I think the image issue goes deeper than the Republic image, it was specifically associated with the Jedi, even being called the "Jedi Cruiser" on occasion. Every time you see those dual bridges is a reminder that there's no Jedi on either.
Personally I really hate the term “Jedi cruiser” because it’s primarily manned by clones, they should deserve the honor, just like padme called the tanks that beat the zillo beast “Jedi stun cannons” while the Jedi have never manned or build a tank in their lifetime
The only source that actually says that is the Force Unleashed Campaign guide which is Legends and a very low canon value at that. It's also pretty stupid since there's nothing in the Tarkin doctrine text itself that says they shouldn't rely on fighters
@@mcatalano813 Even by Legends, saying that the Empire got rid of all Venators is wrong as several of them were used to guard the Sanctuary Pipeline that connected Sullust to Endor during the construction of Death Star 2 and there was a large fleet of mothballed Venators that were kept long after Endor that were used in 13 ABY by Ennix Devian as a part of his Restored Empire
I think that's the case in a short story that I can't remember off the top of my head. Vader is brought onto an old one to oversee its training program and the captain is fed up with the Empire and tries to send it into a star.
@@BoisegangGaming I remember that one. I recall it was a ship called the defiance and the captain tried to get one of the new cadets to enter hyperspace coordinates that would send the ship into a sun or somewhere
@@Andy_Sidaris Some were, depending on the nations that did it. Now I can actually picture the early Death Star laser test firing phases using decommissioned Venators as target practice....
He based his idea off US Navy fleets that have aircraft carriers as flagships. At first his idea is interesting until you realize that the Empire had so many other craft for Tie support that could do the job better.
Such as? Admittedly I myself tend to be influenced by USN thought. Glares at ISD lacking point defense “ All I’m saying is we reduce its main battery by 1/3 and use the power saved from it for point defense,”
@@_gungrave_6802 … but the venator is already in production and can send out a lot more ties then most other things. And carriers were useful and central both in all out wars, like wwii AND in global power projection in non total war times like pretty much any time between wwii and today.
@@MercenaryPen Possibly if the Empire starts to add large numbers of swimming pools to your homeworld. Then it might make you more eager to pretend to be loyal. >.>
The Venator was known across the galaxy as the “Jedi Cruiser” throughout the Clone Wars. And Emperor Palpatine wanted all indications that the Jedi Order never existed so he decommissioned the Venator months after the Clone Wars ended and the Tarkin Doctrine didn’t help the Venator.
Related to the "war runs them ragged" theory, I think that given the sheer speed at which most of the Venator fleet was assembled, it is entirely possible that a lot of them were relatively shoddily built. Obviously they were durable enough to pull through in the war, but it's easy to imagine that an enormous number of corners were cut in the name of getting the things out the door faster, and this may have made their long-term operation and maintenance very difficult or expensive. The ISDs may have been built with the expectation of decades of service rather than the necessity of nearly-instant deployment.
I like this line of thought. Taking the Templin analogy, it would be interesting if the Venators were a cross between the Essex classes and the Victory transport ships of WW2. Supremely fast to build, but not destined to last long - one way or another.
Alot of equipment, including ships built during WWII, was with built with haste and not adding mateiral to protect them long-term. For example German fighters did not add rubber between different metals since it was coldy calculated that they would be shot down/damaged enough before it would become a serious problem. In addition rubber was a material hard to get for Germany. The same applies for many ships regarding thickness and rust protection of hull plating. Ships that had taken heavily damaged was in some cases repaired during war-time but would have had long-term maintenace problems and thus prime candidates to be scrapped first. I also like the idea that some starships/equipment was scrapped to get spare parts to keep others running. This would in turn release funds to produce new starships such as ISD instead of funding parts for the Venator.
@@WingcommanderLuna lol, the CIS is even more of a threat than the Rebels due to its Gigantic Industrial might. But Venators and Acclimators has already proven their success on a large scale galactic war against the CIS. The ISD is made on a peace time whilst Venators are made for a Galactic war that includes large scale Space battles and Planetary invasions. In fact, the ISD's were made to compliment the need of Venators of a Tank Firepower battleships so it could freely launch its numerous fighters and bombers as well as carrying supplies and heavy equipments for the invading Armada.
A beautiful ship. I wonder if the empire has museum ships. I know palpatine considered it too much a symbol of the jedi. To the point, it was known as the jedi crusier.
Have to keep in mind that the Venator and the Imperials were designed for different purposes. While sure Venator could be a multi-purpose ship it's main role was as a fleet carrier/battleship. Acclamator was used to carry and land the troops en-masse. Inperials were designed to have everything they need to carry out all kinds of missions including limited planetary assaults. And sure they could have kept the Venators and added Imperials but Venators were a symbol of the Republic and Jedi in particular. So they had to go.
That still doesn't make it smart. The Venator-class was still capable of doing all of those things, on top of having a larger range than the Imperial-class, what with its hundreds of hyperspace-capable starfighters.
@@occam7382 I didn't say it was smart just considering that palpatine most likely went mad and continued to slide down into the dark side madness even the one fact that jedi used Venators was enough for him to issue the orders to get rid of them.
@Joshua Davis those hyperspace equipped starfighters were a massive disadvantage to the empire, it increases the chances of desertion and giving the rebellion more pilots, which is what the rebellion used to great effect
@@calebbarnhouse496, even so, I would argue that the benefits of those starfighters far outweighs any of the negatives. I mean, it's not as if Imperial pilots who want to defect are going to let something like the number of hyperdrive-equipped starfighters on hand get in their way. The fact is, one Venator-class Star Destroyer with its fighter complement could easily monitor and control several systems at once, while an Imperial-class could only cover one. And the biggest problem the Empire always faced was controlling its massive amount of territory, so doesn't it make sense to have ships capable of doing that?
@Joshua Davis except it literally does, if they are stuck on your ship with the only craft able to go into hyperspace being limited amount of shuttles, you can only entrust those shuttles to your most loyal pilots, when defecting is harder it's less common, what the empire should have had was there mini carriers that carry 4 to 6 ties, that is small enough to monitor vast amounts of space, they don't need to be able to take on any threat by themselves as they can merely be used to call in the calvary, but with things like tie bombers and interceptors, or even just widespread deployment of the tie advanced without the hyperdrive in it, would allow the empire to project power while being a stupid mobile and flexible force
@@abdurrazzaqmumin1574 Well seeing as Mt Tantiss is now confirmed, I suppose it's the Spaarti treatment now. If you don't know what that is, read the Thrawn Trilogy.
I always assumed because of at least two reasons. First, Venator was too closely related to the Jedi. Sometimes called Jedi Cruisers. Second, the Tarkin Doctrine which saw large warships had no place for the Venator. And as you said, the Destroyer made a lot of jobs. The idea of selling the ship was probably never thought of because the idea was the Empire ruled the galaxy. The Empire would provide defense, not provide the means of defense. You don't have a Naboo fighter core, you have the imperial fighter core stationed on Naboo. They wouldn't want to sell a warship, that was basically the symbol of the republic, to anyone. Rather scrap them down into brand new star destroyers. The empire can afford it.
I think another aspect of why they were scrapped is that lots of venators were destroyed in the war, with many people in the confederacy and elsewhere (who might later become prominent rebel leaders) learning how to destroy them. Learning what their weaknesses are and how to exploit them. The star destroyers were brand new and had seen no major combat against any potential enemies, meaning their unknown abilities were themselves advantages the empire could use against its enemies
@@nahuelleandroarroyo The biggest weakness of the Venator were the large vulnerable hanger bay and the lack of firepower, both of which the ISD's corrected
One of my favorite takes I've heard on the Empire Vs. Republic militaries, is that Clone Troopers were soldiers, while Stormtroopers were militarized police officers. One ship was designed for engaging near peer foes in large fleet engagements, while the other is made for long patrols, and occasionally enforcing a blockade while it's onboard garrison stomped out some insurgents and insurrectionists on some random world. The Empire probably also chose to dismantle their Venerators because they didn't want a bunch of top of the line warships running around: they wanted the vast majority of their ships to only be capable when punching down, and then only kept a relatively tiny contingent of top of the line warships around to keep the others in line, who in turn were only crewed by the most loyal of troops to the Emporer. Even within the Imperial military, there were checks put in place to disempower everyone, and make them afraid, and the only way to gain more power, was to further prove one's loyalty to the Emporer.
Excellent work on all this. I don't think the Empire would have completely retired their Venator force by the time the Death Star was completed, mostly because we still see the Arquitens class (Refited) and even the ancient Dreadnought Heavy Cruisers (In SW Rebels) still being used then. However, it can be easily assumed that the Empire just stopped making more. With no refit and parts wearing out, many of the surviving Venators that weren't scrapped immediately were obviously thrown to the scrap yards. With ISDs being produced in bulk, it wouldn't have taken much for the Empire to utterly overwhelm whatever they had of the worn-out Venators.
I also wonder if maybe the Venators had some shoddy construction or cut corners that increased their speed of production, but made long-term maintenance a real pain. If an ISD takes two or three years to build but is expected to remain in service for decades, that's fine - they are being built in peacetime, so the Empire can wait. But I wouldn't be remotely surprised to learn that a Clone Wars Venator was thrown together in three months by a shipyard that had never before built a warship because that was the only way for the Republic to bulk up fast enough. Different priorities for different situations.
@Michael Ramon bruh capital ships in starwars can survive for thousands of years easily, the falcon is almost 100 with retro fits, and by the time of sequal trilogy, and the good timeliness new republic it's over 100, and it's not really that special as far as ships go outside of the emotional attachment and the aftermarket upgrades, the venators were scrapped primarily because they were a status symbol of the previous age, Palpatine wanted the empire to last under his rule and his legacy, anything that wasn't following that path was nothing but a liability to him
I'm just surprised that the Rebel Alliance were never seen using them... if for nothing else than as a mobile outpost for refuel/resupply between missions, using it like that would hypothetically just need a skeleton crew to maintain while also having somewhere to store starfighters long term during periods when the Alliance had no bases.
Way I understood it, it was, ironically, a bad choice for Rebellion. Too noticeable, too costly, too hard to get and maintain. Once rebel cell would get one, it would place a huge target on it. That if they'll even manage to find people or droids to crew it or starfighters to field it's bay. Dauntless-class or, let's say, an old Munificent-class would provide all rebel cell needs and for fraction of cost and trouble compared to Venator.
It might be because it might be hard to find them in a manner that wouldn't bring suspicion. After all, it doesn't seem like these would be easy to obtain, refit, and maintain without bringing attention. Of course, I'm sure there were a few cells that may have used one or two that were stripped down but something tells me that the venator wasn't designed for guerilla campaigns.
It might have been that getting a hand on one was too difficult. They had few big ships. And those few they had were arguably dual purpose civilian/military transports. Also they would have to find a way to produce all the spare parts.
An important thing to remember about refitting ships is that changing a flight deck and changing a powerplant are separated by orders of magnitude in complexity. Replacing power plants can result in the deconstruction of large portions of your full and internal bulkheads, force you to run new piping and electrical lines, or perhaps force you to rearrange the entire layout of your crew compartments, hanger, or storage space. Changing a flight deck may force you to limit the ship's speed, shift its ballast, or drop the height of your hanger and build new elevators, but that pales in comparison to working on a ship's drive and power system. Refitting a starship would be much the same and, like the recently damaged USS Bon Homme Richard, bringing back into service at a modern standard could well eclipse the cost of building a new ship as, at the end of the day, your hull's age may also dictate time and mission limitations upon your ship.
As well as the "hard use" angle (and yes, the rule of thumb is one year of war = ten years of peacetime) there's also the fact the Venators were built very quickly. I would speculate that that like how navies would build wooden ships out of unseasoned wood in wartime - accepting short service life for cheaper and quicker construction - there may have been signifant corners cut in its construction that meant staying in service was unviable.
