My friends and I built a 1:1 scale Venator Star Destroyer in Space Engineers, and I can definitely say that the large hanger door is very difficult. It took us almost 2 months to build the most complicated mechanism we've ever built to get the ventral doors to work properly, and all it takes is damage on one mechanism to make everything fail
@ilpoomatili9549 It can take a pretty serious hit. We got about 12 layers of heavy armor around the hanger mechanism, and most other places have at least 20 layers
They really didn't. Practicality and efficiency vs Psychological deterrent and inefficiency. One was meant to actually fight. The other was meant to scare people enough they won't fight.
Eh. I don't know how it is now. But original explanation did make sense. Venator was as hoc design where they pressured Carrier and Battleship roles on the same hull. What was for the same reason why people usually think that Battle-Carriers aren't dumb. But they quite fast find out that it do not work. Venator didn't have sufficient power as Battleship. To deal effectively with stuff like Lukrahulk. While it did have too many fighters what make lost of every ship costly. In fact over time GAR start removing unnecessary fighters, keeping the needed minimum and uparming decks instead. What in Canon is known as Venator 2 variant. But it was also temporary solution. Victory class was already in design as those flaws become apparent during the war. Original design predating Imperial. Actually use specialized Light Battlecruiser Tector class. Which was paired with Gladiator class Escort Carriers. Tector class while similar in power to later Imperial, lack many of its flaws. Gladiator was meant to provide anti-fighter screening and leave combat zone after releasing fighters. But Republic fall so fast, that Empire didn't need those ships anymore and so only few were made. As result someone come with brilliant idea and place hangar in Tector design, creating famous Imperial. It allow to notably cut the cost and create on paper potent Assault Ship. Problem was that as result is start repeating same mistakes as Venator did. Well. Maybe rather Victory, but still. While this part may be not canon anymore. In canon Empire actually did the same after Endor. Supplementing lacking Gladiator (not Venator!) with Quasar Fire. What was lighter, but could fulfil similar duty. If Empire wouldn't be short signed, they ships would be way more powerful!
@@Dakarai_Knight that is the most retarded logic i have ever heard. It sounds like it came from the mind of someone who knows nothing about military strategy.
Its not really that hard to "get rid" of Venators. As war time mass produced ships, they could easily have established that Venators had a short lifespan for their drive core that required high maintenance. Most ships were not worth updating with a new core so they got scrapped. Another simple answer would be that they were still around during the OT era just as second line ships. in the Original Trilogy whatever is happening in the movie is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO THE EMPIRE. ANH death star plans, ESB Vader looking for his son, RoTJ Emperor is luring the Rebels into a trap to win the war. Just like we don't see Imperial patrol forces we also don't see Venators. Instead, Disney Starwars came up with this retarded idea that they were "symbols of the Republic"
"Admiral, we need some more carriers." "Ugh, not this AGAIN, Lieutenant! Can't you see I'm playing with my Star Destroyers?" "I'm serious, sir. The Rebels are running rings around our frigates without a proper fighter screen, and we can't have a Destroyer in every system-" "FINE! Just approve the cheapest one you can find, and leave me alone! Oh, and put in an order for five more super-weapons, while you're at it!"
@dreademperor2094 your average Imperial Moff or Admiral isn't the product of a machine designed to select for thw most effective warfighters- they're the product of a machine that selects for the most devious backstabbers that can make open displays of loyalty while actively manipulating and betraying wveryone around them. The fact that these purpose-made snakes in the grass occasionally display sparks of martial competence is just a nice bonus.
The quasar is great as a stationary starfighter platform for law enforcement deep within friendly territory because It’s low crew and cheap cost. The venator is a way more versatile naval carrier that can take a beating if found by the enemy and can provide a transport for marines and act as an orbital bombardment platform. You also don’t need the ventral door of the venator if you deploy your fighters before you enter a system and have them fly in hyperspace
It's like WW2. Escort Carriers were present to stop enemy submarine attacks, be cheap, protect convoys, and light support roles but nothing more. It's likely that the Empire loved the idea of a convoy defender carrier (especially since ISDs couldn't be everywhere) and did well with it, but as the Rebels became more and more dangerous, they either tried to mass-produce the Imperial Escort Carrier in greater numbers or looked for something better.
Rebels were a rare occurrence and not worth the time or money. In all three OT movies, the Rebel Alliance was almost wiped out. The only thing that saved them was divine intervention from the Cosmic Force.
For the Empire it makes sense that they use two types of military forces- the "hand" and the "fist" one is made up of small cheap flexible patrol and enforcement assets like Arrestor Cruisers, skipray blast boats, gunships and other patrol vessels. This one is more like a police force that enforces law in the territories and searches for contraband. The other half are the Imperial Star Destroyers. This is the heavy-duty reaction force. Fleets of heavily armed Starships with armored hull and heavy shields that normal weapons cannot pierce, capable of carrying a mixed force of fighters, assault troops and supplies to carry out a prolonged suppression campaign.
Star Wars space combat is literally WWII in space. With lasers. And still flack cannons and mortars that somehow fire arcing shots. It's a space fantasy, not a science fiction. There is no actual science involved.
Well, yes, actually. The venator was known as the "Jedi cruiser" among the civilian population, while Palpatine did everything he could to erase the Jedi. Can't have a ship colloquially known as a "Jedi cruiser" around when you're trying to wipe the order out
The other advantage of smaller carriers is that if one is destroyed you've only lost 4 squadrons, rather than 40. So it's not just the cost of the vessel, it's the cost of the cargo as well.
Has anyone noticed that looked at from just above its port or starboard bow, the Quasar Fire has the same frowning look as the angriest man in Gorham City?
Furthermore, the Quasar originated as a Legends ship, mainly as a vessel used by the Rebellion. I feel like the ship design was meant to be a Rebel ship first, which may be why the Venator looks and functions better.
Truce at Bakura was a dumb idea of "weird aliens to mix things up" that was greenlit after Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy became surprisingly successful and somebody in the licensing department just slapped approval on the first completed script for another book that came across their desk. Those weird aliens with their "strange and unsettling" technology of basically enslaving ghosts to power their machines and a primary personal weapon called a "paddle beamer" never became relevant again after some better authors who were able to at least stay more or less consistent with the already low standards of Lucas' lore coherency were hired.
I'm quite fond of Truce at Bakura as it's one of the Star Wars books I read. I feel like the Ssi-ruuvi (or was it Ssi-ruuk or something?) don't necessarily fit all that well, and that it was weird for them to launch an invasion so immediately, but it's quite fun nonetheless
I think it can be argued whether the elements Truce at Bakura added to the Star Wars universe fit well, but the book itself was a great read, very entertaining. And I personally have no issues with the new technologies and aliens introduced. I think they were all very interesting and Star Wars has a lot of room for crazy stuff in it. It's a big galaxy.
I'm sure this fourteen and a half minute video represents at least twenty nine times more time thinking about how these ships actually function than the people who made the shows and movies put into it. "Yeah that looks cool gimme a 3D model and we'll show some shots of it flying around a planet or something. Nerds love that stuff."
maintenance have always been the one true factor to consider and operational cost to keep a platform working throughout its life span, one of the main reasons why for example in the US Navy they replaced the F-14 with the F/A-18 is because even though the price tag to buy a brand new F-14 is cheaper then buying a brand new F-18, due to factors such as the moveable wings being a burden on crews to keep working as pretty much most other aircraft with moveable wings such as (my favorite) the F-111 also being notoriously high on maintenance partly due to the moveable wings but also as platforms age though of course designers do plan for a platform's lifespan but still generally as time goes on a aircraft's operational cost goes down more and more, especially if the infrastructure needed to it from anything like a specialized hanger that is needed to house said craft, to crews who have to be trained on how to use the tools and equipment and the experience they gain on doing so, to a specific spare part needed, if any of those things were to go down which they eventually will like the manufacturer stops producing that one spare part then now effectively that platform's operational cost and thus overall lifespan has been negatively impacted. Things like the F-18 was created as a response to these issues, learning the mistakes from the old and creating brand new infrastructure and simplified crew training and parts, that even though a brand new F-18 price tag is quite expensive, compared to its true cost its operational cost with that of the F-14, a F-18 is much cheaper in that regard. I think the Quasar more or less does the same for the Venator in that regard though obviously not taking over its role as the main carrier but it does fill a certain niche that the Venator also filled alongside being the main frontline carrier of the fleet. another tangent is that aircraft or this case starfighter readiness rate is something to consider which is how ready or how many aircraft are actually working in a fleet and not just something ready to fall apart, because aircraft and especially military aircraft are HEAVY and I mean *HEAVY* on maintenance, like what I explained already on the F-14 and F-111, you will inevitably find that not all aircraft in your inventory would be 100% working, if I recall that on public sources that the US Airforce, the no.1 most well funded and largest and most advanced and powerful airforce in the whole world right now currently reports that its entire fleet and that means ALL of its aircraft overall are at a readiness rate of 70% or something like that, that means every 10 aircraft in their inventory, only about 7 of them are actually working and thus can be used for military work, the other 3 are currently in the hanger being maintained or in rarer cases, being stripped down for spare parts, though if you have a smaller military or have a budget not as reliable or good as the US airforce like for example Russia or something then that readiness rate might be lower. So assuming the numbers are the same for both the empire and republic, the Republic has a very expensive fleet like not only probably about only 70% of their starfighters are actually working but considering a single Venator carries hundreds of aircraft of which they are all diverse and different like at least 5 different models which all perform different roles, this is a literal nightmare for flight crews who probably need to order at least 50 different spare parts just so barely maintain probably 3 different platforms while running short on the other two, with operational and logistical cost to consider then it is no huge wonder that the Empire ditched most fighter platforms and stuck to 2 or 3 for a single ship to carry, so it eases the mind of crews and to at least streamline the order of parts.
