Introducing... USD type 1 *updated*

[Krougal]

Looking more designs of some of my ships I'll need a docking arm at least 25 meters long for stations to get past the engines on some of them but most of my ships should be able to adopt the docking collar idea. Of course on stations it's a simple task to make extendable docking arms to accommodate more ships.

Well maybe we'll start seeing more ships that aren't cigar shaped anyway, now that we're free of "designing around the docking box" , so long docking arms will probably become a standard as well. Much as I'm bitching about what a chore it is working with the rails, it really is great the amount of freedom they give.

 

[CaptainTaz]

I GOT THE IDEA!
the best USD just poped in my head!
so take all sorts of USD verions that are used, place em on a track and make it possible to change between dock modes
tadaaaaaa
thats 1 problem off the universe

yay! lots of wasted space!

 

[HolyCookie]

yay! lots of wasted space!

like that is much space for a titan.. :p

 

[Krougal]

like that is much space for a titan.. :p

The titans aren't the issue; it's everything else.
Current proposal actually reduces the whole thing to just a few blocks that anyone should be able to fit on almost any ship.
I'll whip up some screenshots on different use cases cause as usual people are making this way more complicated than it should be.
In my career I've found that the simplest solution that meets the mission requirements is usually the best. K.I.S.S as I always say.

 

[HolyCookie]

The titans aren't the issue; it's everything else.
Current proposal actually reduces the whole thing to just a few blocks that anyone should be able to fit on almost any ship.
I'll whip up some screenshots on different use cases cause as usual people are making this way more complicated than it should be.
In my career I've found that the simplest solution that meets the mission requirements is usually the best. K.I.S.S as I always say.

anyways how can all those USD things be so different, i mean i cant think of anything different than this on from the thread.
also every other USD thing would fit on that one, right?

 

[Krougal]

anyways how can all those USD things be so different, i mean i cant think of anything different than this on from the thread.
also every other USD thing would fit on that one, right?

It's up in the air. People going on to name things USD-1a, 1b, etc are being premature. Of course this still isn't official and even once something here is accepted and voted on, there is nothing to prevent 100 other people from making their own docking solution and naming it USD-1 as well, which would probably start a huge series of flamewars and endless confusion.
[DOUBLEPOST=1431560993,1431558699][/DOUBLEPOST]So here's a shameless self-plug again of my own WIP cruiser, fitted with one of the possible standards which happens to be the one I back (unless Sven changes his mind on the direction of the arrows again :P) So this may or may not become the USD-1.

Spoiler: Reference Example

Here we have several different but yet all valid USD-1 docks (agreeing for sake of argument that what I presented above is the USD-1, if it changes then blocks change accordingly)

Spoiler: Cross-samples

So let me 'splain how all these different examples fit the same standard.Light blocks are added for visibility, but also denote where NO blocks should be placed from there on out away from your ship in all directions. You can place something like this on any side of your ship, wherever it fits provided nothing extends out around the light blocks.

Ship core can be anything or nothing.
Top we have with wedges and without. The wedges could also be solid blocks. We could have some stuff in the middle too, as long as there's at least a 2x1 opening in the center. 1 so you can get through, 2 so you can open/close doors on both ships.

Bottom left we have no blocks, you could put the door to your own ship where ever your little heart desires. So long as you don't block the access to the other ship's door. So for example you could stick the docker and rail at the very end of a wing or the back of an engine.

Middle we have just a 2x1 door, like one might see in a small craft, we could put blocks around it. Yes, the airlocks don't seal. Like I said earlier, airlocks are for RP purposes, put your GD helmet on and RP EVA your ass across in a spacesuit. Not all ships are big enough for or merit airlocks.

Lastly we have a large door, such as one might see on a hangar or just a big ship or maybe a ship crewed by giants. In fact Sven posted an example above.

All of these fit the same standard. THERE...IS...NO...GOOD...REASON for them to have any other designation than USD-1, not USD-1a, not USD-1b, not USD-2. Even an OCD person like Sven :P (kinda OCD myself) probably wouldn't disagree.

That settled? M'kay. Good. Can we move this discussion along?

Docking arm lengths, important, but since it is more for stations than ships it isn't universal. Once "we" settle on the final USD-1, that would be relevant for discussion on USD-1 Receiving port (or whatever we decide to call it) if necessary, and desired, and if anyone still cares by that point.

 

[mindlord0013]

I reckon that Sven_The_Slayer has hit the nail on the head with his design, I was thinking of changing it to precisely that. It's pretty much USD type 1.5. Rail Docker on the left of the ring, rail basic on the right (looking at the ring from outside the ship), down at the bottom of the ring, facing towards eachother.

This way it won't mess with door logic, it's fairly out of the way, and allows versatile USD type 1 compatible docks.

 

[Krougal]

I reckon that Sven_The_Slayer has hit the nail on the head with his design, I was thinking of changing it to precisely that. It's pretty much USD type 1.5. Rail Docker on the left of the ring, rail basic on the right (looking at the ring from outside the ship), down at the bottom of the ring, facing towards eachother.

This way it won't mess with door logic, it's fairly out of the way, and allows versatile USD type 1 compatible docks.

Is 1.5 what "we're" going to call it or just stick with 1? Yes, when I say we I really mean you since you started this whole thing, and the rest of us just took over your thread.

 

[max stripe]

i see your USD type 1 and completely disregard it and make my own

 

[Krougal]

i see your USD type 1 and completely disregard it and make my own

See, there's my case in point above. Somehow I knew you would be first too. :P

 

[max stripe]

See, there's my case in point above. Somehow I knew you would be first too. :p

Mandalore: going against galactic standards since the beginning of time.

 

[Krougal]

Mandalore: going against galactic standards since the beginning of time.

That explains everything!

 

[max stripe]

That explains everything!

my personal standard will likely be a little larger since i generaly use large ships (ill probly have 2 standards... a fighter/freighter standard and a capital ship standard)

 

[mindlord0013]

Is 1.5 what "we're" going to call it or just stick with 1? Yes, when I say we I really mean you since you started this whole thing, and the rest of us just took over your thread.

For the convienience of it all, let's just say it's "The new USD type 1".

 

[Malacodor]

Why not just USD?

 

[CaptainTaz]

Somehow I knew you would be first too. :p

*Ahem*

I think just to spite everyone, I'm going to make my docks too big for this to work :3

I believe I was first.

 

[Krougal]

For the convienience of it all, let's just say it's "The new USD type 1".

All hail the new USD type 1!

Why not just USD?

Let's not start that again!

*Ahem*

I believe I was first.

You didn't say you were going to call yours USD-1 as well though. :P

 

[EricBlank]

Sven/krougal's suggestion will work fine for me. Although I notice they have the docker/rail on opposite sides of the center block. It doesn't matter which we actually use, just nail down that last detail, and you have a functional standard that, as krougal pointed out, should work for any door configuration behind the docker, since the docking components are part of the floor. Most common way to mess that up will be people trying to put their door underneath the docking mechanisms or something. :P

There's no real obligation to comply with the standard, but it's useful nonetheless to have one that most of us will be able to remember, and hopefully we can find a spot on a given ship for such an airlock.

 

[mindlord0013]

Sven/krougal's suggestion will work fine for me. Although I notice they have the docker/rail on opposite sides of the center block. It doesn't matter which we actually use, just nail down that last detail, and you have a functional standard that, as krougal pointed out, should work for any door configuration behind the docker, since the docking components are part of the floor. Most common way to mess that up will be people trying to put their door underneath the docking mechanisms or something. :p

There's no real obligation to comply with the standard, but it's useful nonetheless to have one that most of us will be able to remember, and hopefully we can find a spot on a given ship for such an airlock.

And so I decree, when looking at the docking ring from outside the ship: rail dockers on left, rail basic on right. Or rail rotaters if that's your thing.

 

[Valiant70]

And so I decree, when looking at the docking ring from outside the ship: rail dockers on left, rail basic on right. Or rail rotaters if that's your thing.

Any chance you'll be putting up a new image in the OP?