Talk:GA-TL1 Longsword

Halo 3 Design Changes
Am I correct in assuming that the Longsword has changed since its original incarnation. For example, some form of atmospheric intake or vent is seen at the front of the craft, but these appear absent in Halo 3. Does anyone know the full extent of these changes?Isidis 128 22:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

yeah plus the cockpit area has changed from the first two to halo3 Darkproxy

There are alot of changes, I'm currently compiling a pair of comparisons to spot all of em.

Spartan 501 06:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

What's Wrong with These Images?
what's wrong with these pictures is that they are'nt from in-game, using the cutscenes or gameplay. they were made using modding to adjust the camera angle. the pictures are cool, but are not official, because we can't know if they have been tampered with or not, like moving control panels, changing dimensions, etc., and may be misleading. -- 125.238.89.110 22:25, 10 December 2006

frigate
it says that frigates do not carry longswords + there are no habgers big enough J!MMY8806 22:29, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

How could the Pillar of Autumn actually carried the Longsword? The POA isn't big enough for it! --Master Chief Petty Officer 10:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

well it says it holded around 8 so well have to go with it although i agree because when you watch the end movie on halo 1 showing the chief escape the POA looks much bigger than the 1st movie on the game were you see the longswords with the POA so i dont know really but all we know is it does kk thanks! J!MMY8806 13:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I count eleven, including the one in the hangar, not seven, like it says on the page. can anyone else confirm this? -SpecOps306

The PoA is a pretty big cruiser.

there has been some size discussion going on in some other sites, and it appears to me that this page's specs on the longsword are alittle to large. the Longsword's wingspan does not appear to be larger than that of a B36 Peacemaker (230 foot wingspan), the predecossor to the current B52. I've personally scene these things, and i have pictures of people walking on the wings. I specifically went through Co-Op to have someone try and stand in front of the thing without the mission ending, and it just does not seem right. 245 feet is just an outragous size.

i really wish i knew where this person was getting their sizes from. its way off.- CAB IV

There are major discrepancies regarding the Pillar of Autumn's size. It is officially recognised as being 1.17 km in length. Although it is at least 3 km long in some appearences, we have to pretend that it all makes sense even though it does not. Isidis 128 22:12, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

A-A
does anyone know what Anti air missile the longsword posses to fight e.g. seraphs, or do the fire the ASGM-10s at seraphs? J!MMY8806 17:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that longswords fire thier ASGM-10s at seraphs --UNSC AI 20:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

i did think this but it states that they have mass damage on an unshielded target, so i didnt think they would have the tracking ability of A-A missiles of today like the AMRAAM or AIM-9M sidewinder, because from the sondes of it hey are used to target capital ships but i suppose that they could use the ASGM-10s and that it has just been posted wrong kk, thanks mate--J!MMY8806 21:23, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Title
I dont know about anyone else, but the title looks pretty fecked up. like theres another one behind it, bigger in size. if someone who knows how could fix it up, i would be grateful!! -- SpecOps306 07:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * That has been happening on a lot of pages for some reason --Gzalzi 07:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Title Pic
Come on, doesn't anyone on this website have a better pic of a Longsword? If anyone has a better screenshot of a Longsword, (such as a screenshot of a Longsword in Halo:Custom Edition) please upload it and put it where the old pic of the Longsword is. Thank you.

-SPARTAN-001  [COM•C S V ] DARKEST NIGHT 

Anyone think it's sad that the prettiest pic of a longsword is of it being shot down.

Yea i agree, this pic sucks. Ghost elite 00:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

yeah, the ship would look better if it wern't blowni' up.--Arabsbananas 04:31, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Longsword pic
[IMG]http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l148/megatron6543/8441298-Medium.jpg[/IMG]

Shields?
Look at the article Tour in Longsword. In one of the last readouts, where is ammo etc.. is also SHIELDS. Is longsword then equipped with them?

It is not. The texture for this readout was likely created on a whim, as the only craft which possess energy shielding in the Halo universe belong to the Covenant. Isidis 128 22:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps (completely contextual speculation) the longword's computer can calculate opposing ship's shield strengths based on data taken from former UNSC encounters and help the pilot determine which targets to attack and which weapons to use.