On the surface ship side it is worse, generally 1/3 of the fleet is deployable at any one time. Then 1/3 is in maintenance and the remaining 1/3 is working up to be qualified for deployment. Theoretically you can surge working up ships early and delay maintenance but the longer you do that the longer a space you will have less than 1/3 deployable. There is also a limited amount of maintenance space and industry for supplies the size of an SD. The quasar can fit in a commercial maintenance bay.
Doesn’t mean the venator can be a sitting air(space?)port and let as explained in the reply above me the hyperdrive capable vessels perform patrols in nearby systems while the usual non ftl ships patrol the system the ven is in.
what about the "pocket carrier" the Gladiator Class star destroyer? they basically took an Arquitens doubled the hangar space, and gave it the armor and weapons to enable self defense.
I'm willing to bet that a venator is far more expensive to operate than 20 of those cruiser-Carrier ships Quasar has a crew of 250 pilots technicians and officers 150 troopers 48 fighters and several shuttles, landing craft, and utility vehicles Keep in mind this is for operating so thats pay, feeding, maintenance, fuel, outfitting costs. Now account for the distribution of force across a given zone. These things cover more territory, have a lower overall operating cost per cubic light year of territory, which can decrease response times. 20 units have 5000 crew, 3000 troopers, 960 fighters/bombers compliments, cost is 22 million credits for 20 units with increased numbers and smaller size there is less lapse in coverage when rotating ships for maintenance, refit, and other things. Venators are overly expensive, can only cover so much cubic light year of space in a given time frame, concentrates forces into a small area limiting response times and ability to respond to multiple crises. Venator- legends only available 😕 Crew 7600 Troops 2000 Fighters 384 Utility support 20-40 gunships, walkers, shuttles and a prefabricated base A single formidable vessel for warfare, terrible for holding and securing territory due to being a singuar expensive AF vessel Cost 59 million credits
Even if it was too expensive, I'd keep the Venator Class SD in the core systems. Maybe not in large numbers but enough where they would be a viable asset. Heck, I'd keep them near the Death Star.
To be fair, most of the Venator's fighter complement lacked Hyper Drives. The few that did were ones created for long range recon like the ARC-170 and the Y-Wing for bombing runs.
Another advantage of the Quasar Fire is that nothing about it is exactly cutting edge military technology. That likely means that it could be built under contract in civilian shipyards across the galaxy, rather than tying up the important military shipyards that were pumping out ISDs and other more advanced and resource-intensive naval vessels. The thing is that the Quasar Fire is basically just a WW2 escort carrier. It's meant primarily to project starfighter coverage across the spacelanes to protect shipping from rebels or pirates, so it's not built to go up against powerful enemy capital ships because it's not meant to. It's far more important to the design that it be cheap and easy to build in large numbers than it is to be effective in large scale battles.
4 squadrons of fighters is more than enough to handle any pirate groups or subjugate many planets. Man I absolutely loved the imperial ships introduced in Rebels.
I think the Quasar Fire is like the CVE escort carriers of WWII. They are smaller, more fragile and slower than fleet or light carriers, but they are vastly cheaper, and they allow the navy to spread its influence over a wide area. Escort carriers aren't supposed to fight warships - they're supposed to fight opportunistic raiders (like submarines) and support ground operations without breaking the bank.
I love you guys and I love nerding out about this stuff alongside you. That being said, I'm sure this fiurteen and a half minute video represents at least twenty nine times more time thinking about how these ships actually function than the people who made the shows and movies put into it.
I always thought that the smaller door was there to give someone entering or existing the ship the ability to do so without opening the main door but not eliminating the ability to open the full door. Sort of like a doggy door on a main door.
The venator would have been amazing if filled with X wings and such, it could literally lock down a sector by itself by acting as a base for hyper space fighters.
I can kind of see why they replaced the Venators with Quasars. Though now that I think about it, I would think that when the Rebellion started to get more and more aggressive and getting bigger in numbers that they might grab a few Venators out of mothballs if necessary. I know they didn't use them mostly for financial purposes. But towards the end of the war, after the first Death Star was destroyed, I think that, even though it might cost a little bit more money than most Star Destroyers, they could at least bring a few Venators out of mothballs. Especially since a Venator is a battleship carrier and a Venator II is mainly just a capital ship without a giant hanger.
Quasar Fire + TIE Defenders + Thrawn would have been a fantastic solution for the Empire to the Rebellion’s guerrilla warfare, and the Empire’s more general problem of overextension (at least in the space vacuum; actual land control might have still been hard)
Until the Rebels start resorting to unfair tactics to actually completely take out the TIE Defenders. Just because the Defender is the be all end all fighter, the Rebels would eventually develop a counter to it.
I really enjoy ending my nights smoking getting a good buzz and listening to good SW talk… Allen, I wished you’d do more Mandalorain /Boba Fett theories . Otherwise great stuff
The Rebel Alliance would have trouble fielding that many fighters and supporting such a big ship. Its designed for the clone wars era of combat, Alen made some good points about how it was just overkill for the Empire's needs and with the Rebels dodging direct confrontations with the Empire's superior forces it doesn't really work for them either. ...but it would have been great to see!
One big advantage of the Mon Cal Cruisers is that, because they were really a commercial design, they took a lot less money and crew to operate than a purpose-built military ship. Sure, they could only haul a few squadrons of snubbies (unlike a Venator), but then the Rebels could not risk more than that in one ship anyway.
Fun fact, in legends, it was a converted freighter. It was a "make shift" carrier and not a carrier out right. The book "The Courtship of Princess Leia" is where it describes this ship. Like most Rebel ships, it was a necessity ship rather than a practical one. Including it into Rebels in this way as a Tie Carrier from the factory was kinda dumb.
The Quasar fire class is absolutely great. For a universe where fighters are so strong and important, it's nearly the ideal ship, so long as it has some screens. Absolutely loved the details of the Flurry in Truce at Bakura, which really showed how even such a small force could punch very far above its weight.
That would also be 35 different skirmishes the rebels could wage at once if they had their hands on a venator & enough fighters to fill it. Sure... a few might have slipped through the cracks, but sending them to the scrapyards was probably a wise decision despite all the benefits those vessels would bring to the imperial fleet. The rebels could have housed most of their forces on just one of those before the GCW fully took off.
Me doing the advanced forgotten clone start in X4 Interworlds.. "That providence is wiping out my shields! Quick pull around to the rear, wipe that clanker ship out!"
it's kind of weird that most of the use case for an ISD is covered by an acclimator. i mean to be sure an ISD can take out an acclimator in a fight, but it's role as an mobile forward operating base is comparable especially if you remove half LAAT complement for 2 Squadrons of fighters and make 2 hangers on the sides of the craft. both craft can execute a Base Delta Zero and an acclimator is something like 1/6th the price of an ISD.
The venator 2 would work well as a ressupply ship for larger venator fleets. That additional cranes and equipment attached to the roof of the old hangar doors would help with cargo.
To be honest, the Venetor one was the best in my opinion, its massive hanger doors was so iconic. But the fact of the matter is even though it’s got massive hanger space it doesn’t need to use only fighters. In peace time they could use a fraction of the fighters and use the residual space for any number of other objects. From supplies to troops. That’s why when the new Republic came about, I thought they should’ve reintroduced the Venetors, as with their size, manoeuverability and potential internal space they could be invaluable. The best military in my opinion is not overwhelming firepower but the most adaptable. It is better to be a jack of all trades than simply a master of one. All the imperial ships were far too specialised for specific scenarios only, whereas the Venetor covers nearly all the rolls that was needed. It could be a command ship, a carrier, a destroyer. Small enough to be a support ship but large enough to be a Battleship, a cargo ship, a troop transport. Its capabilities were endless. Its weapon systems were capable of easily fighting off starfighters but also enough heavy weapons to be able to fight against other capital ships.
Love your content. I like listening to someone who overthinks star wars as much as I do. Especially the politics and logistics. Slight critique, Put up some acoustic foam or something.
I always thought that the Venator was given far too big a fighter complement. Prior to its introduction into the timeline, 72 fighters was a LOT to bring into battle.