There's little economic or military reasoning to it, but there is a lot of political reasoning. Can't have the famous 'Jedi Cruiser' stick around after the whole Order 66 situation.
This looks like a video that should've been made years ago! So I'm glad you got around to anwser it. And I especialy love the point that ships in wartime just gets put under huge stress, not to mention the ones that got outright destroyed. Excellent video. I hope to see your further discussion video on the matter
Likely the giant ventral red hangar plates would be removed and a row of centrally-aligned superfiring turrets would be put in their place, with some of the hangar space being replaced with extra generators and ordinance reserves.
Been thinking about making a rebel call that fits in the universe of Star Wars, but a group of ex-republic navy veterans, and CIS veterans getting ahold of many old starships including the Venator from scrapyards or from other battlefields and then operate at the very edge and going where the Empire wouldn't dare to go.
There are alot of reasons they scraped the Venator and I also understand why it was never used by the Rebellion either. It was a symbol of a long lost time in the republic that was quickly buried. The ship did inspire that feeling of rising up against oppression for most and this is what the Emperor didnt want in his Empire in its early days
Generation tech has done videos on this and concluded that not only was the Venator an objectively superior warship to the Imperial classes that succeeded it, but it was an objectively poor decision to retire the entire ship class with the man reasons being the Emperor and Tarkin as Palpatine knew that, while objectively good ships, they were heavily associated with the Republic and Jedi-with them even having the nickname 'Jedi Cruiser' so he wanted them gone. Tarkin was big on the 'Rule through fear' ideology and the Venator didn't fit into that as it didn't invoke that fear he wanted like how an Imperial class could, despite the fact one Venator could cover a much larger area of responsibility or patrol thanks to is massive starfigher wing which even a half decent commander could use to destroy 2 or even 3 Imperial classes if they ever had to fight.
Tbf by the time of the Empire there wasn't anyone who could challenge the Star Destroyers. If the CIS or some other major faction had declared war then maybe, but for what they were needed for, to cause fear and blow shit up, they did an excellent job. Especially when the only enemies they had were rebels in modified cargo and personal vessels.
You perhaps aren't considering the difference in technologies as well. So let's compare! An USS Franklin (CV-13, Essex-class) had a flight complement of 103 Aircraft. An USS Enterprise (CVN-65, Nimitz-class) had a flight complement of 60 Aircraft. Which is superior?
@@wolfrainexxx I find your argument flawed as while the Nimitz-class is no doubt superior to the Essex, they're both carriers and the Nimitz much more advanced aircraft. The Imperial class was a space battleship which carried cheaply made and underequipped starfighters while the Venator was a space aircraft carrier which carried older, but much better starcraft. Even in Star Wars, Starfighters and Carriers proved themselves superior to Star Destroyers but unlike in our world, the Empire doubled down instead of shifting to this new era of warfare.
@@Illier1 True, the Empire wasn't expecting to fight any major conflicts but as they could have kept them around regardless, perhaps serving as carriers, training ships for TIE fighters, placed them in sector fleets that patrolled less important and problematic sectors, heck even as museum ships. But as far as we know, every one of them was reduced to scrap.
@@mosesmm5473 In what way is the ISD inferior to the Venator though? There's no galactic threat to justify swarms of fighters, nor is there entrenched enemies to justify hordes of Assault Ships. So I ask again, in what way was the Venator superior to the ISD? If the Empire needed more fighters, they had dedicated Fighter Carriers, and the onboard firepower, shields, and electronics were leagues beyond the Venator. X-Wing was superior to the Arc-170, and inferior to a TIE fighter (Death Star Battle), and even the Empire At War RTS game (cannon) showed that the Empire could field 5 TIEs for the price of a single X-Wing; the hyperdrive was useless, and the X-Wing had no other function that the TIE didn't. The Rebels used the Hyperdrive for guerilla tactics, which doesn't prove the Empire wrong, it just shows it fit the needs of the Rebels better than it did the Empires.
At the end of the Clone Wars, the Republc's fleets were depleted of starships in operation. Tarkin wanted a new fleet of ships capable of striking fear in its enemies. This was also in line of Emperor Palpatine's vision of controling the masses through fear, a Sith concept. It also introduced new technologies that were incompatible or not economical into refitting on the Venator as they were hastily designed for the Clone Wars. Or at least, that was my understanding of it. This was stated by Grand Moff Tarkin, and thus it was known as the Tarkin Doctrine.
I would have, in Palpatine's position, used the Venator as a support ship for the Imperial. Like another comment said, Eckharts Ladder did a formation where the Venator was used in larger formations as a dedicated carrier. Smaller units could swap the Vemator to the main ship with an Escort Carrier like the Quasar Fire or Ton Falk as support for even more TIE fighter variants in space.
I always assumed it was to address the glaring issues that cost the Republic during the war: Lack of firepower. The CIS consistently outgunned the Republic in fleet engagements and while the fighters were useful, it only had 16 heavy turbolasers compared to over 70 on the ISD. The Empire quickly retired both the Venator AND the Victory due to insufficient firepower. Considering the numbers of CIS capital ships still floating around the galaxy, a handful of Munificent frigates could possibly defeat a Venator, whereas an ISD would crush them easily.
I think that using the Venator as a carrier for Imperial battlegroups would have helped the Empire a lot. The biggest weakness of the Imperial class was a lack of starfighter capacity and having a 2:1 mix of Imperial and Venator Star destroyers would have helped a lot.
Except that is the reason Venator got replaced. The 300-400 starfighters complement was only viable for Venator assigned to core world defense. on campaign, Venator typically carried way less and use the extra space for supplies so they usually carried around a hundred or so starfighters. That defeated the purpose of dedicated carrier. Imperial's starfighter complement was enough. The problem is the outdated TIE-Fighters. The replacement of them to TIE-Interceptors would render most problem moot. It was underway but the collapse happened.
The Imperial class needed smaller boats that could perform screening actions more than anything. Tie fighters can only do so much and were outperformed by the fighters they ended up facing. En masse fighter wings might have helped, but really they needed something akin to the Imperial class for point defense.
@@huntermad5668 100 or so fighters is better then an Imperial star destroyer could bring to the party. An Imp 1 carried 36 fighters, and an Imp 2 carried 72. Two Imp 1s backed by a Venator could operate 180 or so fighters between themselves, and have some specialized scout fighters aboard the Venator to help find Rebel forces.
@@trevynlane8094 Imperials always have standard complement of 72. TIE-Fighters are only weak against new Rebel fighters. It is around the level of Late clone war V-wing. Except scout fighters only viable against conventional enemy like Seperatists. Not like Imperial Navy have a shortage of hyper capable scout vessel anyway.
the same reason the Grand Fleet was largely scrapped after WW1, and the entire Royal Navy battlefleet was destroyed after WW2. Firstly, they were desiged before the war, and so include none of countless inevitable lessons learned during the war about ship design. Secondly, war service is incredibly hard on a warship of any kind, and by the end of the clone wars, most these ships would be worn completely out. On the training point, that only works if the weapons systems and mechanical components are updated to actually reflect the conditions of the modern fleet.
I'd argue that the Venator wasn't replaced by the Imperial, but the Victory Class Star Destroyer. I flew many fighter sorties during the Clone Wars, and if memory serves me right, the Venator was being supplemented and supplanted by the Victory toward the end of that conflict during the outer rim sieges. The Imperial class was designed to embody the Tarkin Doctrine. The Victory was designed to win fleet engagements.
@@garrettharriman6333, ah. I remember Ryloth. That was a mess. I was a combat engineer on a Venator during Ryloth, and after my first ship bit the dust, I was reassigned to Resolute. I don't think I ever had more work than when I was on that ship. There were starfighters and gunships coming in scrapped pretty much every other day. I'll never forget all the times I nearly got killed while trying to fix the twisted heaps that were General Skywalker and Commander Tano's fighters after nearly every mission they went on. You ever encounter those two? Let me tell you, it was quite the spectacle, seeing them at work.
@@occam7382 I flew a V-Wing at Ryloth. I never got close to the general or his aide(? Never was sure how that worked militarily). I only heard him on comms during the flight briefs.
@@garrettharriman6333, if I'm not mistaken, she was 2nd-in-Command of the 501st Brigade following the Battle of Christophsis up until the... situation with the Jedi Temple. You know what I mean. We all saw the tribunal. Anyway, I constantly had to fix their trashed ships, and every time I would complain to General Skywalker about how he kept messing up his ships, he just brushed it off. At least Commander Tano was more understanding about it. She was pretty cool.
4:19 "But wars have the tendency to advance military sciences in sudden leaps and bounds as state of the art gun, tank, plane, or ship at the start of a conflict can easily be obsolete after just a few years or even months" A perfect real world example would be the Mitsubishi Zero used by the Empire of Japan in World War 2. It outclassed virtually all allied fighters at the start of the war but by its end they were shot down by the dozen. This was due to a combination of all of the following: 1. The inability to keep up with the new classes of planes the Americans came up with (Hellcats and Corsairs). 2. Improvements to the American fleet's anti-aircraft capabilities (more accurate guns on the ships and proximity fuses in the shells). 3. The training of the pilots (Americans had 400 hours average flight training vs Japan's 120 hours average flight training late in the war). 4. The vastly changing tactics used to counter the Zero (American aces were sent home to help with the training of new pilots and they captured an intact Zero in the Aleutian Islands in 1942 to study for weaknesses).
I usually find it odd that most videos about Star Wars, and more specifically factions that have Palpatine in it somewhere, it usually tried to portray both the faction and the man as misguided but reasonable rather than what they truly are, Sith. The Sith are the polar opposite to The Jedi (ok not completely but they're defiantly open to their shortcomings rather than The Jedi), they value strength and power above all else, even basic connections, and that thirst for power always leads towards massive armies and navies waging war upon The Galaxy and The Republic. But ever sense Palpatine became Supreme Chancellor and later Emperor of The Galaxy, the Sith has won and can now openly make a comeback without resistance poppin up as strongly as it has before. I think the actual reason why The Venator Class was sent to the scrap yard is because Palpatine wanted any trace of The Republic gone so that his brand new oddly Sith style Star Destroyers can enter the show.
The problem with the Venator is that it was made ad hoc by a company that had never made a capital ship before and is extremely impractical. The engine design alone costs more fuel than 2 ISD's. The entirety is extremely weak with the hollow hangar hull and makes the entire ship weak to frontal attacks because of it. It also suffers from having two bridges instead of one which makes coordination difficult since both sides need to be in constant communication with each other, and there is no connecting elevator or bridge to the other side. The big guns are pretty weak in reality as well. It was easier to just make a new ship than to completely redesign and re-manufacture the Venator. It is kinda like the M4 Sherman. A design which won the war but had a ton of issues and did not see much continued use in the USA after the war, being scrapped for the Pershing and Patton series instead.
Star Wars uses WW2 as its operating model, so scrapping or selling war time (especially war built) vessels matches what actually happened, perfectly. Many ships were wrecked internally, desperately needing huge machinery refits after having been worked mercilessly for years. The newer ones, or thise which had experienced easier wartime service, could be upgraded and kept for 5 to 10 years (but technology moved fast in the 50's, and most becsme obsolete, again) or sold to smaller countries. This theory of Venator disposal works fine in a historical comparison.
I like the idea the Venator was scrapped for materials to be used on the Death Star. It's a bit more discrete than diverting billions of metal from ISDs and civil construction for a "secret project." Scrappers probably wouldn't care where the junk goes as long as they get paid. They may even want the junk moved so they have room on their planet to live or keep scrapping.
According to the Thrawn series books, the older republic warships were less efficient and more manpower intensive (though there they were called Dreadnought class). It makes sense when you have an unlimited supply of clones to man the navy in wartime. But the new empire turned to drafting troops from occupied worlds, and likely wanted more efficient ships with smaller crews and more automation to help spread the imperial presence wider.