Shilds could be a reference to heat sheilds. they are used by any Human ship that can function in space and atmosphere. themasteridiot

RE: Shields
A longsword does not have shields. Ghost elite 12:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

?????????
this thing seems way too big to be a intercepter maybe a heavy fighter but the UNSC must have something smaller--Garyclementspunji 00:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * They do, the SkyHawk. Remember, the Longsword was intended for space combat, never meant for the role it plays now. Specops306 ,  Kora 'Morhek  03:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Now if you look at the size comment then it would make sense as fighters and interceptors have grown in size with each passing generation

Contemporary Comparison
The P-61 Black Widow is a better comparison to the Longsword than the B-17.

wait, where are you getting your information? do you have any idea what those 2 aircraft are? they are both multi-piston engined American aircraft form WWII. i fail to see any resemplence other than the P-61's role as a heavy night fighter/interceptor and the B-17's role as a bomber.-VYPER117

Size
the longsword is almost the size of a b2 bomber but it moves like an F-35 strike fighter however over the years fighters have grown in size look at the P-38 and then fast forward fifty years later and look at the changes in size it make sense if you truely think about it

Longsword Fighter
I think that in one of the games, there should be a mini-game where Master Chief gets into a Longsword and flies into a space battle. Then, he blows up an uncountable number of fighters and ships.

Primary Weapon (Right Trigger) : 110 Rotary Guns (what does that mean anyway ?) Secondary Weapon (Left Trigger) : Fires 12 missiles that home in on targets and recharges every 5 seconds Third Weapon (B) : Launches a Shiva-Tipped Nuclear Warhead that recharges every 5 minutes

-Lotus Leaf

WOOOOO!!!!!I vote for this guy's idea.......It's like I've been saying whatif they had a battlefront2 type game where you have space battles and ground battles or can transition between the two--4.153.69.250 23:00, November 28, 2009 (UTC)Lance Corporal Phy-ODST

Longsword modifications
A lot of people seem to be getting hung up on trivial differences about this craft, from colouring, dimensions, modifciations etc. When it comes to combat aircraft, if you look throughout history you will note that not everyone of them ended up looking the same after operational service. Yes, they may have all been produced on the factory floor to a standard set by the prototypes that worked, but combat aircraft are modified for a variety of reasons once deployed into service, such as: - to carry mission specific ordinance; - structurally modified by squadron engineers because what works in testing doesn't work/last during combat or extended use; - to operate effectively in different environments (what enables space superiority may not enable air superiority); - due to a lack of replacement/repair parts (operating far from resupply, behind enemy lines); - and changes by ground/pilot/fleet crews (pilot/squadron/fleet colours/markings).

What you can say for sure is the basic design and dimensions, basic armament, and from there throw in a caveat about the design(s) being heavily modified by ground crew/squadrons/fleets due to operational requirements etc.

Anoctris - anoctris@hotmail.com

Longswords seem to carry ordnance pods that can drop things such as target locaters. you can see what they say here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyWmnbni02U  * Darb 013 03:52, August 2, 2010 (UTC) *

Halo 3 Differences
to me the longsword looks smaller in halo 3 SILENT ONE 18:28, 13 Oct 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect Trivia
The trivia says this: "In Halo 3, the only time you see Longswords in game is when they are being shot-down and crashing"

But in the cutscene just before Floodgate you see some fly right above you followed by the UNSC frigates Forward Unto Dawn and Aegis Fate. They aren't yet shot down.

Physics Mistake
Escape velocity only applies to non-powered flight. For powered vehicles like the longsword, the engines would only need to be powerful enough produce enough lift / produce enough thrust to overcome gravity. The more notable thing to mention is that the same engines operate in a vacuum as well as atmosphere. Assuming the engines function by burning fuel of some sort (rocketry-based) this implies that the ship carries an oxidizer for the fuel in addition to the fuel itself ElFroCampeador TALK 22:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

God where to even begin tearing this apart...

Escape velocity is just as relevant to a powered craft since no matter if one acquires the needed velocity all at once (fired out of a cannon or the like) or over a longer period of thrusting you must still reach escape velocity. The only thing that changes is what that speed happens to be since it get's lower as you climb you can in practice make orbit without reaching the the speed needed for a surface escape velcioty. That later bit is what you're thinking of and is how fast you'd need to go if you simply fired say a cannon shell from the ground. Thing is that's just one possible escape velocity.

Adding an engine that thrusts as you climbs doesn't somehow mean you no longer must reach escape velocity to break orbit, it merely alters what the velocity will be. If you put an engine on the craft that cannot produce the needed velocity it won't matter if it can overcome gravity and climb it will NEVER escape orbit. Being able to overcome gravity means nothing any rocket plane can overcome gravity, but not any rocket plane can blast into low orbit; because it cannot produced the needed velcioty to do: it can't reach escape velcioty.

Thus in order for a vehicle to break orbit it's engine must not simply "overcome gravity" it must be able to overcome gravity while accelerating the vehicle up to the planetary escape velocity.

As for the second bit first off get the terms right "Fuel" is what runs the reactor "Reaction Mass" is glowly shit that comes out the tail pipe. The Longsword is clearly fusion powered these people can make a fusion reactor small enough to stick in a backpack for christ sake. A nuclear powered Longsword is child’s play by comparsion and we know the Pelican uses nuclear turbines. If the Longsword was rocket powered it would have to be the size of a fucking Saturn 5 rocket to do what it does.

Such a drive would work by simply dumping your Remass into the flaming hot reactor chamber and shooting it out the back as superheated plasma. In an atmosphere it’s vaguely possible one could even use straight up air for this freeing you of the need to burn Remass when climbing for the first few dozen kilometers. What appear to be air intakes on the machine support the idea that it uses this approach. As a side effect it would also mean it would have effectively unlimited range on a planet (It would only need to land when it had to refuel the reactor which could be weeks or even months)--TK3997 22:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

absolutely right there is no escape velocity for powered vehicles, the same argument may be applied to UNSC firgate which can hover above cities, they can move away from the earth at any speed they want provided they have enough fuel as they do.

with reference to the game In halo the longsword had to escape the halo rings in a specific time frame.. ie before the Autum blew up and it also had to enter a free fall trajectory taking it way from the ring and the planet it was orbiting, assuming a longsword engine can only run at high power ( the required power to escape the blast) for a certain time, before the engine overheats there could have been a "escape velocity" given those parameters ( to acheive the correct free fall trajectory). That escape velocity would off course have to be calculated by an AI.--Spartan3123 23:51, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Designation?
How exactly are they designated? Like Knife 26 or 7-89? PX1'7'3 11:23, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

My theory is that they are assigned (or pick) squadron names and then their numbers are assigned to them based on what fleet they are in.(just a theory I'm not really sure)--4.153.69.250 23:06, November 28, 2009 (UTC)Lance Corporal Phy-ODST

Squads r made by the UNSC
the unsc makes the squadrons probably and then asighn people to them and give them numbers in the squadron.SPARTAN-III leader 20:40, April 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * What are you talking about?? Please be more clear.  CR8ZY-Ar@B "Dancin' on Glass."  20:43, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

