I think if you cut everything forward of the two loading arms and moved the repair bots next to the docking tube it'd be a more efficient footprint as the one shown is pretty huge. The Cyclops doesn't need as secure a holding set-up since it floats in the water, just enough to pull it in and lock it down. But otherwise that design is very nice.
Ooh...I like this. Though I don't think it needs to have the rear half, that might be a bit to much. Then again, why not have it for the 'big seabase' feel?
Hey guys, thanks for the kudos and critique! Of course I am partial to the overall design on it, but I mainly wanted to just throw the concept (of a cyclops open sea docking platform) out there for the devs to consider. I'm sure others have different versions or approaches on it, equally as interesting and valid, to add in. All I know is that I got a special lump from Jonas over it, so now my SN brainstorming career feels complete.
It looks too complicated and oversized. Any berthing system should be self contained and not reliant on so many foundations. The docking arms could be much smaller and located under the sub to conserve space.
There are only four points of contact... so it's no more sturdy than a man shooting a rifle standing up. Besides, storms only affect surface water. Currents are the real worry, but the only ones powerful enough to pose any threat are far out at sea.
I feel a ribbed design might look more believable (like the Project Azorian capture vehicle). That, or just make the side booms shorter and put three on each side. The berth should encompass the craft, not just steady it - seeing as the sub already stays put on its own.
There are only four points of contact... so it's no more sturdy than a man shooting a rifle standing up. Besides, storms only affect surface water. Currents are the real worry, but the only ones powerful enough to pose any threat are far out at sea.
I feel a ribbed design might look more believable (like the Project Azorian capture vehicle). That, or just make the side booms shorter and put three on each side. The berth should encompass the craft, not just steady it - seeing as the sub already stays put on its own.
how is a man shotting a rifle standing up four points of stability? ( i usually dont consider the cheek a sabalization point if thats what you mean)
tyler111762Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada Join Date: 2015-05-17Member: 204558Members
i think they should have a large room you have to build as a canopy type thing on support legs, that sucks the cyclops up into the base like the cyclops sucks up the seamoth, then it goes into a dry dock, maybe forcing you to dry dock the cyclops to repair it, and eventually getting repair bots ( same model as the fabricator buts if the devs want to save reasources) that repair it automaticly, and maybe have upgrades to how many bots you have (one bot fixes one hole at a time), how many reapirs/ percentage repair that a bot can do before it needs to recharge, and how fast each bot is at repairing
There are only four points of contact... so it's no more sturdy than a man shooting a rifle standing up. Besides, storms only affect surface water. Currents are the real worry, but the only ones powerful enough to pose any threat are far out at sea.
I feel a ribbed design might look more believable (like the Project Azorian capture vehicle). That, or just make the side booms shorter and put three on each side. The berth should encompass the craft, not just steady it - seeing as the sub already stays put on its own.
how is a man shotting a rifle standing up four points of stability? ( i usually dont consider the cheek a sabalization point if thats what you mean)
The sub is the rifle and the man's hands, shoulder, and cheek are the contact points... it's not the most stable configuration.
The sub is the rifle and the man's hands, shoulder, and cheek are the contact points... it's not the most stable configuration.
Hmmm 1, 2, 3.. ummmm
It appears you know little about firearms and their basic fundamentals. The cheek rest is a point of contact, and people typically have two hands... so that's 1, 2, 3, 4.
The sub is the rifle and the man's hands, shoulder, and cheek are the contact points... it's not the most stable configuration.
Hmmm 1, 2, 3.. ummmm
It appears you know little about firearms and their basic fundamentals. The cheek rest is a point of contact, and people typically have two hands... so that's 1, 2, 3, 4.
I don't know of any rifleman that counts the cheek as a 'stabilization point'. In fact you DON'T want to hold your cheek to the gun since it could buck and smack you in the face, stunning you as you lose your target.
As to the design itself, since we might have exterior upgrades having a large base on further thought makes sense. Some of those arms could be used to upgrade and/or repair the Cyclops. Also having a center control station for the Moonbay could make sense if that is where you research, build, and outfit upgrades for your subs.
The sub is the rifle and the man's hands, shoulder, and cheek are the contact points... it's not the most stable configuration.
Hmmm 1, 2, 3.. ummmm
It appears you know little about firearms and their basic fundamentals. The cheek rest is a point of contact, and people typically have two hands... so that's 1, 2, 3, 4.
I don't know of any rifleman that counts the cheek as a 'stabilization point'. In fact you DON'T want to hold your cheek to the gun since it could buck and smack you in the face, stunning you as you lose your target.
As to the design itself, since we might have exterior upgrades having a large base on further thought makes sense. Some of those arms could be used to upgrade and/or repair the Cyclops. Also having a center control station for the Moonbay could make sense if that is where you research, build, and outfit upgrades for your subs.
no you do hold your cheek on the cheek riser, you just keep your face back to allow the scope to recoil without making you a pirate
The sub is the rifle and the man's hands, shoulder, and cheek are the contact points... it's not the most stable configuration.
Hmmm 1, 2, 3.. ummmm
It appears you know little about firearms and their basic fundamentals. The cheek rest is a point of contact, and people typically have two hands... so that's 1, 2, 3, 4.
I don't know of any rifleman that counts the cheek as a 'stabilization point'. In fact you DON'T want to hold your cheek to the gun since it could buck and smack you in the face, stunning you as you lose your target.
As to the design itself, since we might have exterior upgrades having a large base on further thought makes sense. Some of those arms could be used to upgrade and/or repair the Cyclops. Also having a center control station for the Moonbay could make sense if that is where you research, build, and outfit upgrades for your subs.
no you do hold your cheek on the cheek riser, you just keep your face back to allow the scope to recoil without making you a pirate
Yea, I think some people here haven't operated firearms.
The sub is the rifle and the man's hands, shoulder, and cheek are the contact points... it's not the most stable configuration.
Hmmm 1, 2, 3.. ummmm
It appears you know little about firearms and their basic fundamentals. The cheek rest is a point of contact, and people typically have two hands... so that's 1, 2, 3, 4.
I'm going to hazard as a multi-toured veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom, I probably know more about rifles, their various ordinances, and their combat usages. (Or perhaps not, I'm not a SME so who knows, perhaps you are) I wasn't counting the points of contact on the rifle, which I think is a poor analogy anyway, but I only see three on his model. Am I missing one? Also, heres the TRADOC link, starting on pg 120. http://www.tradoc.army.mil/tpubs/pams/p600-4.pdf
The sub is the rifle and the man's hands, shoulder, and cheek are the contact points... it's not the most stable configuration.
Hmmm 1, 2, 3.. ummmm
It appears you know little about firearms and their basic fundamentals. The cheek rest is a point of contact, and people typically have two hands... so that's 1, 2, 3, 4.
I'm going to hazard as a multi-toured veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom, I probably know more about rifles, their various ordinances, and their combat usages. (Or perhaps not, I'm not a SME so who knows, perhaps you are) I wasn't counting the points of contact on the rifle, which I think is a poor analogy anyway, but I only see three on his model. Am I missing one? Also, heres the TRADOC link, starting on pg 120. http://www.tradoc.army.mil/tpubs/pams/p600-4.pdf
Well, Figure 5-1. Steady position elements exhibits it pretty clearly.
I was counting the docking port as a forth point of contact.
And no, it's a great analogy. Considering that there is little vertical support on the sub model, and very little horizontal support on the rifle (indicating lacking in a particular area). Given, not much horizontal support is needed to fire a rifle. There just isn't enough support for a craft like the sub in open water. The platform needs to be smaller in area and more secure around all three axis.
Comments
Edit-
Just to voice what I mentioned in HipChat.
I think if you cut everything forward of the two loading arms and moved the repair bots next to the docking tube it'd be a more efficient footprint as the one shown is pretty huge. The Cyclops doesn't need as secure a holding set-up since it floats in the water, just enough to pull it in and lock it down. But otherwise that design is very nice.
When I saw that you took a lot of time creating a 3d model of it I fell out of my chair
Edit: In case you can't tell I'm 100% for this in every way
Dev, the team needs to see this :P Please?! This would marry the Cyclops and bases so well
I feel a ribbed design might look more believable (like the Project Azorian capture vehicle). That, or just make the side booms shorter and put three on each side. The berth should encompass the craft, not just steady it - seeing as the sub already stays put on its own.
As to the design itself, since we might have exterior upgrades having a large base on further thought makes sense. Some of those arms could be used to upgrade and/or repair the Cyclops. Also having a center control station for the Moonbay could make sense if that is where you research, build, and outfit upgrades for your subs.
http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/m16a2/four-fundamentals-of-mark.shtml
Also, heres the TRADOC link, starting on pg 120.
I was counting the docking port as a forth point of contact.
And no, it's a great analogy. Considering that there is little vertical support on the sub model, and very little horizontal support on the rifle (indicating lacking in a particular area). Given, not much horizontal support is needed to fire a rifle. There just isn't enough support for a craft like the sub in open water. The platform needs to be smaller in area and more secure around all three axis.
The basic concept of open water docking is fine.