I think what happened was that with the Imperials the Empire took the lessons of the Clone Wars to heart. Reducing the fighter complement, because even 400 starfighters can't really compete with the sheer mass of Vultures the CIS could stuff into their hulls. Increasing the firepower to be both able to quickly smash lighter armoured CIS ships like the Munificent or Recusant and go tow to tow with the bigger ships, like Lucrehulks, Bulwarks and the odd dreadnought like the Malevolence. There was just the tiny problem that the next war wasn't fought that way and the Venator would have been the better counter to the guerilla tactics of the rebels.
I was wondering this too, but after the ships are scrapped the raw materials are used to construct new ships, i can imagine that the level of technology allows almost all of the scrapped raw materials to be reused and recycled resulting in very little loss of materials in the process. Another thing is, that the only real cost here is the energy required to scrap and remake the raw material and the labor costs, both which are probably a drop in a bucket for a massive galactic nation such as the republic or the empire. And let's not forget that most of the "dirty work" is probably done by droids of various size, all of these would also stimulate the economy and increase purchasing power.
The Venator may have also been built like the Liberty ships of WW2. It may have been built for reliable service for only a few short years, after which it would be relegated to low intensity duties before scrapping. Refitting and overhauling the ship may very well have cost nearly as much as building a new one from scratch, and it still wouldn't be as capable as a brand new warship. By the end of the Clone War, Palpatine and Tarkin were probably well aware that the remaining Venators, much like their clone crews, were unsuited for the long game that they were planning, so they immediately began producing new ships that would both out-preform and out-last the Venators by years or even decades.
The republic was already begging to introduce victory and even imperial star destroyers towards the end of the clone wars. Essentially they were already being phased out, also no one knows just how many venators were produced, i suspect it's not as many as we think
Thanks for sharing! I would add a key central doctrinal change: the move towards larger capital ships and less reliance on starfighters. Without any remaining large foe, the Empire didn’t see the value that small starfighters may bring. Imperial doctrine wanted something imposing, powerful, and destructive. This over-reliance on large weaponry would end up becoming a critical weakness exposed by the Rebel Alliance, but Imperial-class Star Destroyers remained a formidable foe.
It's worth noting that in SW Legends Grand Admiral Thrawn employed the Victory class, an interim design between the Venator and Imperial mk1 (if I remember correctly) to great effect in the Imperial Remnant. One possible technical justification for a larger hull design could be that larger engine blocks provide more efficient fuel-thrust ratio making it cheaper to have a smaller number of "do everything" ships like Star Destroyers instead of dedicated Battle Groups like Carrier Groups from Earth Navies.
Any chance when Rampart was shown using them to bombard Kamino, that, in part, was one reason the Venator was given public stigma and helped contribute to its disuse?
"Why scrap the Venator?" Palpatine: "F*ck the Republic. That includes its symbolism. Lmao." I'm not even joking, to be blunt - it was the first thing that came to mind, aside from the obvious lore complications that could've been formed if George Lucas and his cohorts at LucasArts said "these were the same Star Destroyers, we just remodeled them" or such. Immersive worldbuilding requires good attention to detail - both in terms of the powers at play and in terms of recognizing what's important and what isn't, imo. In this case, I think the Venator was scrapped, aside from the "Tarkin's Big Dick Energy Dakka" Doctrine, because he saw it as a strong symbol of the Galactic Republic. As such, that's a big no-no. He wants the Republic gone in favor of his Empire, so it has to go. In fact, I heard you acknowledge this point late into your video, as I was typing this out on my phone, funnily enough!
It wasn't the ship that "won the clone wars". Palpatines own insights did. The Venator was underamred and its hull would have been an easy breach for the superheavy turbolsaers on the recusant or munificent not to mention that a luckerhulk carried more than three times as many fighter as the venator while being much better armed and armoured while smaller ships that could alsp carry hundreds of fighters like the captor were avaliable to the CIS
Just a thought: The mass decommissioning and scrapping of the Venators could have also been used as a cover operation by Palpatain (as part of his contingency program) to relocate quality military hardware into the unknown region, until industrial capacity could have been built out there.
Excellent content as usual! I would add that the Empire was maintaining a police/subjugation force more than a navy capable to fight another large navy as they had no major rival. As such the Imperial class was significantly better at deploying garrisons, mass troop movements, and orbital bombardments. Even the now canon lore points to the fact that many systems when faced with just one Imperial star destroyer opted to surrender rather than continue revolting because they knew it was a lost cause at that point. Venator class just wasn't large enough to carry personnel and equipment to quell rebel movements and protests alone as the Imperial class could.
This video inspired my Space Junker campaign for Star Wars TTRPG. I have a bunch of players who made a team of salvagers and I think i just found what the Rebelion is going to recruit them for as they found a space storage dock full of Venators to repatriate for the fights ahead. Now only if they had a crew experienced in getting old broken ships running again
To be fair it's a big galaxy and even though we see a lot of Venators being scrapped that could just represent a fraction of the total number out there in all the non-frontline roles or ships sold to other powers like what was mentioned in the video. This line of thought would give writers some leeway if they ever wanted them to appear in future stories.
Symbolism. Like the Death Star, Imperial Star Destroyers are an image of terror. Visually imposing and uncompromising in function. Venators were designed for troop and fighter mobilization in multi-function roles. Although warships in function, they still remained less aggressive and imposing than the Imperial ships that followed them. Imperial Destroyers were the polar opposite. They were designed for planetary bombardment and rapid put down of insurrection. When the Empire was defeated, the New Republic never used Imperial Star Destroyers for the same reasons. It was a symbol of another era that didn't service the new one. They went back to smaller more versatile ships akin to the Old Republic era. Less imposing, more passive vessels that better represented the philosophy of a more peaceful time.
In a way, I would say the Venator's frontline usage demise was sound since the Empire was more focused on quashing small scale rebellion and Seppy holdouts. Analogous to that, I would argue that the Empire would have been quite shrewd to maintain the Venator alongside the Imp Star Deuce as a matter of precedent and forward thinking defensive readiness. In our own world, The Essex class operated alongside the Super Carriers well into the 70s, 30 years after their construction and commissioning. The only real hinderance to these ships was the consideration of operational range and more importantly, heavier laden aircraft that took up more room. The Venator did not either of these concerns to contend with. Quite the opposite considering just how much smaller the TIE was to Republic starfighters. These ships were perfectly suited to act as CAP command vessels to properly contend with Rebel starfighters. 400 TIE's vs a dozen or two X and Y Wings from 1 or 2 Mon Cala warships, even with better craft to work with, make exceptional use of the "Quantity has a Quality all its Own" facet of reality. Even if the Mon Cala warships could destroy the Venator, all those agree little bees would eventually be able to overwhelm them. Beyond the numerical superiority, refitting these ships to carry more fighters or to serve as Auxiallary command cruisers or even as backwater picket ships, the Empire could have stretched out their service lives and still be able to entice Industry/Fabricators/Shipyards to continue their support. This would satisfy military contractors with the guarantee of continued income and the possibility of being subsidized by the Empire to produce parts and new warships simultaneously. And even if this were not the case for all, their would still be the aspect of hiring additional laborers/technicians to operate and maintain these ships for the forseeable future. Loyalty through economic incentive still accomplished. All in all, suplanting the ISD lines with the Venator, even if only until the events of the OT (almost 20 years) would have been a far greater use of materiel and manpower.
it just gos to show much more was going on then just the clones, if i remember right, when obi wan kenobi found out about the clones, they were commissioned 10 years earlier, to have an army you had to have a fleet to go with it, you dont build and hope someone comes along and buys it, more was hidden then the clones, if you watch the ending of attack of the clones you see the majority of it, ships, troops, assault vehicles, weapons carried, all of this was planed out 10 years earlier, it a very good question of why was it scrapped and not used as back up or support for the new Imperial fleet.
Because Palps said I want all grey triangles... Also you gotta remember without that decision we wouldn't have got a mongol band creating a song called "Sugaan Essena".
You've been watching Perun videos lately I see, nice I might not agree with everything he says, but he does a great job in explaining the logistics sides of the military industrial complex.
I do agree with most of these comments proposing the theory that the Venator was designed with corner cutting. Everything made for the clone wars on both sides was designed with cheap and rapid deployment as a priority. It might also be worth mentioning that at least in legends canon the Venator was already being supplemented by the Victory Class (I think they were Victory class) and the process of replacing then began before the clone wars were even over. I am also of the opinion that the ISD might have worked in its "primary ubiquitous warship" role and be a near unstoppable ship if it just had better point defense, guns on its underside, and either better starfighters or more of them.
I think some of Palpatine's fleet in Rise of Skywalker should have been mostly these. Like the secret fleet was made of things that where supposed to be mothballed...but the emperor was actually tucking away for his back up plan.
I think the reasons as outlined here are more then enough reason for the Empire to have cast aside the Venator. The scrap itself would have been a boon to those producing the Imperial and Victory classes. The job creation and economic boon would have been seen very favorably. Palpatine was not worried about nostalgic symbols but rather creating the foundation for his empire, regardless of the cost.
The last point about the military-industrial motive is really good. We see time and time again that steady work was one of the biggest carrots the Empire would offer to those who were seen as loyal and useful, and it would make sense that a program like that would be very effective at keeping manufacturing heads and investors happy, if nothing else. Plus it plays to the Empire's other strength of fostering factionalism and destructive competition, setting quotas for different parts and adjusting contracts to reward those most loyal would turn more ire and attention to groups within the Empire rather than the Empire itself.
The vendor was, to me, a warrior that now has passed, but it would be so cool to see the rebels were able to get their hands on some and then use the capable legendary warship against the empire
The Venator would have really given the Empire the edge against the Rebels, especially since the Imperial class kept getting destroyed by Rebel starfighters. So Venators, with their massive anti fighter capabilities, would have been a great counter to Rebels and their heavy use of starfighters. The Venator really was the greatest capital ship of the Republic, and the Empire were fools to replace them with the Imperial in mainline service. Imperials would have been better served as a flag ship with a Venator or two to serve as the mainline warship alongside the Victory Class Star Destroyer.
Yesss, an imperial Venator II-ship would totally make sense, particularly when the galactic civil war started ramping up! The Ventator II could have had even more hangar-space, and forgo the original Venator's lackluster turbo lasers completely. Instead it could have an emphasis on anti starfighter-laser guns and point defense-systems. As well as missile launchers resembling those on the Victory I star destroyer. I think this would have made for a long range firesupport/carrier-ship that would complement the Imperial Star Destroyer nicely and rectify many of the disadvantages the empire faced during the galactic civil war
Remember that the Entire “Clone Wars” was a manufactured conflict with one individual playing two sides off one another , each using tactics and equipment that were significantly different , while the emerging EMPIRE unveiled both tactics and equipment different from both factions. Ive often wondered if Palipatine was undecided on which faction should be victorious, to the point i wonder if his plans for Luke Skywalker to turn would have been not to join the Empire, but defeat it and rule as a Sith lord
hmm.... tough one; firstly minor correction: the war between the sith empire and old republic occurred roughly 3000 years prior not a millennia. That aside I would say the 'Victory Class' was in fact the replacement for the Venator hold around the same size and speed. The Victory Class held less fighters but it was also much faster and had multi-system scanning making it able to monitor several systems at distance at the same time as well as send long range strike wing such as Imperial Gunboats to deal with minor threats. Was is a mistake? ....hmm....Personally I would say Yes. Far from being the Tactical Genius that some would like to believe Palpatine was an absolute idiot; Thrawn warned him about the Death Star and how making it was pulling far too much man power and resources to maintain the Imperial Fleet...and what did Palpatine do? Build a second one! bigger and with far more resources than the first! Palpatine had an illustrious history of squandering resources and engaging in project of mindless self indulgence. If I had been in his place not only would I have kept and upgraded the Venator class I would have (under the cover of rebuilding bounds with the then defeated CIS) assimilated the most effective elements of the CIS fleet as well, and the Mandalorian Death Guard as a secret police to assist Vader. Imagine Super Battle Droids and Droidekas in lockstep with Elite Stormtroopers lead by a Mandalorian Elite perhaps add in a Basilisk War Droid or two.... Venator Class star destroyers flying escort for an Imperial Class Star Destroyer as flagship with squadrons of not only Tie fighters but Vulture Droids as well? It would be glorious. Palpatine didn't invest well in his Empire and as a result it fell.
