[Mikal768]What if the Federation followed Mike's suggestion?

[Junghalli]

Just because I'm giving the Federations a few months (could be as few as two), it doesn't mean that the wormhole is necessarily destructible.

Throwing a large bomb into it should destabilize it. A Kon Ma terrorist was going to do that to the Bajoran Wormhole and he seemed pretty confident that it would work. Why not try it? It's not like they've got much to loose. Would you rather have your worlds overrun and have to fight a guerilla war, or burn the only bridge your conquerors can use to get to you before they find it?

suppose you’re a Klingon or Romulan diplomat or analyst who has prepared a report similar to Darth Wong’s strategic evaluation of the Empire.

They're in essentially the same position as the Federation.

Or, suppose you’re a Borg.

Well, since the Borg are a collective consciousness I would actually be the Borg.
Same thing, I'd use my foreknowledge to cut off the wormhole before the Empire can find it. If that doesn't work I'd use the interdimensional portals they used to get into 8472 space to find a nice, safe universe, withdraw all my cubes there, close the door behind me, and start assimilating it.

[Patrick Degan]

I was under the impression that the closest galaxies would still be years away, even with Hyperdrive.

Given the fact that they can go from a Core System to the Outer Rim in a matter of hours, and the distance from here to Andromeda is only 60 times the diameter of our galaxy, they would hardly need years. If ths galaxy in question was Andromeda (which, at 3 million light years, easily meets the "far, far away" criterion), they would need weeks, not years.

The only real problem would be fuel consumption during the trip, so they would have to modify their vessels for greater fuel capacity (or build tankers for mid-trip refueling).

Would a stardestroyer require refueling? My impression was that the hypermatter reactor system is somewhat akin to the nuclear power core in a modern attack submarine, at least in principle: the fuel is contained within the reactor core, which is designed to provide sufficent power through the vessel's operational lifetime (or until a scheduled midlife core replacement) which would obviate the necessity for refueling. Or am I mistaken?

[SirNitram]

I was under the impression that the closest galaxies would still be years away, even with Hyperdrive.

Given the fact that they can go from a Core System to the Outer Rim in a matter of hours, and the distance from here to Andromeda is only 60 times the diameter of our galaxy, they would hardly need years. If ths galaxy in question was Andromeda (which, at 3 million light years, easily meets the "far, far away" criterion), they would need weeks, not years.

The only real problem would be fuel consumption during the trip, so they would have to modify their vessels for greater fuel capacity (or build tankers for mid-trip refueling).

Would a stardestroyer require refueling? My impression was that the hypermatter reactor system is somewhat akin to the nuclear power core in a modern attack submarine, at least in principle: the fuel is contained within the reactor core, which is designed to provide sufficent power through the vessel's operational lifetime (or until a scheduled midlife core replacement) which would obviate the necessity for refueling. Or am I mistaken?

Operational range is only, IIRC, given for the Acclamator, but she's rated for 160,000LY at .6 on the hyperdrive. It's possible that easing off the throttle will extend it, but you'd need some tankers to make it all the way. Or, I suppose, one large scale ship simply loaded full of fuel.

[Darth Fanboy]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Caamas was not technically part of the rebellion, nor did the destruction of Caamas deal with the Rebels at all. Also, since the Empire never really took responsiblity for Caamas, Alderaan wasn't necissarily supporting the rebels by harboring Caamasi refugees.

Although Alderaan, was indeed led by those who opposed the Empire.

Correct that it wasn't technically part of the Rebellion, but they did not support the ideology of the Empire either.

[Patrick Degan]

Given the fact that they can go from a Core System to the Outer Rim in a matter of hours, and the distance from here to Andromeda is only 60 times the diameter of our galaxy, they would hardly need years. If ths galaxy in question was Andromeda (which, at 3 million light years, easily meets the "far, far away" criterion), they would need weeks, not years.

The only real problem would be fuel consumption during the trip, so they would have to modify their vessels for greater fuel capacity (or build tankers for mid-trip refueling).

Would a stardestroyer require refueling? My impression was that the hypermatter reactor system is somewhat akin to the nuclear power core in a modern attack submarine, at least in principle: the fuel is contained within the reactor core, which is designed to provide sufficent power through the vessel's operational lifetime (or until a scheduled midlife core replacement) which would obviate the necessity for refueling. Or am I mistaken?

Operational range is only, IIRC, given for the Acclamator, but she's rated for 160,000LY at .6 on the hyperdrive. It's possible that easing off the throttle will extend it, but you'd need some tankers to make it all the way. Or, I suppose, one large scale ship simply loaded full of fuel.

To extend the discussion a bit: I have to admit that this is the first time I've heard of Star Wars ships having a short refueling requirement. Borrowing again on the nuclear submarine model —say your fleet boat runs itself at maximum speed for an exceptional period of time and does so multiple times, and to get this additional power they've let out the control rods which increases the fission rate in the reactor. It might shorten the operational life of that reactor and require replacement, say one or two years in advance of schedule, but it would not leave the vessel short of fuel within X number of days/weeks. The overall physics of the design would still obviate the need for core refueling over a period of several years.

To go with possibly a more relevant model in SF: a black-hole power core. The "fuel" is essentially self-sustaining depending upon the mass of the singularity and its decay rate is a fundamental property. For a small black hole, it would be feasible to feed enough material to offset its decay rate and thereby sustain it. But because of the nature of the core, this material could be anything and could be harvested from any source in space. Powdered asteroidal matter, for example.

Essentially, my thinking is proceeding from the idea that a starship, especially a military starship, would have be based around a power system with built-in longterm stability and independence from the necessity for frequent refueling. Especially given the possible conditions under which a ship may be cut off from convenient resupply and would have to operate independently into an indefinite period of time.

I know I wouldn't design my starship any other way.

[Battlehymn Republic]

Why not try it? It's not like they've got much to loose. Would you rather have your worlds overrun and have to fight a guerilla war, or burn the only bridge your conquerors can use to get to you before they find it?

Of course I'd try it- it's almost literally cutting the Gordian knot. However, since I'm the one creating this version of ST meets SW, I'm making the wormhole extra-powerful, so the Federation is forced to take careful measures. All of this is set up so that somehow the Federation found out that the Empire is bad news, and wrote the exact strategic evaluation that Darth Wong wrote on the site.

[Darth Wong]

Essentially, my thinking is proceeding from the idea that a starship, especially a military starship, would have be based around a power system with built-in longterm stability and independence from the necessity for frequent refueling. Especially given the possible conditions under which a ship may be cut off from convenient resupply and would have to operate independently into an indefinite period of time.

I know I wouldn't design my starship any other way.

However, in this galaxy the propulsion systems are such that any part of the galaxy is never more than a few hours away. If every real-life naval vessel could easily return to American seaports in 8 hours or less from anywhere on the globe, there would be a lot less need for long-term independence.

[Ender]

Well, the Star Destroyer will eventually run out of fuel and that will stop it, if they haven' made new fueling facilities already.

A stardestroyer is powered by a hypermatter reactor. It's not going to run out of fuel anytime soon.

Yes actually, it will. They will have to operate at reduced power and acceleration for a prolonged campaign until they get a logistics base set up. Granted, reduced power wills till let them own the Trek forces, but it grants them more then 3-4 hours peak operation time

[Ender]

Would a stardestroyer require refueling? My impression was that the hypermatter reactor system is somewhat akin to the nuclear power core in a modern attack submarine, at least in principle: the fuel is contained within the reactor core, which is designed to provide sufficent power through the vessel's operational lifetime (or until a scheduled midlife core replacement) which would obviate the necessity for refueling. Or am I mistaken?

Operational range is only, IIRC, given for the Acclamator, but she's rated for 160,000LY at .6 on the hyperdrive. It's possible that easing off the throttle will extend it, but you'd need some tankers to make it all the way. Or, I suppose, one large scale ship simply loaded full of fuel.

To extend the discussion a bit: I have to admit that this is the first time I've heard of Star Wars ships having a short refueling requirement. Borrowing again on the nuclear submarine model —say your fleet boat runs itself at maximum speed for an exceptional period of time and does so multiple times, and to get this additional power they've let out the control rods which increases the fission rate in the reactor. It might shorten the operational life of that reactor and require replacement, say one or two years in advance of schedule, but it would not leave the vessel short of fuel within X number of days/weeks. The overall physics of the design would still obviate the need for core refueling over a period of several years.