I think there's also a major issue for the Quasar class. As you mentioned in legends it was subject to micro fractures when coming back from hyperspace but also suffer from another major flaw; it's a civilian design, conceived to be at her basis a bulk freighter, where what are on some hangar bays; there's on the standard model bays to hold bulk cargo (ore, cargo). If you want to have a purpose-built carrier for the empire, there's the Ton-Falk carrier; and here you might say, hey, for the price of a Venator I have 6 lighter carriers with more fighters overall*. BUT The Ton Falk, if caught by flanking maneuvers is basically scrap in waiting to become, especially if caught by a capital ship (something only as big as a Dreadnaught can be enough, and the rebels had a ton to spare) while the Venator can fend off attacks (not the best, but the correct arsenal of turbolasers might do the job to crack smaller ships) Finally A Ton Falk, nor a Quasar can do landing operations with CAS right before touching the LZ and equipment inside its belly, whereas the Empire had to rely on heavier ships (like the Evakamar landing craft but it's hella bigger) *If you forget all the space hold by the whole regiment; its vehicle and logistical equipment can be reverse to hold more starfighter, where you could hold maybe 1 AT-TE or a single LAAT you might be able to fit 2 V-Wing or an ARC-170
Based on what we've seen in canon stories as late as 0 BBY, some Venators were still around for quite a while so it's unclear when or if they actually retired under the Empire and in Tarkin there was one that carried Tie Fighters so they would have experienced some upgrades and refit for the needs of the Navy, the Quasar wouldn't have been a replacement but instead filled a different role to the older ship.
The quasar is great for imperial fleet comps tho? The hangar layout allows fighters to disgorge in swarms which is playing into the tie’s strengths. It isn’t represented ever but the hangar doors that face eachother on the venator would almost certainly cause collisions or slow down launching of fighters. This was fine when they had shielded fighters that can act well alone but a slow trickle of swarm fighters being launched by a venator would not be all that effective.
The Empire fielded the Ton Fawlk carrier as the replacement for the Venator's carrying capabilities. we don't see it in the movies because of the Tarkin Doctrine which doesn't see the use of en mass starfighters. The Quasar wasn't used in any military capabilities it was used as a freighter only the rebels used it as a carrier for military fighters.
72 vs 410 ? You need atleast 6 Ton falks to be at a similar number of Starfighters to a Venator , and the tarkin doctrines Tie fighters Used Cheap swarm fighter tactics Venators on other hand has hyperdrive capable well developed fully armed Starfighters , the Y wings and Z-95s were used even beyond Galactic civil war , Arc 170s lead to x wings , V wings to Tie fighters and A wings , hell Even if Venators had the Inquistor Tie fighters , they can rule a group of star systems
A good way to make a suitable vessel capable of post-war operations, in this instance, would probably be to hybridize the traits of venators and ISDs: reduce starfighter complement to about a quarter of its original capabilities, allowing the hangar door size reduction to be far less problematic, and use that newly cleared space for the troop transportation aspect of ISDs. You'd maintain that space control while also effectively delivering reinforcements to ground positions. Even with the lack of hyperdrive-equipped fighters, you'd still be able to patrol an area with relative ease. Though I'm not sure how cost effective it would actually be, it certainly wouldn't cost as much to build a venator's superstructure as it does to build an ISD's.
How about taking another look and evaluation of both the Arquitens-class light cruiser and Gozanti-class armed transport in light of this video and the last video? Both videos' talking points put new light into the Arquitens-class and Gozanti-class in the Outer Rim regions.
10:14 Had to chime in again. Nationalizing some aspects of the defense industry (and the medical and transport industries) can make sense. Arguably. Springfield Arsenal was the US' national arsenal. It did not interfere with the free market in any way except that it sometimes developed the technology behind or designed the weapons the US procured. This meant the US government actually owned what it bought. It didn't rely on expensive contractors or company representatives to maintain its own weapon systems. You can imagine how this might benefit the production of vaccines or other medicines of national importance. Springfield Arsenal also did the very important work of making technical data packages for America's weapons. It did not produce most guns or ammo. Private companies still did that. What Springfield did was design the process private factories would use to build weapons. That kind of deep R and D is difficult for private companies to do. Nationalizing it means small companies can participate easily. They just need to know how to read the prints to set their tools. It also means defense doesn't become reliant single massive companies, which in basically create the same corruption and cost issues as singular nationalized industries (they're nearly identical in all but name). So while military first economies are dumb, nationalization, to a degree, is not dumb.
I always assumed, that the Venator 2 still had those large Hangar-Bay Doors, like the Venator 1 had, but that a smaller door, like we see in Episode 3, was also integrated inside the bigger door. So you can either have a small opening for only launching a small number fighters or maybe a shuttle or a big one if you need to launch as many ships as possible as quickly as possible.
If I remember right, these ships were made by SoroSuub, out of the Sullust system, which the Empire captured at gunpoint. Those micro fractures were a deliberate flaw built into them by the Sullustans who were forced to build them.
In Legends they had the Secutor replace the Venator. But it was much bigger and was a dreadnought. So a lot more expensive. It could do what several Venators did while being significantly more durable. I don't think the Empire fielded them in mass. But, it was definitely built as a successor to the Venator.
In Legends, the re-design of the Imperial Navy vs the Republic Navy was primarily to prepare for the Vong invasion, which Palpatine was aware of due to his early contact with the Chiss during the Clone Wars. I always thought that this was a very interesting way of looking at things from a different perspective... yes, Palpatine and the Imperial Navy as a whole was using their new military might to oppress systems, but they also had a long-term goal of making sure they could protect their new empire from new threats. This was also why they had so many superweapons programs going.
While not canon by any means, these units rocked in Star Wars Rebellion, even if they were just lazily named "Imperial Escort Carrier". Costing 34 'credits' to a Imperial Star Destroyer Mark II's 158 or a Super Star Destroyer's 282, it carried 6 squadrons - the same as the ISD, and half as the SSD. For the price of one SSD, you could build 8 escorts and have 3 times as many squadrons. Load them up with TIE Defenders and you had a capital ship killer with star fighter speeds as well as the ability to bombard enemy planets. It was always fun to have the 'fleet' of 1-2 Star Destroyers and a few troop transports en route, but go in first with these to wipe out any orbital fleet or planet based star fighter defenses.
I love your videos, but I noticed some mistakes with the lore involving the Imperial Navy. 1 The Imperial 2 class actually has pretty good Anti-fighter capabilities. The Imperial 1 had the ablitiy to fight fighters, but the Imperial 2 class had the ability to rapid fire its Turbolasers in a weaker state that is also unstable giving the Laser bolts a "Flax" like quality AND they had Anti-Starfighter Proton Torpedo launchers. 2 The lore for how many Star Destroyers their are has slowly degrade via word of mouth. In the lore when we see the 25K number its talking about the Imperial Class, however its likely in reference to the "Imperial 1 class" because in the lore, theirs one Imperial 2 class star destroyer for every planet in the Galactic Empire between Ep 4 and 6 after the first Death Star is destroyed. Also theirs lots of other classes of Star Destroyers and even non-Star Destroyer capital ships in the Empire, going by fleet formations and how-many named systems are in the Empire, a low ball number for capital ships should be over 3 Million. The largest chunk of the Navy being made up of Victory classes and non-Star Destroyer capital ships. 3 I dont agree with what you are saying, that the "Imperial Class is a Battleship class" in the lore its in the Cruiser class. With all the various Star Destroyer classes in the Empire, theirs lots of Star Destroyers that are Light Cruisers, Heavy Cruisers, Battle cruisers, a few Battleship classes, and a bunch of different Star Dreadnought/Super Star Destroyer classes. I dont disagree with the Imperial class being heavily armed, its just theirs lots of heavier more armed Star Destroyer classes than the Imperial Class. 4 Over all, I think all the Imperial Era Star Destroyers are better carrier ships with better fighter and bombers. Granted it depends on the Squadron/Wing/Group but the Imperial Ships are just superior at what they were designed to do, while the Republic era ships really only the Y-Wing and V-Wings did good at their jobs, the ARC was just way to big to be a multi-role fighter. Despite the tech differences, I think both offensively and defensively, if the Empire and Republic had a skirmish between one Imperial 2 and a Venerator and all the craft they carry, the Imperials will win most the time, and for sure will win 99% of the time if they are one of the lucky Imperial 2 that got one Squadron of TIE Interceptors or better. 4 I wouldn't say the Imperial 1 and 2 were primarily made for Broadsides or close fighting. They were both armed with more than just the Heavy Turbolasers you mentioned, which I will add, they wouldnt look like the turret variation used on basses, but the biggest guns, or missiles if its a variation that has those, will have around 6 - 8 "Super Heavy Turbo" emplacements. The way most Star Destroyers are built all the Super Heavy cannons can fire straight ahead. The Victory 1 and 2 look like they have 2 Super Heavy Turbo Lasers depending on its configuration. Baring ECM and some other serious interference, the "Super Heavy Turbo Lasers" will have close to pin point "Light Minute Ranges" Its like a Cruiser IRL, it has various guns that have different ranges, rates of fire and so on. I love your videos and Peace be with you.
I absorb these videos eagerly, but could I repeat any of it? Maybe. Would it be accurate? Definitely not. Each tike you make one of these I'm astounded at how deep you go. Do you even remember all this!? So much!🎉
I think the primary issue with the venator is it’s very high cost for the relative lack of firepower and fragility of the vessel. In combination with an isd a few escort carriers like the triangle thingie from rebels makes a whole lot more sense, they can basically act as additional hangars and repair facilities, while the isd provides firepower and shielding, and the lack of point defense is compensated by the sheer number of fighters. This is similar to Japanese ww2 fleet loadouts with massive battleships and a whole bunch of escort carriers vs a modern us fleet load out with a massive all-in-one carrier as a centerpiece and a bunch of arleigh burkes and cruisers on picket duty which is more equivalent to a venator and a bunch of acclamators/cr90s/dp20s.
