r/StarWarsShips

So the MG-100 StarFortress SF-17 heavy bombers. from Star Wars Disney era. I'm mad that it took me a long time to realize this but it was just a dumbed down, mixed match horrifically of an ww2 bomber which to be honest it was better to just go to that route than trying make one for themselves and the Kirov airship from red alert 2. things made sense if the sequence and their try hard "intense" scene. till now I'm disappointed at that scene.

Today on Rendili Skunkworks we're going to be covering a ship that isn't Rendili sadly but we will make it batshit insane nonetheless!

This is the Recusant. It's a fine ship if a bit spindly, but you know what would make it better?

A Giant Fuck-off Ion Cannon!

Yes that's right we're going to strap a v-150 Planet Defender to the Recusant. To accomodate this we're going to have to remove most of the heavy turbolasers from the ship. I'd guess we'd have to remove 5 of the prow heavy turbolasers and downgrade the other 11 to Double Light Turblasers. Since the Recusant already has a great power supply of 73 × 10^(23) Watts we don't have to remove as much weaponry as we otherwise would have.

Stat Sheet

Recusant Planet Defender/Destroyer

Class: Light Destroyer

Length: 1,187m

Cost: 65,000,000 Credits

Crew Complement: 300

Armament:
1x v-150 Planet Defender Ion Cannon
11x Dual Light Turbolaser Turrets
30x Point Defense Laser Cannons
12x Point Defense Dual Light Laser Cannons
60x Point Defense Light Laser Cannons

Complement:
72x Vulture Droids
40,000x Battle Droids

Or, What if Rendili had pushed through and created a new Capital Ship before the Clone Wars. (The Art used here isn't mine. Here's the link to the Artist's gallery)*

A quick history lesson for those who don't know. When the Free Dac Engineering Corps was founded by the Quarren, one of their engineers stole the designs for the successor of the Dreadnought-Class from Rendili. These designs would later be used to create the Providence-Class used by the C.I.S.

Now, here I propose a scenario where Rendili, instead of staying put and later focusing on the Victory Initiative alongside Kuat, decided to move with their original plan and develop a new, improved Cruiser ship.

I am aware that Rendili suffered a lot of bad PR around this time, what with the Katana Fleet fiasco and having their new design stolen, and loosing contracts to Kuat, but that's precisely why it would make sense, at least to me, for them to push to make a new, better class of ship to sell.

As such, I present to you the Saber-Class Carrier/Destroyer.

Both its size and specifications are similar to the Providence, though slightly larger. This ship is 1100 meters long, 150 meters tall and 200 meters wide. It has a secondary bridge that is exposed, similar to the Providence, though it sits far closer to the overall structure of the ship rather than what we see with its C.I.S counterpart.

3 Ion Engines of Kuat/Naboonian make allow for incredible sublight speeds, and a Class 1.5 Hyperdrive makes it one of the fastest capital ships in the Galaxy at this point, not accounting for the Acclamator.

Where it diverges, however, is in the megastructure at the prow and crew requirements. The in-universe explanation for this design choice is to take inspiration from the Hammerhead designs from the Old Republic to inspire a feeling of being made for the Republic and protection. It also has some practical reasons, too. The main bridge is also located in the megastructure, on the upper half, allowing direct line of sight with forward elements.

The crew requirement is also extremely reduced in comparison to the Dreadnought-Class, mainly due to the usage and improvement of the Katana Fleet Automation System (improved so it can't be hijacked a second time).

The ship has 2 main configurations based on the role it takes.

• Carrier

As a Carrier, the Saber can carry nearly 400 starfighters and a dozen shuttles (This is based on some rough math and estimations on my part, so take this with a grain of salt).

Weapons are arranged for complete coverage and potential broadside action, but the real kicker is the prow. In this configuration, the hull of the prow is bare of any weapons but is reinforced to facilitate hammering action. Now, this isn't so the ship can go into close range. It's a Carrier for God's sake.

No, the reason behind this is to facilitate escape. If the ship is ever cornered, the Saber can use its superior engines and enhanced prow to essentially "cut" through whatever is blocking its path of escape.