To go with possibly a more relevant model in SF: a black-hole power core. The "fuel" is essentially self-sustaining depending upon the mass of the singularity and its decay rate is a fundamental property. For a small black hole, it would be feasible to feed enough material to offset its decay rate and thereby sustain it. But because of the nature of the core, this material could be anything and could be harvested from any source in space. Powdered asteroidal matter, for example.

Essentially, my thinking is proceeding from the idea that a starship, especially a military starship, would have be based around a power system with built-in longterm stability and independence from the necessity for frequent refueling. Especially given the possible conditions under which a ship may be cut off from convenient resupply and would have to operate independently into an indefinite period of time.

I know I wouldn't design my starship any other way.

You are forgetting a couple of key differences though:

1) Stricter mass limits
2) Far higher peak power
3) greater energy demands

While that model is the best, it doesn't work for large starships very well. As the ICS says, the Venator must annihilate 40,000 tons of matter each second at peak power. Its mass is limited by its peak power and acceleration. Thus you have a strict limit as to how long you can operate at peak power, and it is far les then 25 years. My own estimates give EFPHs (Effective Full Power Hours) of 10-20 hours for various craft, and peak acceleration times of 4-6 hours.

[Patrick Degan]

Operational range is only, IIRC, given for the Acclamator, but she's rated for 160,000LY at .6 on the hyperdrive. It's possible that easing off the throttle will extend it, but you'd need some tankers to make it all the way. Or, I suppose, one large scale ship simply loaded full of fuel.

To extend the discussion a bit: I have to admit that this is the first time I've heard of Star Wars ships having a short refueling requirement. Borrowing again on the nuclear submarine model —say your fleet boat runs itself at maximum speed for an exceptional period of time and does so multiple times, and to get this additional power they've let out the control rods which increases the fission rate in the reactor. It might shorten the operational life of that reactor and require replacement, say one or two years in advance of schedule, but it would not leave the vessel short of fuel within X number of days/weeks. The overall physics of the design would still obviate the need for core refueling over a period of several years.

To go with possibly a more relevant model in SF: a black-hole power core. The "fuel" is essentially self-sustaining depending upon the mass of the singularity and its decay rate is a fundamental property. For a small black hole, it would be feasible to feed enough material to offset its decay rate and thereby sustain it. But because of the nature of the core, this material could be anything and could be harvested from any source in space. Powdered asteroidal matter, for example.

Essentially, my thinking is proceeding from the idea that a starship, especially a military starship, would have be based around a power system with built-in longterm stability and independence from the necessity for frequent refueling. Especially given the possible conditions under which a ship may be cut off from convenient resupply and would have to operate independently into an indefinite period of time.

I know I wouldn't design my starship any other way.

You are forgetting a couple of key differences though:

1) Stricter mass limits
2) Far higher peak power
3) greater energy demands

While that model is the best, it doesn't work for large starships very well. As the ICS says, the Venator must annihilate 40,000 tons of matter each second at peak power. Its mass is limited by its peak power and acceleration. Thus you have a strict limit as to how long you can operate at peak power, and it is far les then 25 years. My own estimates give EFPHs (Effective Full Power Hours) of 10-20 hours for various craft, and peak acceleration times of 4-6 hours.

A couple of factors I had not considered and I'd not read the ICS passage on the matter.

[RThurmont]

Without wanting to get into the debate of whether or not Star Destroyers or other vessels from the SW universe require refueling (at the very least, for an extended intergalactic journey, I expect resupply would be neccessary), I would like to challenge the first suggestion made by Darth Wong.

I think that moving supply depots from one set of stationary locations to another set of stationary locations, albeit in harder to reach areas, would be difficult for the Federation to implement in preparation for an invasion from the Galactic Empire, for two reasons:

1. The Federation would be pressed for time, and relocating the contents of every supply depot and equipment cache to highly inaccessible areas would be an extremely time consuming process, and it might not be possible to complete such a defensive measure ahead of the arrival of Imperial forces.

2. Relocating critical supplies to inaccessible areas would make the Federation much less efficient from an operational standpoint. It would take much longer for ships in need of fresh supplies, spare parts or additional munitions to get them, and in some cases, replenishment could become prohibitive. For example, suppose a Federation starship was severely damaged in an engagement with an enemy vessel. Instead of having convenient access to a spare parts inventory, the damaged vessel has to travel a long distance in a state of extreme disrepair, and through extremely hazardous conditions, in order to get to needed equipment. Quite possibly, badly damaged ships would have to be scuttled.

I think a better idea could be drawn from Darth Wong's second suggestion. Just as command and training centers would become highly mobile, resupply bases could be mobilized as well. Why bother to have a network of fixed supply depots anyway? Why not instead maintain a nimble fleet of mobile repair tenders and supply ships, scheduled using sophisticated mathematical models to optimize the availibility of supplies, convenient access to supply ships by mainline vessels, and security? Commercial airlines already use computerized scheduling systems to maximize the use of their aircraft, in fact, they've been doing it since the 1980s.

By the 24th century, computer systems and mathematics should have advanced enough to permit the creation of a constantly changing timetable that would ensure that supplies were convenient to all Federation starships, yet relatively secure from Imperial seizure. It would be somewhat like a computer encryption. The Imperials would be able to seize supply ships occasionally, but unless they were able to decipher and interpret the model, they would find it very difficult to have a meaningful impact on the Federation's ability to service its fleet. Space is vast, and the possible routings are endless.

Again, I think Darth Wong's second suggestion would be a great idea for the federation In business today we're already moving towards widespread implementation of highly complex systems to optimize productivity, so I think applying the concept of maximum mobility and flexibility to the supply system as well as management and training systems would be something the Federation should do. That said, knowing how stupid the Federation is, I doubt that any of the suggestions made would occur to them (or more precisely, Star Trek's writers).

[Tiger Ace]

Essentially, my thinking is proceeding from the idea that a starship, especially a military starship, would have be based around a power system with built-in longterm stability and independence from the necessity for frequent refueling. Especially given the possible conditions under which a ship may be cut off from convenient resupply and would have to operate independently into an indefinite period of time.

I know I wouldn't design my starship any other way.

However, in this galaxy the propulsion systems are such that any part of the galaxy is never more than a few hours away. If every real-life naval vessel could easily return to American seaports in 8 hours or less from anywhere on the globe, there would be a lot less need for long-term independence.

Though If I recall correctly, the fact there are no straight hyperspace routes all over the galaxy, it would take quite abit more.

[Noble Ire]

Essentially, my thinking is proceeding from the idea that a starship, especially a military starship, would have be based around a power system with built-in longterm stability and independence from the necessity for frequent refueling. Especially given the possible conditions under which a ship may be cut off from convenient resupply and would have to operate independently into an indefinite period of time.

I know I wouldn't design my starship any other way.

However, in this galaxy the propulsion systems are such that any part of the galaxy is never more than a few hours away. If every real-life naval vessel could easily return to American seaports in 8 hours or less from anywhere on the globe, there would be a lot less need for long-term independence.

Correct. As I recall, depending on the route taken, it can take up to a month or two to cross the galaxy (although it can also take a vastly shorter amount of time, it all depends on what hyperspace lanes are nearby.)

Though If I recall correctly, the fact there are no straight hyperspace routes all over the galaxy, it would take quite abit more.

[Mikal768]

Refueling aside, it'd take a little while for the SW ships to actually be able to map out safe hyperspace routes through the galaxy, let alone plot out said routes and travel them consistently.

One of the reasons SW travel can be so fast is that there are several well known trade routes in said galaxy, which can account for relativly quick travel times. In the ST galaxy, you can't assume the same.

After all, even after 25,000 years of galactic travel (with perhaps more, with the Hutts and Rakatan), there were still mishaps, people being taken off course, and general accidents, although it's rare.

Using SW standard hyperdrive, it'd be a long time before the actual ST galaxy could be traveled with any fair degree of accuracy.

[The Spartan]

Refueling aside, it'd take a little while for the SW ships to actually be able to map out safe hyperspace routes through the galaxy, let alone plot out said routes and travel them consistently.

Are we forgetting something? Linky The pertinent part being: "Specially designed for deep space exploration..."

One of the reasons SW travel can be so fast is that there are several well known trade routes in said galaxy, which can account for relativly quick travel times. In the ST galaxy, you can't assume the same.

And it has nothing at all to do with hyperdrives being insanely fast... oh, wait.

After all, even after 25,000 years of galactic travel (with perhaps more, with the Hutts and Rakatan), there were still mishaps, people being taken off course, and general accidents, although it's rare.

