StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Just out of curiosity, but would you consider a Super Star Destroyer to be a flagship? Or a command ship? Perhaps just a dreadnought?

Any ship with the flag officer of the fleet onboard is a flagship. Be it Battleship or PT boat

The Executor was in fact all three (although the last is not as concrete). Admirals Ozzel and Piett both based their commands from the ship. The Executor-class was considered to be a "command ship" class. Finally, the designation of the Executor-class is thought to (AFAIK) lie somewhere between battlecruiser, dreadnought, and carrier.

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:The Executor was in fact all three (although the last is not as concrete). Admirals Ozzel and Piett both based their commands from the ship. The Executor-class was considered to be a "command ship" class. Finally, the designation of the Executor-class is thought to (AFAIK) lie somewhere between battlecruiser, dreadnought, and carrier.

A slight off-topic question: doesn't the carrier role apply to Star Destroyers as well, seeing that they have a *sizeable* fighter complement, much like the SSD does?

I don't think so, there are actual Carriers available to the Empire that are either around the same size or larger

Castor Troy wrote:

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:The Executor was in fact all three (although the last is not as concrete). Admirals Ozzel and Piett both based their commands from the ship. The Executor-class was considered to be a "command ship" class. Finally, the designation of the Executor-class is thought to (AFAIK) lie somewhere between battlecruiser, dreadnought, and carrier.

A slight off-topic question: doesn't the carrier role apply to Star Destroyers as well, seeing that they have a *sizeable* fighter complement, much like the SSD does?

They actually have a small fighter compliment. Look at comparable ships.
TF BBs carried 1500 fighters. Independence class star cruisers carried 120. Lateer production versions of the MC80B carried 96 fighters. The Venator carried 420. The New Republic version of the Venator, the Endurance class carried 432 fighters. The Defender class escort carrier had 216 fighters.

The fighter compliment of the Imperator class is really rather small. Compared to others, it is analogous to the helicopters destroyers today carry.

Actually, the Imperator-class destroyer does retain certain aspects of carriers, while the Tector-class destroyer matches the traditional destroyer-role more closely (it has no large hangarbay).

Just a nit pick its not an SSD.

Super star destroyer is just rebel slang for a Comand Ship or Super Dreadnought.

So really an Executer is most likely able to carry at least a few thousand fighters considering the size of hanger bay. I would take all the WEG stuff as a grain of salt.

Ender wrote:

Castor Troy wrote:

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:The Executor was in fact all three (although the last is not as concrete). Admirals Ozzel and Piett both based their commands from the ship. The Executor-class was considered to be a "command ship" class. Finally, the designation of the Executor-class is thought to (AFAIK) lie somewhere between battlecruiser, dreadnought, and carrier.

A slight off-topic question: doesn't the carrier role apply to Star Destroyers as well, seeing that they have a *sizeable* fighter complement, much like the SSD does?

They actually have a small fighter compliment. Look at comparable ships.
TF BBs carried 1500 fighters. Independence class star cruisers carried 120. Lateer production versions of the MC80B carried 96 fighters. The Venator carried 420. The New Republic version of the Venator, the Endurance class carried 432 fighters. The Defender class escort carrier had 216 fighters.

The fighter compliment of the Imperator class is really rather small. Compared to others, it is analogous to the helicopters destroyers today carry.

While i know, that those numbers are based on the NR-squadron (not wing as during the times of the RA) having 36 fighters at the time of BFC, can somebody please provide the exact quote from CTD?

Aside from that, do the stats of the ships concerning numbers of fighters in the Sourcebook fit with the result to be expected based on that quote?

Thanks in advance.

Admiral Drason wrote:Just a nit pick its not an SSD.

Super star destroyer is just rebel slang for a Comand Ship or Super Dreadnought.

SSD flows from the fingers more easily than "Imperial Star Dreadnaught."

(Edited for stupidity.)

*Ahem* Star Dreadnought.

Firefox wrote:*Ahem* Star Dreadnought.

So would an Executer be called and ESD?

Wait a second...isn't the Dreadnaught a clone-wars era ship built by Rendili Star Drive? My impression was that Dreadnaughts were considered hulking, lumbering antiquated backup ships by the time the super star destroyers were in service.

Every Star Wars book I've seen has referred to the KDY star destroyers as "Star Destroyers" and to the Super Star Destroyer as such. I've never seen it called a "Super Dreadnaught." Am I just badly out of date on this?

Also, whatever happened to Victory-class star destroyers?

RThurmont wrote:Wait a second...isn't the Dreadnaught a clone-wars era ship built by Rendili Star Drive? My impression was that Dreadnaughts were considered hulking, lumbering antiquated backup ships by the time the super star destroyers were in service.

Every Star Wars book I've seen has referred to the KDY star destroyers as "Star Destroyers" and to the Super Star Destroyer as such. I've never seen it called a "Super Dreadnaught." Am I just badly out of date on this?

Also, whatever happened to Victory-class star destroyers?

You're just out of date.

The ITW:OT gave the Executor a new name (one that had already been speculated though): an Executor-class Star Dreadnought. The older "Super Star Destroyer" name was deemed a Rebel slang name.

RThurmont wrote:Wait a second...isn't the Dreadnaught a clone-wars era ship built by Rendili Star Drive? My impression was that Dreadnaughts were considered hulking, lumbering antiquated backup ships by the time the super star destroyers were in service.

Every Star Wars book I've seen has referred to the KDY star destroyers as "Star Destroyers" and to the Super Star Destroyer as such. I've never seen it called a "Super Dreadnaught." Am I just badly out of date on this?

Also, whatever happened to Victory-class star destroyers?

The Rendili Dreadnaught class ship is a star frigate, not a true star dreadnaught. And thus they are considered rather pathetic. The Executor class was mentioned to be a star dreadnaught for the third time (and in its most official form) in ITW OT. Previous uses of the term occured in the black fleet crisis trilogy, and the old Marvel comics series.

Victories are still around.

Next time someone mentions Star Dreadnaughts (or -noughts, spelling varies), add a dictionary definition of the ship-type, so as to avoid confusion with Rendili Dreadnaughts (who have nothing in common with real dreadnaughts).

Thanks for clearing that up. That said, I wish they hadn't renamed the SSD...it fit in well with the whole heirarchy of classes that seemed to peak with the Eclipse and Sovereign class in Dark Empire.

Speaking of the Rendili Dreadnaught, is the massive Seperatist ship that Anakin crash landed in the opening scene of ROTS considered to be of this class? While it lacks the characteristic massive front viewscreens seen in illustrations and has an observation tower and glasshouse bridge, it does seem to have proportions that are very similiar, if not identitcal, to those of Dreadnaughts seen in illustrations. Also, the EU literature mentions that the Dreadnaught was a very common ship in the Cold Wars, so it's conceivable that it was a design that both the Republic and the Seperatists would have had access to. So I'm curious-is that ship a Dreadnaught, or just a similiarly-shaped design?

No, the Invisible Hand was a Providence class ship. It was constructed by the CIS.

And I'm with you on the whole Star Dreadnaught bullshit. Sure, it is a dreadnaught, but that doesn't stop it being a Star Destroyer. That's not a destroyer type ship among the stars folks, that's a class in its own right Goddammit! It's still a freaking Star Destroyer Saxton, it is still a Star Destroyer! *spasms*

Sorry.

Nay, sir. The Invisible Hand is made by "Free Dac Volunteers and Pammant Docks" and is a Providence-class carrier-destroyer. It's also over a kilometer long. Far too long to be a Rendili Dreadnaught-class cruiser.

Edit: Ford beat me to it, except for the spasms of course.