• Destroyer

The Destroyer variant, as the name suggests, is where the firepower can be found, and with a very minor reduction to it's fighter complement, being reduced from 400 to roughly 200 fighters, or as little as 144 total for reactor and cable space.

In this configuration, the megastructure is blistering with turbolasers, with standard coverage along its sides, and some of you may understand from reading the name. This configuration is called the "Cross of Fire," mainly because of the sheer amount of forward laser fire that can be outputted. With a Time-on-Target strategy, a single Saber can completely burn right through even a Lucrehulk from sheer intensity.

Now, I would like to close this post with 2 questions:

- How do you think the Clone Wars would have gone if this ship had been available for use?

- And, if it were you in Rendili's place, what kind of ship would you have made as a successor for the Dreadnought in time for the Clone Wars?

*A lot of people have commented this, so a disclaimer: The picture isn't Star Wars, it's from EVE online. I didn't notice this, but it didn't matter. I didn't build the ship around the image, the image is just a visual aid I found that matched what I wanted to convey. If that bothers you, I apologize. I should have marked it earlier, but I didn't know.

I saw this on Facebook Marketplace in SoCal. Seems distinctly Star Warsy with the shield deflector domes on top and it kinda resembles the concept image from The Art of the Rise of Skywalker book.

It's large unfinished model, made of wood and plastic, over four feet long, and seemingly too detailed for a throwaway tradeshow booth display. Seems like it was made to shoot with a movie camera in a studio, because of the heavy duty fixture?

I'm curious on others' thoughts, opinions, or insight?

Was playing my campaign as Eriadu and during an invasion of a planet in the South-East of the Galaxy i found these 2 cool looking ship and i am wondering if they possess a name.

As they kinda look like Lambda-shuttle (especially the cockpit part) but at the same time not (Is that a missile launcher ? and doesn't the turret block the path of the missile, if it is a launcher's)

Hello everyone!
The results of the polls are in, and we have the five models that are going to be the giveaway for the Star Wars Day.

The models are:
The Gladiator Star Destroyer (IMP/GAR), the Mandalorian Keldabe, the Nebula Star Destroyer, the Interdictor Star Destroyer, the TIE Interceptor + TIE Royal Guard - (X-Wing Scale)

You can find the models here: https://www.patreon.com/posts/may-4th-giveaway-158711340

May the force be with you! :D

Hi, I am looking for a small/medium leaning (up to 50 crew) prison ship in Star Wars but there seems to be vessels. Do you have any recommendations? I am lookin for imperial or clone wars era spacecraft. (Photo for attention)

Contents: pg1 TLDR version. pg1-4. explanation pg4-7. cleaner more detailed math section 

TLDR version: unmodified Acclamator floor space available for starfighters: old: 81,600m^2 => new: 112,800m^2 + 1551.88m long LAAT rail system that can accommodate vehicles with wingspans of up to 36.4m. (these numbers do not include the separate dorsal logistics hangar) 

BS-1 standard complement update: oldest: 407 GAT-12j Skipray Blastboats, 4,537 Tri-fighters, => old: 520 Blastboats, 5,889 Tri-fighters, => current: 631 Blastboats, 8,096 Tri-fighters. 

BS-1 ‘slow’ complement update: old: 2,160 Blastboats, 12,991 Tri-fighters-34,591 => current: 2,832 Blastboats, 13,437 Tri-fighters with potentially up to 41,757 if the accompanying blastboats carry their own Tri-fighters in addition to the ship carried complement. Restricted to class 2.0 hyperdrive speed of the blastboats, hence ‘slow’. 

The new BS-1 numbers also include additional rails that were installed on the ceilings of the ATTE/SPHA bays because, now that I have thought about their height, I realized that they would be tall enough for rails holding TRI-fighters. 