And what do malfunctions have to do with the speed of hyperspace use? Oh, I remember. Nothing. Malfunctions are a normal, if undesired, part of any kind of machinery. Particularly ones as complex and requiring as much power as a hyperdrive. You can do various things to minimize their occurance but they will eventually happen.

Using SW standard hyperdrive, it'd be a long time before the actual ST galaxy could be traveled with any fair degree of accuracy.

Bullshit. Using the aforementioned probe droids, FTL sensors and these funny little things called telescopes the can map out hyperspace routes with ease. And did we not forget that once they capture a ship in our galaxy that they'll have access to star charts?

[Mikal768]

Refueling aside, it'd take a little while for the SW ships to actually be able to map out safe hyperspace routes through the galaxy, let alone plot out said routes and travel them consistently.

Are we forgetting something? Linky The pertinent part being: "Specially designed for deep space exploration..."

This still takes time. Odds are for every single route found, a lot of probe droids are going to be destroyed. And that still doesn't change the fact that until the SW ships can create long term routes that they'll have to send out probe droids every time they travel, to account for the changes in position from stellar drift.

One of the reasons SW travel can be so fast is that there are several well known trade routes in said galaxy, which can account for relativly quick travel times. In the ST galaxy, you can't assume the same.

And it has nothing at all to do with hyperdrives being insanely fast... oh, wait.

Did I make any mention of hyperdrives? Let's see, nope. There's no denying that hyperdrive technology is fast, but it's much less forgiving mistake wise. And the fact they have an unexplored galaxy will mean it'll take awhile. Even the Empire doesn't have unlimited resources.

After all, even after 25,000 years of galactic travel (with perhaps more, with the Hutts and Rakatan), there were still mishaps, people being taken off course, and general accidents, although it's rare.

And what do malfunctions have to do with the speed of hyperspace use?

Simple, in a galaxy with no navigational data, (and using the navagational data of any species they MAY be lucky to encounter before using the probe droids in mass still won't be totally useful, since they don't account for any hyperspace type of travel needs, outside of astronimcal positions.) mishaps which might only hinder a ship in a well traveled space lane can cripple a ship in space that is largely unknown to them, far from the nessecary facilities to rescue and repair them.

Using SW standard hyperdrive, it'd be a long time before the actual ST galaxy could be traveled with any fair degree of accuracy.

Bullshit. Using the aforementioned probe droids, FTL sensors and these funny little things called telescopes the can map out hyperspace routes with ease.

Which is why it took thousands of years for it to be done in the SW universe, and even then there are many routes which get lost, forgotten, or change over time as stellar drift happens, right? Unless the galaxy is static, neverchanging, and largely motionless.

And did we not forget that once they capture a ship in our galaxy that they'll have access to star charts?

Star charts which are in use for Warp capable vessels, not those which use hyperspace style travel.

[Mikal768]

GE: Clarification: If anything, the star charts from a ST ship would be useless because they wouldn't be detailed enough for the navigational needs for SW ships, unless they took microjumps the entire way, thus severly negating their speed advantage.

The fact that a hyperspace jump needs to be completely plotted out before being implemented shows that they must need detailed information, most likely more detailed then what could be provided by a captured star map, especially since said information would need to be constantly updated.

[Zwinmar]

I dont see why the Empire couldnt have the equivalent of an exploration vessel, thats designed to find those hyperdrive routes

[Mikal768]

I dont see why the Empire couldnt have the equivalent of an exploration vessel, thats designed to find those hyperdrive routes

Technically any of their vessels can count as exploration vessels. The problem is that without safe routes its EXTREMLY dangerous to do so, with one small mistake in the calculations having a good chance to kill you. I never said it couldn't be done, but it'd take awhile. It took hundreds if not thousands of years for the SW galaxy to be totally explored, and even in 'contemporary' SW there's problems with navigation in several regions of space.

[hvb]

How much fuel endurance do SW ships have?

The ICS says that a Acclamator has a range of 250,000 ly and a .6 hyperdrive; now the Falcon has a .5, and this seems to be "very fast", so .55 or .6 must be a normal-to-fast ship speed (and if .55 then .6 is normal-to-slow). Thus the 50 million c speed for the Tatooine-Alderaan run (which is a fast route) naively gives an endurance of 1/200 years, or 2 days.

