Copilots

[Skeksin]

Ok I have searched a bit using the tools but didn't find anything regarding this. I'm trying to see if anyone has another viewpoint or knows more about the copiloting rules. Several ships require more than 1 crew member for the ship to run. My question is this: Do the characters beyond the main pilot need to make any roll or do they just say "I use an action and act as copilot"?

For Example the YT-2400 (Stock Ships page 19) states it requires a crew of 2 to operate. So would the pilot make all the rolls and the copilot basically state "I use an action to assist". Or does the copilot actually need to make any kind of roll? Is it the same roll as the pilot? If so then how does anyone manage to fly a Star Destroyer?

Also when it states they may coordinate. Does this mean they can combine rolls or is it like the Command skill where every person beyond the first gives a +1 to the roll?

[Rerun941]

The standard jobs in any starship are:
Piloting - Maintain Control, Reaction Dodges
Communications - encrypt/decrypt, anti-jam
Sensors - detect/identify targets, anti-jam, deploy decoys, etc
Astrogation - Enter nav coordinates
Gunnery - fire at targets
Shields - Activate/redeploy shields
Tech Station/Ship's systems - Monitored from the cockpit, but the mechanic usually has to go to the damaged system to effect repairs.

With a co-pilot, these jobs can be split between two people, instead of overwhelming one person.

And yes, "can coordinate" means that the pilot and co-pilot can use the combined actions rules.
_________________
Han - "How're we doin'?"
Luke - "Same as always."
Han - "That bad, huh?"

[garhkal]

If the crew is listed as 2, then you NEED 2 people to do the tasking otherwise you ain't flying.
If 1 can do it, then havng a co-pilot can assist by either A) doing other actions such as sensors/comms/shields, or coordinating the piloting which would give +1d to the pilot. BUT that would be all he would be able to do.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[vanir]

There is a short piece of dialogue in RotJ Endor Battle for the Millennium Falcon which is listed as a 2 crew requirement.

The Falcon has autoblasters which it relies on but the Corellian Gunports appear to require power management. When Lando uses autoblasters on one TIE during a manoeuvre to get on the tail of another you hear from the cockpit "Pressure steady?" And then the distinct change to the gunport cannon firing its mighty repeater shots desintegrates the next target.

So in this case it appears the complex power systems in the Falcon require the copilot to be concerned with power management to keep the ships systems functioning for the pilot and gunners.


edit. or if that first shot was also from the turret and the dialogue more like "Pressure (still) steady?"
the point remains.

I like to enforce the Falcon description that it has unlisted modifications and you need gunners for the ports...

[Bren]

[jmanski]

There was discussion somewhere that the Falcon may also have a forward firing laser cannon in addition to the two quads and repeater.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?

[Orville]

[Bren]

[atgxtg]

And don't forget that astromech druids can usually coordinate as well.

My current group is discovering just what a Vulture Droid killer the Y-Wing is. With a pilot, gunner and astromech, the PCs get to pull off quite a few actions each turn, and usually only suffer 1 MAP each.

[Bren]

[vanir]

Actually contrary to popular belief in both world wars multi-crewed bombers and heavy fighters were just as dangerous as traditional single engine fighters.
The Mosquito, Beaufighter, Whirlwind, BF-110/210/410, B-25 and Douglas A-10, the soviet IL2 and Pe-2 in particular. These were very dangerous to fighters, even a well armed heavy bombers like the B-17 and B-29 were extremely dangerous to fighters.

The IL2 became very dangerous when it was modified to allow for a gunner, the stucture was so armoured that interceptors had to sit at point blank on the tail and gradually remove parts off the plane with cannon fire, when they started featuring rear gunners with twin-fifties the Germans started losing interceptors trying to down them. Until the rear gunner they only had sporadic success, but after this they were declared the aerial saviour of the soviet union and became a very effective tank and supply train killer, built and used in greater numbers than any other warplane in history.

In later times the gunner position remained but was adapted from gun stations to the WSO/RIO crew position of a heavy jet fighter.
Marines have this preferred configuration, pilot/RIO for their Hornets whilst the Navy uses it for their fleet interceptors, strike aircraft and heavy fighters in the USAF use pilot/WSO configurations also, the Strike Eagle maintains an air-air role and of course they used to equip Phantoms.

The reasons are pretty much the same as SW. As a gunner the extra crew adds free actions that would normally increase pilot workload. Secondarily the extra crew can coordinate on existing actions with the effect of increasing pilot skill. For example the piloting/manoeuvre roll to dodge blaster fire is the same as dogfighting to break the weapons lock of an enemy aircraft, if you have your RIO helping visually track the e/a it helps the pilot beat the bad guy. This is all incorporated into piloting rolls normally in SW but represents these multitudes of minor actions for the round, it's simply assumed you either look out the cockpit or at the screens periodically to keep track of e/a shooting at you.

Especially in SW tech, larger starships have larger energy reactors and in turn can power more demanding systems and larger engines, if you can keep superfluous mass to a minimum then bigger does usually mean better. Heavy starfighters using good equipment are likely to be higher powered and higher performing than smaller ones.

The minimum good size of a starfighter scale structure is around the light transport class because it has a proper power reactor and plenty of weapons hardpoints and combat equipment can be fitted to make use of it.
Small starfighters are really more like special purpose craft than space superiority craft, they have specific reasons for being so small. An affordable planetary customs and security force that doesn't have to face any cruiser fleets. Or an inexpensive means for raiders to do their thing, most civilian vessels can't cope against starfighters. They can fit on larger craft which is probably the main reason for them as a picket and starfighter screen for cruisers.

The reasons starfighters are the size they are is not because it is all they need, but because it is as large as their usefulness will allow. Otherwise they don't fit easily on cruisers and aren't affordable for small systems governments. It's more a restriction than an elite specialisation in technological terms, though certainly starfighter pilots consider themselves an elite organisation and rightly so.

[Fallon Kell]

[vanir]

Plus there's a distinction to be made for dual control combat craft and the pilot/WSO or RIO combination, which isn't dual control.
Foxhounds, Tomcats, Marines Hornets and F-15E don't have dual controls, the WSO/RIO seat is configured specifically for that role (handling weapons and fire control system usually), only an emergency piloting system is placed in the rear in special cases (the Foxhound has small emergency pilot controls in the WSO station, but it is still dominated by the sensors and weapons machinery).

Combat capable trainers like the F-16D, F-15D, F/A-18B have all reproduced pilot cockpits in the second station but retain full combat capability at reduced performance (increased drag and mass, usually cutting into the fuel range). The F/A-18D is an exception, only the first small batch were built as dual controls, the rest were built for the Marine Corps with pilot/RIO layout and substituted most of their front line F/A-18A squadrons. The Navy used the F/A-18C and the kit was offered as an export upgrade, but trainers remained the F/A-18B and whilst in foreign air forces these have mostly been brought to C-standard for AMRAAM use (can't be used on the wingtips, but under wings and on fuselage is becoming NATO standard), in the USN the Hornet-B remains the standard trainer.
A new direction happened with the Superbug though, since it was taking over the Tomcat role as a fleet interceptor the main initial orders came for F/A-18F with a pilot/RIO configuration but I don't know if the rear position has a unique layout or is just a reproduced pilot station with combat capability. Ostensibly the F-35 will take over from fleet Hornets for the strike role, it seems the Navy likes single seaters for this so they might mix in a few F/A-18E as heavy strikers. Kind of opposite the Marines who like two seaters for strike and single seaters for counter-air, like army air with navy ranks.

Basically it means some heavy fighters have crew: 1 or 2 (can coordinate), whilst others have crew: 1, plus gunners: 1 (can coordinate shields and sensors).
In the pilot/WSO-RIO layout often the pilot has limited control over the extensive sensor suite and fire control system. He might have just a small lookdown screen with very basic display and otherwise use the HUD. He might not have full control of weapon capabilities.
You represent this in weapon descriptions under crew listings, whether pilot or gunner, pilot only or 1 (gunner only).

[atgxtg]

[garhkal]

And there are a number of threads both here and over on the holonet discussing whether a Gunner on a ship (freighter or fighter) SHOULD be penalized for his pilots erratic movement when dodging, especially full dodges.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!