Based on provided LAAT/C and SPHA measurements from u/Desperate-Put-7603: 

Explanation: Ok, so for anyone who doesn’t remember the BS-1 project: 

https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWarsShips/comments/1m0nrh0/its_my_birthday_today_so_here_is_the_first_part/basic explanation, 

 https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWarsShips/comments/1m8zygo/bs1_math_section_part_1_i_couldnt_make_this_one/  math 1 

https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWarsShips/comments/1m903oi/bs1_math_section_part_ii/ math 2 

It is basically an attempt to figure out how many Droid Tri-fighters and Skipray Blastboats a slightly modified Acclamator could carry using external magnetic hull plating in addition to the ships existing hangar which would hot swap fighters to service them. Created by CIS and rebellion veteran and Lahara Sector Governor Warcrim In’all  

Now for anyone who has read my original post, I started by breaking down an unmodified Acclamator’s internal space: the main hangar floors, the bays where the ATTE’s and SPHA-Ts are stored since they connect directly to the hangar, and the LAAT/i rail system. You will also know that I based my breakdown on the ‘Incredible Cross Sections’ and that I was relatively conservative in my estimates.  

This manifested in two ways: 1. The clearance needed for the wingspan of the LAATs 2. the decision to accept the 15x15 measurement for the floor squares instead of 20x20. 

The reason for the first is that there was no official width for the LAAT/C and no reliable fan measurement at the time I did my original math, so when estimating the minimum length and width the main hangars would need to have for the LAAT wings to have clearance I used the minimum based on the LAAT/i: 17m. The same goes for the SPHA-Ts. Now, using the LAAT/i wingspan was not unreasonable at the time because the LAAT/I and c do appear side by side in the cross section and don’t look that much different in terms of wingspan, even if they are very different in other lore.  

This 17m minimum meant that the minimum length and width for the hangar would be what was needed to accommodate the smaller LAAT/i with at least one meter of distance between the wingtips and the hangar walls. The rail system itself was 4m wide so I subtracted that from the LAAT/i’s width and then divided by half to get how far the wing extended beyond the rail perimeter, but since this space would be needed twice (on either end of the rail system for length and width) you can just put in the vehicle width minus four meters plus 2 meters if you want to do the calculation for something else. This came out to 347.81m = 334.81m+6.5m+6.5m+2m, for the minimum hangar length. And the minimum width of 48.84m = 33.81+ 15m. I rounded up the length to 350m because an in-universe engineer would probably want a nice round number and because the 1m gap was only the minimum space I was ok with. I rounded the width up to 60m because in addition to its being a round number it looked like there was a greater distance between the LAATs and the outside hangar wall based on the floor squares.  

Since I had to choose between 15x15m and 20x20m for the floor squares, (the LAAT size comparison could have gone either way) I ended up choosing the more conservative 15x15m since it fit with my LAAT rail estimate and was the more conservative option because I did not want to overestimate the available space. This was important because the width of the ATTE bays was based on those floor squares.  

However, a few days ago I got a message from u/Desperate-Put-7603 who had some reliable measurements for the LAAT/c and the SPHA-T. He was asking about hangar height, so I gave him some estimates. He is making a heavy engineering unit for the imperial army with lots of large walkers, and he wanted to know if they would fit in an Acclamator.  But he also asked how the LAAT/c and SPHA-T sizes would affect the rest of my math, and that was what prompted me to take another look at calculating the Acclamator’s capacity.  

Because they do change my estimates a lot. To start with, it changed the Main hangars area from 42,000=>60,000m^2. My old dimensions for the Acclamators two main hangars were 350 meters long and 60 meters wide. My new dimensions are 375 meters long, 80 meters wide and 35 meters tall from floor to ceiling.  

The old Length was based on the minimum distance needed to accommodate the LAAT/i with the rail system and proper clearance rounded to the nearest whole number that I thought an in-universe engineer would pick.: 

334.81m + 6.5m + 6.5m + 1m + 1m = 347.81m (minimum) => 350 (rounded) 

The New length was calculated with the same method but an additional observation that the final floor square on the bow end of the hangar only has about ¼ of its length visible in the hangar. With these squares now being estimated as 20x20m instead of 15x15m. This should mean that the hangar length ends at 5m instead of a round 10 due to the additional 5 meters from the incomplete square.   