Sacred Cow Shipyards did a wonderful breakdown on why the venator was honestly not *that* great of a ship. But to summarize: Huge dorsal hanger. Two broadside hangers. One ventral hanger. That big hanger door is just begging for a torpedo to hit the flight deck and explode inside the ship. Side guns aren't super firing, unless you tilt the entire ship "down". Meanwhile, the ISDs are much more focused on ship to ship firepower, but still carry a sizable tie fleet. The angle of the ship is likewise steeper, allowing more of the guns to be fired at a "level" target. The twin bridge is likewise, pretty silly and offers no real redundancy. (Anything big enough to take out one will likely take the other.) As for refits: Looking to the real world is actually helpful. Because WWI battleships we're modernized instead of replaced. But this is because the nations of the world decided, by treaty (London and Washington Naval treaties) to stop production of new ships. Had the treaties not been made, it's likely those refits would not have occured. British shipyards we're always SCREAMING for more capital ships to build even during peak build rates.
There is another reason as well, the Venator was built with old Republic Military Doctrine which focused on Starships being able to carry other smaller ships from Starfighters, to troop transport, tanks, walkers, to even smaller warships like Frigates. To this end the Venator main attribute was its huge hanger space to accommodate all these smaller vessels. A single Venator could carry over 400 Starfighters while a Imperial Class SD could only carry 80. Imperial Doctrine was based off Sith teachings...rule by fear. As such the Victory and Imperial Star Destroyers were designed as terror weapons (as was the Death Star), and their main attribute was to turn enemy ships, based and planets to slag by the sheer number of turbolaser and ion cannons they carried. While they did have a hanger too, it was nowhere near as large as a Venators. When extra starfighter support was needed the Empire preferred to carry extra TIE fighters in smaller warships like the Gonzanti Cruisers. So you see the reason the Venators were scrapped was because they simply did not fit with the military Doctrine of the Empire.
The perfect KDY fleet would include; Venators, Aquitans light cruisers, Raider corvettes and the Nebula class star defenders. Anything outside those 4 would probably be a waste
Also, I could think over another use for it: Support, freight and repair Missions. I mean, maybe you need to upgrade the Hyperdrive a little so it can hold up with the ISDs, but than you could pack this thing full with all kind of Cargo Movers, Worker Bees and so on, for Repairing ISDs in the Field or building complete Outposts. The ship would be armed enough, to hold off Pirates and Rebels for as long as needed or, after a refit, could be used as a mobile Anti Fighter Plattform too. Even for some rich Merchants and after a demilitarisation, this ship would be interesting... even if it would be very costly to maintain it and on some point, you wouldn't get spare parts for it anymore and have to modernise or scrap it. But maybe the Design will survive the Empire, like the Hammerhead Corvets. The Design is nearly Ancient, compared to some others and they still exist.
I think a large factor could be the technology - consider that technology development ramps up during war, there was probably a large capability difference between the pre and late war Venators. Compare the early WWII carriers to those of late war, and even the early war survivors were fairly quickly decommissioned and broken up for scrap, though they had received many upgrades during the conflict, they just weren't as capable as new designs. Then post war technology improvements continue at a more pedestrian rate, so those late war ships were still seen 10-20 years later, though not so much for front line operations - there's only a finite level of upgrades you can install, before space and power requirements are just too inadequate for the new toys.
The Senate: Decommission the Venator, all signs of the Jedi and Republic must be removed from my Empire! Also The Senate: But keep the Secutor, Victorys, Gozantis, repurpose the Gladiators, and rename the Imperator into the “Imperal-1”.
to be honest I think they just needed a new class of battleship that could be the back bone of the fleet and that was well suited for that role. The Venator was a carrier and as such illsuited for the role it was given
Just like USN wants to decommission some ships in order to actually expand over next almost 30 years. If maintenance takes a lot of your resources - then this makes producing new ones much slower/impossible. Also Victory Class was there to fill for weaker not as important fleets. And Venator has 1 huge flaw. It is wider in the back in only 2 axis, versus ISD which is in 3 axis. That means that they can only fire 2 front turrets when fighting head on. ISD's also had some problems with that on certain turrets, but they could at least bring much more firepower than just front guns. And refits (just like making those turrets superfiring) are often almost as costly (from 1/3rd of the cost to over 100% of the cost) of a new ship.
In real world terms, it was just to sell more toys. :P But probably the best in-universe reasons would be that TIEs simply would not fit, and would have to loaded and unloaded in a very different way, and it would really come down to overall doctrine. ISDs were basically mobile FOBs, where the Empire could establish a beachhead in any star system, and put troops on the ground, or sit back and bombard from space, while carrying a large amount of cheap almost disposable fighters to protect it, and have some extra reach out and touch you capability. The heavier fighters of the republic would take too many resources to maintain in the quantity that the Empire needed. Likely the older ships were being scrapped so that their materials could be used in the new Doctrine. It would not be a technology thing, really, a galactic civilization as old as the one in SW, there would not really be much in the way of new technology, as much as how much do you want to spend on building a given thing, how much in the way of resources do you want to spend? How much time to complete it? The ISDs were basically just bigger versions of their predecessors, so that what they carried would cost less, so they could carry more.
At the end of the clone wars Ventnor Class Star destroyers were being phased out in small amounts as the Empire was replacing them with the prototype of the ISD and Victory Class prototypes. The Venator had served its purpose being used to deploy large amounts of star fighters in a short period of time but as the clone war was over and the fighting stopped (well almost most of it) the Empire was switching over to a police force which needed more firepower to reinforce itself than more than a fast deploying one.
I would love to see at some point either the empire or a privateer use the venator as a cargo ship. I made a post about this on reddit once about how its large hangars can hold a large amount of cargo like in tcw when the separatists loaded one full of probably thousands of barrels of explosive fuel probably worth millions if not billions of credits. and I can imagine they make perfect long distance heavily armored freighters
I think also a lot of it has to do with the fact we rarely see Imperial flotillas with support ships. Even though they are supposedly completely canon, you never see an Imp with an escorting Raider, Victory, or Gladiator. Or even Arquents and that ship is in Clone Wars and what is apparently a late empire variant shown to be Gideon's cruiser in Mando. Even though we do the Rebel fleet engage in this with Nebulons and Corvettes flanking their MCs or the Phoenix Home in rebels. I personally think a Ven would be a great support ship for an Imp. It would also allow the Ven to fall back into the combat carrier role that she seems to have been built for and not a front line warship. Let the Victory and Imperial trade blows with opposing craft while the Venator hangs back and fills the Engagement Zone with strike craft.
I think it happened for multiple treasons, even beyond the tarkin doctrine, the venator was a multi role ship, and as we see, the empire has more focused ships, while the acclamator was use for prolonged ground campaigns, we see venators being used for invasions and a few of them can carry a sizeable ground force, it’s my guess the empire took a focus more on space superiority, and so focused on ship to ship combat, and reduced the amount of ground troops carried, with the extra space going to more weapons and other systems. Another thing to keep in mind is that other than the fact that the ships being scrapped may be damaged ones or older ones, it could also be venators from an older ‘block’ like how modern ships are built in blocks and have improvements in them, I’d bet the ones scrapped were the ones seen in TCW, compared to the ones in episode 3, but it’s just my take on it
The biggest reason it was a mistake to scrap the Venator was that the Venator would have been a great combat partner for the Imperial. Her carrying capacity would have mitigated the Imperial’s vulnerability to fighter attack while still being able to keep up with the Imperial
The biggest problem with scrapping Venator and going with the Imperial designs was a complete overhaul in military doctrine to something that wasn't tested. Even the Separatist army had a huge reliance on fighters and fleet tactics rather than putting so much emphasis on singular ships. In attempting to create a class of ship that was unbeatable in one on one fights with other major warship designs they ended up exposing it to flaws against smaller-scale anti-ship tactics. This is during an era when the greatest threat to the Empire was internal discontent. I don't even know if it could be claimed that the Imperial classes were built to fight the previous war. Even during the Clone wars smaller ships with hyperdrives were becoming possible.
There's the often ignored fact that by the Battle of Yavin the Venator class was over 40 years old. Even the newest examples would be 20 years old. Add to that a change in doctrine and it makes perfect sense that by then any surviving examples would be doing rear guard duty. Even in real life the expense of maintaining a major vessel means that one which no longer fills doctrine will either be scrapped, sold or mothballed. Just look at the original HMS Dreadnaught. A ship that drove forward warship design immensely, but became obsolete so fast it went from commission to scrapping in less than 15 years.
I think the image issue goes deeper than the Republic image, it was specifically associated with the Jedi, even being called the "Jedi Cruiser" on occasion. Every time you see those dual bridges is a reminder that there's no Jedi on either.
It's a planetary assaults ship in an era where the Empire controls all the planets.
@@mattheww.6232 Excellent point!
Personally I really hate the term “Jedi cruiser” because it’s primarily manned by clones, they should deserve the honor, just like padme called the tanks that beat the zillo beast “Jedi stun cannons” while the Jedi have never manned or build a tank in their lifetime
@@mattheww.6232 I thought that that other fatter star destroyer was the planetary assault ship, a venator Is a carrier
@@art-games6230 Yeah, the clones got so much crap and they were the ones who did all the hard work, too. :(
Because Tarkin was like “muh Tarkin doctrine an stuff, gotta have big scary starships and deaff stars to scare everyone innit”.
After reading this comment now I'm imagining Tarkin with a brummie accent lmao
Haha this is hilarious but it completely ruined the image of tarkin in my head
The only source that actually says that is the Force Unleashed Campaign guide which is Legends and a very low canon value at that. It's also pretty stupid since there's nothing in the Tarkin doctrine text itself that says they shouldn't rely on fighters
@@josesanchezrodriguez1783 and yet here we are lol
@@mcatalano813 Even by Legends, saying that the Empire got rid of all Venators is wrong as several of them were used to guard the Sanctuary Pipeline that connected Sullust to Endor during the construction of Death Star 2 and there was a large fleet of mothballed Venators that were kept long after Endor that were used in 13 ABY by Ennix Devian as a part of his Restored Empire
The idea of it being used as a training ship is actually a good idea. I never thought of that myself.
I think that's the case in a short story that I can't remember off the top of my head. Vader is brought onto an old one to oversee its training program and the captain is fed up with the Empire and tries to send it into a star.
@@BoisegangGaming I remember that one. I recall it was a ship called the defiance and the captain tried to get one of the new cadets to enter hyperspace coordinates that would send the ship into a sun or somewhere
In fact, not only a Training ship but as a heavy patrol vessel or barracks ship that navies did with a lot of their aging battleships.
@@cmedtheuniverseofcmed8775 weren't aging battleships nuked or turned into mothballed museums?
@@Andy_Sidaris Some were, depending on the nations that did it. Now I can actually picture the early Death Star laser test firing phases using decommissioned Venators as target practice....
EckhartsLadder did show off his idea of the perfect Imperial battle group and he included a Ventor having the rear, proving TIE craft support.
He based his idea off US Navy fleets that have aircraft carriers as flagships. At first his idea is interesting until you realize that the Empire had so many other craft for Tie support that could do the job better.
Link?
Such as? Admittedly I myself tend to be influenced by USN thought. Glares at ISD lacking point defense “ All I’m saying is we reduce its main battery by 1/3 and use the power saved from it for point defense,”
@@_gungrave_6802 … but the venator is already in production and can send out a lot more ties then most other things.
And carriers were useful and central both in all out wars, like wwii AND in global power projection in non total war times like pretty much any time between wwii and today.
@@_gungrave_6802 like the harrower? Well that one is good but I think venator got larger capacity and more space to get out
Still one of the coolest ships in star wars
Jack of all trades, master of none.
- some guy who served on a Venator, probably
@@trumediamix1 do you have the slightest of how little that narrows it down?
Still looks like Jar Jar
@@trumediamix1 ...but better than a master of one.
Yeah they are cooler than the og's
"And does working in Imperial shipyards make you more loyal to the Empire?"
Sir, I think you just triggered several species worth of PTSD patients.
may as well ask "does the inability to swim make you more loyal to the empire?"
@@MercenaryPen Ouch.
@@MercenaryPen Possibly if the Empire starts to add large numbers of swimming pools to your homeworld. Then it might make you more eager to pretend to be loyal. >.>
@@MercenaryPenI don't get the joke ?
@@thejoojoo9999 sorry, its an Andor reference
The Venator was known across the galaxy as the “Jedi Cruiser” throughout the Clone Wars. And Emperor Palpatine wanted all indications that the Jedi Order never existed so he decommissioned the Venator months after the Clone Wars ended and the Tarkin Doctrine didn’t help the Venator.
ooo thats a good point i missed
The Tarkin Doctrine also relied on the fact that the Venator was replaced by the Secutor, which was its replacement; the ISD replaced the Acclamator.
THE VENATOR ISN'T REAL!!!!!
@@scopilio13 No shit, thanks for trying to suck the fun out our imaginations fun sucker.
And then got a ship that looked nearly identical? 😂
Related to the "war runs them ragged" theory, I think that given the sheer speed at which most of the Venator fleet was assembled, it is entirely possible that a lot of them were relatively shoddily built. Obviously they were durable enough to pull through in the war, but it's easy to imagine that an enormous number of corners were cut in the name of getting the things out the door faster, and this may have made their long-term operation and maintenance very difficult or expensive. The ISDs may have been built with the expectation of decades of service rather than the necessity of nearly-instant deployment.
I like this line of thought. Taking the Templin analogy, it would be interesting if the Venators were a cross between the Essex classes and the Victory transport ships of WW2. Supremely fast to build, but not destined to last long - one way or another.
Alot of equipment, including ships built during WWII, was with built with haste and not adding mateiral to protect them long-term. For example German fighters did not add rubber between different metals since it was coldy calculated that they would be shot down/damaged enough before it would become a serious problem. In addition rubber was a material hard to get for Germany. The same applies for many ships regarding thickness and rust protection of hull plating.
Ships that had taken heavily damaged was in some cases repaired during war-time but would have had long-term maintenace problems and thus prime candidates to be scrapped first.
I also like the idea that some starships/equipment was scrapped to get spare parts to keep others running. This would in turn release funds to produce new starships such as ISD instead of funding parts for the Venator.
@@WingcommanderLuna lol, the CIS is even more of a threat than the Rebels due to its Gigantic Industrial might. But Venators and Acclimators has already proven their success on a large scale galactic war against the CIS. The ISD is made on a peace time whilst Venators are made for a Galactic war that includes large scale Space battles and Planetary invasions. In fact, the ISD's were made to compliment the need of Venators of a Tank Firepower battleships so it could freely launch its numerous fighters and bombers as well as carrying supplies and heavy equipments for the invading Armada.
You...
I like you.
You get it.
@@cptnemo20kl Feels like a parallel to the Cone Troopers that served aboard them.
A beautiful ship. I wonder if the empire has museum ships. I know palpatine considered it too much a symbol of the jedi. To the point, it was known as the jedi crusier.
I think Mon Mothma's flagship in Legends was a museum ship that the Rebellion stole.
jedi cruiser as vital in defeat of jedi rebelion?
Have to keep in mind that the Venator and the Imperials were designed for different purposes. While sure Venator could be a multi-purpose ship it's main role was as a fleet carrier/battleship. Acclamator was used to carry and land the troops en-masse. Inperials were designed to have everything they need to carry out all kinds of missions including limited planetary assaults. And sure they could have kept the Venators and added Imperials but Venators were a symbol of the Republic and Jedi in particular. So they had to go.
That still doesn't make it smart. The Venator-class was still capable of doing all of those things, on top of having a larger range than the Imperial-class, what with its hundreds of hyperspace-capable starfighters.
@@occam7382 I didn't say it was smart just considering that palpatine most likely went mad and continued to slide down into the dark side madness even the one fact that jedi used Venators was enough for him to issue the orders to get rid of them.
@Joshua Davis those hyperspace equipped starfighters were a massive disadvantage to the empire, it increases the chances of desertion and giving the rebellion more pilots, which is what the rebellion used to great effect
@@calebbarnhouse496, even so, I would argue that the benefits of those starfighters far outweighs any of the negatives. I mean, it's not as if Imperial pilots who want to defect are going to let something like the number of hyperdrive-equipped starfighters on hand get in their way. The fact is, one Venator-class Star Destroyer with its fighter complement could easily monitor and control several systems at once, while an Imperial-class could only cover one. And the biggest problem the Empire always faced was controlling its massive amount of territory, so doesn't it make sense to have ships capable of doing that?
@Joshua Davis except it literally does, if they are stuck on your ship with the only craft able to go into hyperspace being limited amount of shuttles, you can only entrust those shuttles to your most loyal pilots, when defecting is harder it's less common, what the empire should have had was there mini carriers that carry 4 to 6 ties, that is small enough to monitor vast amounts of space, they don't need to be able to take on any threat by themselves as they can merely be used to call in the calvary, but with things like tie bombers and interceptors, or even just widespread deployment of the tie advanced without the hyperdrive in it, would allow the empire to project power while being a stupid mobile and flexible force
The Templin Institute is about to produce Clone Wars related videos at the same rate that Kamino produces Clone Troopers.
200,000 videos are ready, with a million more well on the way.
Does that mean not at all? Seeing as Kamino got the Mando treatment
So, in non-quantifiable amounts?
“Your videos are very impressive. You must be very proud of them.”
“….tell me, who was the one ordered their production?”
@@abdurrazzaqmumin1574 Well seeing as Mt Tantiss is now confirmed, I suppose it's the Spaarti treatment now.
If you don't know what that is, read the Thrawn Trilogy.
I always assumed because of at least two reasons.
First, Venator was too closely related to the Jedi. Sometimes called Jedi Cruisers. Second, the Tarkin Doctrine which saw large warships had no place for the Venator. And as you said, the Destroyer made a lot of jobs. The idea of selling the ship was probably never thought of because the idea was the Empire ruled the galaxy. The Empire would provide defense, not provide the means of defense. You don't have a Naboo fighter core, you have the imperial fighter core stationed on Naboo. They wouldn't want to sell a warship, that was basically the symbol of the republic, to anyone. Rather scrap them down into brand new star destroyers. The empire can afford it.
Good point, if there were conflicts that other nations were concerned about the Empire would offer a "peacekeeping" force instead of materiel.
I think another aspect of why they were scrapped is that lots of venators were destroyed in the war, with many people in the confederacy and elsewhere (who might later become prominent rebel leaders) learning how to destroy them. Learning what their weaknesses are and how to exploit them. The star destroyers were brand new and had seen no major combat against any potential enemies, meaning their unknown abilities were themselves advantages the empire could use against its enemies
ISDs have the same (almost no guns on ventral side) and worst (exposed shield projectors) weaknesess of the Venator
@@nahuelleandroarroyo The biggest weakness of the Venator were the large vulnerable hanger bay and the lack of firepower, both of which the ISD's corrected
Finally a realistic assesment instead of just comparing ship stats.
One of my favorite takes I've heard on the Empire Vs. Republic militaries, is that Clone Troopers were soldiers, while Stormtroopers were militarized police officers.
One ship was designed for engaging near peer foes in large fleet engagements, while the other is made for long patrols, and occasionally enforcing a blockade while it's onboard garrison stomped out some insurgents and insurrectionists on some random world.
The Empire probably also chose to dismantle their Venerators because they didn't want a bunch of top of the line warships running around: they wanted the vast majority of their ships to only be capable when punching down, and then only kept a relatively tiny contingent of top of the line warships around to keep the others in line, who in turn were only crewed by the most loyal of troops to the Emporer.
Even within the Imperial military, there were checks put in place to disempower everyone, and make them afraid, and the only way to gain more power, was to further prove one's loyalty to the Emporer.
Excellent work on all this. I don't think the Empire would have completely retired their Venator force by the time the Death Star was completed, mostly because we still see the Arquitens class (Refited) and even the ancient Dreadnought Heavy Cruisers (In SW Rebels) still being used then. However, it can be easily assumed that the Empire just stopped making more. With no refit and parts wearing out, many of the surviving Venators that weren't scrapped immediately were obviously thrown to the scrap yards. With ISDs being produced in bulk, it wouldn't have taken much for the Empire to utterly overwhelm whatever they had of the worn-out Venators.
I also wonder if maybe the Venators had some shoddy construction or cut corners that increased their speed of production, but made long-term maintenance a real pain. If an ISD takes two or three years to build but is expected to remain in service for decades, that's fine - they are being built in peacetime, so the Empire can wait. But I wouldn't be remotely surprised to learn that a Clone Wars Venator was thrown together in three months by a shipyard that had never before built a warship because that was the only way for the Republic to bulk up fast enough. Different priorities for different situations.
@Michael Ramon bruh capital ships in starwars can survive for thousands of years easily, the falcon is almost 100 with retro fits, and by the time of sequal trilogy, and the good timeliness new republic it's over 100, and it's not really that special as far as ships go outside of the emotional attachment and the aftermarket upgrades, the venators were scrapped primarily because they were a status symbol of the previous age, Palpatine wanted the empire to last under his rule and his legacy, anything that wasn't following that path was nothing but a liability to him
I'm just surprised that the Rebel Alliance were never seen using them... if for nothing else than as a mobile outpost for refuel/resupply between missions, using it like that would hypothetically just need a skeleton crew to maintain while also having somewhere to store starfighters long term during periods when the Alliance had no bases.
maybe bc of the replacement parts issue?
Way I understood it, it was, ironically, a bad choice for Rebellion. Too noticeable, too costly, too hard to get and maintain. Once rebel cell would get one, it would place a huge target on it. That if they'll even manage to find people or droids to crew it or starfighters to field it's bay. Dauntless-class or, let's say, an old Munificent-class would provide all rebel cell needs and for fraction of cost and trouble compared to Venator.
It might be because it might be hard to find them in a manner that wouldn't bring suspicion. After all, it doesn't seem like these would be easy to obtain, refit, and maintain without bringing attention.
Of course, I'm sure there were a few cells that may have used one or two that were stripped down but something tells me that the venator wasn't designed for guerilla campaigns.
It might have been that getting a hand on one was too difficult. They had few big ships. And those few they had were arguably dual purpose civilian/military transports. Also they would have to find a way to produce all the spare parts.
@@jannegrey basically, this. Too much trouble to get one, keep one and field one.
An important thing to remember about refitting ships is that changing a flight deck and changing a powerplant are separated by orders of magnitude in complexity. Replacing power plants can result in the deconstruction of large portions of your full and internal bulkheads, force you to run new piping and electrical lines, or perhaps force you to rearrange the entire layout of your crew compartments, hanger, or storage space.
Changing a flight deck may force you to limit the ship's speed, shift its ballast, or drop the height of your hanger and build new elevators, but that pales in comparison to working on a ship's drive and power system.
Refitting a starship would be much the same and, like the recently damaged USS Bon Homme Richard, bringing back into service at a modern standard could well eclipse the cost of building a new ship as, at the end of the day, your hull's age may also dictate time and mission limitations upon your ship.
As well as the "hard use" angle (and yes, the rule of thumb is one year of war = ten years of peacetime) there's also the fact the Venators were built very quickly. I would speculate that that like how navies would build wooden ships out of unseasoned wood in wartime - accepting short service life for cheaper and quicker construction - there may have been signifant corners cut in its construction that meant staying in service was unviable.
There's little economic or military reasoning to it, but there is a lot of political reasoning. Can't have the famous 'Jedi Cruiser' stick around after the whole Order 66 situation.
I love this ship so much, the design and looks is just beautiful.
This looks like a video that should've been made years ago! So I'm glad you got around to anwser it.
And I especialy love the point that ships in wartime just gets put under huge stress, not to mention the ones that got outright destroyed.
Excellent video. I hope to see your further discussion video on the matter
I wonder what a Venator with more weaponry would look like.
The energy takes to run it is already so taxing would be impractical
Look up the Venator “Liberation.” It was modified with extra turbolasers.
That would be a“Secutor”.
Likely the giant ventral red hangar plates would be removed and a row of centrally-aligned superfiring turrets would be put in their place, with some of the hangar space being replaced with extra generators and ordinance reserves.
Been thinking about making a rebel call that fits in the universe of Star Wars, but a group of ex-republic navy veterans, and CIS veterans getting ahold of many old starships including the Venator from scrapyards or from other battlefields and then operate at the very edge and going where the Empire wouldn't dare to go.
There are alot of reasons they scraped the Venator and I also understand why it was never used by the Rebellion either.
It was a symbol of a long lost time in the republic that was quickly buried. The ship did inspire that feeling of rising up against oppression for most and this is what the Emperor didnt want in his Empire in its early days
Generation tech has done videos on this and concluded that not only was the Venator an objectively superior warship to the Imperial classes that succeeded it, but it was an objectively poor decision to retire the entire ship class with the man reasons being the Emperor and Tarkin as Palpatine knew that, while objectively good ships, they were heavily associated with the Republic and Jedi-with them even having the nickname 'Jedi Cruiser' so he wanted them gone. Tarkin was big on the 'Rule through fear' ideology and the Venator didn't fit into that as it didn't invoke that fear he wanted like how an Imperial class could, despite the fact one Venator could cover a much larger area of responsibility or patrol thanks to is massive starfigher wing which even a half decent commander could use to destroy 2 or even 3 Imperial classes if they ever had to fight.
Tbf by the time of the Empire there wasn't anyone who could challenge the Star Destroyers. If the CIS or some other major faction had declared war then maybe, but for what they were needed for, to cause fear and blow shit up, they did an excellent job. Especially when the only enemies they had were rebels in modified cargo and personal vessels.
You perhaps aren't considering the difference in technologies as well. So let's compare!
An USS Franklin (CV-13, Essex-class) had a flight complement of 103 Aircraft.
An USS Enterprise (CVN-65, Nimitz-class) had a flight complement of 60 Aircraft.
Which is superior?
@@wolfrainexxx I find your argument flawed as while the Nimitz-class is no doubt superior to the Essex, they're both carriers and the Nimitz much more advanced aircraft.
The Imperial class was a space battleship which carried cheaply made and underequipped starfighters while the Venator was a space aircraft carrier which carried older, but much better starcraft.
Even in Star Wars, Starfighters and Carriers proved themselves superior to Star Destroyers but unlike in our world, the Empire doubled down instead of shifting to this new era of warfare.
@@Illier1 True, the Empire wasn't expecting to fight any major conflicts but as they could have kept them around regardless, perhaps serving as carriers, training ships for TIE fighters, placed them in sector fleets that patrolled less important and problematic sectors, heck even as museum ships. But as far as we know, every one of them was reduced to scrap.
@@mosesmm5473 In what way is the ISD inferior to the Venator though?
There's no galactic threat to justify swarms of fighters, nor is there entrenched enemies to justify hordes of Assault Ships.
So I ask again, in what way was the Venator superior to the ISD? If the Empire needed more fighters, they had dedicated Fighter Carriers, and the onboard firepower, shields, and electronics were leagues beyond the Venator.
X-Wing was superior to the Arc-170, and inferior to a TIE fighter (Death Star Battle), and even the Empire At War RTS game (cannon) showed that the Empire could field 5 TIEs for the price of a single X-Wing; the hyperdrive was useless, and the X-Wing had no other function that the TIE didn't.
The Rebels used the Hyperdrive for guerilla tactics, which doesn't prove the Empire wrong, it just shows it fit the needs of the Rebels better than it did the Empires.
At the end of the Clone Wars, the Republc's fleets were depleted of starships in operation. Tarkin wanted a new fleet of ships capable of striking fear in its enemies. This was also in line of Emperor Palpatine's vision of controling the masses through fear, a Sith concept. It also introduced new technologies that were incompatible or not economical into refitting on the Venator as they were hastily designed for the Clone Wars. Or at least, that was my understanding of it. This was stated by Grand Moff Tarkin, and thus it was known as the Tarkin Doctrine.
I would have, in Palpatine's position, used the Venator as a support ship for the Imperial.
Like another comment said, Eckharts Ladder did a formation where the Venator was used in larger formations as a dedicated carrier.
Smaller units could swap the Vemator to the main ship with an Escort Carrier like the Quasar Fire or Ton Falk as support for even more TIE fighter variants in space.
I like taht these types of video essays portray the Templin Institute not just as a research institute, but also as a think tank
I always assumed it was to address the glaring issues that cost the Republic during the war: Lack of firepower. The CIS consistently outgunned the Republic in fleet engagements and while the fighters were useful, it only had 16 heavy turbolasers compared to over 70 on the ISD. The Empire quickly retired both the Venator AND the Victory due to insufficient firepower. Considering the numbers of CIS capital ships still floating around the galaxy, a handful of Munificent frigates could possibly defeat a Venator, whereas an ISD would crush them easily.
I think that using the Venator as a carrier for Imperial battlegroups would have helped the Empire a lot. The biggest weakness of the Imperial class was a lack of starfighter capacity and having a 2:1 mix of Imperial and Venator Star destroyers would have helped a lot.
Except that is the reason Venator got replaced. The 300-400 starfighters complement was only viable for Venator assigned to core world defense. on campaign, Venator typically carried way less and use the extra space for supplies so they usually carried around a hundred or so starfighters. That defeated the purpose of dedicated carrier.
Imperial's starfighter complement was enough. The problem is the outdated TIE-Fighters. The replacement of them to TIE-Interceptors would render most problem moot. It was underway but the collapse happened.
The Imperial class needed smaller boats that could perform screening actions more than anything. Tie fighters can only do so much and were outperformed by the fighters they ended up facing. En masse fighter wings might have helped, but really they needed something akin to the Imperial class for point defense.
@@huntermad5668 100 or so fighters is better then an Imperial star destroyer could bring to the party. An Imp 1 carried 36 fighters, and an Imp 2 carried 72. Two Imp 1s backed by a Venator could operate 180 or so fighters between themselves, and have some specialized scout fighters aboard the Venator to help find Rebel forces.
@@trevynlane8094
Imperials always have standard complement of 72.
TIE-Fighters are only weak against new Rebel fighters. It is around the level of Late clone war V-wing.
Except scout fighters only viable against conventional enemy like Seperatists. Not like Imperial Navy have a shortage of hyper capable scout vessel anyway.
I can't believe you forgot to mention that they kept the Acclamator, a ship that was present at the start of the clone wars, but Scraped the Venator
I was thinking this, the Acclamator didn't even last one movie.
You’re telling me that they favored flying target practice over the carrier/battleship
That is a Damm good question!
the same reason the Grand Fleet was largely scrapped after WW1, and the entire Royal Navy battlefleet was destroyed after WW2. Firstly, they were desiged before the war, and so include none of countless inevitable lessons learned during the war about ship design. Secondly, war service is incredibly hard on a warship of any kind, and by the end of the clone wars, most these ships would be worn completely out. On the training point, that only works if the weapons systems and mechanical components are updated to actually reflect the conditions of the modern fleet.
I'd argue that the Venator wasn't replaced by the Imperial, but the Victory Class Star Destroyer. I flew many fighter sorties during the Clone Wars, and if memory serves me right, the Venator was being supplemented and supplanted by the Victory toward the end of that conflict during the outer rim sieges. The Imperial class was designed to embody the Tarkin Doctrine. The Victory was designed to win fleet engagements.
You did now? Where did you serve?
@@occam7382 I flew during the incursion on Kamino and against the blockade of Ryloth.
@@garrettharriman6333, ah. I remember Ryloth. That was a mess. I was a combat engineer on a Venator during Ryloth, and after my first ship bit the dust, I was reassigned to Resolute. I don't think I ever had more work than when I was on that ship. There were starfighters and gunships coming in scrapped pretty much every other day. I'll never forget all the times I nearly got killed while trying to fix the twisted heaps that were General Skywalker and Commander Tano's fighters after nearly every mission they went on. You ever encounter those two? Let me tell you, it was quite the spectacle, seeing them at work.
@@occam7382 I flew a V-Wing at Ryloth. I never got close to the general or his aide(? Never was sure how that worked militarily). I only heard him on comms during the flight briefs.
@@garrettharriman6333, if I'm not mistaken, she was 2nd-in-Command of the 501st Brigade following the Battle of Christophsis up until the... situation with the Jedi Temple. You know what I mean. We all saw the tribunal. Anyway, I constantly had to fix their trashed ships, and every time I would complain to General Skywalker about how he kept messing up his ships, he just brushed it off. At least Commander Tano was more understanding about it. She was pretty cool.
4:19 "But wars have the tendency to advance military sciences in sudden leaps and bounds as state of the art gun, tank, plane, or ship at the start of a conflict can easily be obsolete after just a few years or even months"
A perfect real world example would be the Mitsubishi Zero used by the Empire of Japan in World War 2. It outclassed virtually all allied fighters at the start of the war but by its end they were shot down by the dozen. This was due to a combination of all of the following:
1. The inability to keep up with the new classes of planes the Americans came up with (Hellcats and Corsairs).
2. Improvements to the American fleet's anti-aircraft capabilities (more accurate guns on the ships and proximity fuses in the shells).
3. The training of the pilots (Americans had 400 hours average flight training vs Japan's 120 hours average flight training late in the war).
4. The vastly changing tactics used to counter the Zero (American aces were sent home to help with the training of new pilots and they captured an intact Zero in the Aleutian Islands in 1942 to study for weaknesses).
I usually find it odd that most videos about Star Wars, and more specifically factions that have Palpatine in it somewhere, it usually tried to portray both the faction and the man as misguided but reasonable rather than what they truly are, Sith. The Sith are the polar opposite to The Jedi (ok not completely but they're defiantly open to their shortcomings rather than The Jedi), they value strength and power above all else, even basic connections, and that thirst for power always leads towards massive armies and navies waging war upon The Galaxy and The Republic. But ever sense Palpatine became Supreme Chancellor and later Emperor of The Galaxy, the Sith has won and can now openly make a comeback without resistance poppin up as strongly as it has before. I think the actual reason why The Venator Class was sent to the scrap yard is because Palpatine wanted any trace of The Republic gone so that his brand new oddly Sith style Star Destroyers can enter the show.
The problem with the Venator is that it was made ad hoc by a company that had never made a capital ship before and is extremely impractical. The engine design alone costs more fuel than 2 ISD's. The entirety is extremely weak with the hollow hangar hull and makes the entire ship weak to frontal attacks because of it. It also suffers from having two bridges instead of one which makes coordination difficult since both sides need to be in constant communication with each other, and there is no connecting elevator or bridge to the other side. The big guns are pretty weak in reality as well.
It was easier to just make a new ship than to completely redesign and re-manufacture the Venator.
It is kinda like the M4 Sherman. A design which won the war but had a ton of issues and did not see much continued use in the USA after the war, being scrapped for the Pershing and Patton series instead.
Star Wars uses WW2 as its operating model, so scrapping or selling war time (especially war built) vessels matches what actually happened, perfectly. Many ships were wrecked internally, desperately needing huge machinery refits after having been worked mercilessly for years. The newer ones, or thise which had experienced easier wartime service, could be upgraded and kept for 5 to 10 years (but technology moved fast in the 50's, and most becsme obsolete, again) or sold to smaller countries.
This theory of Venator disposal works fine in a historical comparison.
I like the idea the Venator was scrapped for materials to be used on the Death Star. It's a bit more discrete than diverting billions of metal from ISDs and civil construction for a "secret project."
Scrappers probably wouldn't care where the junk goes as long as they get paid. They may even want the junk moved so they have room on their planet to live or keep scrapping.
According to the Thrawn series books, the older republic warships were less efficient and more manpower intensive (though there they were called Dreadnought class). It makes sense when you have an unlimited supply of clones to man the navy in wartime. But the new empire turned to drafting troops from occupied worlds, and likely wanted more efficient ships with smaller crews and more automation to help spread the imperial presence wider.
I think what happened was that with the Imperials the Empire took the lessons of the Clone Wars to heart. Reducing the fighter complement, because even 400 starfighters can't really compete with the sheer mass of Vultures the CIS could stuff into their hulls. Increasing the firepower to be both able to quickly smash lighter armoured CIS ships like the Munificent or Recusant and go tow to tow with the bigger ships, like Lucrehulks, Bulwarks and the odd dreadnought like the Malevolence. There was just the tiny problem that the next war wasn't fought that way and the Venator would have been the better counter to the guerilla tactics of the rebels.
I was wondering this too, but after the ships are scrapped the raw materials are used to construct new ships, i can imagine that the level of technology allows almost all of the scrapped raw materials to be reused and recycled resulting in very little loss of materials in the process. Another thing is, that the only real cost here is the energy required to scrap and remake the raw material and the labor costs, both which are probably a drop in a bucket for a massive galactic nation such as the republic or the empire. And let's not forget that most of the "dirty work" is probably done by droids of various size, all of these would also stimulate the economy and increase purchasing power.
The Venator may have also been built like the Liberty ships of WW2. It may have been built for reliable service for only a few short years, after which it would be relegated to low intensity duties before scrapping. Refitting and overhauling the ship may very well have cost nearly as much as building a new one from scratch, and it still wouldn't be as capable as a brand new warship. By the end of the Clone War, Palpatine and Tarkin were probably well aware that the remaining Venators, much like their clone crews, were unsuited for the long game that they were planning, so they immediately began producing new ships that would both out-preform and out-last the Venators by years or even decades.
In legends it answers this by that Palpatine was preparing for a war with the Yuuzhan Vong. A large powerful fleet would be needed.
The republic was already begging to introduce victory and even imperial star destroyers towards the end of the clone wars. Essentially they were already being phased out, also no one knows just how many venators were produced, i suspect it's not as many as we think
Thanks for sharing! I would add a key central doctrinal change: the move towards larger capital ships and less reliance on starfighters. Without any remaining large foe, the Empire didn’t see the value that small starfighters may bring. Imperial doctrine wanted something imposing, powerful, and destructive. This over-reliance on large weaponry would end up becoming a critical weakness exposed by the Rebel Alliance, but Imperial-class Star Destroyers remained a formidable foe.
It's worth noting that in SW Legends Grand Admiral Thrawn employed the Victory class, an interim design between the Venator and Imperial mk1 (if I remember correctly) to great effect in the Imperial Remnant. One possible technical justification for a larger hull design could be that larger engine blocks provide more efficient fuel-thrust ratio making it cheaper to have a smaller number of "do everything" ships like Star Destroyers instead of dedicated Battle Groups like Carrier Groups from Earth Navies.
Any chance when Rampart was shown using them to bombard Kamino, that, in part, was one reason the Venator was given public stigma and helped contribute to its disuse?
That can be good point
"Why scrap the Venator?"
Palpatine: "F*ck the Republic. That includes its symbolism. Lmao."
I'm not even joking, to be blunt - it was the first thing that came to mind, aside from the obvious lore complications that could've been formed if George Lucas and his cohorts at LucasArts said "these were the same Star Destroyers, we just remodeled them" or such.
Immersive worldbuilding requires good attention to detail - both in terms of the powers at play and in terms of recognizing what's important and what isn't, imo.
In this case, I think the Venator was scrapped, aside from the "Tarkin's Big Dick Energy Dakka" Doctrine, because he saw it as a strong symbol of the Galactic Republic. As such, that's a big no-no. He wants the Republic gone in favor of his Empire, so it has to go.
In fact, I heard you acknowledge this point late into your video, as I was typing this out on my phone, funnily enough!
It wasn't the ship that "won the clone wars". Palpatines own insights did.
The Venator was underamred and its hull would have been an easy breach for the superheavy turbolsaers on the recusant or munificent not to mention that a luckerhulk carried more than three times as many fighter as the venator while being much better armed and armoured while smaller ships that could alsp carry hundreds of fighters like the captor were avaliable to the CIS
Just a thought: The mass decommissioning and scrapping of the Venators could have also been used as a cover operation by Palpatain (as part of his contingency program) to relocate quality military hardware into the unknown region, until industrial capacity could have been built out there.
That makes a lot of sense. Later claim they were scrapped to rebuild devastating worlds as a good cover
Would be cool to see one in use with the Rebellion
Excellent content as usual! I would add that the Empire was maintaining a police/subjugation force more than a navy capable to fight another large navy as they had no major rival. As such the Imperial class was significantly better at deploying garrisons, mass troop movements, and orbital bombardments. Even the now canon lore points to the fact that many systems when faced with just one Imperial star destroyer opted to surrender rather than continue revolting because they knew it was a lost cause at that point. Venator class just wasn't large enough to carry personnel and equipment to quell rebel movements and protests alone as the Imperial class could.
This video inspired my Space Junker campaign for Star Wars TTRPG. I have a bunch of players who made a team of salvagers and I think i just found what the Rebelion is going to recruit them for as they found a space storage dock full of Venators to repatriate for the fights ahead. Now only if they had a crew experienced in getting old broken ships running again
The example that comes to mind in my country is the F111, we did away with a strike capable bomber and got the f35...
To be fair it's a big galaxy and even though we see a lot of Venators being scrapped that could just represent a fraction of the total number out there in all the non-frontline roles or ships sold to other powers like what was mentioned in the video. This line of thought would give writers some leeway if they ever wanted them to appear in future stories.
Symbolism. Like the Death Star, Imperial Star Destroyers are an image of terror. Visually imposing and uncompromising in function. Venators were designed for troop and fighter mobilization in multi-function roles. Although warships in function, they still remained less aggressive and imposing than the Imperial ships that followed them.
Imperial Destroyers were the polar opposite. They were designed for planetary bombardment and rapid put down of insurrection.
When the Empire was defeated, the New Republic never used Imperial Star Destroyers for the same reasons. It was a symbol of another era that didn't service the new one. They went back to smaller more versatile ships akin to the Old Republic era. Less imposing, more passive vessels that better represented the philosophy of a more peaceful time.
In a way, I would say the Venator's frontline usage demise was sound since the Empire was more focused on quashing small scale rebellion and Seppy holdouts. Analogous to that, I would argue that the Empire would have been quite shrewd to maintain the Venator alongside the Imp Star Deuce as a matter of precedent and forward thinking defensive readiness. In our own world, The Essex class operated alongside the Super Carriers well into the 70s, 30 years after their construction and commissioning. The only real hinderance to these ships was the consideration of operational range and more importantly, heavier laden aircraft that took up more room. The Venator did not either of these concerns to contend with. Quite the opposite considering just how much smaller the TIE was to Republic starfighters. These ships were perfectly suited to act as CAP command vessels to properly contend with Rebel starfighters. 400 TIE's vs a dozen or two X and Y Wings from 1 or 2 Mon Cala warships, even with better craft to work with, make exceptional use of the "Quantity has a Quality all its Own" facet of reality. Even if the Mon Cala warships could destroy the Venator, all those agree little bees would eventually be able to overwhelm them. Beyond the numerical superiority, refitting these ships to carry more fighters or to serve as Auxiallary command cruisers or even as backwater picket ships, the Empire could have stretched out their service lives and still be able to entice Industry/Fabricators/Shipyards to continue their support. This would satisfy military contractors with the guarantee of continued income and the possibility of being subsidized by the Empire to produce parts and new warships simultaneously. And even if this were not the case for all, their would still be the aspect of hiring additional laborers/technicians to operate and maintain these ships for the forseeable future. Loyalty through economic incentive still accomplished. All in all, suplanting the ISD lines with the Venator, even if only until the events of the OT (almost 20 years) would have been a far greater use of materiel and manpower.
Clone/Venator stans inbound.
it just gos to show much more was going on then just the clones, if i remember right, when obi wan kenobi found out about the clones, they were commissioned 10 years earlier, to have an army you had to have a fleet to go with it, you dont build and hope someone comes along and buys it, more was hidden then the clones, if you watch the ending of attack of the clones you see the majority of it, ships, troops, assault vehicles, weapons carried, all of this was planed out 10 years earlier, it a very good question of why was it scrapped and not used as back up or support for the new Imperial fleet.
Because Palps said I want all grey triangles...
Also you gotta remember without that decision we wouldn't have got a mongol band creating a song called "Sugaan Essena".
I love these star wars videos
You've been watching Perun videos lately I see, nice I might not agree with everything he says, but he does a great job in explaining the logistics sides of the military industrial complex.
Can''t say I have. Can you link me?
@@TemplinInstitute here you go dude enjoy. www.youtube.com/@PerunAU
I like this format of "conventionally IC-presented episode" followed by "OOC opinion piece on the subject"
I do agree with most of these comments proposing the theory that the Venator was designed with corner cutting. Everything made for the clone wars on both sides was designed with cheap and rapid deployment as a priority. It might also be worth mentioning that at least in legends canon the Venator was already being supplemented by the Victory Class (I think they were Victory class) and the process of replacing then began before the clone wars were even over.
I am also of the opinion that the ISD might have worked in its "primary ubiquitous warship" role and be a near unstoppable ship if it just had better point defense, guns on its underside, and either better starfighters or more of them.
I think some of Palpatine's fleet in Rise of Skywalker should have been mostly these. Like the secret fleet was made of things that where supposed to be mothballed...but the emperor was actually tucking away for his back up plan.
I think the reasons as outlined here are more then enough reason for the Empire to have cast aside the Venator. The scrap itself would have been a boon to those producing the Imperial and Victory classes. The job creation and economic boon would have been seen very favorably. Palpatine was not worried about nostalgic symbols but rather creating the foundation for his empire, regardless of the cost.
The last point about the military-industrial motive is really good. We see time and time again that steady work was one of the biggest carrots the Empire would offer to those who were seen as loyal and useful, and it would make sense that a program like that would be very effective at keeping manufacturing heads and investors happy, if nothing else. Plus it plays to the Empire's other strength of fostering factionalism and destructive competition, setting quotas for different parts and adjusting contracts to reward those most loyal would turn more ire and attention to groups within the Empire rather than the Empire itself.
The vendor was, to me, a warrior that now has passed, but it would be so cool to see the rebels were able to get their hands on some and then use the capable legendary warship against the empire
The Venator would have really given the Empire the edge against the Rebels, especially since the Imperial class kept getting destroyed by Rebel starfighters. So Venators, with their massive anti fighter capabilities, would have been a great counter to Rebels and their heavy use of starfighters.
