Enhanced Docking Clamps

Breakaways are inherently expensive, but what you'd be after is localizing the interface to the docking apparatus, giving the primary hull's bridge network and spacecraft's power grid a connection to the secondary hull's bridge network and power grid.
I hear you, but I think what I’ve put together makes more sense.
 
I would expect that they would be installed automatically during construction to power systems before the power plant and fuel tank were installed. Then of course they would be useful when overhauling the power plant as the shipyard would just hook to the power umbilical to keep life support, gravity etc working during the overhaul. Naturally search and rescue vessels would want to be able to connect to them as well to power systems if the power plant was down.

So I would assume standard power umbilicals are in fact present already.
No doubt that they are present, All I was saying is that the would be to be located at in the area that the clamp was connecting to.
 
16566-Cat-carrying-a-kitten-white-background.jpg


Wouldn't be there by default.

Designed for, tonnage, and cost.
 
With the size of the clamps being 1,5,10, 20, and 50, when it comes to cargo airlocks, they would have to be placed adjacent to the clamps.

I don’t have anything to go on other than lot sizes in the core rulebook, so 1, 5, 10, and 20 ton (displacement, I assume) crates (1 & 5) or containers (10 & 20) would be standard. Five tons might be a small container, I suppose.

It seems that Starports might default to 20 ton airlocks as the standard. As long as the pod doesn’t have to contain the airlock (see my post about a mating airlock that extends from the port: https://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/threads/mating-airlocks-to-cargo-hatches.125817/) the the size of the access hatch isn’t relevant. Go big.

Seems unlikely that there are larger containers. 20 dtons is pretty big. Like twice (or close to that) the size of a shipping container on our humble planet, I think, so a 20 ton airlock should be a good standard for cargo.
 
Type one wouldn't have a big cargo airlock. Open both doors and shove the container through.
Risky in orbit. The chances of a blowout might be low but aren't zero. Also, those big hatches would also cause docking clamp spread. I'm not against the idea, but I bet the Imperial OSHA folks would have a cow.

How about this? It would work almost the same as you describe but be safer for the starport.

Extendable Airlock

Airlocks consume a minimum of two tons and cost KCr1 per ton. Larger airlocks can be used for cargo bays.

An extendable airlock is a sealed unit built into a structure that deploys to mold one end to a cargo hatch or airlock on a vessel attached by a docking clamp. It adds 25% to the tonnage of the desired airlock and costs an additional Cr500 per ton.
 
Last edited:
Standardisation would seem to be the no-brainer to me too. Standard sizes of cargo bay hatches, that can mate with a same sized one for a convenient cargo transfer. At the very least, ships built on the same standard hull should be able to manage it between them, unless the hatch is really poorly placed. That is, a Type A1 or Type A2, or many refits of that same venerable hull design could all line up their identical cargo bay hatches and lock them in place. The ships might be upside down in respect to each other, but g-plates... and Space.
 
Standardisation would seem to be the no-brainer to me too. Standard sizes of cargo bay hatches, that can mate with a same sized one for a convenient cargo transfer. At the very least, ships built on the same standard hull should be able to manage it between them, unless the hatch is really poorly placed. That is, a Type A1 or Type A2, or many refits of that same venerable hull design could all line up their identical cargo bay hatches and lock them in place. The ships might be upside down in respect to each other, but g-plates... and Space.
I posted this in the other thread, but here are the standard cargo container sizes. A 10-ton airlock would handle them all with space for cargo movers.

1753321463710.png
 
Last edited:
Cargo and passengers are likely to have different requirements.

Comparatively, passengers can utilize, pretty narrow gangways and ramps.

Possibly, breakbulk cargo, at the lower end.

Containerization and cranes, possibly those that have connecting rails into the spacecraft, and we'll assume, into the spacestation.
 
In your write-up, don't forget to mention that these can be paired with the base free airlocks. Either with no cost or a small charge on the airlock if you think it needs a cost.
 
Updated to include that and a few more tweaks.
Can you combine all the typesof clamps into one if you want all the functionality for each clamp you have? So power/fuel and airlock all together? So if I wanted to put a type 2 clamp with fuel and airlock on a 100 ton seeker to have extra fuel on the way out but pick up a passenger pod on the way back?
 
Can you combine all the typesof clamps into one if you want all the functionality for each clamp you have? So power/fuel and airlock all together? So if I wanted to put a type 2 clamp with fuel and airlock on a 100 ton seeker to have extra fuel on the way out but pick up a passenger pod on the way back?
Done. Check that out and see if it meets your needs.
 
Back
Top