The New length is based on the width of the LAAT/c which is either 36.4m or 34m with either ending up being similar when rounded.  

334.81m + 34.4m (36.4m-2m) = 369.21m (minimum) => 375m (would have been 370m if not for the floor square) 

334.81m + 32m (34m-2m) = 366.81 => 375m  

The Old width was based on the minimum: 48.84m with the fact that the rail system was offset and had a large gap between it and the outside wall. I estimated it to be at least a 10m gap and this would correspond to the floor squares if they were all 15x15m because the hangar is four squares wide. 

However, the New 80m width is based on the minimum of 68.24 with the approximate 10m gap rounded to the nearest whole. This is supported if the floor squares if they are 20mx20m since the hangar is four wide. This floor square measurement is supported by the fact that the squares are as wide as the ATTE-SPHA bays which would have to be wide enough to accommodate a 18.81m wide SPHA.  

33.84m + 34.4m = 68.24m, + 10m = 78.24m => 80m  

Height: the hangar needs to be high enough for a SPHA-T to walk underneath a LAAT/c hanging from the ceiling with enough clearance to be safe.  

20.6m + 1m + 12.12m + 1m (rail) = 34.72m (minimum) => 35m 

ATTE/ SPHA bays: 

The Bays need to be long enough to hold one ATTE and one SPHA-T end to end with a 1m gap between them, and tall and wide enough to hold an 18.81m wide and 20.6m tall SPHA. 

Length: 55m <= 54.35m (minimum) = 13.2m (ATTE) + 1m (gap) + 40.15m (SPHA)| 

Width: W: 20m <= 19.81m (minimum)= |.5m (gap) + 18.81m (SPHA) + .5m (gap)| 

Height 20.6m + 1 = 21.6m (minimum) => 22m estimate  

These changes meant that the unmodified Acclamators internal area (available to starfighters) went from 81,600m^2= 42,000m^2 (2 x 350m x 60m) + 39,600m^2 (48 x 15m x 55m) to => 112,800m^2 = 60,000m^2 (2 x 380m x 80m) + 52,800m^2 (48 x 20m x 55m). 

Which is a significant increase of 38% in capacity. This does not take into account the separate logistics hangar which I leave untouched on my Acclamator projects. I do have measurements for it now if you are interested: L: 100m, W:30m H: 35m (the cieling is sloped downwards and this maximum height is right below the hangar door which opens on the dorsal side of the ship). These measurements are literally just eyeball based estimates from the cross section so take them with a grain of salt and one more thing to note is that the logistics hangar has two decks. So 2 x 100m x 30m = 6,000m^2 of space that I am not using for starfighters but could potentially be used if you absolutely wanted to. making the ships maximum total about 118,800m^2.  

BS-1 (5/2026) updated math breakdown: 

LAAT/c: L:28.82m W:36.4m H:12.12m  

Legends SPHA: L:40.15m, W:18.18m, H: 20.6m 

Legends Tri-fighter: L: 5.4m, W:3.45m, H:3.45m 

Legends Blastboat: L:25.m, W:14.3m, H:7.2m (W&H given are for landing configuration) 

Tri-fighter OA: 28.48m^2 = (5.4m + 1m) x (3.45m + 1m):  

Skipray Blastboat OA: 397.8m^2 (25m + 1m) x (14.3m + 1m)  

Formula for determining rail clearance minimum: LAAT/c –2m: = (VW-4m) + 2m 

4m (rail width) 

2m (1m of clearance beyond the LAAT wingspan on either side of the system) 

Main Hangar:  

L: 375m <= 369.21 (minimum) = 334.81m (rail) + 34.4(LAAT/c) | caveat* the number had to end in 5 because the final visible row of floor squares extends 1/4^(th) of the way into the hangar.  

