Talk:F-302

message: Whatever gave you the idea that they were using energy weapons in Antarctica? Walter distinctly said that the F-302s had "expended their ordnance", and I distinctly saw a smoke trail and a movement that was NOT a straight line exhibited by the missile Mitchell shot at the Al'kesh (the flashback scene in "Avalon, Part 1"). Staff blasts have only ever been seen to go in straight lines, and have NEVER been seen to emit smoke trails, and cannot be "expended", AND it has been repeatedly stated (or at least implied) that Earth has no energy weapons. So I will put that down here, for the record. The F-302s were using their standard weaponry. LD 00:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

message: Unless there's any objections...I'm going to merge X-302 into this article in the next few days.  Both are basically stubs. -b 20:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as there's a separate section for the X-302, I don't really see much value in keeping them separate articles. I know they're not exactly the same thing but IMO they're close enough, and now that the F-302s are in production we're probably never going to get any additional material about X-302s to expand that article with. Bryan 06:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely. As it stands, neither article has much substance.  Perhaps together they can unite and like, take over the world.  -b 16:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

text: No objection. Actually I don't see why all of the human built spacecraft in Stargate need their own entries. Merge them all into a main article called Tau'ri Spacecraft. Each craft would get its own heading. The X-302 would be a subsection of the F-302 section. Lady Aleena | Talk 09:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Wrong.  The X-301 was not a prototype to the X-302.  Two completely different ships.  I can agree on merging them into one single article, but don't confuse them as the same thing. Alyeska 00:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  See my this sandbox and edit as you feel appropriate Alyeska. Lady Aleena | Talk 01:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That looks very good.  We should get a new picture for the X-302.  The picture in question is a shot of the F-302.  But that shouldn't be too hard to manage.  Asside for the picture, its a very good start for the combined page. Alyeska 04:07, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

text: See my sandbox for a preview of the merged article. Lady Aleena | Talk 05:17, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I say go ahead with it. Alyeska 04:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge complete Lady Aleena | Talk 09:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Addendum: You wouldn't believe how many articles mentioned those two ships. I am trying to edit the articles now to point to this one, but it's going to take a while. Lady Aleena | Talk 11:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: This sentence does not make sense:
Production models are known to still are still equiped with the hyperdrive.
Do the F-302s still have hyperdrive or not?
Lady Aleena | Talk 20:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because it wasn't shown regularly on screen doesn't imply non-existance.  However, I just watched "Allies" and never heard anything mentioning a hyperdrive on the F-302s, only that the 302s were to attack the Wraith ship hyperdrive through a weak point in their hull.  Perhaps I missed it elsewhere. -- Huntster T • @ • C 18:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyperdirve in F-302 

message: As it has been shown that Atlantis hads an alpha site with 302s, should the alpha... sites be listed with their respective galaxy or command that they are alternate sites for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.242.6.168 (talk • contribs) 
We have only seen the Alpha site once, I don't recall their being any F-302s.  Then again, there wasn't much of anything. Rockintheface (talk • contribs) 17:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Alpha... sites

message: The Gamma site had at least 3 F-302's
See this pic:
http://www.stargatecaps.com/sg1/s9/917/shroomy/html/the%5Fscourge064.html
There are clearly 3 visible.
--Faris b 20:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gamma site 

message: Why were the Daedalus patches different.  Generally, air force uniforms all pretty much the same as they appeared on the Odyssey but the Daedalus crew, especially Col. Caldwell have different ones.  Also, has anyone noticed that on Atlantis, the team memebers never wear F-302 flight suits as they do on SG-1?  What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockintheface (talk • contribs) 17:53, 14 March 2007
the patches with a 302 on it would mean the pilot is a qualified 302 pilot Ss9999 (talk) 17:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ...And that would be speculation unless it was clearly stated somewhere official. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 17:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Uniforms?

message: Why is this page called F-302 when the ship is an X-302. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.137.53.221 (talk • contribs) 04:54, 9 April 2007   (UTC)
:Only the prototype(s) of the ship was called the X-302.  Once testing was complete and the vessel went onto the production line, the title was changed to F-302, much like regular fighter jets do...see X-35 for an example of a fighter going from prototype to production and changing title. -- Huntster T • @ • C 17:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: X-302?

message: Just because they used the hyperdrive in Fallen doesn't mean anything, if they still had them on the production models, wouldn't they have deployed F-302's against the Ori satellite weapon in Ethon or against the Ori ships in Camelot then? They didn't which suggests that they don't have them.
I personally don't believe they included them anymore. If you have proof of a more recent mention/useage since season 7, please feel free to mention it.
Think about it, why add something that will cost more money and space to produce if it doesn't work properly? Plus, they stopped using Naqahdriah in season 7 when the SGC got a Naqahdah mine on P3X-403 and they could only make the hyperdrive work with Naqahdriah.
Vala M (talk) 19:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because your personal opinion is that they don't include them, does not mean that they don't.  "Suggests", "personally", etc are terms of speculation and POV, so please don't use them.  Do not remove the data from the article again until further discussion has taken place.  The fact is, unless I'm seriously misremembering events (if so, I apologize), a production model 302 has been shown using a hyperdrive window and we don't know why it hasn't been used elsewhere, so until it is established that this normally is not included, we have to work with the information at hand.  Burden of proof falls on you to establish this, not the other way around. -- Huntster T • @ • C 22:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm sorry, my previous reply was overly harsh, so I apologize for that.  I would suggest that the hyperdrive reference be left in the infobox, because we simply don't know if it currently is being used or not, but there is at least some evidence that it may.  However, the paragraph should certainly be reworded to account for this fact.  How about rewriting the hyperdrive material to clarify that it was only seen being used on the prototype and an early production model (I'll have to dig up my DVDs to get some things straight), and that no data is available as to whether 'current' 302s are still equipped with a generator.  How does that sound?  If yes, I'll write it up tomorrow. -- Huntster T • @ • C 21:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: F-302s do not have hyperdrive engines anymore. Only the experimental unit had one which used Naqadria, but it was too unstable to be used for long durations, which is why it was only used in "Fallen" when they used it to penetrate Anubis' shields. They flicked it on and off in a matter of seconds. Current models do not include them. There really is no assuming going on here, they just don't have them. I forget where it is specifically stated but it is shown through their non-use and it is inferred by the instability that was explained during the test and after. Konman72 (talk) 23:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that's exactly the same thing I was mentioning before, we should not assume they don't have have them just because they aren't used.  I actually agree that they don't, but I work off verifiability.  If you can find that citation, that's fantastic, but inferred is not something we should use here. -- Huntster T • @ • C 02:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I posted a question over on Joe Mallozzi's blog, hopefully he will give us an answer. Konman72 (talk) 03:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyperdrive 

message: I'm going to find a new picture to replace the current F-302 picture. The current one just shows the back of it, and dosen't show much of the top view of the front. Ss9999 (talk) 20:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Picture