If were talking imperial starfighter carriers, let's not forget the gladiator class star destroyer. Like the quasar, it was smaller than an ISD, but carried a decent amount of starfighters.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when the "Flurry" was introduced in The Truce at Bakura, wasn't it described as a converted bulk hauler? I recall that it was a one-off conversion made by the rebellion, and the design was dictated by the need to fit large cargo containers between the bridge and the engineering section.
I've just checked the original Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels, and by EU lore the Quasar Fire was a conversion, but not a one-off conversion... though it may be that at the time of Truce at Bakura the Rebel Alliance only had one such ship, with more being acquired later (I recall another Quasar Fire class as part of Han Solo's anti-Zsinj task force in the Wraith Squadron books)
Alan, going back to Earth's Second World War, I think tthe Quasar Fire light carrier takes up the same job as a Casablanca- and Commencement Bay- class escort carriers, ships built on merchant hulls and not very sturdy (think USS St. Lo that was hit by a kamikaze)
I'd argue that the best fighter bays are those of a Battlestar or the cobra bays in B5. Almost instantly launch the entire fighter complement in an emergency. Takes longer to land them again, but it's really the front end of the battle when you need speed.
I think I have come up with a better alternative for the Empire to replace the Quasar: convert the Class 4 Containment Transport (the large triangular cargo transport from Rebels/BB) to have multiple run through hangers like on the Providence. It can provide forward and rear launch and Retrieval capabilities without having to sacrifice as much structural integrity. I think this would be something that would be in larger operations compared to the Quasar and more carrier focused than the Gladiator.
The thing that always struck me as a bit odd is that, much like a present day aircraft carrier, a ship that's going to carry around a bunch of fighters will need to have quarters and facilities not only for its own crew, but also the for the pilots and maintenance technicians of all of those fighters... and the Quasar Fire class carrier cruiser just never seemed large or thick enough to have sufficient interior space.
Here's a thought: multiple small doors. But seriously, I'm not convinced at all that one giant hangar door was the best or fastest way to deploy fighters. If you absolutely must build a Venator, though, and inevitably replace its massive door because it is ridiculous, then I suggest replacing it with VLS cells. If you're worried about gun range, so was every navy after the 50s. VLS cells eventually solved the problem for real world navies. In space they're even better. In space, you could even launch starfighters from VLS cells. I've been thinking about Star Wars for more years than is probably healthy. But every time I do, new ideas like the starfighter VLS come to mind. I think that's evidence that the Star Wars vehicles are designed for the rule of cool and not for hard sci-fi analysis. It's really fun to do as a thought exercise, but I don't think we should be excessively impressed by how much engineering Star Wars' designers have put into Star Wars' vehicles. We should, rather, praise them for their cool and how well they fool us when they are on screen. That said, would you consider inviting Dr. Alexander Clarke on for one of these analyses? Pretty please?
My headcannon for why the Venator was abandoned so quickly is that most of the class, due to being built during the war with construction and repair speed being more important than long term use, were in horrible condition, with it being cheaper to replace them than fix all the problems.
The Quasar Fire class reminds me of the escort carriers of ww2. The US and UK converted around a hundred cargo ships into small carriers and place them in their convoys. On their own these ships weren't very impressive, carrying only about two dozen planes each, but by assigning just one or two to a convoy they gained a big boost in recon capacity and maybe even some light preemptive strike capability. This And it also had the psychological impact that it was difficult to tell if a convoy had these escort carriers from a distance, which might dissuade a lone convoy raider from attacking. It also allowed the Allies to free up things like cruisers or extra destroyers for other more pressing roles, while simultaneously forcing the Axis to gather more resources to attack a convoy. All at a relatively modest budget.
It baffles me that the engineers at Kuat didn’t make multiple segments for the Venator’s main hangar door. That way, if a commander wants to launch multiple squadrons of fighters out of enemy turbolaser range, the entire door can be opened for rapid deployment. On the other hand, if only a few ships need to be launched/recovered and the Venator is in the middle of a battle, only one section of the door can open to launch/recover the ship with minimal risk of damage.
The operating and maintenance costs were probably way to high and man power intensive to keep the Venator around. At the end of World War 2, the USA immediately retired most of the naval fleet. The older ships, Battleships, and more cost heavy ships were the ones retired from service. Newer ships and smaller ships were kept.
Escort carriers make sense as a flagship for convoys on the outer rim. A couple Acclamators or Arquitens with some anti-starfighter corvettes would make for a well-balanced small task force in my mind.
The sad thing, in my mind, is that they could have effectively used the Venator to better project power over multiple systems by equipping the Venator 1's with hyperdrive capable fighters, piloted by loyal elites, and sending them out for patrol and escort missions within sector regions. One capitol ship that can house and maintain 35 squadrons is still cheaper than multiple light duty carriers that can only field 4 squadrons. Not to mention that a Venator can still maintain a sizable garrison of troops and walkers along with the fighters. Not nearly as much as an Acclimator, but enough to serve as a rapid response vessel to deter civil unrest if necessary. If the Empire had been just a little more trusting earlier on in their reign, then the Venator could have easily been rebranded as a launching platform to put war weary citizens on the fast track to a cushy career aboard an ISD, while simultaneously enjoying better pay, benefits and equipment, and gaining much needed practical experience at the same time.
I understand the quasar is made for a different era but when comparing it to the venator then it also has a large hole in it which is right in the firing line and it can’t even cover its hangers like the venator 1 did. This makes it supposedly easier to take down than the venator
Curious question, what would be the best formation or ship composition for the Imperial Navy regarding a military engagement or for handling a sector in the galaxy?
My friends and I built a 1:1 scale Venator Star Destroyer in Space Engineers, and I can definitely say that the large hanger door is very difficult. It took us almost 2 months to build the most complicated mechanism we've ever built to get the ventral doors to work properly, and all it takes is damage on one mechanism to make everything fail
I can only imagine the many sacrifices that were offered up to Clang before completing such an endeavour.
@Reoh0z We sacrificed 100 virgins to Clang when we tested the doors (We burned King with a thruster 100 times)
I could imagine that beast probably doesn't want to get hit by anything larger
@ilpoomatili9549 It can take a pretty serious hit. We got about 12 layers of heavy armor around the hanger mechanism, and most other places have at least 20 layers
@@bendavis3778 well damn! That's though. I wouldn't want to be tasked with breaking through that
They really created a lore conundrum when they made the Venator so awesome
They really didn't. Practicality and efficiency vs Psychological deterrent and inefficiency. One was meant to actually fight. The other was meant to scare people enough they won't fight.
Eh. I don't know how it is now. But original explanation did make sense.
Venator was as hoc design where they pressured Carrier and Battleship roles on the same hull. What was for the same reason why people usually think that Battle-Carriers aren't dumb. But they quite fast find out that it do not work. Venator didn't have sufficient power as Battleship. To deal effectively with stuff like Lukrahulk. While it did have too many fighters what make lost of every ship costly.
In fact over time GAR start removing unnecessary fighters, keeping the needed minimum and uparming decks instead. What in Canon is known as Venator 2 variant. But it was also temporary solution. Victory class was already in design as those flaws become apparent during the war.
Original design predating Imperial. Actually use specialized Light Battlecruiser Tector class. Which was paired with Gladiator class Escort Carriers. Tector class while similar in power to later Imperial, lack many of its flaws. Gladiator was meant to provide anti-fighter screening and leave combat zone after releasing fighters. But Republic fall so fast, that Empire didn't need those ships anymore and so only few were made.
As result someone come with brilliant idea and place hangar in Tector design, creating famous Imperial. It allow to notably cut the cost and create on paper potent Assault Ship. Problem was that as result is start repeating same mistakes as Venator did. Well. Maybe rather Victory, but still. While this part may be not canon anymore. In canon Empire actually did the same after Endor. Supplementing lacking Gladiator (not Venator!) with Quasar Fire. What was lighter, but could fulfil similar duty. If Empire wouldn't be short signed, they ships would be way more powerful!
Saying it’s a plot hole or paradox is lazy logic, this channel(and this video?) is literally centered around expanding on these ideas
@@Dakarai_Knight that is the most retarded logic i have ever heard. It sounds like it came from the mind of someone who knows nothing about military strategy.
Its not really that hard to "get rid" of Venators. As war time mass produced ships, they could easily have established that Venators had a short lifespan for their drive core that required high maintenance.
Most ships were not worth updating with a new core so they got scrapped.
Another simple answer would be that they were still around during the OT era just as second line ships. in the Original Trilogy whatever is happening in the movie is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO THE EMPIRE. ANH death star plans, ESB Vader looking for his son, RoTJ Emperor is luring the Rebels into a trap to win the war.
Just like we don't see Imperial patrol forces we also don't see Venators.
Instead, Disney Starwars came up with this retarded idea that they were "symbols of the Republic"
"Admiral, we need some more carriers."
"Ugh, not this AGAIN, Lieutenant! Can't you see I'm playing with my Star Destroyers?"
"I'm serious, sir. The Rebels are running rings around our frigates without a proper fighter screen, and we can't have a Destroyer in every system-"
"FINE! Just approve the cheapest one you can find, and leave me alone! Oh, and put in an order for five more super-weapons, while you're at it!"
Why your comment gives me the vibe of oversimplified channel 😂
Imperial doctrine in a nutshell
@dreademperor2094 your average Imperial Moff or Admiral isn't the product of a machine designed to select for thw most effective warfighters- they're the product of a machine that selects for the most devious backstabbers that can make open displays of loyalty while actively manipulating and betraying wveryone around them. The fact that these purpose-made snakes in the grass occasionally display sparks of martial competence is just a nice bonus.
The quasar is great as a stationary starfighter platform for law enforcement deep within friendly territory because It’s low crew and cheap cost. The venator is a way more versatile naval carrier that can take a beating if found by the enemy and can provide a transport for marines and act as an orbital bombardment platform.
You also don’t need the ventral door of the venator if you deploy your fighters before you enter a system and have them fly in hyperspace
Too bad TIE fighters don’t have hyperdrives.
Yep, the best place for your Carrier is so far off the board your adversary cannot find it.
@@robertnelson9599 If only the tie defender and phantom were more used
Exactly, ideally you deploy your fighters way before you enter the range of the enemies turbolasers and in the empires case under cover of ISDs
@@GAJake or hunter, avenger, schimitar, and a few other varients
It's like WW2. Escort Carriers were present to stop enemy submarine attacks, be cheap, protect convoys, and light support roles but nothing more.
It's likely that the Empire loved the idea of a convoy defender carrier (especially since ISDs couldn't be everywhere) and did well with it, but as the Rebels became more and more dangerous, they either tried to mass-produce the Imperial Escort Carrier in greater numbers or looked for something better.
Rebels were a rare occurrence and not worth the time or money. In all three OT movies, the Rebel Alliance was almost wiped out. The only thing that saved them was divine intervention from the Cosmic Force.
I literally just said this lol.
For the Empire it makes sense that they use two types of military forces- the "hand" and the "fist" one is made up of small cheap flexible patrol and enforcement assets like Arrestor Cruisers, skipray blast boats, gunships and other patrol vessels. This one is more like a police force that enforces law in the territories and searches for contraband. The other half are the Imperial Star Destroyers. This is the heavy-duty reaction force. Fleets of heavily armed Starships with armored hull and heavy shields that normal weapons cannot pierce, capable of carrying a mixed force of fighters, assault troops and supplies to carry out a prolonged suppression campaign.
Star Wars space combat is literally WWII in space. With lasers. And still flack cannons and mortars that somehow fire arcing shots. It's a space fantasy, not a science fiction. There is no actual science involved.
@@pyronuke4768 Sometimes people think alike. :)
They replaced the Venator because it was too Jedi for their tastes.
AKA the shields were probably too good.
Well, yes, actually. The venator was known as the "Jedi cruiser" among the civilian population, while Palpatine did everything he could to erase the Jedi. Can't have a ship colloquially known as a "Jedi cruiser" around when you're trying to wipe the order out
@@nandoman4769 Not really. Many times we see the Venator get its butt whooped.
And it doesn’t fit to the whole Tarkin Doctrine
@@HolyknightVader999most of the time, not really
The other advantage of smaller carriers is that if one is destroyed you've only lost 4 squadrons, rather than 40. So it's not just the cost of the vessel, it's the cost of the cargo as well.
No idea why but the Quasar is one of my favorite imperial ships. Like it’s design screams “watchu gonna do about it”
Has anyone noticed that looked at from just above its port or starboard bow, the Quasar Fire has the same frowning look as the angriest man in Gorham City?
It looks like a cargo ship they strapped with hangars and turrets and I love it
Furthermore, the Quasar originated as a Legends ship, mainly as a vessel used by the Rebellion. I feel like the ship design was meant to be a Rebel ship first, which may be why the Venator looks and functions better.
Yall kidding? It looks like a reeally nice and shiny DORRITO. Pretty, but still a Dorrtito
@@JamarD421 bro tried and failed to spell Dorito twice lmao
One thing I'll say, the Quasar Fire was introduced in a really great book. Truce at Bakura is an absolute classic.
Truce at Bakura was a dumb idea of "weird aliens to mix things up" that was greenlit after Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy became surprisingly successful and somebody in the licensing department just slapped approval on the first completed script for another book that came across their desk. Those weird aliens with their "strange and unsettling" technology of basically enslaving ghosts to power their machines and a primary personal weapon called a "paddle beamer" never became relevant again after some better authors who were able to at least stay more or less consistent with the already low standards of Lucas' lore coherency were hired.
I'm quite fond of Truce at Bakura as it's one of the Star Wars books I read. I feel like the Ssi-ruuvi (or was it Ssi-ruuk or something?) don't necessarily fit all that well, and that it was weird for them to launch an invasion so immediately, but it's quite fun nonetheless
I think it can be argued whether the elements Truce at Bakura added to the Star Wars universe fit well, but the book itself was a great read, very entertaining. And I personally have no issues with the new technologies and aliens introduced. I think they were all very interesting and Star Wars has a lot of room for crazy stuff in it. It's a big galaxy.
They needed a cost effective way to distribute power against Moderate threats, and the the Light Carrier does that.
Rebels, "Yum, just what we needed!"
I'm sure this fourteen and a half minute video represents at least twenty nine times more time thinking about how these ships actually function than the people who made the shows and movies put into it. "Yeah that looks cool gimme a 3D model and we'll show some shots of it flying around a planet or something. Nerds love that stuff."
A light carrier with lots of smaller craft. Star Destroyers as Capital ships.
They replaced the Venator with the Secutor, which was a star destroyer scale super-carrier that functioned as the command ship of a task force
It just looks so darn heroic. Palps likely found it repulsive.
Probably had nightmares about them.
@@Reoh0z then time to give the captured Imperial warships with Republic Navy colours just to continue to haunt him like vengeful wraiths of the past.
@@merafirewing6591 a bellator in republic colors would be nightmare fuel for the imperial side
@@nathanpierce7681 for sure.
maintenance have always been the one true factor to consider and operational cost to keep a platform working throughout its life span, one of the main reasons why for example in the US Navy they replaced the F-14 with the F/A-18 is because even though the price tag to buy a brand new F-14 is cheaper then buying a brand new F-18, due to factors such as the moveable wings being a burden on crews to keep working as pretty much most other aircraft with moveable wings such as (my favorite) the F-111 also being notoriously high on maintenance partly due to the moveable wings but also as platforms age though of course designers do plan for a platform's lifespan but still generally as time goes on a aircraft's operational cost goes down more and more, especially if the infrastructure needed to it from anything like a specialized hanger that is needed to house said craft, to crews who have to be trained on how to use the tools and equipment and the experience they gain on doing so, to a specific spare part needed, if any of those things were to go down which they eventually will like the manufacturer stops producing that one spare part then now effectively that platform's operational cost and thus overall lifespan has been negatively impacted. Things like the F-18 was created as a response to these issues, learning the mistakes from the old and creating brand new infrastructure and simplified crew training and parts, that even though a brand new F-18 price tag is quite expensive, compared to its true cost its operational cost with that of the F-14, a F-18 is much cheaper in that regard. I think the Quasar more or less does the same for the Venator in that regard though obviously not taking over its role as the main carrier but it does fill a certain niche that the Venator also filled alongside being the main frontline carrier of the fleet.
another tangent is that aircraft or this case starfighter readiness rate is something to consider which is how ready or how many aircraft are actually working in a fleet and not just something ready to fall apart, because aircraft and especially military aircraft are HEAVY and I mean *HEAVY* on maintenance, like what I explained already on the F-14 and F-111, you will inevitably find that not all aircraft in your inventory would be 100% working, if I recall that on public sources that the US Airforce, the no.1 most well funded and largest and most advanced and powerful airforce in the whole world right now
currently reports that its entire fleet and that means ALL of its aircraft overall are at a readiness rate of 70% or something like that, that means every 10 aircraft in their inventory, only about 7 of them are actually working and thus can be used for military work, the other 3 are currently in the hanger being maintained or in rarer cases, being stripped down for spare parts, though if you have a smaller military or have a budget not as reliable or good as the US airforce like for example Russia or something then that readiness rate might be lower.
So assuming the numbers are the same for both the empire and republic, the Republic has a very expensive fleet like not only probably about only 70% of their starfighters are actually working but considering a single Venator carries hundreds of aircraft of which they are all diverse and different like at least 5 different models which all perform different roles, this is a literal nightmare for flight crews who probably need to order at least 50 different spare parts just so barely maintain probably 3 different platforms while running short on the other two, with operational and logistical cost to consider then it is no huge wonder that the Empire ditched most fighter platforms and stuck to 2 or 3 for a single ship to carry, so it eases the mind of crews and to at least streamline the order of parts.