W: 80m <= 78.24m <= 10m (rail system off center; farther from outside wall) + 68.24m (minimum): 33.84m(rail)+34.4m(LAAT/c)  

H: 35m<= 34.72m (minimum)= 20.6m (SPHA) + 12.12m(LAAT/c) +1m (clearance) + 1m (rail height)  

Area: 60,000m^2 = 2 x 30,000m^2 (each main hangar) = 2 x 375m (L) x 80m (W) 

Main hangar Starfighter storage breakdown: 1,470 Tri-fighters or 140 GAT-12j Blastboats 

Storage visual example when viewing each hangar from the BS-1s rear door: 

| : hangar wall or ATTE bay 

0 : Fighter in question (3.45m for Tri-fighter) (14.3m for Blastboat)  

+ : 1m open space between starfighters to allow technicians to operate around them 

---  : 2.5m open space as a pathway for small repulsorcraft or larger droids to move through and carry munitions or large spare parts down the length of the hangar to the rows of starfighters. Think a more high-tech version of this: https://i.imgflip.com/as6t0z.jpg  

...: the additional space left open at the outside wall of the hangar to allow repulsorcraft access to the ATTE bays 3.75m for tri-fighters, 1.5m for blastboats (this is in addition to about 3m of open space at the front of every ATTE/SPHA bay). 

Visual display of Tri-fighter layout when being serviced: 80m wide: 

|0—0+0—0+0—0+0—0+0—0+0—0+0—0+0...| 

There are 15 rows of Tri-fighters that are each 58 Tri-fighters deep (375m/6.4m). All of the Tri-fighters have a 2.5m space next to them large enough for a small repulsorcraft to come alongside them carrying munitions or heavy parts/ tools. This arrangement was made with the fighters actively being serviced in mind.  870 Tri-fighters on each hangar floor, 1740 in total. More fighters could be carried if they were just being loaded on to be carried through hyperspace using raw OA if they did not need work done: 1,052 in each hangar, 2,106 total. 

Visual display of the Blastboat layout when being serviced: 

|0—0+0—0+0...|  

There are 5 rows of blastboats with 14 Blastboats in each row. 70 blastboats per hangar able to be serviced and 140 total on both the main hangars floors. you could actually fit 72 in each hangar with 3 rows of 24 stored horizontally from the perspective of the visual display but the extra 2 were deemed to not be worth the extra effort required to reposition the blast boats when they entered through the rear hangar door.  

The ATTE/SPHA-T bays: 

L : 55m <= 54.35m (minimum) = 13.2m (ATTE) + 1m (gap) + 40.15m (SPHA) | 

W: 20m <= 19.81m (minimum)= |.5m (gap) + 18.81m (SPHA) + .5m (gap)| 

H: 22m <= 21.6m (minimum)= _ 20.6m + 1m (gap) _ 

Area: 52,800m^2 = 48 x 1100m^2 = 48 x 55m x 20m 

Bay floors Starfighter storage breakdown:1,536 Tri-fighters or 96 blastboats 

Visual representation of Tri-fighter storage when viewed from the front of the bay: 

|.0—0+0—0.|   (.) the additional space represents .1m here. 

There are four rows of Tri-fighters with 8 fighters in each row. The front of each bay actually has about 3mx20m of open space because the rows start a little further back in the bays, which allows room for the repulsorcraft to turn and enter. There are two open 2.5m paths that each row borders where small repulsorcraft and droids can pass through to carry heavy stuff. 

32 per bay x 48 bays = 1,536 Tri-fighters 

Visual representation of blastboat storage when viewed from the front |...0...|  

2 per bay x 48 bays = 96 blastboats that can be serviced in the bays.  

Blastboat storage is literally just two per bay with one behind the other since they are not wide enough to hold two rows but are wide enough for repulsorcraft to pass on either side of the blastboats. I thought there might potentially be room to store a row of 8 tri fighters with each pair of blast boats with enough space for a repulsorcraft to pass between them, but it ended up with only 2.45m of room even if both the blastboats and tri-fighters were completely flush with the wall. 

Rails on the hangar cieling: Visual Representation: 

|00000000000000000000000...| hangar ceiling with rail systems holding Tri-fighters 

|_______________________________| hangar floor (normally has starfighters 

In each of the main hangars there are 58 80m wide rails that can hold 23 tri-fighters each given that they do not require even the 1m of space between fighters that are just being stored. The total for both hangars is 2,668 Tri-fighters, = 2 x 58 x 23= 2 x 1,334 tri-fighters. 

