Question: Page 258 of the Core Book says most light freighters have exterior clamps (one or two) to haul starfighters through hyperspace.

Is there any listing of which freighters have what? It doesn't sound like they can hook up in atmosphere. How do you get the starfighter pilot into the freighter? Freighters can be in hyperspace longer than the starfighter has consumables (oxygen, food/water, life support). Does this mean many small jumps to allow the starfighter to replenish?

Or is all of this just GM handwavium?

-The Citadel is specifically called out as having two.

-They are supposed to allow a smaller craft to attach externally to an access hatch or airlock, allowing the fighter to attach, piggyback through hyperspace/realspace, and deploy when needed while allowing the pilot to board the freighter when not needed, BUT not allow the full service support of a hanger bay. So no, you don't need to replenish the fighter continually. Only it's actual flight time counts.

-It's not so much Handwavium, and it is an integrated "out" for the GM to allow it. It's not uncommon to find groups that want a freighter and a fighter or two but not able to afford a hyperspace capable one, or wanting a way to use the freighter to drag them around to save on consumables. By dropping that line into the core book the issue is resolved simply and cleanly.

Now... all that clarified.... if you have a group that wants to do that, make sure the players and GM understand what starfighters are like in this system. A lot of people show up with Roguesquadronitis, expecting to fly that lone Z-95 into a squadron of a dozen TIE fighters and come back without a scratch. Starfighters don't work like that, they are much more like conventional real world fighters. They bring a lot of options and firepower in a small package, but they are lucky to survive more then a hit or two, relying on the ability to hit hard fast and first and not the ability to tough it out. Despite what others have said, I've found that, as long as the GM and players "get" this, and plan accordingly, the system works fine and you can do some neat stuff with a fighter... but if you don't get it... the Z-95 pilot is gonna be floating home...

The Gozanti is shown as having attachments for externally mounted TIE fighters in the animated Rebels series. That’s an excellent example to show people. They also have the example of the Ghost VCX-100 and the shuttle attachment on the rear of the ship.

But most fighters are glass cannons. One or two hits and they’re out. You need more Hull Armor and more Shields before you can be capable of taking a few hits, and you’re not going to get that on anything smaller than Silhouette 4. Even Sil 4 has a hard time taking more than a few hits.

-snip-

Now... all that clarified.... if you have a group that wants to do that, make sure the players and GM understand what starfighters are like in this system. A lot of people show up with Roguesquadronitis, expecting to fly that lone Z-95 into a squadron of a dozen TIE fighters and come back without a scratch. Starfighters don't work like that, they are much more like conventional real world fighters. They bring a lot of options and firepower in a small package, but they are lucky to survive more then a hit or two, relying on the ability to hit hard fast and first and not the ability to tough it out. Despite what others have said, I've found that, as long as the GM and players "get" this, and plan accordingly, the system works fine and you can do some neat stuff with a fighter... but if you don't get it... the Z-95 pilot is gonna be floating home...

Roguesquadronitis.... Ha! I like that.

I shall steal that term at a time to be revealed later

How do you get the starfighter pilot into the freighter?

Very carefully.

I recently featured a freighter with an externally attached starfighter in my game. In my case the procedure was as follows:

1. The pilot-to-be would don a vacuum-tight flight suit.

2. He would go to the cargo bay where a ladder had been installed leading to a small hatch cut in the dorsal hull.

3. The hatch would open into a tiny, cramped airlock large enough for one person to kneel inside while he sealed the interior hatch and cycled the atmosphere.

4. He would then open the exterior hatch and climb out onto the hull of the freighter.

5. The starfighter was docked a few feet away, and the pilot could now walk over and climb inside (being careful not to float away into space).

6. Inside the starfighter was a switch to disengage the docking claw, separating the two ships.

The details would obviously vary based on the ships in questions and how the docking clamp system had been set up. But what I described would be, more or less, the procedure for entering an externally attached ship.

The only simpler procedure might be some sort of boarding-ramp-corridor-thing allowing people to walk/crawl/climb directly from one ship to the other without having to go outside. But such a setup probably isn't feasible for something as small as a starfighter. However, it might be feasible if you had two large freighters clamped together (for whatever reason).

For starfighters, a physical trip out into the vacuum is likely to be necessary.

For starfighters, a physical trip out into the vacuum is likely to be necessary.

