Are USD really USD?

[Plisko]

I'm wondering if I am missing something.

We have this system players came up with that requires the docking blocks to aways line up correctly. That's a good start but how is it really that useful if the docking port itself isn't also required to reach at least 1 block beyond the rest of the ship?

I've been downloading lots of ships lately to study designs and many of them use the USD system but most of them, no matter what size, don't actually dock with each other because they are all missing this critical last step. How can it really be called a USD if two ships or a ship and a station following the standard still can't dock with each other?

Is there a design part of this standard that a lot of people miss? Or is there any way to go about updating this standard so it also requires the docking port to actually be reachable by another docking port? I like what it is trying to do. . . it just seems like it's not really doing it.

 

[diremage]

The USD if implemented properly on a ship is a bit dangerous because it's relatively easy for an enemy to force-dock and jump into a star with it (or so I've been told).

Most useful is on stations and 'receptive' and small docks (like shuttles) have it protrude about 5 blocks out from anything else. That lets them dock to those big fancy ships whose docks are inset for security reasons. Basically have a male dock and a female dock, like a USB plug.

 

[lupoCani]

This is a known weakness of the USD standard. It is a difficult one to resolve, too.

The USD standard is designed around minimum requirements. A small amount of walking space, dockers just barely enough out of the way. This isn't very different from ship to ship, since astronauts don't change size.

Dock placements, however, do vary from ship to ship, and do so extensively. In an ideal world, all would place their docks at the edge of their ships, but this is not feasible. We could mandate some minimum docking arm length, but any set number would be too small for large ships and too large for small ones. We could get into percentages and who-knows-what, but god do I not want to try to get this community to agree on something like that.

There is, however, a solution that can work. I have spoken of it before, calling it the auto-docking principle. Essentially, given certain conditions, any ship that can dock to an identical copy of itself, can dock to all other ships that fulfill the same criterion. This works even if moving docking arms are involved, so any ship that wants a sunken main dock can simply install a long enough docking arm on rails, and dock to itself using that one.

This rule doesn't involve any numbers, only a practical reflexion of a ship's design, so it should be workable, given some campaigning.

 

[StormWing0]

The USD if implemented properly on a ship is a bit dangerous because it's relatively easy for an enemy to force-dock and jump into a star with it (or so I've been told).

lol rail door on top of the USD or maybe put some permission blocks down?

 

[diremage]

This is a known weakness of the USD standard. It is a difficult one to resolve, too.

The USD standard is designed around minimum requirements. A small amount of walking space, dockers just barely enough out of the way. This isn't very different from ship to ship, since astronauts don't change size.

Dock placements, however, do vary from ship to ship, and do so extensively. In an ideal world, all would place their docks at the edge of their ships, but this is not feasible. We could mandate some minimum docking arm length, but any set number would be too small for large ships and too large for small ones. We could get into percentages and who-knows-what, but god do I not want to try to get this community to agree on something like that...

Put at least one USD at the edge of your bounding box. Problem solved. Except for that whole "dock to your ship and jump it into a star" thing.

lol rail door on top of the USD or maybe put some permission blocks down?

As I understand the forced dock procedure, permission blocks don't help. Ship A has a USD with a private docking beam. Ship B has a standard rail on a public block. Ship B rams the public rail to ship A's docking rail and the system sees Ship A attempting to dock to a public entity. Ship A is now docked to ship B.

Doors help with that, but they making docking to the inset dock behind the doors problematic.

 

[kiddan]

Rail doors seem the easiest solution for forced docking, as they don't confuse docking ships when opened correctly. You can also protect your docking point if you have room for a thicker door.

Otherwise, having permission blocks affect rail dockers could be useful. A public docker will dock to anything and a faction one only docks to entities in your faction.

 

[Zekester81]

You can protect yourself from forced docking. It's super easy.

To the original question, yes, USD is universal. Only the placement sometimes makes it unfeasible. The problem with having it extended out like you suggest is like a hydra. Some designs do place it where it is extremely accessible. Others, for reasons related to design or purpose do not. Some ships have them in out of the way places so that only things able to dock are ships that the builder would think reasonable. Maybe it's a shuttle docking port, that just happens to use USD and was never meant to hold a large vessel as a quick example. There's literally tons of reasons for placement.

 

[Mortiferum]

I use USD.... (for my own benefits)

Guess who made a USD sized door breaching device ))))))

 

[Az14el]

lol rail door on top of the USD or maybe put some permission blocks down?

Its your own docker thats being "allowed" to dock up to a publically permissioned "attacking" non-phys rail/basic combo. Meaning it can't be countered with permissions blocks nor physical blocking of the docker, it has to counter these things implicitly to even work in the first place due to its design requirements.

You have to just not have a docker if you suspect such a ship is around, as it can force dock a hidden docker in the center of your ship surrounded by other physical blocks quite easily, and it will be a cloaker so *shrugs*

A worthy "work around" would be to design your main ship entity to dock only with shipyard anchors, not rail basics, as cores can't be "grabbed" by pick up points on another ship afaik.

 

[Valck]

I'm wondering if I am missing something.

We have this system players came up with that requires the docking blocks to aways line up correctly. That's a good start but how is it really that useful if the docking port itself isn't also required to reach at least 1 block beyond the rest of the ship?

[...]

Is there a design part of this standard that a lot of people miss? Or is there any way to go about updating this standard so it also requires the docking port to actually be reachable by another docking port? I like what it is trying to do. . . it just seems like it's not really doing it.

The original USD specification had requirements for physical location as well, ie. the USD has to extend to the bounding box limit as per the specs. I leave finding that thread as an exercise to the reader ;)

Everything that does not have the USD sitting right at the bounding box limit is technically not USD compliant.

 

[SneakyFish]

I don't even bother on my large ships anymore. Only point in using USD is to board and capture ships using USD, in my experience.

 

[Tamren Shade]

I use USD style docks on my airlock, but they're recessed a bit from my ship bounding box.

If I intend to dock to it, I'll use a docking tube structure on a station.

 

[GDPR 302420]

USDs were basicly a roleplay dock that some people tried to get everyone to use as the "standard" for all docking on ships.

Of course, most people would rather use their own stuff so its just a roleplay dock desinged to dock to other USD for roleplay purposes or what not.

 

[StormWing0]

I only use such a docking type on stations, most of my ships aren't big enough to be worth it.

 

[Zekester81]

Its your own docker thats being "allowed" to dock up to a publically permissioned "attacking" non-phys rail/basic combo. Meaning it can't be countered with permissions blocks nor physical blocking of the docker, it has to counter these things implicitly to even work in the first place due to its design requirements.

You can stop docking with a simple activation block. If there is an ON signal to a rail from an activated block, the rail auto detaches from whatever is docked to it. If the signal remains active, nothing can dock. There is a small problem, which may or may not have been fixed by now. The rail may switch orientations with a signal sent to it(does that to me every time). By placing a NOT connected to the activator, with a rail set to the proper docking rail orientation, it will switch it back when the activator is deactivated. Preventing docking can be as simple as one block.

 

[Az14el]

sounds like a nice theory, wont help with pick ups though (also remember it is NOT docked to you, and they wont have the courtesy to install such a system on their ship which is what would be required, you are docked to it and it has all the tools to keep you that way)

this is a practised technique not some random idea, and im giving fair warning, thats all

 

[Zekester81]

You can do the same thing with your own docker blocks, not just rails. Also, pickups can be disabled/enabled with logic.

edit: Trust me, I built a cargo module tug that allowed me to magnetically dock with a station as well as a cargo pod, and to be released/prevent docking in any direction with nothing but a couple logic blocks. It can be prevented.



Edit 2: I actually messed that up slightly, that is for activating/deactivating one or the other side in opposition. To make nothing dockable when power is on, simply leave out the NOT on the main control, and link the main control activator(logic in bottom middle of pic) to the activator that links to the Rail Docker(group on right side of pic). In that configuration, a logic signal is sent to both rail docker and rail, making them unreceptive of docking. When turned off, the NOT activates the pickup point(if applicable) and resets the rail/docker in case the on signal made the rail/docker change orientation. If you use landing rails, you may want to include a button and rails to reset their orientation as well, connect from the NOT like the rail/docker reset ones.

Corrected diagram:

 

[Az14el]

guess you got nothing to worry about then :>

 

[Extholious]

i believe that the USD that bench showed off on his youtube channel had the ability to deny people from docking and undock and not allow anyone to dock

 

[Plisko]

i believe that the USD that bench showed off on his youtube channel had the ability to deny people from docking and undock and not allow anyone to dock

I see what they are saying though. You could set that dock to deny people from docking to you but you still want to use your USD to dock to public docks, so it currently still lets you use your USD to do that. This appears to use that convenience against you. It runs the public dock into you and, I assume, relies on the auto docking that happens when a docker and a rail are close enough together. Now you've been force docked. There also appears to be a workaround that uses the pickup rails that would normally be used to guide ships into a carrier. Instead, they are used as a butterfly net that tries to catch the rail docker involuntarily and reel a hostage ship in.

It does seem like both of those can be foiled by sending a logic signal to the docker or the rail to undock. . . but maybe there is some logic trick or cheeze that foils that too. Pretty much anything designed for immersion or convenience can be weaponized without lots of effort to lock it down to just specific uses. So the docking feature that is essential to the immersion experience of cargo pods and forklifts. . . also lets pirates involuntarily dock onto your ship.

We just can't have nice things. Everything gets boring the more mugger proof they make it. . . but the less they lock it down. . . the more intolerable it becomes to anyone but predators.