*Rails on the ATTE/SPHA Bay ceilings: (this is new to these calculations because I never considered the height of the ATTE bays or the potential for putting rails on their ceilings in my previous posts) Visual Representation: but 22m of height is plenty to give 4.45m to the Tri-fighters and rail systems, while having enough below to service other fighters. 

|00000..| ..: represents 2.75m of additional space. 

Each bay has 8 20m rails stretching the width of the bay which store 5 tri-fighters each.  

Total tri-fighters: 1,920 Tri-fighters = 48 x 40 = 48 x 8 x 5  

Total internal complement for the BS-1 Acclamator: 140 Blastboats (main hangar floors) + 6,124 Tri-fighters: 2,668 (main hangar rails) + 1,536 (ATTE bay floors) + 1,920 (ATTE bay rails). This is the standard configuration I have chosen for this (5/2026) version of the BS-1. 

Total fighters that can be serviced at one time: 236 Blastboats: 140 (main hangar floors) + 96 (Bay floors) or 3,276 Tri-fighters: 1,740 (main hangar floors) + 1,536 (ATTE bay floors).  

External complement: given that the increase in internal capacity primarily benefits the number of Tri-fighters I have decided to rework the external storage on the hull to have a higher ratio of blastboats to Tri-fighters than previous versions: 1 blastboat : 4 trifighters. 

Total external area useable: 251,330.288m^2 (unchanged from previous calculations) 

4:1 Step 1: 113.6 + 397.8 = 511.4m^2 Step 2: 251,330.288m^2/ 511.4m^2= 491.455 Step 3: .455 x 511.4m^2 = 232.687m^2/ 28.4m^2 = 8 extra, Step 5 491 x 4 = 1964 + 8 = 1972 Tri-fighters: 491 blastboats  

This is compared to the previous external complement of 4,087 tri-fighters and 340 blastboats. If the new BS-1 complement used the old external hull configuration then the complement would by 480 blastboats and 10,211 tri-fighters, but I prefer having more blastboats because of their greater versatility as long as the 10:1 overall ratio is maintained so they can get escorts when operating alone. Another complement that I considered was 727 blastboats and 6,560 tri-fighters, but I ultimately went with:  

(5/2026) Total for standard ship: 631 GAT-12j Skipray Blastboats, 8,096 Tri-fighters 

 

 

 

 

Are there any calculations or measurements of the Mantis' size? There doesn't seem to be any official length or anything for the ship anywhere and I'm not sure how one would go about measuring it in the game. I just need the length or height and the rest I can figure out from there

The ICE-variant Acclamator was the brainchild of Colonel Vaarn Kel, a decorated veteran of the Clone Wars who rose to command the Imperial Army Corps of Engineers in the early years of the New Order. Kel first proposed the concept in 10 BBY during a closed session of the Imperial High Command on Coruscant, frustrated by the slow pace of planetary fortification during the Empire’s expansion into the Outer Rim. His idea, to convert existing Acclamator hulls into dedicated heavy construction platforms rather than building new ones from the keel, was approved by Grand Moff Tarkin himself, who saw it as a way to rapidly “Imperialize” newly conquered worlds before Rebel cells could take root.

116 Acclamators would be converted under the ICE program, all of them drawn from the veteran fleet that had survived the Clone Wars. The conversion itself (if it could even be called that) was simple, requiring only the removal of the ceiling-mounted LAAT rails in the two primary hangers. Other than that, the only difference compared to a base Acclamator was the number and type of vehicles carried.

The two primary hangar bays, at 375 x 80 x 35 meters, could hold 12 SPHAs, 6 HI-CTs, 6 OI-CTs, 3 AT-HHs, and 9 AT-ACTs each. While the 48 AT-TE/SPHA bays, at 55 x 20 x 22 meters, could hold 1 SPHA and 7 AT-CTs each. The Acclamator's small dual-decked logistics hangar, 100 x 30 x 31 meters, accommodated ten V-82 dropships for a combined passenger capacity of 360 Corps specialists per trip, as well as a small fighter complement of 48 TIE Fighters.