On the surface ship side it is worse, generally 1/3 of the fleet is deployable at any one time. Then 1/3 is in maintenance and the remaining 1/3 is working up to be qualified for deployment. Theoretically you can surge working up ships early and delay maintenance but the longer you do that the longer a space you will have less than 1/3 deployable.
There is also a limited amount of maintenance space and industry for supplies the size of an SD. The quasar can fit in a commercial maintenance bay.
Alan, can you make a video about what if the empire manufactured a star forge instead of the death star?
Venators are overkill for some patrol duties. So smaller Quasar carriers are needed.
Venators can sit in one star system , and using hyperdrive capable Starfighters patrol even the neighbouring star systems too
Doesn’t mean the venator can be a sitting air(space?)port and let as explained in the reply above me the hyperdrive capable vessels perform patrols in nearby systems while the usual non ftl ships patrol the system the ven is in.
what about the "pocket carrier" the Gladiator Class star destroyer?
they basically took an Arquitens doubled the hangar space, and gave it the armor and weapons to enable self defense.
I'm willing to bet that a venator is far more expensive to operate than 20 of those cruiser-Carrier ships
Quasar has a crew of 250 pilots technicians and officers
150 troopers
48 fighters and several shuttles, landing craft, and utility vehicles
Keep in mind this is for operating so thats pay, feeding, maintenance, fuel, outfitting costs.
Now account for the distribution of force across a given zone.
These things cover more territory, have a lower overall operating cost per cubic light year of territory, which can decrease response times.
20 units have
5000 crew,
3000 troopers,
960 fighters/bombers compliments,
cost is 22 million credits for 20 units
with increased numbers and smaller size there is less lapse in coverage when rotating ships for maintenance, refit, and other things.
Venators are overly expensive, can only cover so much cubic light year of space in a given time frame, concentrates forces into a small area limiting response times and ability to respond to multiple crises.
Venator- legends only available 😕
Crew 7600
Troops 2000
Fighters 384
Utility support 20-40 gunships, walkers, shuttles and a prefabricated base
A single formidable vessel for warfare, terrible for holding and securing territory due to being a singuar expensive AF vessel
Cost 59 million credits
Even if it was too expensive, I'd keep the Venator Class SD in the core systems. Maybe not in large numbers but enough where they would be a viable asset. Heck, I'd keep them near the Death Star.
Keeping *anything* near the Death Star would have helped.
@@Reoh0zeven a floating astromech would’ve boosted the death stars defence by 50%
To be fair, most of the Venator's fighter complement lacked Hyper Drives. The few that did were ones created for long range recon like the ARC-170 and the Y-Wing for bombing runs.
10:27 TIE fighter pilot was so close that he could taste it...🤣
where is this scene from?
Lick 👅
@@oskaroks2285it was from star wars squadrons.
I appreciate your videos. A lot of my head canon you say the same thing in your videos and it always makes sense.
The Venator was also commonly called a Jedi Cruiser so sith probably don't want something linked with jedi around at all
Another advantage of the Quasar Fire is that nothing about it is exactly cutting edge military technology. That likely means that it could be built under contract in civilian shipyards across the galaxy, rather than tying up the important military shipyards that were pumping out ISDs and other more advanced and resource-intensive naval vessels. The thing is that the Quasar Fire is basically just a WW2 escort carrier. It's meant primarily to project starfighter coverage across the spacelanes to protect shipping from rebels or pirates, so it's not built to go up against powerful enemy capital ships because it's not meant to. It's far more important to the design that it be cheap and easy to build in large numbers than it is to be effective in large scale battles.
I love your deep-dives into specific ships, ship classes, and insight into how the Empire thought. Well done!
4 squadrons of fighters is more than enough to handle any pirate groups or subjugate many planets. Man I absolutely loved the imperial ships introduced in Rebels.
Rebels litterally did not introduce any new ships.
I think it first appeared in the book Truce at Bakura, but it was good to see it make it to screen in such a prominent role.
I think the Quasar Fire is like the CVE escort carriers of WWII. They are smaller, more fragile and slower than fleet or light carriers, but they are vastly cheaper, and they allow the navy to spread its influence over a wide area. Escort carriers aren't supposed to fight warships - they're supposed to fight opportunistic raiders (like submarines) and support ground operations without breaking the bank.
I love you guys and I love nerding out about this stuff alongside you. That being said, I'm sure this fiurteen and a half minute video represents at least twenty nine times more time thinking about how these ships actually function than the people who made the shows and movies put into it.
I love your videos and content
I always thought that the smaller door was there to give someone entering or existing the ship the ability to do so without opening the main door but not eliminating the ability to open the full door. Sort of like a doggy door on a main door.
In the lore, the smaller door was added so the main one wouldn't be used.
Also, the information for the Quasar was wrong as well, like saying it had two guns, as the rebels took control of six turrets.
The venator would have been amazing if filled with X wings and such, it could literally lock down a sector by itself by acting as a base for hyper space fighters.
I can kind of see why they replaced the Venators with Quasars. Though now that I think about it, I would think that when the Rebellion started to get more and more aggressive and getting bigger in numbers that they might grab a few Venators out of mothballs if necessary. I know they didn't use them mostly for financial purposes. But towards the end of the war, after the first Death Star was destroyed, I think that, even though it might cost a little bit more money than most Star Destroyers, they could at least bring a few Venators out of mothballs. Especially since a Venator is a battleship carrier and a Venator II is mainly just a capital ship without a giant hanger.
Quasar Fire + TIE Defenders + Thrawn would have been a fantastic solution for the Empire to the Rebellion’s guerrilla warfare, and the Empire’s more general problem of overextension (at least in the space vacuum; actual land control might have still been hard)
Until the Rebels start resorting to unfair tactics to actually completely take out the TIE Defenders. Just because the Defender is the be all end all fighter, the Rebels would eventually develop a counter to it.
I really enjoy ending my nights smoking getting a good buzz and listening to good SW talk… Allen, I wished you’d do more Mandalorain /Boba Fett theories . Otherwise great stuff
Great video GenTech. A shame the Empire was so quick to scrap the Venators.
I can imagine the Rebel Alliance using the Veantor Star Destroyer for their fleet.
If only the Empire did not scrap them all.
Only reason not to is it’s too crew intensive for their numbers
The Rebel Alliance would have trouble fielding that many fighters and supporting such a big ship. Its designed for the clone wars era of combat, Alen made some good points about how it was just overkill for the Empire's needs and with the Rebels dodging direct confrontations with the Empire's superior forces it doesn't really work for them either.
...but it would have been great to see!
@@Reoh0znot to mention the cost of maintenance for those things. All the moving hangar bay doors are a weak point that can be exploited
One big advantage of the Mon Cal Cruisers is that, because they were really a commercial design, they took a lot less money and crew to operate than a purpose-built military ship. Sure, they could only haul a few squadrons of snubbies (unlike a Venator), but then the Rebels could not risk more than that in one ship anyway.
I hope you’re having a good vacation!
Fun fact, in legends, it was a converted freighter. It was a "make shift" carrier and not a carrier out right. The book "The Courtship of Princess Leia" is where it describes this ship. Like most Rebel ships, it was a necessity ship rather than a practical one. Including it into Rebels in this way as a Tie Carrier from the factory was kinda dumb.
Great stuff A dawg 👍🏻
The Quasar fire class is absolutely great. For a universe where fighters are so strong and important, it's nearly the ideal ship, so long as it has some screens. Absolutely loved the details of the Flurry in Truce at Bakura, which really showed how even such a small force could punch very far above its weight.
The Empire, like other military economic states (like North Korea and Russia) is all about Quantity over Quality.
LOVE THE INTRO "MY NAME IS" Hysiterical dude hysterical and well done the whole video.
Isnt this the thing Jun Sato flew into Konstantine's ship during the Battle of Antollon
Yep
Yes. Rip to him
bad ass
@@GenerationTechthe captain went down with his ship like any good commander would.
Add an Intradictor to a fleet of ISDs and Venators and your fleet will crush anything
You Chiss by any chance?
Rebel Starfighters : You Miss by any chance ?
The smaller quasar fire, at some 300m makes sense for tiny. Gladiator at 600m makes decent sense. The larger quasar fire at 1,000m does not.
Just view it as two different variants like how the Providence class has a Dreadnought version.
That would also be 35 different skirmishes the rebels could wage at once if they had their hands on a venator & enough fighters to fill it. Sure... a few might have slipped through the cracks, but sending them to the scrapyards was probably a wise decision despite all the benefits those vessels would bring to the imperial fleet. The rebels could have housed most of their forces on just one of those before the GCW fully took off.
Me doing the advanced forgotten clone start in X4 Interworlds.. "That providence is wiping out my shields! Quick pull around to the rear, wipe that clanker ship out!"
it's kind of weird that most of the use case for an ISD is covered by an acclimator. i mean to be sure an ISD can take out an acclimator in a fight, but it's role as an mobile forward operating base is comparable especially if you remove half LAAT complement for 2 Squadrons of fighters and make 2 hangers on the sides of the craft. both craft can execute a Base Delta Zero and an acclimator is something like 1/6th the price of an ISD.
You mean the Nevoota bee type acclamators ? 172 Starfighters
A pirate with a Venator in the Empire era would make fer a fun tale.
The venator 2 would work well as a ressupply ship for larger venator fleets. That additional cranes and equipment attached to the roof of the old hangar doors would help with cargo.
To be honest, the Venetor one was the best in my opinion, its massive hanger doors was so iconic. But the fact of the matter is even though it’s got massive hanger space it doesn’t need to use only fighters. In peace time they could use a fraction of the fighters and use the residual space for any number of other objects. From supplies to troops.
That’s why when the new Republic came about, I thought they should’ve reintroduced the Venetors, as with their size, manoeuverability and potential internal space they could be invaluable. The best military in my opinion is not overwhelming firepower but the most adaptable.
It is better to be a jack of all trades than simply a master of one. All the imperial ships were far too specialised for specific scenarios only, whereas the Venetor covers nearly all the rolls that was needed.
It could be a command ship, a carrier, a destroyer. Small enough to be a support ship but large enough to be a Battleship, a cargo ship, a troop transport. Its capabilities were endless. Its weapon systems were capable of easily fighting off starfighters but also enough heavy weapons to be able to fight against other capital ships.
A Venator I with a swarm of TIE Fighters coming out of its ventral hangar would be absolutely terrifying.
Venator : bleaugh! (Ties)
Love your content. I like listening to someone who overthinks star wars as much as I do. Especially the politics and logistics.
Slight critique, Put up some acoustic foam or something.
I always thought that the Venator was given far too big a fighter complement. Prior to its introduction into the timeline, 72 fighters was a LOT to bring into battle.
I think there's also a major issue for the Quasar class. As you mentioned in legends it was subject to micro fractures when coming back from hyperspace but also suffer from another major flaw; it's a civilian design, conceived to be at her basis a bulk freighter, where what are on some hangar bays; there's on the standard model bays to hold bulk cargo (ore, cargo).
If you want to have a purpose-built carrier for the empire, there's the Ton-Falk carrier; and here you might say, hey, for the price of a Venator I have 6 lighter carriers with more fighters overall*.
BUT
The Ton Falk, if caught by flanking maneuvers is basically scrap in waiting to become, especially if caught by a capital ship (something only as big as a Dreadnaught can be enough, and the rebels had a ton to spare) while the Venator can fend off attacks (not the best, but the correct arsenal of turbolasers might do the job to crack smaller ships)
Finally
A Ton Falk, nor a Quasar can do landing operations with CAS right before touching the LZ and equipment inside its belly, whereas the Empire had to rely on heavier ships (like the Evakamar landing craft but it's hella bigger)
*If you forget all the space hold by the whole regiment; its vehicle and logistical equipment can be reverse to hold more starfighter, where you could hold maybe 1 AT-TE or a single LAAT you might be able to fit 2 V-Wing or an ARC-170
Based on what we've seen in canon stories as late as 0 BBY, some Venators were still around for quite a while so it's unclear when or if they actually retired under the Empire and in Tarkin there was one that carried Tie Fighters so they would have experienced some upgrades and refit for the needs of the Navy, the Quasar wouldn't have been a replacement but instead filled a different role to the older ship.
You rock Alan!
Thanks
I was playing squadrons and somehow flew directly into the hanger and killed myself.
Worst way to end a mission
The quasar is great for imperial fleet comps tho? The hangar layout allows fighters to disgorge in swarms which is playing into the tie’s strengths. It isn’t represented ever but the hangar doors that face eachother on the venator would almost certainly cause collisions or slow down launching of fighters. This was fine when they had shielded fighters that can act well alone but a slow trickle of swarm fighters being launched by a venator would not be all that effective.
The Empire fielded the Ton Fawlk carrier as the replacement for the Venator's carrying capabilities. we don't see it in the movies because of the Tarkin Doctrine which doesn't see the use of en mass starfighters. The Quasar wasn't used in any military capabilities it was used as a freighter only the rebels used it as a carrier for military fighters.
72 vs 410 ? You need atleast 6 Ton falks to be at a similar number of Starfighters to a Venator , and the tarkin doctrines Tie fighters Used Cheap swarm fighter tactics
Venators on other hand has hyperdrive capable well developed fully armed Starfighters , the Y wings and Z-95s were used even beyond Galactic civil war , Arc 170s lead to x wings , V wings to Tie fighters and A wings , hell Even if Venators had the Inquistor Tie fighters , they can rule a group of star systems
A good way to make a suitable vessel capable of post-war operations, in this instance, would probably be to hybridize the traits of venators and ISDs: reduce starfighter complement to about a quarter of its original capabilities, allowing the hangar door size reduction to be far less problematic, and use that newly cleared space for the troop transportation aspect of ISDs. You'd maintain that space control while also effectively delivering reinforcements to ground positions. Even with the lack of hyperdrive-equipped fighters, you'd still be able to patrol an area with relative ease. Though I'm not sure how cost effective it would actually be, it certainly wouldn't cost as much to build a venator's superstructure as it does to build an ISD's.
How about taking another look and evaluation of both the Arquitens-class light cruiser and Gozanti-class armed transport in light of this video and the last video?
Both videos' talking points put new light into the Arquitens-class and Gozanti-class in the Outer Rim regions.
Bro can read minds stay tuned for the next episode
10:14 Had to chime in again. Nationalizing some aspects of the defense industry (and the medical and transport industries) can make sense. Arguably. Springfield Arsenal was the US' national arsenal. It did not interfere with the free market in any way except that it sometimes developed the technology behind or designed the weapons the US procured. This meant the US government actually owned what it bought. It didn't rely on expensive contractors or company representatives to maintain its own weapon systems. You can imagine how this might benefit the production of vaccines or other medicines of national importance. Springfield Arsenal also did the very important work of making technical data packages for America's weapons. It did not produce most guns or ammo. Private companies still did that. What Springfield did was design the process private factories would use to build weapons. That kind of deep R and D is difficult for private companies to do. Nationalizing it means small companies can participate easily. They just need to know how to read the prints to set their tools. It also means defense doesn't become reliant single massive companies, which in basically create the same corruption and cost issues as singular nationalized industries (they're nearly identical in all but name).
So while military first economies are dumb, nationalization, to a degree, is not dumb.
I always assumed, that the Venator 2 still had those large Hangar-Bay Doors, like the Venator 1 had, but that a smaller door, like we see in Episode 3, was also integrated inside the bigger door. So you can either have a small opening for only launching a small number fighters or maybe a shuttle or a big one if you need to launch as many ships as possible as quickly as possible.
If I remember right, these ships were made by SoroSuub, out of the Sullust system, which the Empire captured at gunpoint. Those micro fractures were a deliberate flaw built into them by the Sullustans who were forced to build them.
In Legends they had the Secutor replace the Venator. But it was much bigger and was a dreadnought. So a lot more expensive. It could do what several Venators did while being significantly more durable. I don't think the Empire fielded them in mass. But, it was definitely built as a successor to the Venator.
In Legends, the re-design of the Imperial Navy vs the Republic Navy was primarily to prepare for the Vong invasion, which Palpatine was aware of due to his early contact with the Chiss during the Clone Wars. I always thought that this was a very interesting way of looking at things from a different perspective... yes, Palpatine and the Imperial Navy as a whole was using their new military might to oppress systems, but they also had a long-term goal of making sure they could protect their new empire from new threats. This was also why they had so many superweapons programs going.
While not canon by any means, these units rocked in Star Wars Rebellion, even if they were just lazily named "Imperial Escort Carrier". Costing 34 'credits' to a Imperial Star Destroyer Mark II's 158 or a Super Star Destroyer's 282, it carried 6 squadrons - the same as the ISD, and half as the SSD. For the price of one SSD, you could build 8 escorts and have 3 times as many squadrons. Load them up with TIE Defenders and you had a capital ship killer with star fighter speeds as well as the ability to bombard enemy planets. It was always fun to have the 'fleet' of 1-2 Star Destroyers and a few troop transports en route, but go in first with these to wipe out any orbital fleet or planet based star fighter defenses.
11:38 _Nice_
I love your videos, but I noticed some mistakes with the lore involving the Imperial Navy.
1 The Imperial 2 class actually has pretty good Anti-fighter capabilities. The Imperial 1 had the ablitiy to fight fighters, but the Imperial 2 class had the ability to rapid fire its Turbolasers in a weaker state that is also unstable giving the Laser bolts a "Flax" like quality AND they had Anti-Starfighter Proton Torpedo launchers.
2 The lore for how many Star Destroyers their are has slowly degrade via word of mouth. In the lore when we see the 25K number its talking about the Imperial Class, however its likely in reference to the "Imperial 1 class" because in the lore, theirs one Imperial 2 class star destroyer for every planet in the Galactic Empire between Ep 4 and 6 after the first Death Star is destroyed.
Also theirs lots of other classes of Star Destroyers and even non-Star Destroyer capital ships in the Empire, going by fleet formations and how-many named systems are in the Empire, a low ball number for capital ships should be over 3 Million. The largest chunk of the Navy being made up of Victory classes and non-Star Destroyer capital ships.
3 I dont agree with what you are saying, that the "Imperial Class is a Battleship class" in the lore its in the Cruiser class. With all the various Star Destroyer classes in the Empire, theirs lots of Star Destroyers that are Light Cruisers, Heavy Cruisers, Battle cruisers, a few Battleship classes, and a bunch of different Star Dreadnought/Super Star Destroyer classes.
I dont disagree with the Imperial class being heavily armed, its just theirs lots of heavier more armed Star Destroyer classes than the Imperial Class.
4 Over all, I think all the Imperial Era Star Destroyers are better carrier ships with better fighter and bombers. Granted it depends on the Squadron/Wing/Group but the Imperial Ships are just superior at what they were designed to do, while the Republic era ships really only the Y-Wing and V-Wings did good at their jobs, the ARC was just way to big to be a multi-role fighter.
Despite the tech differences, I think both offensively and defensively, if the Empire and Republic had a skirmish between one Imperial 2 and a Venerator and all the craft they carry, the Imperials will win most the time, and for sure will win 99% of the time if they are one of the lucky Imperial 2 that got one Squadron of TIE Interceptors or better.
4 I wouldn't say the Imperial 1 and 2 were primarily made for Broadsides or close fighting. They were both armed with more than just the Heavy Turbolasers you mentioned, which I will add, they wouldnt look like the turret variation used on basses, but the biggest guns, or missiles if its a variation that has those, will have around 6 - 8 "Super Heavy Turbo" emplacements. The way most Star Destroyers are built all the Super Heavy cannons can fire straight ahead.
The Victory 1 and 2 look like they have 2 Super Heavy Turbo Lasers depending on its configuration.
Baring ECM and some other serious interference, the "Super Heavy Turbo Lasers" will have close to pin point "Light Minute Ranges" Its like a Cruiser IRL, it has various guns that have different ranges, rates of fire and so on.
I love your videos and Peace be with you.
I absorb these videos eagerly, but could I repeat any of it? Maybe. Would it be accurate? Definitely not. Each tike you make one of these I'm astounded at how deep you go. Do you even remember all this!? So much!🎉
I’m trying to picture a Venator class Mark III but having the hangar opening at the underbelly? That would’ve been helpful for launching TIEs
You need to make a whole video about how you would completely fix the imperial navy.
I think the primary issue with the venator is it’s very high cost for the relative lack of firepower and fragility of the vessel. In combination with an isd a few escort carriers like the triangle thingie from rebels makes a whole lot more sense, they can basically act as additional hangars and repair facilities, while the isd provides firepower and shielding, and the lack of point defense is compensated by the sheer number of fighters. This is similar to Japanese ww2 fleet loadouts with massive battleships and a whole bunch of escort carriers vs a modern us fleet load out with a massive all-in-one carrier as a centerpiece and a bunch of arleigh burkes and cruisers on picket duty which is more equivalent to a venator and a bunch of acclamators/cr90s/dp20s.
If were talking imperial starfighter carriers, let's not forget the gladiator class star destroyer. Like the quasar, it was smaller than an ISD, but carried a decent amount of starfighters.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when the "Flurry" was introduced in The Truce at Bakura, wasn't it described as a converted bulk hauler? I recall that it was a one-off conversion made by the rebellion, and the design was dictated by the need to fit large cargo containers between the bridge and the engineering section.
I've just checked the original Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels, and by EU lore the Quasar Fire was a conversion, but not a one-off conversion... though it may be that at the time of Truce at Bakura the Rebel Alliance only had one such ship, with more being acquired later (I recall another Quasar Fire class as part of Han Solo's anti-Zsinj task force in the Wraith Squadron books)
Alan, going back to Earth's Second World War, I think tthe Quasar Fire light carrier takes up the same job as a Casablanca- and Commencement Bay- class escort carriers, ships built on merchant hulls and not very sturdy (think USS St. Lo that was hit by a kamikaze)
I'd argue that the best fighter bays are those of a Battlestar or the cobra bays in B5. Almost instantly launch the entire fighter complement in an emergency. Takes longer to land them again, but it's really the front end of the battle when you need speed.
I think I have come up with a better alternative for the Empire to replace the Quasar: convert the Class 4 Containment Transport (the large triangular cargo transport from Rebels/BB) to have multiple run through hangers like on the Providence. It can provide forward and rear launch and Retrieval capabilities without having to sacrifice as much structural integrity. I think this would be something that would be in larger operations compared to the Quasar and more carrier focused than the Gladiator.
are you in Japan right now? i kinda get the vibe that you're in Japan right now
can you bring me back a cup of tea? kinda thirsty today
Anybody else love how Alan talks about pretty much all of this as if it was historical fact, and he’s describing real people?
The thing that always struck me as a bit odd is that, much like a present day aircraft carrier, a ship that's going to carry around a bunch of fighters will need to have quarters and facilities not only for its own crew, but also the for the pilots and maintenance technicians of all of those fighters... and the Quasar Fire class carrier cruiser just never seemed large or thick enough to have sufficient interior space.
Could you do a comparison video between the Quasar and the gladiator please?
12:30 Did that Tie Fighter got left behind?
Here's a thought: multiple small doors. But seriously, I'm not convinced at all that one giant hangar door was the best or fastest way to deploy fighters. If you absolutely must build a Venator, though, and inevitably replace its massive door because it is ridiculous, then I suggest replacing it with VLS cells. If you're worried about gun range, so was every navy after the 50s. VLS cells eventually solved the problem for real world navies. In space they're even better. In space, you could even launch starfighters from VLS cells.
I've been thinking about Star Wars for more years than is probably healthy. But every time I do, new ideas like the starfighter VLS come to mind. I think that's evidence that the Star Wars vehicles are designed for the rule of cool and not for hard sci-fi analysis. It's really fun to do as a thought exercise, but I don't think we should be excessively impressed by how much engineering Star Wars' designers have put into Star Wars' vehicles. We should, rather, praise them for their cool and how well they fool us when they are on screen.
That said, would you consider inviting Dr. Alexander Clarke on for one of these analyses? Pretty please?
A Venator with 35 squadrons can patrol... 36 systems, seems cost-effective to me.
My headcannon for why the Venator was abandoned so quickly is that most of the class, due to being built during the war with construction and repair speed being more important than long term use, were in horrible condition, with it being cheaper to replace them than fix all the problems.
The Quasar Fire class reminds me of the escort carriers of ww2. The US and UK converted around a hundred cargo ships into small carriers and place them in their convoys. On their own these ships weren't very impressive, carrying only about two dozen planes each, but by assigning just one or two to a convoy they gained a big boost in recon capacity and maybe even some light preemptive strike capability. This And it also had the psychological impact that it was difficult to tell if a convoy had these escort carriers from a distance, which might dissuade a lone convoy raider from attacking. It also allowed the Allies to free up things like cruisers or extra destroyers for other more pressing roles, while simultaneously forcing the Axis to gather more resources to attack a convoy. All at a relatively modest budget.
It baffles me that the engineers at Kuat didn’t make multiple segments for the Venator’s main hangar door. That way, if a commander wants to launch multiple squadrons of fighters out of enemy turbolaser range, the entire door can be opened for rapid deployment. On the other hand, if only a few ships need to be launched/recovered and the Venator is in the middle of a battle, only one section of the door can open to launch/recover the ship with minimal risk of damage.
The operating and maintenance costs were probably way to high and man power intensive to keep the Venator around.
At the end of World War 2, the USA immediately retired most of the naval fleet. The older ships, Battleships, and more cost heavy ships were the ones retired from service.
Newer ships and smaller ships were kept.
Escort carriers make sense as a flagship for convoys on the outer rim. A couple Acclamators or Arquitens with some anti-starfighter corvettes would make for a well-balanced small task force in my mind.
A battle group made of a venator a ISD and two light cruisers could have been an extremely effective force.
> Allen, "Hello there!"
General Allen, you're a bold one.
The sad thing, in my mind, is that they could have effectively used the Venator to better project power over multiple systems by equipping the Venator 1's with hyperdrive capable fighters, piloted by loyal elites, and sending them out for patrol and escort missions within sector regions. One capitol ship that can house and maintain 35 squadrons is still cheaper than multiple light duty carriers that can only field 4 squadrons. Not to mention that a Venator can still maintain a sizable garrison of troops and walkers along with the fighters. Not nearly as much as an Acclimator, but enough to serve as a rapid response vessel to deter civil unrest if necessary.
If the Empire had been just a little more trusting earlier on in their reign, then the Venator could have easily been rebranded as a launching platform to put war weary citizens on the fast track to a cushy career aboard an ISD, while simultaneously enjoying better pay, benefits and equipment, and gaining much needed practical experience at the same time.
Though currently just legends, I like the escort carrier from Tie Fighter, which can carry 6 squads.
Tarkin screwed the Empire - the ISD and Venator were the two core ships, you then have 2 Quasar and 4Gazanti
I understand the quasar is made for a different era but when comparing it to the venator then it also has a large hole in it which is right in the firing line and it can’t even cover its hangers like the venator 1 did. This makes it supposedly easier to take down than the venator
10:25 anyone know what this scene is from? The pilot being left behind?
5:29 Wouldn't a monitor carrier designation work better than a cruiser carrier?
Curious question, what would be the best formation or ship composition for the Imperial Navy regarding a military engagement or for handling a sector in the galaxy?
Personally a isd, 2 vsds, a venator and a few support ships for a standard task force