kind of a crapy response to up top.SPARTAN-III leader 20:39, April 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Answers only as good as the problem. 80.png  El Ammo Bandito, "¡Para todas sus necesidades destructivas!"  21:26, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Name Designation Conflict
According to the Reach Human Arsenal video on Waypoint, it says that the Longsword is called the GA-TL1. Not C709. Feedback?--Nerfherder1428 15:42, September 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Either one could be a designation given by the manufacturer, while the other may be used in the UNSC Navy itself; real militaries do that sometimes. Alternatively, it's a slightly different model of Longsword. I wouldn't go as far as to change it, but the other designation should be mentioned on the page. --Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 17:57, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, we've known that there's been variants of the Longsword, it makes sense that it may have a different designation. The problem is: how do we handle this? Do we rename the article? Do we keep it the same? Do we create a new article? Que   Sera,  Sera  18:17, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Variants of Longswords? Never heard of such thing. Jugus' provided the best reasoning for now. As such, we would keep it the same for now.-  5 əb'7 aŋk (7alk ) 18:21, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * If there are indeed different variants of the Longsword, then I suggest simply removing the "C709" from the article's title to encompass both models.
 * This sounds like a good idea. We'll just call it "Longsword-class Interceptor" and mention both model designations on the page.--Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 18:39, September 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * The Army uses a different naming scheme from the Navy and Marine corps. Oh, Subtank - do visored (H1) and visorless (H3) count as different variants or just as a retconned design?--  Fore  run  ner  18:28, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I would consider them as visual updates, not actual variants.-  5 əb'7 aŋk (7alk ) 18:35, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't still be completely unheard of for them to be variants, seeing as the Longsword is the most common fighter used by the UNSC and as such, would likely have several variants in use. Which design is used in Reach BTW? Haven't seen one closely enough to tell. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Jugus (<font color="Gray">Talk  | <font color="Gray">Contribs ) 18:39, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but just as confirmation of variants, in the short story "Pariah" within Halo: Evolutions, Soren flies away in an older variant of the Longsword to escape the UNSC, and also calls it an older model. The H1-H3 Longswords could just be slight improvements on the design, and not neccesarily variants. If anything, the H1 Longsword would be a better model because of the importance of the PoA mission. Que   Sera,  Sera  18:59, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry. He does not call it a different model or variant. It is stated "There is an older Longsword." While that plus the fact that the other Longswords were able to catch up to it so easily suggests that he was flying an older, less advanced model, it is not neccesarily confirmed. Que   Sera,  Sera  19:20, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Or simply a Longsword of the same model but different production years, with the old one not receiving proper maintanence.- <font face="Century Gothic"> <font color="#FF4F00">5 əb<font color="#FF4F00">'7 aŋk (<font color="#FF4F00">7alk ) 19:29, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is why I posted again, because it was more of conjecture than I remember when I read it. Que   Sera,  Sera  19:36, September 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * Has anyone considered the fact that C709 is the Hull Classification Symbol of the Pillar of Autumn? The Longsword from which we get C709 may have simply carried the HCS of the Autumn, rather than it's own designation. --  Specops306   Autocrat     Qur'a 'Morhek   09:36, September 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * *raises hand*- <font face="Century Gothic"> <font color="#FF4F00">5 əb<font color="#FF4F00">'7 aŋk (<font color="#FF4F00">7alk ) 09:53, September 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * *high-fives Subs* --  Specops306   Autocrat     Qur'a 'Morhek   12:30, September 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've considered that, too, Specops. Great observation. It should also be noted that the Longsword's supposed C709 designation has not appeared anywhere, to my knowledge, other than the Encyclopedia, which copied and pasted the content from here. In contrast, the GA-TL1 designation is given in both the Halo: Reach manual and on Waypoint. So.... is a move acceptable now? --&quot;Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have.&quot; -Thomas Jefferson 14:31, September 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * I guess so. No comment has shown any opposition. :) - <font face="Century Gothic"> <font color="#FF4F00">5 əb<font color="#FF4F00">'7 aŋk (<font color="#FF4F00">7alk ) 14:34, September 19, 2010 (UTC)

Rename to "GA-TL1 Longsword"
I think the part about "-class Interceptor" should be removed from the title, in accordance with the titling standard of other aircraft articles. As far as I know, the part has never even been mentioned in the books (not in the sources provided on the page, anyway). Not that the current title really even makes sense. The Longsword is a fighter craft, not a warship. In comparison, I haven't seen anyone call an F-18 "F-18 Hornet-class multirole fighter". --<font color="MidnightBlue">Jugus (<font color="Gray">Talk  | <font color="Gray">Contribs ) 10:33, 24 January 2011 (EST)
 * I agree.--The All-knowing Sith&#39;ari 12:59, 24 January 2011 (EST)
 * My thoughts exactly, Jugus. --&quot;Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have.&quot; -Thomas Jefferson 16:30, 24 January 2011 (EST)
 * - I'm sure Cortana referred to it as a "Longsword-class" in The Maw. -- Forerunner 16:46, 24 January 2011 (EST)
 * - It would appear that someone just named it "longsword-class" early on in Halopedia history and no one questioned it.-- Forerunner 16:47, 24 January 2011 (EST)
 * --  Specops306   Autocrat     Qur'a 'Morhek   17:40, 24 January 2011 (EST)