RThurmont wrote:Thanks for clearing that up. That said, I wish they hadn't renamed the SSD...it fit in well with the whole heirarchy of classes that seemed to peak with the Eclipse and Sovereign class in Dark Empire.

How the hell did it fit well? A "super star destroyer" is the term handed out to any ship bigger then an Imperator class. It blanket covers over a dozen other ships. Breaking it down into star frigates, star destroyers, star cruisers, star battlecruisers, star carriers, and star dreadnaughts works much better.

Speaking of the Rendili Dreadnaught, is the massive Seperatist ship that Anakin crash landed in the opening scene of ROTS considered to be of this class? While it lacks the characteristic massive front viewscreens seen in illustrations and has an observation tower and glasshouse bridge, it does seem to have proportions that are very similiar, if not identitcal, to those of Dreadnaughts seen in illustrations. Also, the EU literature mentions that the Dreadnaught was a very common ship in the Cold Wars, so it's conceivable that it was a design that both the Republic and the Seperatists would have had access to. So I'm curious-is that ship a Dreadnaught, or just a similiarly-shaped design?

No, its a modified Providence class star destroyer.

Ok, that makes sense, thanks for answering my questions.

Basically, I haven't bought a Star Wars book since the mid 1990s and only regained my interest in the franchise after seeing Revenge of the Sith. Generally, though, since the last time I was interested in Star Wars, I've just been too busy first with college and then with entering the workforce and getting into the corporate identity sector to have any time at all to read something like a Star Wars technical book. Heck, until this year, I think it had been several years since I had even seen a Star Wars film. So I might be out of date on a few things...

One other really stupid question then that I have to ask, is what actually does "Dreadnaught" connotate in the Star Wars universe? If memory serves the original Dreadnaught was a prototype battleship built by the British around 1900-I don't think in reality Dreadnaught has ever referred to a class of ship, but I could be wrong. I'd be interested to note what differentiates a "Dreadnaught" and a "Destroyer" within Star Wars, since both classes seem to be used in interchangable roles, for example, both the Super Dreadnaught and the Providence-class destroyer were apparently used as flag ships at different times in history. Perhaps someone can clarify that.

RThurmont wrote: One other really stupid question then that I have to ask, is what actually does "Dreadnaught" connotate in the Star Wars universe? If memory serves the original Dreadnaught was a prototype battleship built by the British around 1900-I don't think in reality Dreadnaught has ever referred to a class of ship, but I could be wrong.

It means really really big and powerful ship. That's about the long and short of it. A lot of people are debating how if it actually fits into the proper naval role, should it be a battlecruisr instead, etc. But it appears they went with the usual layman idea of it just being one big mother.

I'd be interested to note what differentiates a "Dreadnaught" and a "Destroyer" within Star Wars, since both classes seem to be used in interchangable roles, for example, both the Super Dreadnaught and the Providence-class destroyer were apparently used as flag ships at different times in history. Perhaps someone can clarify that.

About the same difference as a destroyer and a battleship in our world. Grievous only used the Invisible Hand a couple of times from what we can tell. Other times he was in command of a Geonosian Dreadnaught. It appears that he shifted his flag when appropriate - Coruscant was a quick raid, using a star dreadnaught 1) would have made him the focus of the republic's firepower, which is bad from the POV of the plan, and 2) would have made it far more difficult for Kenobi and Skywalker to be lured aboard, again, bad for the plan. At Beledrone they wre taking a planet to hide the seppie leaders on, and a destroyer moving will attract much less attention from Republic Intellegence then a dreadnaught.

Ender wrote:No, its a modified Providence class star destroyer.

Star Destroyer? Since when is the Providence-class a Star Destoyer?

He means a lowercase "star destroyer", i.e., a Saxtonian destroyer-amongst-the-stars a la the "star cruiser" or "star dreadnought" as opposed to the canonical proper noun "Star Destroyer."

I think the lowercase usage of "star destroyer" cropped up in the ItWoSWT. The Hoth page, specifically.

I see.