The Venator really was the greatest capital ship of the Republic, and the Empire were fools to replace them with the Imperial in mainline service. Imperials would have been better served as a flag ship with a Venator or two to serve as the mainline warship alongside the Victory Class Star Destroyer.
Yesss, an imperial Venator II-ship would totally make sense, particularly when the galactic civil war started ramping up! The Ventator II could have had even more hangar-space, and forgo the original Venator's lackluster turbo lasers completely. Instead it could have an emphasis on anti starfighter-laser guns and point defense-systems. As well as missile launchers resembling those on the Victory I star destroyer. I think this would have made for a long range firesupport/carrier-ship that would complement the Imperial Star Destroyer nicely and rectify many of the disadvantages the empire faced during the galactic civil war
I love Venator Class! I remember seeing it for the first time in Episode III and was insanity became my favorite star wars ship!
Remember that the Entire “Clone Wars” was a manufactured conflict with one individual playing two sides off one another , each using tactics and equipment that were significantly different , while the emerging EMPIRE unveiled both tactics and equipment different from both factions. Ive often wondered if Palipatine was undecided on which faction should be victorious, to the point i wonder if his plans for Luke Skywalker to turn would have been not to join the Empire, but defeat it and rule as a Sith lord
hmm.... tough one; firstly minor correction: the war between the sith empire and old republic occurred roughly 3000 years prior not a millennia. That aside I would say the 'Victory Class' was in fact the replacement for the Venator hold around the same size and speed. The Victory Class held less fighters but it was also much faster and had multi-system scanning making it able to monitor several systems at distance at the same time as well as send long range strike wing such as Imperial Gunboats to deal with minor threats. Was is a mistake? ....hmm....Personally I would say Yes. Far from being the Tactical Genius that some would like to believe Palpatine was an absolute idiot; Thrawn warned him about the Death Star and how making it was pulling far too much man power and resources to maintain the Imperial Fleet...and what did Palpatine do? Build a second one! bigger and with far more resources than the first! Palpatine had an illustrious history of squandering resources and engaging in project of mindless self indulgence. If I had been in his place not only would I have kept and upgraded the Venator class I would have (under the cover of rebuilding bounds with the then defeated CIS) assimilated the most effective elements of the CIS fleet as well, and the Mandalorian Death Guard as a secret police to assist Vader. Imagine Super Battle Droids and Droidekas in lockstep with Elite Stormtroopers lead by a Mandalorian Elite perhaps add in a Basilisk War Droid or two.... Venator Class star destroyers flying escort for an Imperial Class Star Destroyer as flagship with squadrons of not only Tie fighters but Vulture Droids as well? It would be glorious.
Palpatine didn't invest well in his Empire and as a result it fell.
Sacred Cow Shipyards did a wonderful breakdown on why the venator was honestly not *that* great of a ship.
But to summarize: Huge dorsal hanger. Two broadside hangers. One ventral hanger.
That big hanger door is just begging for a torpedo to hit the flight deck and explode inside the ship.
Side guns aren't super firing, unless you tilt the entire ship "down".
Meanwhile, the ISDs are much more focused on ship to ship firepower, but still carry a sizable tie fleet. The angle of the ship is likewise steeper, allowing more of the guns to be fired at a "level" target.
The twin bridge is likewise, pretty silly and offers no real redundancy. (Anything big enough to take out one will likely take the other.)
As for refits: Looking to the real world is actually helpful. Because WWI battleships we're modernized instead of replaced. But this is because the nations of the world decided, by treaty (London and Washington Naval treaties) to stop production of new ships.
Had the treaties not been made, it's likely those refits would not have occured.
British shipyards we're always SCREAMING for more capital ships to build even during peak build rates.
7:36 And thus, the Templin Institute has in a few sentences explained the concept of pork barreling...
There is another reason as well, the Venator was built with old Republic Military Doctrine which focused on Starships being able to carry other smaller ships from Starfighters, to troop transport, tanks, walkers, to even smaller warships like Frigates. To this end the Venator main attribute was its huge hanger space to accommodate all these smaller vessels. A single Venator could carry over 400 Starfighters while a Imperial Class SD could only carry 80.
Imperial Doctrine was based off Sith teachings...rule by fear. As such the Victory and Imperial Star Destroyers were designed as terror weapons (as was the Death Star), and their main attribute was to turn enemy ships, based and planets to slag by the sheer number of turbolaser and ion cannons they carried. While they did have a hanger too, it was nowhere near as large as a Venators. When extra starfighter support was needed the Empire preferred to carry extra TIE fighters in smaller warships like the Gonzanti Cruisers.
So you see the reason the Venators were scrapped was because they simply did not fit with the military Doctrine of the Empire.
The perfect KDY fleet would include; Venators, Aquitans light cruisers, Raider corvettes and the Nebula class star defenders. Anything outside those 4 would probably be a waste
Also, I could think over another use for it: Support, freight and repair Missions.
I mean, maybe you need to upgrade the Hyperdrive a little so it can hold up with the ISDs, but than you could pack this thing full with all kind of Cargo Movers, Worker Bees and so on, for Repairing ISDs in the Field or building complete Outposts.
The ship would be armed enough, to hold off Pirates and Rebels for as long as needed or, after a refit, could be used as a mobile Anti Fighter Plattform too.
Even for some rich Merchants and after a demilitarisation, this ship would be interesting... even if it would be very costly to maintain it and on some point, you wouldn't get spare parts for it anymore and have to modernise or scrap it.
But maybe the Design will survive the Empire, like the Hammerhead Corvets. The Design is nearly Ancient, compared to some others and they still exist.
The empire wanted to rebrand themselves after the clone wars.
I think a large factor could be the technology - consider that technology development ramps up during war, there was probably a large capability difference between the pre and late war Venators. Compare the early WWII carriers to those of late war, and even the early war survivors were fairly quickly decommissioned and broken up for scrap, though they had received many upgrades during the conflict, they just weren't as capable as new designs. Then post war technology improvements continue at a more pedestrian rate, so those late war ships were still seen 10-20 years later, though not so much for front line operations - there's only a finite level of upgrades you can install, before space and power requirements are just too inadequate for the new toys.
The Senate: Decommission the Venator, all signs of the Jedi and Republic must be removed from my Empire!
Also The Senate: But keep the Secutor, Victorys, Gozantis, repurpose the Gladiators, and rename the Imperator into the “Imperal-1”.
to be honest I think they just needed a new class of battleship that could be the back bone of the fleet and that was well suited for that role. The Venator was a carrier and as such illsuited for the role it was given
Finally, a video about this that's not just all the reasons the Venator was a great ship.
I mean, we all love the Venator, and will never give up the Venator circlejerk, but it is still an... interesting change of pace.
Galactic Empire: *throws away Venators*
Rebel Alliance: "It's free real estate."
Just like USN wants to decommission some ships in order to actually expand over next almost 30 years. If maintenance takes a lot of your resources - then this makes producing new ones much slower/impossible.
Also Victory Class was there to fill for weaker not as important fleets.
And Venator has 1 huge flaw. It is wider in the back in only 2 axis, versus ISD which is in 3 axis. That means that they can only fire 2 front turrets when fighting head on. ISD's also had some problems with that on certain turrets, but they could at least bring much more firepower than just front guns. And refits (just like making those turrets superfiring) are often almost as costly (from 1/3rd of the cost to over 100% of the cost) of a new ship.
In real world terms, it was just to sell more toys. :P
But probably the best in-universe reasons would be that TIEs simply would not fit, and would have to loaded and unloaded in a very different way, and it would really come down to overall doctrine. ISDs were basically mobile FOBs, where the Empire could establish a beachhead in any star system, and put troops on the ground, or sit back and bombard from space, while carrying a large amount of cheap almost disposable fighters to protect it, and have some extra reach out and touch you capability.
The heavier fighters of the republic would take too many resources to maintain in the quantity that the Empire needed.
Likely the older ships were being scrapped so that their materials could be used in the new Doctrine.
It would not be a technology thing, really, a galactic civilization as old as the one in SW, there would not really be much in the way of new technology, as much as how much do you want to spend on building a given thing, how much in the way of resources do you want to spend? How much time to complete it? The ISDs were basically just bigger versions of their predecessors, so that what they carried would cost less, so they could carry more.
God that large red stripe does something to me. I dunno what it is but it's just so awesome.
Thank you the Video and the English subtitle.
At the end of the clone wars Ventnor Class Star destroyers were being phased out in small amounts as the Empire was replacing them with the prototype of the ISD and Victory Class prototypes. The Venator had served its purpose being used to deploy large amounts of star fighters in a short period of time but as the clone war was over and the fighting stopped (well almost most of it) the Empire was switching over to a police force which needed more firepower to reinforce itself than more than a fast deploying one.
I would love to see at some point either the empire or a privateer use the venator as a cargo ship. I made a post about this on reddit once about how its large hangars can hold a large amount of cargo like in tcw when the separatists loaded one full of probably thousands of barrels of explosive fuel probably worth millions if not billions of credits. and I can imagine they make perfect long distance heavily armored freighters
I think also a lot of it has to do with the fact we rarely see Imperial flotillas with support ships. Even though they are supposedly completely canon, you never see an Imp with an escorting Raider, Victory, or Gladiator. Or even Arquents and that ship is in Clone Wars and what is apparently a late empire variant shown to be Gideon's cruiser in Mando.
Even though we do the Rebel fleet engage in this with Nebulons and Corvettes flanking their MCs or the Phoenix Home in rebels.
I personally think a Ven would be a great support ship for an Imp. It would also allow the Ven to fall back into the combat carrier role that she seems to have been built for and not a front line warship. Let the Victory and Imperial trade blows with opposing craft while the Venator hangs back and fills the Engagement Zone with strike craft.
I think it happened for multiple treasons, even beyond the tarkin doctrine, the venator was a multi role ship, and as we see, the empire has more focused ships, while the acclamator was use for prolonged ground campaigns, we see venators being used for invasions and a few of them can carry a sizeable ground force, it’s my guess the empire took a focus more on space superiority, and so focused on ship to ship combat, and reduced the amount of ground troops carried, with the extra space going to more weapons and other systems. Another thing to keep in mind is that other than the fact that the ships being scrapped may be damaged ones or older ones, it could also be venators from an older ‘block’ like how modern ships are built in blocks and have improvements in them, I’d bet the ones scrapped were the ones seen in TCW, compared to the ones in episode 3, but it’s just my take on it
The biggest reason it was a mistake to scrap the Venator was that the Venator would have been a great combat partner for the Imperial. Her carrying capacity would have mitigated the Imperial’s vulnerability to fighter attack while still being able to keep up with the Imperial
The biggest problem with scrapping Venator and going with the Imperial designs was a complete overhaul in military doctrine to something that wasn't tested. Even the Separatist army had a huge reliance on fighters and fleet tactics rather than putting so much emphasis on singular ships. In attempting to create a class of ship that was unbeatable in one on one fights with other major warship designs they ended up exposing it to flaws against smaller-scale anti-ship tactics. This is during an era when the greatest threat to the Empire was internal discontent. I don't even know if it could be claimed that the Imperial classes were built to fight the previous war. Even during the Clone wars smaller ships with hyperdrives were becoming possible.
Loving the Clone Wars content of late
My fav thing in the star wars movies is when the old skool retro ships with 60s flashing buttons replace the 'old' ones
A good and thorough look
There's the often ignored fact that by the Battle of Yavin the Venator class was over 40 years old. Even the newest examples would be 20 years old. Add to that a change in doctrine and it makes perfect sense that by then any surviving examples would be doing rear guard duty. Even in real life the expense of maintaining a major vessel means that one which no longer fills doctrine will either be scrapped, sold or mothballed. Just look at the original HMS Dreadnaught. A ship that drove forward warship design immensely, but became obsolete so fast it went from commission to scrapping in less than 15 years.