Ironically, it would be the logistics walkers the Imperial Corps of Engineers used that would be more difficult. The two most important walkers, the HI-CT and the OI-CT, were taller than the primary hangars, both of them being over forty meters tall. The solution was to have them be in a kneeling position, bringing them down to ~25 meters in height. This presented another problem: in this configuration, the HI-CTs and OI-CTs could not deploy or embark under their own power. The solution to *that* problem was to create wheeled attachments that could be rigged to the HI-CTs and OI-CTs. A new tractor beam variant of the SPHA was developed and added to the loadout, which would tractor the walkers during deployment or embarkment. Kel would not be entirely pleased about this, as the SPHAs were not originally intended to be a part of the walker complement and took up room that could've ideally be spent on other models. But it was pointed out that the presence of SPHAs were not entirely without merit, as after deploying the HI-CTs and OI-CTs, the SPHAs could then be refitted with one of the more common offensive loadouts, providing significant defensive protection for the landing and construction site.

The new ICE Acclamators, dubbed the Munitor-subclass, would see immediate success in high-priority operations across the Mid and Outer Rims. During Operation Domino in 2-1 BBY, seventeen Munitors would be deployed to create enlarged Imperial garrisons, which assisted in the brutal crackdown and suppression of the revolting worlds. They would also see notable service during the Mid Rim Retreat of 2-3 ABY, although by this point, the Munitors had been supplemented and in some cases even replaced by the much larger Consolidator-class Corps Assault Carriers.

At 2000 meters long, the Consolidators had much better weaponry, a much larger and deadlier starfighter complement, and were capable of carrying an entire Imperial Army Corps of up to 38,000 troops, along with 692 various landing craft, 800 various walkers, and 4,674 repulsorlift vehicles. While the Consolidator's primary role was deploying Army Corps, it was not uncommon for some to carry an Imperial Corps of Engineers detachment as well, and unlike the Munitors, there were no problems with deploying HI-CTs and OI-CTs, as the Consolidator had 60 meter tall hangars.

In 4 ABY, the aftermath of the Battle of Endor and the subsequent fragmentation of the Empire into multiple infighting warlord factions saw many Munitors either destroyed in the chaos or mothballed at the Kuat reserve yards. Six of them would find limited service under Warlord Zsinj, but by 9 ABY the last confirmed Imperial Munitor had been scuttled by its commanding officer rather than allow it to fall into New Republic hands. Two Munitors would be captured by the New Republic during the Taking of Kuat in 8.5 ABY, but these would eventually be scrapped in 25 ABY, just two months before the beginning of the Yuuzhan Vong War.

*****

A couple of things: first, I’d like to thank u/Flat_Abroad9238 for his help in figuring out the heights of the hangars and bays, and for letting me know that walkers (or at least the AT-AT) were capable of kneeling. Without our delightful chat, I would’ve given up on the idea. He also corrected some misconceptions I had about the Acclamator, including the idea that the primary hangars were back to back, and not side by side.

This is primarily Legends-based, but it does include several Canon ideas such as the AT-ACT, AT-HH, HI-CT, OI-CT, V-82, and the Mid Rim Retreat. I generally try to incorporate Canon characters and starships/vehicles in Legends in some way, if I think it’s possible. The walkers mentioned, I especially headcanon as existing in some form, as they’re four of only five logistics walkers that I know of.

Lastly, this is my first time trying to create some sort of lore. Usually, when I’m making my carriers, I don’t really take the time to come up with a backstory, only really being concerned with “does this thing fit in this ship, and does it make some sense?”. So please let me know what you think.

Just wondering why we dont see more fighters with folding wings to better fit in hangers like in real life

I love love love the arquitens. If I found a genie my first wish would be asking for a corvette sized aruitens class cause they are so very pretty and cool.

(If you disagree you're bad and wrong)

Ew change my mind