battlestations Jim Vassilakos (28 May 2022 16:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Thomas RUX (28 May 2022 16:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Ian (28 May 2022 18:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Greg Nokes (28 May 2022 19:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (29 May 2022 00:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (29 May 2022 00:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Alan Peery (29 May 2022 10:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (29 May 2022 13:49 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Jim Vassilakos (29 May 2022 14:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Alan Peery (29 May 2022 16:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Kurt Feltenberger (29 May 2022 16:58 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Phil Pugliese (29 May 2022 23:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Mark Urbin (30 May 2022 00:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (30 May 2022 01:57 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Kurt Feltenberger (30 May 2022 23:54 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Jim Vassilakos (31 May 2022 00:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Rupert Boleyn (31 May 2022 01:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (31 May 2022 01:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (31 May 2022 01:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Kurt Feltenberger (31 May 2022 01:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (31 May 2022 01:30 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Rupert Boleyn (31 May 2022 04:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (31 May 2022 12:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (31 May 2022 12:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Kurt Feltenberger (31 May 2022 12:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Evyn MacDude (31 May 2022 18:49 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (31 May 2022 01:22 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Ingo Siekmann (29 May 2022 16:48 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Rupert Boleyn (29 May 2022 17:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (30 May 2022 02:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Hubert Figuière (30 May 2022 02:22 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (30 May 2022 10:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations kaladorn@xxxxxx (06 Sep 2022 02:46 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Richard Aiken (06 Sep 2022 03:24 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations kaladorn@xxxxxx (06 Sep 2022 05:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] battlestations Jeffrey Schwartz (15 Sep 2022 18:54 UTC)

Re: [TML] battlestations Rupert Boleyn 29 May 2022 17:53 UTC


On 29May2022 0409, Jim Vassilakos - jim.vassilakos at gmail.com (via tml
list) wrote:
> Suppose you're serving on an Imperial Navy Cruiser, and there's a call to
> battlestations. What exactly happens?
>
> In specific, I'm thinking that everyone would get into some sort of
> pressure suit, right? Or would people still be walking around essentially
> at the mercy of possible atmospheric decompression?
>
> Also, to minimize potential damage and disruption, would the ship itself
> preemptively decompress, sucking air back into the life support system (if
> that's even possible) or venting it to space? Why? So things won't go
> flying around the moment the full gets breached. Not sure, but if this is
> overkill. I realize that in Star Trek and Star Wars, this doesn't happen,
> but in a hard-SF setting, one without force fields (although one could
> argue that gravitics constitutes a sort of forcefield), wouldn't combatants
> be better off preemptively decompressing?
IMTU spacers wear coveralls with lots of pockets, that are loose enough
to be easy to move in but not too baggy (don't want them catching on
stuff when you're working in a tight spot in the engines, etc.) or a
equivalent top and trousers, plus light footwear (or heavier boots if
working in engineering, moving cargo, etc.). The main feature of these
clothes is that they're easy to get out of in a hurry, so swapping to a
vacc suit when general quarters is sounded is easy.

The standard suit for civilians and most naval personnel is a light
compression suit that's good for dealing with vacuum and a certain
degree of high and low temperature contact but which isn't intended for
spacewalks or prolonged exposure to direct sunlight, etc. the on board
air supply is also of only a hour or so's duration - when at their
station the spacers will plug into the ship's air system if pressure is
lost (hopefully the air system is still functioning). Those spacers in
damage control parties or who might be expected to need t spacewalk will
wear heavier suits and carry more air.

Ships will not generally de-pressurise before combat IMTU. It's
inconvenient, makes wearing the suits and being at general quarters that
much more uncomfortable and fatiguing, and invites accidents. Also, a
lot of the ship is designed with assumption it's got air flowing through
it - it's the primary coolant for a heck of a lot of the incidental
electronics and machinery, for example. While in theory everything that
matters should be vacuum rated, in practice after any loss of pressure
there's going to be a lot of diagnostic, maintenance, and repair work to
be done. Most navies and pretty much all civilians don't consider the
extra potential damage from shock and blast from leaving the air in to
be enough of a threat to justify the downsides.

Besides, if all the PCs are in suits when the ship is holed there's much
less drama and excitement, and that's what we're playing this game for,
right?

--

Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>