Talk:YT-1300 light freighter

Back to page

123,723pages on
this wiki

This is the talk page for the article "YT-1300 light freighter."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for a discussion about the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit the Knowledge Bank. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

Another YT-1300 in ROTS Edit

Seen in this pic,

  • Easter Eggggggggggggs. - TopAce 21:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I first saw that one when we were looking for the N-1s in Episode III. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:41, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Wow, that freighter's been there for three years! Think someone would have towed it away by now :p - Kwenn 13:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
        • There was also another one on the platform in Episode II. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:21, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


Can the YT-1300 really be just 26.7 meters long? Based on the near-identical cockpit modules, the YT-1210 (listed as 35 meters) ought to be shorter than the YT-1300. Or is it that the 1210 should be 25 meters instead of 35? 13:10, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Yeah, it does seem like it should be a lot longer. The pictures of them parked on Naboo make them look HUGE.
    • Well, until a resonable length in a good source comes along, that's the length. Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 11:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
      • The Secrets of the Falcon article in Dungeon 103 tries to put this discrepancy down as an in-universe clerical error. If I get the time I'll add it into the article.Tocneppil 01:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
        • Aren't the Dungeon magazines non-canon? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 20:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
          • The full magazine title is 'Dungeon/Polyhedron' (although 'Dungeon' is the only title on the mast-head), and the mag deals with all RPG universes. 2003 was after the cancellation of SW Gamer, another Paizo Publishing-owned mag. The article has the "Star Wars Roleplaying Game" logo across its banner, so it's official as far as suppliments for the games are.Tocneppil 20:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
            • Wait, isn't Polyhedron non-canon anyway? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
              • But the article published had the official "Star Wars Roleplaying Game" logo attached to it, meaning it had the sanction of the Game publishing company to print the article. Since Dungeon is Paizo-owned the article was probably left-over from when SW Gamer folded, and Paizo thought it wouldn't hurt to put into Dungeon. It's a big article, and focuses on a gaming suppliment, which was why it wasn't published in SW Insider (Paizo folded SW Gamer because it felt that two mags that carried articles about Star Wars competed with each other, but since Paizo owned both mags, it was competing with itself, which was a waste of money. It had a perfectly good gaming magazine in Dungeon, so it folded SW Gamer, put articles related to the movies & books, etc. in SW Insider and gaming articles in Dungeon). The article is canon, even if the mag isn't.Tocneppil 21:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
                • Good enough for me. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 00:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
                  • To be more specific, Tasty's caveat about Polyhedron articles being non-canon has always referred to *early* issues of the mag. Later issues (e.g. this one) have always gone through the approvals process as normal and are just as canon as anything else. I'm not sure what the exact cutoff point is, but I know everything post-Gamer is safe. jSarek 21:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
                    • Wait, then why are there non-canon Polyhedrons, then? Wouldn't they have had to gone through the approval process? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
                      • No, early Polyhedrons apparently did not go through the approval process, so all of the so-called "ambiguous" articles scattered about this site from those issues are really non-canon, little more than published fanfics. Anyway, I found the cutoff - articles after April 2003 are legitimate, and the Millennium Falcon article is from October 2003. jSarek 07:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
                        • Thanks. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 12:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
                          • So what is the length then? You mention the error, but not which fact is in error and which one is true! :) I have read some pretty convincing argument that based on the internal dimension of the ship that can be approximated from the movie (especially the cockpit), the exterior has to be bigger than 26 meters in length.
                            • Einar 90808 (User talk:Einar 90808) In WOC Scum and Villainy on page 65 there is a deck plan for the YT-1250 (which uses a YT-1210 hull) and based on the 1 square=1.5 meter scaling it appears that the vessel is 27 to 28 meters in length.


Shouldn't this be at YT-1300 light freighter, to follow the syntax of the other Y-series vessels? - Kwenn 19:53, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


The West End Games RPG handbook suggests that a new YT-1300 cost 100,000 credits. Do the newer WOTC books indicate a different price? --07:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Because it's interesting to know how much a YT-1300 cost compared to a TL-1800 in the 1 ABY-3 ABY years. Further, comparing costs in general (a new v-150 cost about the same as a used YT-1300) gives us a better relative understanding of the economics of that period. --SparqMan 14:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

It is no less relevant than knowing the number of laser cannons with which an X-wing is armed. I don't understand your resistance.--SparqMan 18:00, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The new Saga system book (by WotC) lists the price as 100 000 new, 25 000 used.

