models.Veltramore (talk) 10:34, November 19, 2018 (UTC)
TIE/LN
Ultimate Star Wars has the EU naming convention of TIE/LN for the regular Tie-Fighter. Should this be amended to the title and references?--Tuskin (talk) 21:48, April 28, 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. - AV-6R7User talk:AV-6R7 03:05, April 29, 2015 (UTC)
- The LEGO Ultimate Collector's Series set also has it as the Legends name. There are a lot of links here, so let's get going! Nivlacanator(talk) 03:24, April 29, 2015 (UTC)
Deflector Shields
Ultimate Star Wars mentions they lack 'deflector shields', but I'm not sure how to put that fact into the article without having it look awkward, any help?--Tuskin38 (talk) 20:50, May 22, 2015 (UTC)
TIE Fighters quite visibly have shields in the original trilogy and that overrides what Ultimate Star Wars says. We see in ANH TIE's shields deflecting long range shots from the Falcon's guns and it is only at short ranges that their shields are overwhelmed.
Recall from film dialogue that blasters have a short effective range against shields and the Falcon was unable to shoot down a single TIE due to Han saying it was out of range. The comment only makes sense if TIE Fighters have shields. We should stop pushing Rebel Propaganda and make it clear TIEs have shields and are as effective as Rebel Starfighter shields.
various mentions of shielding on TIEs https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-TIE-fighters-have-shields-like-the-X-Wing
New Canon Contradictions
In the Rebels Recon for Rebels season 2 episode 5 "Always Two There Are", Pablo Hidalgo states that the TIEs in the show are not supposed to be a different variant than the movie versions, and in SW: Uprising we see a "movie TIE" landed on its wings at the spaceport area.
Also, Aftermath says the TIEs have ejection seats but Rebels season 1 visual guide explicitly states otherwise.
What do we put in the article? --SKLKNKR (talk) 02:46, October 29, 2015 (UTC)
- Since Rebels and Aftermath take years apart, it could be stated in the article that by the aftermath f the Battle of Endor, "some" TIEs did have ejector seats. Nivlacanator(talk) 19:05, March 28, 2016 (UTC)
- Since there is an apparent contradiction, would it be better to simply delete this sentence for now? "TIEs produced in Sienar's factories on Lothal had shorter, sturdier wings. This allowed the fighters to make surface landing, a feature not included in the standard TIE." And just not comment on the apparent difference between the Rebels and movie TIEs? OOU, I'm sure what happened here is that the author of that Ultimate SW entry attempted to fanon away the difference not realizing that it was just because of the animation style (a bit like saying Vader briefly wore a different mask). Gonkgonkgonk (talk) 18:59, April 1, 2016 (UTC)
Quote?
This is really more of an opinion thing than anything else, but do you think we'll be keeping the current canon-side quote for this article? It's a bit dopey, if nothing else. If I could suggest one, it would be...
"Keep your eyes open for those fighters!" -- Red Leader
"He's on me tight, I can't shake him..." -- Biggs
I know it is quite difficult, though. TIE fighters never got their moment in the spotlight as stormtroopers did with Ben Kenobi complimenting their accuracy.
ExplodingChickens (talk) 16:57, December 13, 2016 (UTC)
can someone add this video for the tie fighter? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APED4rd8B7o —Unsigned comment by Jakepunch321 (talk • contribs)
Owner's Workshop Manual
The recent canon reference book TIE Fighter Owner's Workshop Manual refers to the standard TIE fighter as a TIE/in, rather than a TIE/ln or a TIE/LN. Is the is a mistake on the author's part, or should it be changed in the article? Cadeclem (talk) 15:43, August 4, 2019 (UTC)
- I can't find the link right now, unfortunately, but I've seen confirmation that it's just an unfortunate mistake. The fact that it is the TIE Interceptor that's designated /IN is pretty telling. You couldn't have two different models with the exact same designation. --Lelal Mekha
(Audience Room) 16:29, August 5, 2019 (UTC)
Dimensional variations
This entry states a TIE Fighter is 7.24 meters in length, but the Legends version stats it is only 6.3 meters in length. Why the disrepancy? SeniramUK (talk) 16:20, May 29, 2020 (UTC)