Unless someone can find an instance where it's referred to as an interceptor, it should be changed.--  Rusty  - 112   23:44, 24 January 2011 (EST)
 * - Shit. Just found four. Fall of Reach, page 105, Sam refers to the pilots as "Longsword interceptor pilots." They're referred to as "Longsword interceptors" again on page 111, and twice more on page 112.--Emblem 1.jpg  Rusty  - 112   01:00, 25 January 2011 (EST)
 * True, but I think it's more of a description of the craft's role rather than its actual title. Like how Seraphs are often referred to as "Seraph fighters" even though it isn't its official name. The Longsword is an interceptor, I never questioned that, but I think it shouldn't be a part of the title. Plus, my point about the "class" part still stands. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Jugus (<font color="Gray">Talk  | <font color="Gray">Contribs ) 04:13, 25 January 2011 (EST)

Rename GA-TL1 Interceptor/Strike Fighter?
According to the Essential Visual Guide, this is the craft's true designation, but since Lonsword is the more popular name and even the book usually refers to is as such, I didn't want to go renaming the article without the input of the community. Also, the book confirms that C709 is a Longsword variant and mentions a C712 variant as well.--Darth Oblivion 16:27, 6 July 2011 (EDT)


 * Does it get into detail as to the specifics on the variations? Perhaps it is a canon explanation as to why some Longswords are bigger than others (rather than simply for data-storage or lag reasons). I'm sure tons of aircraft have such designations that lack their given-names - Cortana refers to the C709 in Halo: Combat Evolved as a "Longsword-class inteceptor", though they only appear to be used in a technical sense and are likely to be largely unused. While it's technical name is what you stated, it is identified more simply as the "GA-TL1 Longsword".--  Fore  run  ner '' 16:45, 6 July 2011 (EDT)
 * It says the C709 specializes in exostmospheric combat and is fitted with a rotary cannon, while the C712 specializes in short range A/X strike runs and is fitted with missile and mine delivery systems. That's basically it though. No indication of which ones in the games are C712s if any of them are, though I do seem to recall the Reach ones being used in a bomber roll. It does also indicate that there are other variants as well. As far as the size issue, there are larger variants of certain aircraft in real life, the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet for example.--Darth Oblivion 16:58, 6 July 2011 (EDT)

Registry # theory confirmed
In the most recent data drop, the PoA's registry number is C709. This confirms that that prefix, and perhaps the GA-TL1 prefix as well, is based off of the ship it is attached to, not the Longsword's actual designation. pestilence  Phil,  pestilence!  12:26, 14 October 2011 (EDT)


 * True, and The Essential Visual Guide also gives this number. However, the Guide lists the C709 as a Longsword variant. Therefore: in-universe coincidence, real world retcon. --Courage never dies. 18:12, 14 October 2011 (EDT)


 * Well, at least I now realize that there are Longsword variants. This may require us to rename the article... Can you tell me any more of what it says? I don't have the visual guide (I want to though). pestilence   Phil,  pestilence!  19:05, 14 October 2011 (EDT)


 * It says that some variants are purpose-built fighters (C709), others are atmospheric/exoatmospheric attack craft (C712), still others deliver mines, etc. I've already added every bit of information from the Guide. In fact, I almost completely rewrote the article about a week ago. There's no need to rename the article; the craft is indeed called the GA-TL1 Longsword, though it is formally known as the GA-TL1 Interceptor/Strike Fighter. Given our convention for naming air/spacecraft, the current title will suffice. --Courage never dies. 20:01, 14 October 2011 (EDT)


 * Alright, thank you. I haven't read the article recently. pestilence   Phil,  pestilence!  20:15, 14 October 2011 (EDT)

Halo 3 Longsword Image Reference
Could someone do a transparent cutout render of the Halo 3-era Longsword Interceptor for reference and comparison? I'd do it myself, except I can't find a good enough screenshot of the Longsword from Halo 3 to edit in Photoshop. If someone could provide a screenshot, or better yet, do a render themselves, that would be really great, I think it would really benefit the article's Gallery section. --Xamikaze330 21:03, 29 November 2011 (EST)Xamikaze330
 * STATUS UPDATE: Thanks to Pantegral, that's been taken care of now. Sorry it took so long for the heads-up. -- Xamikaze330  [<font color="Blue">Transmit |<font color="Green">Files ] 12:28, 21 March 2013 (EDT)Xamikaze330

Size differences
Am I the only one who thinks that Tempest's Longsword is a tad too tiny? Can someone please explain the brutal size difference of it? --SpartanOfTheArk 14:14, 14 February 2012 (EST)
 * It is too tiny. If you look closely, it can't even fit a single SPARTAN in the cockpit. My guess is that it was made small on purpose as an easter egg.--


 * What purpose would that serve as an easter egg? There are small Longswords in Halo 3 that fly past you - I assume it's to go without taking up too much memory. Maybe they just transferred over one of the small ones rather than make their own 1:1 scale version (would the exploded Halo 3 one work?)--  Fore  run  ner '' 18:18, 14 February 2012 (EST)


 * Good point.--

The size difference most likely what forunner said but if we want a canonical explanation it could be the remote control ones considering the fact they dont need room for crew--Thehalocodplayer 23:09, 26 March 2012 (EDT)


 * This one is easy to clear up. The only time the Longsword has been shown in it's proper size was in Halo 1 and again in Halo 3 with the crashed version on the Ark in the sand. That's it. Every other Longsword seen in Halo 2, Halo 3, and even Reach, they are approximately half their intended size because they are in flight and not near anything to judge their size against. It's because the Longsword model in Halo 3 was mostly available as the half-size version and that was what was adapted into the multiplayer map. If you want to see the size difference, watch the mini-cutscene where the Longsword crashes on the Ark, stop the in-flight one in theater mode and pause it, and compare its size with the one already in the sand. -ScaleMaster117 (talk) 08:29, 14 February 2014 (EST)

Longswords not in Halo 4?
Okay, here's a question. I couldn't help but notice that Longswords were not at all present in Halo 4. Which begs the question, why? Have they been rendered obsolete when compared to the YSS-1000 Sabre and F-41 Broadsword starfighters? I mean, why not just upgrade the Longswords with the same technology as the Sabre and Broadsword fighters? I suppose that maybe they still are in service, but they just weren't included as part of the UNSC Infinity's complement, and possibly not fielded as often anymore. But this is all hypothetical. I don't suppose there isn't any information on this, is there? -- Xamikaze330  [<font color="Blue">Transmit |<font color="Green">Files ] 12:33, 21 March 2013 (EDT)Xamikaze330

I second that, what is the status of Longswords in the post-war UNSC?262VigilantGuardian (talk) 00:16, 14 February 2014 (EST)

Its possible that they were only kept in production as long as they were due the war being on, and that if they changed the type of spacecraft being produced that they would have to shut down all the factories that made longswords for several months whilst they are reworked to make more modern planes. Maybe. VARGR (talk) 00:22, 14 February 2014 (EST)


 * Do not mistake the absence of a game model from a particular game with its absence from the fiction. It was caused by the same reason as the true Pillar of Autumn model missing from Halo 2 or the MA5B not being in Halo 2 or 3. Each game has space and memory for only so many models, sounds, textures, etc., so they can't pack the games with everything. -ScaleMaster117 (talk) 08:29, 14 February 2014 (EST)


 * Okay, good point. So, then, I wonder if they continued use in 2557 or 2558 and so on, or were they phased out and made obsolete due to the more advanced nature of the F-41 Broadsword? I guess I can understand if it was phased out, but still, it was kind of a cool starfighter. Maybe they didn't, and they upgraded it with some of the same technological enhancements for the Broadsword, but then again, that might be too expensive to upgrade and retrofit an existing fighter. Probably cheaper to manufacture the Broadsword than upgrading old ships and fighters. -- Xamikaze330  [<font color="Blue">Transmission |<font color="Green">Commencing ] 16:14, 4 March 2014 (EST)Xamikaze330

Longsword Game Changes section
Shouldn't there be a Changes section describing how each model differs from its past and future iterations? Or does that not really matter in this case? -- Xamikaze330  [<font color="Blue">Transmission |<font color="Green">Commencing ] 16:18, 4 March 2014 (EST)Xamikaze330