Picture Edit

The main picture above the infobox is blurry. Can we get a different one? It could just be my computer so tell me if it looks good to you. It is really low-quality so if anyone has a better image please add it.Edit-sorry thought I was logged in. Chack Jadson 00:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Sensor DishEdit

I believe the oversize sensor dish was exclusive to the Falcon and not part of the 'factory specs'. Can anyone confirm this? (we'll probably need to correct the pictures, too).Tocneppil 22:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Heir to the Empire Edit

Should we have an article for the fake Falcon the Noghri acquired for the Bpfassh ambush? If so What should it be called? MartinMcCann 12:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Appearances Edit

While the Millennium Falcon has appeared all those it really helpful to say that the YT-1300 has, given that the Falcon is so far from a stock vessel? Granted, few of the YT-1300s we see are near stock, but the list doesn't seem particularly useful. — SparqMan Talk 05:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Does any body know positivly how long a YT-1300 freghter is? unsigned

like the article says, 34.75 meters. This is based on a number of sources, including deck plans from licensed sources.Einar 90808 00:53, September 19, 2010 (UTC)

Bunks Edit

If the passenger version only holds 6 passengers, then what are the other 5 bunks for. I know 2 might be used for the crew, but what about the others. (not sure who posted this)

The stats listed are for a 'typical' YT-1300, which is the YT-1300fp model, which combines elements from the YT-1300f and YT-1300p. If you look at the deck plans it is fairly easy to imaging... a YT-1300fp could look like a YT-1300p for the most part, with a few exceptions: the right side boarding ramp would be like the YT-1300f (with a docking hatch not an escape pod); the crew bunks are in the engineering section (like on the YT-1300p)... but there are no passenger cabins near engineering, just cargo holds like on the YT-1300f. The one passenger cabin would have double bunks for 6 passengers.

The YT-1300p would carry less cargo (likely 40 to 50 tons), but use single bunks for 9 total passengers... more then the YT-1300 fp, but with less cargo room.

The YT-1300f would use double bunks for 2 crew and 2 passengers, but carry more cargo, roughly 130 to 140 tons... more crewthen the YT-1300 fp, but less passengers. Now keep in mind, this is a theory of mine, not canon, but loooking at the deckplans it seems to make sense.Einar 90808 01:00, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

If you have a pilot. co-pilot and two turret gunners shouldn't your crew total be 4, not 2? 10:14, October 12, 2014 (UTC)

Good job! Edit

Thank you for removing the vandalism from this article.--Exiledjedi 23:24, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

Millennium Falsehood Edit

I believe that the millennium falsehood (from X-wing Solo Command) isn't mentioned in the known vessels section. Is there a reason or is it just not been added yet? 01:31, April 14, 2011 (UTC) fordlltwm

That's because there are so many YT-1300s out there. Zeta1127 of the 89th Legion (talk) 02:27, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

Cockpit configurations Edit

The article mentions the cockpit was available in three different configurations: starboard, port, and centered, but there is no source given on this information. I have scoured the web looking for images of this centerline cockpit configuration, but all I come up with are the iconic starboard configuration YT-1300s, or the by-design centerline YT-1930s. Looking at the floorplans given in the article, I can supposite how a centerline configuration might be structured, but is there any canonical evidence such a configuration existed?
Is the cockpit corridor such an integral part of the spaceframe that it cannot be redesigned?
What are the advantages to having the cockpit offset (either the iconic starboard, or, as mentioned unsourced in the article, to port)?
What disadvantage(s) might a centerline cockpit configuration face?
Corwin MacGregor 12:07, July 22, 2011 (UTC)

  • Side note on the length listed here, the Millennium Falcon is a YT-1300, yet the Millennium Falcon page lists its length as 55 meters. Any reason for the discrepancy? DarthSideoftheMoon 02:49, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki