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

No worries, no offence taken (hence the LOL)

If you're doing that, then just narrate over the launch sequence too.

somehow I see/hear that sequence in my minds eye

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.

I was referring to the whole "improvised tack on" which was what I was talking about.

Not the several months in the yards retro-fit that a specialized adapter would require. Having spent too much real life time in the yards, the design and build of a specialized rig to allow a freighter to carry a combat fighter would not be quick.

But then we are playing Space Opera. So if I was running a game I would waive all that in interest of the story.

If the player gives a good "space opera plausible" explanation I'll usually roll with it....

--snip--

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.

We are talking "Space Opera Plausibility" here

You are correct about the difficulty of design and implementation of a pressurized docking system, especially one that needs to survive atmospheric transit.

I am sure that there are yards in the SW universe that have designs and can make the modifications for a price with out too much risk of Imperial entanglements.

--snip--

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...

That's about it indeed.

Just a thought but, we have magcon systems to keep atmoshperes in hanger decks openings large enough to cram a frigate through. Setting up a projector to cover the fighter isn't a huge issue. You could either say that the ships normal shields have trapped the atmosphere from the last planet you were on or, that the atmospheric system in the ship can generate that much atmospere without hassle because it was designed with small transport shuttles (think the small cargo/passenger shuttles in Firefly) in mind.

Just a thought but, we have magcon systems to keep atmoshperes in hanger decks openings large enough to cram a frigate through. Setting up a projector to cover the fighter isn't a huge issue. You could either say that the ships normal shields have trapped the atmosphere from the last planet you were on or, that the atmospheric system in the ship can generate that much atmospere without hassle because it was designed with small transport shuttles (think the small cargo/passenger shuttles in Firefly) in mind.

That's probably the way I'd do it... flying the **** thing is important, not how you get in and out of it.

One thought on the Cofferdam idea... It would be pretty impractical on a light freighter.

Take the YT-1300.
You could easily have a Cofferdam connection to, say, an X-wing clamped to one of the airlocks.
However, that would be highly unsafe to fly with in atmosphere.
And most light freighters have to do alot of atmospheric flights.

Sure, I guess if you mount it in the direction of the airflow, that could work, but it would be pretty difficult getting into or out of the cockpit then.

Personally, I'd let my players have a docked starfighter using a Cofferdam connection only on ships of silhuette 5 or maby even 6 and larger.
Definately nothing smaller.

Also, you have to consider landing on platforms or ground.

Strap an x-wing or even an A-wing to the side airlock of a YT-type transport and you'll most likely not be able to land without breaking part of the starfighter (and most likely the clamps too).

But strapping one to the top of a YT-1300 (or similar) would probably be possible. But you'd have to make an EVA to get to it.
But that's not a problem if you are prepared and detect the enemy before they get into combat range.

But if you're not prepared, you'll have to factor in putting the envirosuit on and all that.

Of course, you could just have a droid in the starship at all times, with specialized programming for space combat

I'd also say to land you'd likely need to detach (depending on the mothercraft's geometry of course), but that's no where near the hassle of an EVA.

As for atmo... reentry you might need to retract the shroud, but once you're in atmo the shroud becomes less necessary anyway. At that point all you'd need is (maybe) a wind deflector like you see on military transport planes used to keep paratroopers from being blown back into the aircraft/side of the aircraft. Put something like that (hardly advanced tech) on the forward facing side at the hatch/canopy connection and you're pretty much covered.

I try not to make too many assumptions about where airlocks and hatches would be located though.

Take the YT-1300 using the Falcon as an example. We know for certain it has an airlock on the dorsal port side, and... it has a "docking claw" on the ventral side somewhere... but that's it. The "side airlocks" are EU... maybe they are there... maybe they aren't...So there's A LOT of room to hypothesize and add additional hatches as needed.

When I have some time I'll see if I can scrap a model together so we can better visualize how that would work....

I'm not sure the docking would be used in atmosphere much less landing. It seems to me that it's real intent was to avoid Hyperspace Rings and/or a convenient way to get everyone on one ship for transit. I see disconnecting shortly after coming out of Hyperspace and linking up sometime before making the jump calculations. Just the way it seems to me.

So, I take it that I didn't miss how many docking points are on any given ship type? Just one or two? GM decision?

Another question: What about a Firespray using it's tractor beam to hook up and board another ship?

I'm not sure the docking would be used in atmosphere much less landing. It seems to me that it's real intent was to avoid Hyperspace Rings and/or a convenient way to get everyone on one ship for transit. I see disconnecting shortly after coming out of Hyperspace and linking up sometime before making the jump calculations. Just the way it seems to me.

So, I take it that I didn't miss how many docking points are on any given ship type? Just one or two? GM decision?

Another question: What about a Firespray using it's tractor beam to hook up and board another ship?

Yep, clamp count is GM decision unless otherwise stated. Remember it's largely just an out so the players can have a fighter or two if they want without getting into long pseudoengineering discussions. Soooo basically it's there to avoid everything we've been talking about....

For the boarding... I don't think it explains in the books yet exactly how that works. If I'm wrong someone please correct me.

Otherwise I'd just say you hit the beam to the target (causing it to be unable to move until a Piloting check allows it) and ask your GM what it'll take to dock (ofhand I'd go with difficult terrain check if the target is active, just a maneuver if it's willing or unable to resist). Resistance is the real scary part. The assault boarding tube (unmodified) in DC takes 5 rounds to cut a Sil 1 sized hole, that's a LONG time for something to go horribly wrong. Might be easier to dock with a hatch and ask the security system nicely to just open up...

If hatches are standardized sizes and operating methods, then the use for a Sienar Boarding Tube is for those cases where you expect that the party being boarded will have taken adequate measures to put you at a major disadvantage if you were to try to use that method. So, you elect to connect somewhere else and forcibly cut a hole through the hull, so that you can use your own airlock method.

Most freighters probably wouldn’t be able to put up a significant enough fight to warrant a Sienar Boarding Tube, but military vehicles could.

I would imagine that the result would look something like what was done to the Senator Leia Organa’s CR-90 at the start of ANH, the only major difference being that the Star Destroyer is so big and the bay is so big that they can proceed with the clamping and cutting without having to worry about doing that from inside of a tube.

But using the standard hatch method, you might be able to hack their systems so as to force them to open up even if they don’t want to.

And if that doesn’t work, maybe do an EVA and just cut the hatch open to both the outer and inner airlock doors. If they’re lucky enough to have interior emergency bulkhead doors to prevent total decompression of the entire ship, you would have at least made the problem a bit simpler.

We took over a pirate Marauder Corvette that way. It ended up being so badly damaged that it wasn’t worth salvaging, so — IIRC — we just left it there, cracked wide open to space, after we had gotten out the cargo and other things we wanted.

Ok, so you're saying that boarding at least can be done without the boarding tube? Sounds great using just the regular locks, even though that's going to be the most heavily guarded spot on the ship.

Ok, so you're saying that boarding at least can be done without the boarding tube? Sounds great using just the regular locks, even though that's going to be the most heavily guarded spot on the ship.

Right. That’s the part where you have to do an EVA, unless you’ve used your tractor beams to haul that Capital Ship into the bay of your much larger Star Destroyer, and then you don’t have to worry about lack of atmosphere for the boarding party.

The advantage of the assault tube is it can cut a hole ANYWHERE. Assaulting the lock is easier, but it's the obvious place to enter, allowing defenders to be more prepared. Some craft will actually have integrated boarding prevention devices in and around their airlock. If you have a hull cutting system you can assault the target craft from any location. You'll likely decompress the compartment you cut into when you detach, so cutting directly into the bridge or engineering is probably not a great idea. But you can cut into other areas like corridor intersections, cargo bays, ect. places defenses won't be located or areas that are difficult to defend.