Of course the endurance in ly may well be based on an average speed route, rather then being an absolute (i.e. in higher dust concentrations the fuel consumption does not decrease though the speed does), so endurance may be as much as 10 times this, with the range an average.

If the endurance is in fact, say, 20 days disregarding interstellar dust density, then the distance a ship can travel in intergalactic space goes up sharply (intergalactic space is barren compared to the interstellar dustball we call "empty space"), so speeds may well exceed the 50 million c observed for the comparatively dustfree, and thus fast, Tatooine-Alderaan run by a few orders of magnitude (10 to 1000, say).

Of course, if no such link between dust density and speed exist then the 250,000 ly range would stand unchanged in the intergalactic medium; but then the speeds on all routes in the SW galacy would need be near identical too, which is not the case, we observe 2 orders of magnitude between the Coruscant-Tatooine and the Tatooine-Alderaan runs.

Further the Acclamator is a troop transport, so is likely intended to: go to A, pick up and transport troops to B, then return to C for refuel/refit etc.
A warship intended for long(er) independent deployment, say, in the outer rim , would likely have 4-5 times this endurance, so even if the endurance is a constant disregarding route, the SDs probably have 1 Mly range, and Shrikes etc. likely ½ Mly. (this would still only give them fuel for 1-2 months of independent operations if interstellar dust densities are not a factor).

This ½-1 Mly range of course is not enough to cross an interstellar gulf, so fic writers will have to assume that dust density is a factor (or use wormholes etc.), which will stretch this range by a factor of 10-100+ in the intergalaxtic medium: fuel enough to cross to any neighboring galaxies, but once you enter a new galaxy the increased fuel consumption inside the galaxy will quickly eat away your ability to make the return trip (unless you bring slower fuel ships either in the first wave, or in a followup logistics train).

As for where to put the SW galaxy if you want to use this approach and stay consistent with our current knowledge of our home supercluster: It needs to fulfill the physical shape and size of the SW galaxy (~120 kly disk & type Sb or possibly Sc: the core needs be somewhat smaller then ours for the core worlds to survive), it also needs to be close enough not only to reach the Milkyway, but to make the Milkyway a reasonable target galaxy for the expedition (rather then "well, its the 12th closest large galaxy in that direction, so why not go there"), or some reason must be engineered for our distant run-of-the-mill galaxy to be specifically interesting. (Most probably some variant of 'knowledge that humanity came from the Milkyway being uncovered'.)


Below a table I copied during some research for a fic I will never finish; sorry the tabulators don't survive cut&paste (the rest of the Virgo Cluster is also possible, but suffers from the "12th closest" argument), the conclusion of it is that only M31 (Andromeda) & NGC4945 are reasonable candidates for the SW galaxy, everything else is severely flawed in some way, and there are no spot-on candidates at all within 20 Mly:

Intergalactic Distances & stuff

What is really needed is a Sb borderline Sc (due to the nearness of the core worlds to the core the core must be smaller then ours) (the SW galaxy’s quoted size of:) 120 kly +/-20% (the inaccuracy of these distance  size measurements outside the local cluster) galaxy close enough for a SW ship to travel (a few Mly, so lets look at 20):

A list of Galaxies within 20 million light years:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Catalog Equatorial Supergalactic Group Blue Type Size Distance Name Coordinates Coordinates Mag kly Mly
RA Dec L° B°
N1313 03 18.3 -66 30 9.1 8.7 Ret SB? ~1.5 4.5 barred spiral galaxy structure

Milkyway: Sb (2e11) 0 ly [in Sagittarious from core  from outside: in Auriga{5h15min RA ~63o}]
Galactic centrum: just to the right of the top of the constellation ‘teapot’ (by half its width)

NGC45 00 13.9 -23 10 271.4 +2.9 11.03 Sc 35 14.2
NGC55 00 15.0 -39 12 256.3 -2.4 Sculptor 8.42 Irr 45 4.9
M31,NGC224 00 42.7 +41 16 336.2 12.5 Local 4.36 Sb 140 2.6 (Andromeda, perfect shape, OK size/dist)
NGC247 00 47.2 -20 46 275.9 -3.7 Sculptor 9.67 Sc 50 8.1 (OK-ish shape, too small)
NGC253 00 47.6 -25 18 271.6 -5.0 Sculptor 8.04 Sc 70 8.5 (OK-ish shape, too small)
SMC 00 52.7 -72 50 224.2 -14.8 Local 2.70 Irr 15 0.2 (OK-ish shape, too small)
NGC300 00 55.0 -37 42 259.8 -9.5 Sculptor 8.72 Sc 45 7.1 (OK-ish shape, too small)
NGC404 01 09.5 +35 43 331.9 6.2 11.21 S0 10 10.8
M33,NGC598 01 33.8 +30 39 328.5 -0.1 Local 6.27 Sc 60 2.9 (Triangulum, OK-ish shape, too small)
NGC625 01 35.1 -41 26 257.3 -17.7 11.71 Irr 20 13?
NGC784 02 01.3 +28 50 328.8 -6.3 12.23 Sd 30 16.3
Maffei I 02 36.3 +59 39 359.3 1.5 Maffei 14.60 E >20 14.4
Maffei II 02 41.9 +59 36 359.6 0.8 Maffei 20.50 Sb >25 12? (Perfect shape, too small)
Dwingeloo 1 02 56.9 +58 55 0.0 -1.2 Maffei - Sb >25 16.3 (Perfect shape, too small)
NGC1313 03 18.2 -66 30 228.0 -28.2 9.20 Sc 30 12? (OK-ish shape, too small)
IC342 03 46.9 +68 05 10.6 0.4 Maffei 9.10 Sc 50 8.1 (OK-ish shape, too small)
NGC1569 04 30.8 +64 50 11.9 -4.9 Maffei 11.86 Irr 5 5.8
NGC1560 04 32.8 +71 52 16.0 0.8 Maffei 12.16 Sc 35 12.6 (OK-ish shape, too small)
LMC 05 23.6 -69 45 215.8 -34.1 Local 0.91 Irr 30 0.2
NGC2366 07 28.9 +69 12 29.5 -4.9 M81 11.43 Irr 25 11.2
NGC2403 07 36.8 +65 36 30.8 -8.3 M81 8.93 Sc 70 10.6 (OK-ish shape, too small)
UGC4305,HoII 08 19.1 +70 43 33.3 -2.4 M81 11.10 Irr 25 10.9
NGC2976 09 47.3 +67 55 41.3 -0.8 M81 10.82 Sc 25 14.8 (OK-ish shape, too small)
M81,NGC3031 09 55.6 +69 04 41.1 0.6 M81 7.89 Sa 90 12.0 (Good size, crap shape)
M82,NGC3034 09 55.8 +69 41 40.7 1.1 M81 9.30 Irr 40 12.0
NGC3077 10 03.4 +68 44 41.9 0.8 M81 10.61 Irr 20 12.2
NGC3109 10 03.1 -26 10 137.9 -45.1 Local 10.39 Irr 25 4.1 (perfect location, rest sucks)
IC2574 10 28.4 +68 25 43.6 2.3 M81 10.80 Irr 50 12.4
NGC3738 11 35.8 +54 31 59.6 1.8 Canes I 12.13 Irr 10 11.0
NGC4150 12 10.5 +30 24 84.3 -1.3 Canes I 12.44 S0 30 12?
NGC4214 12 15.6 +36 19 79.0 1.6 Canes I 10.24 Irr 35 13.4
NGC4236 12 16.8 +69 28 47.1 11.4 M81 10.05 Sd 70 10.5
NGC4244 12 17.5 +37 48 77.7 2.4 Canes I 10.88 Sc 70 14.7 (OK-ish shape, too small)
NGC4395 12 25.9 +33 32 82.3 2.7 Canes I 10.64 Irr 50 13.7
NGC4449 12 28.2 +44 05 72.3 6.2 Canes I 9.99 Irr 20 12.1
NGC4605 12 40.0 +61 37 55.5 12.0 10.89 Sc 30 16.9 (OK-ish shape, too small)
M94,NGC4736 12 51.0 +41 07 76.2 9.5 Canes I 8.99 Sa 60 17.0
NGC4945 13 05.4 -49 28 165.2 -10.2 NGC5128 9.30 Sc 90 15? (OK shape, OK size/dist: dist+20% = 18 kly & size 108!)
NGC5023 13 12.2 +44 02 74.0 13.9 Canes I 12.85 Sc 30 17.6 (OK-ish shape, too small)
NGC5102 13 21.9 -36 38 153.4 -4.1 NGC5128 10.35 S0 30 12.1
NGC5128 13 25.4 -43 01 159.8 -5.2 NGC5128 7.84 S0 90 12.4 (Good position, crap shape, good size)
NGC5204 13 29.6 +58 26 59.4 17.8 11.73 Irr 20 14.7
M83,NGC5236 13 37.0 -29 52 147.9 1.0 NGC5128 8.20 Sc 60 15.2 (too small & wrong shape: looses to NGC4945)
NGC5253 13 39.9 -31 38 149.8 1.0 NGC5128 10.87 Irr 15 11.7
Circinus 14 13.2 -65 20 183.1 -6.4 12.10 Sb 25 12? (Perfect shape, too small)
ESO274-01 15 14.2 -46 49 171.6 10.3 NGC5128 11.70 Sc 55 16? (OK-ish shape, too small)
IC4662 17 47.1 -64 38 199.2 8.6 11.74 Irr 5 6.5
NGC6503 17 49.5 +70 08 33.1 34.6 10.91 Sc 35 17.0 (OK-ish shape, too small)
NGC7793 23 57.9 -32 35 261.3 3.1 Sculptor 9.63 Sc 30 10.7 (OK-ish shape, too small)


Column 1: Name of the galaxy.
Column 2: The Right Ascension in hours and minutes for epoch 2000.
Column 3: The declination in degrees and minutes for epoch 2000.
Column 4: Supergalactic longitude.
Column 5: Supergalactic latitude.
Column 6: The group the galaxy belongs to.
Column 7: The blue apparent magnitude of the galaxy.
Column 8: The galaxy type. E=Elliptical; S0=Lenticular; Sa,Sb,Sc,Sd=Spiral; Irr=Irregular.
Column 9: Approximate diameter of the galaxy in thousands of light years.
Column 10: The distance to the galaxy in millions of light years from one of the references
Below[not included]. The error on these distances can be as large as ±20%.

[Mikal768]

of course all your calcs assume that .5-.66 is the normal/fast speed, when most sources show that 1.0 is the normal/fast, with anything lower being QUITE fast, while also not taking into account the fact that the routes in the SW galaxy have been mapped out for millenia, while they would be starting from scratch in the ST galaxy

[SirNitram]

of course all your calcs assume that .5-.66 is the normal/fast speed, when most sources show that 1.0 is the normal/fast, with anything lower being QUITE fast, while also not taking into account the fact that the routes in the SW galaxy have been mapped out for millenia, while they would be starting from scratch in the ST galaxy

.6 is the stated drive speed of the Acclamator, AOTC ICS.

As for 'uncharted territory', the Thrawn Trilogy shows that even the slow Victory-class can clip along at 50LY/hr through completely uncharted territory. This is largely understandable as the ISD has sensors to see where it's going.

[Mikal768]

of course all your calcs assume that .5-.66 is the normal/fast speed, when most sources show that 1.0 is the normal/fast, with anything lower being QUITE fast, while also not taking into account the fact that the routes in the SW galaxy have been mapped out for millenia, while they would be starting from scratch in the ST galaxy

.6 is the stated drive speed of the Acclamator, AOTC ICS.

As for 'uncharted territory', the Thrawn Trilogy shows that even the slow Victory-class can clip along at 50LY/hr through completely uncharted territory. This is largely understandable as the ISD has sensors to see where it's going.

And where in the Thrawn Trilogy does it show that?
As for the Acclimator, that's a fast response ship. All sources for the ISD class show its Hyperdrive to be around a 1.0, thus showing that the Acclimator is faster then the standard Imperial SD.

[Darth Wong]

I dont see why the Empire couldnt have the equivalent of an exploration vessel, thats designed to find those hyperdrive routes

They don't need one. Simply send a probe droid ahead of you. If it makes it to the destination without encountering any mass shadows in hyperspace, then it's safe to make the jump right afterwards. Probe droids are cheap and disposable.

[Mikal768]

Technically that'll work for one jump or so. After that you need constant updating of the route for your navicomps, or stellar drift causes that 'safe' route to go kerflooie