For TIE fighters mounted externally on a Gozanti, it is clear that the mount itself is large enough to encapsulate an airlock. So, you wouldn’t necessarily have to travel outside into the vacuum in order to get inside the TIE, but there wouldn’t be much room to maneuver inside, and the boarding tube would be only strong enough to act as a mount for the fighter and let you get down to the fighter, so the walls might be no thicker than aluminum foil. You’d definitely want that space suit on.

I can see that other fighters might not have that luxury.

For starfighters, a physical trip out into the vacuum is likely to be necessary.

For TIE fighters mounted externally on a Gozanti, it is clear that the mount itself is large enough to encapsulate an airlock. So, you wouldn’t necessarily have to travel outside into the vacuum in order to get inside the TIE, but there wouldn’t be much room to maneuver inside, and the boarding tube would be only strong enough to act as a mount for the fighter and let you get down to the fighter, so the walls might be no thicker than aluminum foil. You’d definitely want that space suit on.

I can see that other fighters might not have that luxury.

Well whether they were thinking ahead or if just by chance, small fighters like a Tie that use a hatch out of a fairly large round surface make an external tube. hard or flexible, a feasible solution. A tube end could get a hard seal against the Tie's hull and then the hatch could be opened.

But small ships/fighters that rely on a canopy like an X-Wing or Y would be another matter. The end would need a specialized end that not only could make a seal around an elongated curved oval of the fighters body, but also allow the canopy to be raised. Unlike a simple tube, it would be large bulky and need a delicate touch to dock with. Perhaps a couple space-suited crew waiting outside to perform the seal.

I think I would go with OverMatt in that accessing the fighters would consist of an EVA by the pilot.

But small ships/fighters that rely on a canopy like an X-Wing or Y would be another matter. The end would need a specialized end that not only could make a seal around an elongated curved oval of the fighters body, but also allow the canopy to be raised. Unlike a simple tube, it would be large bulky and need a delicate touch to dock with. Perhaps a couple space-suited crew waiting outside to perform the seal.

I think I would go with OverMatt in that accessing the fighters would consist of an EVA by the pilot.

I could see going that direction.

However, I could also see something that is a little more complex than modern jetways, where you have an extendable “arm” (either hard-sided or soft) that connects to a business end with flexible and adjustable “jaws” that would mate against various star fighter shapes.

The pilot would still want to have his vacuum-safe suit on as he goes down the corridor to the fighter he’s going to be climbing into, but it doesn’t have to be a zero-g corridor, and it could certainly be filled with breathable atmosphere.

You could even do the business end as nothing more than force fields that are extended around the canopy of the fighter, as you sometimes see where parts of ships are temporarily open to space but have been sealed off with exterior force fields.

Regardless of the particular method you choose, I think you can come up with a suitable rationalization to make it work however you think it should work. I think the key is thinking through that process sufficiently so that when the players ask the question, or when the issue comes up in combat, you’ve got a plausible explanation for why things work the way they do.

And what works on a particular type of ship might not be possible on others. Which might make the players wish they had thought about that when they switched to this model from whatever they previously had.

EVAs to board? Seriously guys, don't you think starfighters are dangerous enough as it is?

But small ships/fighters that rely on a canopy like an X-Wing or Y would be another matter. The end would need a specialized end that not only could make a seal around an elongated curved oval of the fighters body, but also allow the canopy to be raised. Unlike a simple tube, it would be large bulky and need a delicate touch to dock with. Perhaps a couple space-suited crew waiting outside to perform the seal.

I think I would go with OverMatt in that accessing the fighters would consist of an EVA by the pilot.

I could see going that direction.

However, I could also see something that is a little more complex than modern jetways, where you have an extendable “arm” (either hard-sided or soft) that connects to a business end with flexible and adjustable “jaws” that would mate against various star fighter shapes.

The pilot would still want to have his vacuum-safe suit on as he goes down the corridor to the fighter he’s going to be climbing into, but it doesn’t have to be a zero-g corridor, and it could certainly be filled with breathable atmosphere.

You could even do the business end as nothing more than force fields that are extended around the canopy of the fighter, as you sometimes see where parts of ships are temporarily open to space but have been sealed off with exterior force fields.

Regardless of the particular method you choose, I think you can come up with a suitable rationalization to make it work however you think it should work. I think the key is thinking through that process sufficiently so that when the players ask the question, or when the issue comes up in combat, you’ve got a plausible explanation for why things work the way they do.

