Star Wars Roleplay: Chaos

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Approved Starship Vulcan-class Utility Station

Status
Not open for further replies.
AD0TsLQ.jpg
OUT OF CHARACTER INFORMATION
PRODUCTION INFORMATION
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
  • Classification: Multipurpose Utility Station
  • Length: 600 metres
  • Width: 600 metres
  • Height: 1000 metres (No Pylon) | 3000 metres (Maximum Pylon Length)
  • Armament: None
  • Defences: Very High
    • Standard Deflector Shields
    • Redundant Hull Layers
  • Hangar Space: Purpose dependent; orbital starports have far more hangar space than orbital factories.
  • Manoeuvrability Rating: Very Low
  • Speed Rating: Very Low
  • Hyperdrive: Optional.
STANDARD FEATURES
  • All standard systems and facilities; heavily purpose-dependent.
ADVANCED SYSTEMS
  • The Vulcan-class can serve as the anchor point for a space elevator.
  • The Vulcan-class is compatible with Hyperanchors, Voidsiphons, and other exotic systems.
STRENGTHS & WEAKNESSES
  • Jack of All Trades: The Vulcan-class is incredibly versatile. With the exception of essential systems, everything can be customised; Vulcans can serve as orbital spaceports, research stations, factories, hyperdense agricultural facilities, refineries, emergency housing, communication hubs, prisons, processing hubs for dyson swarms (often through Visium synthesis), support stations for shipyards, etc.
  • Graceless Skybox: The Vulcan-class is utilitarian in the extreme. It's neither particularly pretty nor particularly mobile.
DESCRIPTION
The Vulcan-class - aptly nicknamed the Skybox - is a bulky, utilitarian design versatile enough to find a niche virtually anywhere. Whether serving as a service hub for an Inner Rim shipyard, one of many food-production facilities servicing an ecumenopolis, or a refinery-city orbiting a mining world, the Vulcan-class is renowned for its 'logistical invulnerability' - maintenance is easy and layered redundancies all but preclude large-scale accidents.

Despite - or perhaps because - of their sensibly chunky design, Skyboxes are not generally popular places of residence; while not necessarily awful, they have a reputation for cramped quarters and a lack of windows. The lack of windows is hard to do anything about, given the stations' rather low surface-to-interior ratio and the heavy focus on redundant plating over frivolous features like sunlit promenades, aka structural vulnerabilities.

If customers insist on adding such nonsense, they should expect higher insurance premiums.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom