What Was the Imperial Navy Thinking Replacing the Venator with this? 

They replaced the Venator because it was too Jedi for their tastes.

They really created a lore conundrum when they made the Venator so awesome

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

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 just looks so darn heroic. Palps likely found it repulsive.

They needed a cost effective way to distribute power against Moderate threats, and the the Light Carrier does that.

"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!"

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.

No idea why but the Quasar is one of my favorite imperial ships. Like it’s design screams “watchu gonna do about it”

One thing I'll say, the Quasar Fire was introduced in a really great book. Truce at Bakura is an absolute classic.

Venators are overkill for some patrol duties. So smaller Quasar carriers are needed.

I can imagine the Rebel Alliance using the Veantor Star Destroyer for their fleet.

The Empire, like other military economic states (like North Korea and Russia) is all about Quantity over Quality.

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 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.

10:27 TIE fighter pilot was so close that he could taste it...🤣

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

The shot of the Ventator's escorting the star destroyers was beautiful. If they kept them in the fleets, the Rebels wouldn't stand a chance

Isnt this the thing Jun Sato flew into Konstantine's ship during the Battle of Antollon

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.

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.

Probably some sort of Imperial version of the US Aircraft mafia. Some incompetent guys were jealous that the Venator was so good managed to convince some idiot Imperial higher-ups to get a "new and improved design". Then they got a contract to make a Carrier with the only criteria being "Has hangars. Space worthy. Carries aircraft. Is triangular". Probably even cockblocked some better designs in the process.

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.

Alan, can you make a video about what if the empire manufactured a star forge instead of 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.

I hope you’re having a good vacation!

I appreciate your videos. A lot of my head canon you say the same thing in your videos and it always makes sense.

I love your videos and content

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

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.

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.

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

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.

Thanks

You rock Alan!

Happy 80th birthday George Lucas 🎂

Great video GenTech. A shame the Empire was so quick to scrap the Venators.

I was playing squadrons and somehow flew directly into the hanger and killed myself. Worst way to end a mission

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

A Venator I with a swarm of TIE Fighters coming out of its ventral hangar would be absolutely terrifying.

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!"

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’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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Could you do a comparison video between the Quasar and the gladiator please?

A Venator with 35 squadrons can patrol... 36 systems, seems cost-effective to me.

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.

A pirate with a Venator in the Empire era would make fer a fun tale.

> Allen, "Hello there!" General Allen, you're a bold one.

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.

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.

I'd offer the opinion that another factor holding the Venator back as a carrier is the designers' insistence on making it capable of traditional capital ship fights by equipping it with heavy armor and turbolasers. Take most of that away, maybe add a few more point-defense guns, and you'd have one of the most grossly-overpowered pure carriers in the galaxy.

LOVE THE INTRO "MY NAME IS" Hysiterical dude hysterical and well done the whole video.

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.

Tarkin screwed the Empire - the ISD and Venator were the two core ships, you then have 2 Quasar and 4Gazanti

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

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.

It occurs to me that it might have been worth keeping _a few_ Venator's around as maintenance and/or delivery carriers.

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)

"We need something a LOT cheaper" probably

I love the venator, im fairly certain I know how the door issue could have been fixed without compromising it's carrier characteristics too badly. But I'm too tired at the moment to explain it clearly or coherently

I figured that the Gladiator was the spiritual successor of the Venator

Okay, now we have to discuss the glory that is the Ton Falk class carrier.

I literally just watched this Rebels episode

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.

Quasar Fire Carrier was a Rebel ship in Legends if I remember correctly.

They needed something in between the Venator and the Quasar carrier, best of both worlds

Yes. No one can ever accuse the empire of ever doing anything in over-kill.

🤔 . . . Though I would MOSTLY agree, I’d probably keep a Venator-3, or later model primarily as a means of maintenance & repair of TIEs & such. Its more of a Starfighter transport ship than some dedicated warship. Even if its a completely different model that is, mainly by bridge & engine layout, similar to an Imperial-Class Star Destroyer, I can imagine that a Quasar-class carrier could drop out & launch any & all TIEs that it needs repair & maintenance while picking up ready to load TIEs & such. It could also be seen as a repair/factory ship for TIEs & such. If anybody wishes to make a model, please reply with a link when done…

Seems like a good starting ship for an up and rising imperial navy officer.

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

Weird midnight brainstorm idea, why didnt the Venator design have a hangar door at the *nose* of the ship and not the spine? Feels like it'd be a solid deployment method for starfighters

The Jedi knew that ship inside and out. The Jedi were involved with the rebellion. This makes that ship the easiest ship to take out in terms of planning. They already know how to do it.

With the Quasar fire they should have designed it with 2 hangars on top and two on the bottom - that would make it slimmer and narrower - and then it wouldnt need as large hypespace field generator - thus reducing power usage and fuel consumption it would be also harder to hit to a degree and less lumbering to manouver.

the venator is such a cool ship and my favorite and i do like the quasar and i feel like it would be a great companion to the venator 2 class

As much as the Venator was the superior carrier, greater capacity/ armour/ Shields/ weapons. it was also far more expensive too build/run. for a large portion of the Empire, a few squads of fighters and bombers would be enough to keep a system in check and too remind they the empire is here and watching. Though in the event of a dedicated rebel attack the Quasar may struggle, but especially in the earlier days when the rebels were just Cells, a single Quasar would be a huge problem for a significantly cheaper cost.

They should've switched there role to a cruiser/Carrier and used it as a part of a "carrier fleet" with supporting frigates etc. Plus they could have used 2-3 of them in an ISD lead fleet to take fire while you drown the enemy in tie fighters. It's called actual power projection.

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!🎉

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.

11:38 _Nice_

Dunno what they thought a absurdly big paper football would do either... guess some of them in key places REALLY liked the game... properly armored an upgraded they probably coulda had quite a capital ship in the Venerator even IF it got to a Version 2 through "X" model.. maybe at some point even a version capable of taking on the likes of major SDs in good numbers.. but its all theories past the second gen upgrades

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.

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?

if i was in the empire i would have kept the venator but gotten rid of the interceptors and the ARC-170's keep the V-wings. Increase the amount of fire power that's aboard reduce the crew size by half install more power generators for weapons and shields and gotten rid of two engines to the ship.

The Venator could have been retrofitted to have "drop" hangars all across the ventral hull. Hangar doors open and TIEs literally just drop out of them. Side and ventral main hangars for shuttles and the like and possibly fighter recovery.