And what works on a particular type of ship might not be possible on others. Which might make the players wish they had thought about that when they switched to this model from whatever they previously had.

oh, absolutely. There are a lot of methods that could be used.

But I was thinking along the lines of a regular ship improvising to tack on a fighter. A ship that was actually retrofitted with a made to purpose gantry and docking tube is another matter.

EVAs to board? Seriously guys, don't you think starfighters are dangerous enough as it is?

Well, you do have to get from inside the starship, outside to where the fighter is and then inside. That pretty much qualifies as EVA.

EVAs to board? Seriously guys, don't you think starfighters are dangerous enough as it is?

Well, you do have to get from inside the starship, outside to where the fighter is and then inside. That pretty much qualifies as EVA.

And they can't be connected by a cotterdam style docking skirt to a hatch because......????

EVAs to board? Seriously guys, don't you think starfighters are dangerous enough as it is?

Well, you do have to get from inside the starship, outside to where the fighter is and then inside. That pretty much qualifies as EVA.

And they can't be connected by a cotterdam style docking skirt to a hatch because......????

You haven't actually read the other posts above have you?

EVAs to board? Seriously guys, don't you think starfighters are dangerous enough as it is?

Well, you do have to get from inside the starship, outside to where the fighter is and then inside. That pretty much qualifies as EVA.

And they can't be connected by a cotterdam style docking skirt to a hatch because......????

You haven't actually read the other posts above have you?

Yeah, I have, Cofferdam.

Even the canopy isn't an issue of you just assume a single pane can be a small manual hatch itself to allow such a system to work.

Besides, it's not like allowing a freighter to carry a starfighter is unbalancing. one or two starfighters are actually pretty easy to manage from a GMing perspective. Until you start talking 4+ player controlled starfighters it actually takes more work to not vape the fighters by accident then to plan a challenging encounter...

Ok. Both views make good sense. Probably thinking non-EVA makes the most "cinematic" sense for the game even if it's difficult for me to wrap my head around.

Other question: what about patrol boats? Do they have docking clamps? I haven't seen any mention in the CRB. I may just be going blind.

And Thanks for the replies. Helpful, most helpful.

A basic double lanyard similar to that used for climbing takes away almost all risk of floating away during the EVA and would cost much at all.

Of course. I was only joking about the "floating away" bit (at least under normal circumstances).

As to the question of easy-access "tubes", something like the CR-90 pictured above is not what I (and, I assume, most other people here) have been thinking of. That's a craft on the small end of the "capital ship" category - the sort of thing that allows lots of room for large-scale structural modifications. And a large-scale structural modification is what you're talking about when you suggest a sealed access ramp capable of accommodating a typical starfighter.

In Edge of the Empire, this question would most often be in regards to, say, the PCs wanting to clamp an X-Wing onto the exterior of their Silhouette 4 medium freighter. [My personal example was a Z-95 bolted onto the hull of a YT-1000.]

In this sort of case, an EVA would often be the only plausible approach. Anything else would be stretching credulity. Although whether "plausibility" is important is a matter of individual group taste, I suppose.

Of course. I was only joking about the "floating away" bit (at least under normal circumstances).

As to the question of easy-access "tubes", something like the CR-90 pictured above is not what I (and, I assume, most other people here) have been thinking of. That's a craft on the small end of the "capital ship" category - the sort of thing that allows lots of room for large-scale structural modifications. And a large-scale structural modification is what you're talking about when you suggest a sealed access ramp capable of accommodating a typical starfighter.

In Edge of the Empire, this question would most often be in regards to, say, the PCs wanting to clamp an X-Wing onto the exterior of their Silhouette 4 medium freighter. [My personal example was a Z-95 bolted onto the hull of a YT-1000.]

In this sort of case, an EVA would often be the only plausible approach. Anything else would be stretching credulity. Although whether "plausibility" is important is a matter of individual group taste, I suppose.

Not really.

For starters Starfighters aren't all that powerful in this system. From a strictly game system mechanics perspective there's no reason to make docking clamps any more complicated with EVAs. It just adds an additional layer of complexity. And it's just a jerk move in general to boot. Say what.... 1 maneuver to move to airlock, another maneuver/action to don a suit, (1 Round) another maneuver to exit, another to board the fighter (2 Rounds) and another to disengage and punch it (3 rounds). In three rounds most space combat encounter are over.... So you're borking the player out of contributing because you don't like the shape of a canopy...

Secondly....

Look at that CR90 and remember size matters not. The X-wing, with a normal canopy, is docked on an external mount. It doesn't matter if it's on a CR90 or a YT-1210, the mounting is there so you can dock a fighter like that.

Now look at an x-wing's canopy.

There's room for a small uncomfortable hatch there, right on top. you'll probably want to leave your escape kit and helmet in the fighter and toss it on as part of the boarding Maneuver... but the bottom line is there's room for a hatch, and it even kinda looks like there might be one...

I bet if you looked, nearly every starfighter out there either has a hatch, or a canopy that slides open in a way that would allow a simple docking tube to fit.

Factor in the cofferdam docking bracket that can be, relatively speaking, easy to configure to a specific fighter model and entry method, and your canopy shape problem becomes moot.

It wouldn't be any kind of complex sealed access ramp, it would be a hatch that on one side went into the freighter, and on the other had a flexible shroud that would seal over the fighter's canopy/hatch, and a valve to pressurize the gap... that's about it...

In three rounds most space combat encounter are over....

That really hasn't been my experience with this system, as those first turns are usually spent closing on the target from beyond weapon range.

In three rounds most space combat encounter are over....

That really hasn't been my experience with this system, as those first turns are usually spent closing on the target from beyond weapon range.

Really? I just narrate over that stuff and start combat once the ship with the longest-range weapon gets to firing range. Spending three rounds flying towards each other before anything happens is boring as f@µ#.

In three rounds most space combat encounter are over....

That really hasn't been my experience with this system, as those first turns are usually spent closing on the target from beyond weapon range.

Really? I just narrate over that stuff and start combat once the ship with the longest-range weapon gets to firing range. Spending three rounds flying towards each other before anything happens is boring as f@µ#.

I always start mine at sensor range. Can't fight what you can't see and all that jazz. That's why our squad (wing really, 4 ships) has it's slicer/pilot in a Pathfinder (love that medium range).

I also have a HR about detecting outside of mormal sensor range (basically +1 diff per range cat). So far, hasn't presented a problem (but that's another thread)

As for the docking, we have used both in various circumstances. For the most part we tend to just use a universal tube approach, similar to what Ghostofman mentioned. We figured the technology is more then there and it's such a trivial detail. If I want to make things difficult for a fighter that's docked or don't want to have 2 (or more) ships immediately, I can always use threat/despair to have a system malfunction in the docking system. But, YMMV.

If you're doing that, then just narrate over the launch sequence too. Sometimes the characters have things to do before the firing starts, and not allowing them to do so would really annoy my players. Three turns is the amount of time it takes to set up a heavy repeating blaster. Do you really think it's unreasonable that it takes a similar amount of time to launch a fighter from a cold state?

If you're doing that, then just narrate over the launch sequence too. Sometimes the characters have things to do before the firing starts, and not allowing them to do so would really annoy my players. Three turns is the amount of time it takes to set up a heavy repeating blaster. Do you really think it's unreasonable that it takes a similar amount of time to launch a fighter from a cold state?

LOL. Never said whether I narrate over the scene or not. In my games I don't limit things to "always roll" or "always narrate". Some do, that's cool, whatever works for you. I have altered my GM'ing style slightly to suit what players I have at the time, but always keep my base style te same. In myexperience, tends to let the players have a notion as to how things will be, but can't be sure of the specifics. Tends to keep them pleasently (at least they seem so) pleased from game to game.

I tend to narrate mostly, but will call for roll when I think it's appropriate, or vice versa if the situation warrents.

Sorry. My previous post was a reply to Krieger22. On my phone I can't reply with quotes for whatever reason.

If you're doing that, then just narrate over the launch sequence too. Sometimes the characters have things to do before the firing starts, and not allowing them to do so would really annoy my players. Three turns is the amount of time it takes to set up a heavy repeating blaster. Do you really think it's unreasonable that it takes a similar amount of time to launch a fighter from a cold state?

No, I think that sounds perfectly reasonable to take three rounds for that. But does every space combat require the deployment of starfighters? If you're expecting trouble (and let's face it, most players always expect trouble) then they should have at least fired up the engines well beforehand and sitting on standby in the cockpit, if not actually have launched the fighter(s) already. And if they're not expecting trouble then it's pretty realistic that they don't have time to launch fighers.

And also what Jareth Valar said; there's no point starting combat at ranges beyond your ships' sensor ranges.