|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 3, 2017 20:48:58 GMT
Then it's just me panicking lol Right but still with the manual you're trained with the manual. I'd imagine you'd want technicians to know about everything on the ship for redundancy, but if trained experts became scarce like they did for the japanese during WW2 then it might be more of an issue. Have you ever had a service job. Like a skilled trade? Or maybe you built models when you were a kid? Something like that? have you?
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Mar 3, 2017 20:50:55 GMT
There's always troubleshooting manuals for when things go wrong. You make something, watch for common errors and breakdowns, then describe how to fix them as simply and easy as possible.
Plus we're talking about an age where "How to code an Arduino to manage your nuclear reactor" is probably a common video on youtube.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 3, 2017 20:50:55 GMT
Without years of training, the manual is useless. It's not written for laypeople. So my point is, that the nuclear tech will have no idea about radiators, etc. And in each position you have to know a ton. SO it's not realistic for one person to be an expert in 3 or 4 different kinds of systems from nuclear reactors to rocket engines except the Chief. And that's why there is only one per ship. Correct, multi skill expert is unreasonable. BUT, the ability to repair multiple systems isn't, by following the book. USAF jet engine mechanics only get a few months of training. The manual they use isn't for reference (when they get stuck), it lists how to do a task step by individual step. They must be strictly followed without deviation. If you apply that to a few similar space systems, one person could follow similar technical orders for routine maintenance. FWIW I am in a highly skilled trade that the Army split into 5 different jobs. We, however, don't use TOs. Do you know any service people, like HVAC people, or carpenters, or electricians, anyone like that?
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Mar 3, 2017 20:51:37 GMT
deltav you know you just had like 4 replies all with the same questions right?
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 3, 2017 20:52:36 GMT
Have you ever had a service job. Like a skilled trade? Or maybe you built models when you were a kid? Something like that? have you? Actually I work in a skilled trade, but coming from me, any advice I have will sound baised. So I want to know if any of you have or know someone who has, then it will be understand my next point. Without that experience or someone you can ask who has had that experience, my point won't be able to be understood by you.
|
|
|
Post by bdcarrillo on Mar 3, 2017 20:53:11 GMT
Correct, multi skill expert is unreasonable. BUT, the ability to repair multiple systems isn't, by following the book. USAF jet engine mechanics only get a few months of training. The manual they use isn't for reference (when they get stuck), it lists how to do a task step by individual step. They must be strictly followed without deviation. If you apply that to a few similar space systems, one person could follow similar technical orders for routine maintenance. FWIW I am in a highly skilled trade that the Army split into 5 different jobs. We, however, don't use TOs. Do you know any service people, like HVAC people, or carpenters, or electricians, anyone like that? Yes, they work with us every day.
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Mar 3, 2017 20:54:06 GMT
If you're trying to say that you have to be a skilled tradesmen to utilize a trade, it's not the case. You could replace any one you would otherwise need to hire if you just became more familiar with how it worked. But you'd rather pay someone else to do it rather than getting stressed out and potentially causing bigger problems, or when problems do arise you have someone to blame other than yourself.
|
|
|
Post by teeth on Mar 3, 2017 20:57:14 GMT
I'd combine Waste and Water Technician and Air Circulation Technician into Life Support Technician.
Sensor specialist, comm officer, and Astrogation officer into one. The reason for this is astrogation is a boring job, you calculate orbits when a maneuver comes around then it's years, months, or days of drifting to the next maneuver. Sensors can be partially automated by algorithms, the same idea that astronomers use to partially automate the finding of exoplanets. Then that leaves comms, they probably won't be talking too often, just a status report every day or every few hours and whatever priority messages the captain or command might have.
I'd make any amount of drone launchers of the same type only require one fly-by-wire pilot, I highly doubt the pilot is actually flying drones himself with a joystick, and is instead telling their navigation computers "intercept that target" and they use collision avoidance software to not crash into each other.
I'd maybe replace the cook with very good microwavable food as well, but one guy for every 54 crew isn't as important as the above.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 3, 2017 20:58:03 GMT
Do you know any service people, like HVAC people, or carpenters, or electricians, anyone like that? Yes, they work with us every day. Great, do me a favor. I mean this sincerely. Ask them if the average person with no training and a manual could fix some problem they often encounter in the course of their jobs perhaps ever, let alone in a timely manner, and tell me what they say. Then ask them if they think a person who is a licenced carpenter, electrician and HVAC is common and if such a person is realistic. Have them explain their answer to you. Then come back and tell me what they say.
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Mar 3, 2017 21:00:34 GMT
You also don't need to be a computer engineer to piece together a computer. The actual engineers already made it so it's like damn legos. If the engineers and designers behind planning these ships were worried about crew sizes, they would go out of their way to simplify everything. Instead of having a shit tonne of technicians, have one guy that's just know as the technician. Make everything the other group were responsible for as simple and relatable as possible so one guy could do it, or teach others to help him with manuals. Yes, they work with us every day. Great, do me a favor. I mean this sincerely. Ask them if the average person with no training and a manual could fix some problem they often encounter in the course of their jobs perhaps ever, let alone in a timely manner, and tell me what they say. Then ask them if they think a person who is a licenced carpenter, electrician and HVAC is common and if such a person is realistic. Have them explain their answer to you. Then come back and tell me what they say. Really the argument isn't let's conscript a bunch of homeless people to operate and maintain our warships but rather do we need 30 carpenters, electricians, and HVAC for every nut and bolt on the ship when we could have a handful that would be responsible for everything?
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 3, 2017 21:02:20 GMT
I'd combine Waste and Water Technician and Air Circulation Technician into Life Support Technician. Sensor specialist, comm officer, and Astrogation officer into one. The reason for this is astrogation is a boring job, you calculate orbits when a maneuver comes around then it's years, months, or days of drifting to the next maneuver. Sensors can be partially automated by algorithms, the same idea that astronomers use to partially automate the finding of exoplanets. Then that leaves comms, they probably won't be talking too often, just a status report every day or every few hours and whatever priority messages the captain or command might have. I'd make any amount of drone launchers of the same type only require one fly-by-wire pilot, I highly doubt the pilot is actually flying drones himself with a joystick, and is instead telling their navigation computers "intercept that target" and they use collision avoidance software to not crash into each other. I'd maybe replace the cook with very good microwavable food as well, but one guy for every 54 crew isn't as important as the above. Perhaps waste/water tech and air circulation tech could be one person. That is reasonable. But your reasoning behind astro/comm/sensors is unreasonable.
|
|
|
Post by vegetal on Mar 3, 2017 21:03:24 GMT
Let's talk specifics. What jobs would you cut, and what realistic ways could they be cut. Remember no AI. So no, you cannot replace a nuclear tech with a robot/ computer. I keep my initial opinion. Reactor techs would be also radiator techs. As our engines are also just reactors with nozzles, then they could be engine techs too. Training someone on that shouldn't be very hard, and as I said before, reactor technology is already common stuff in CoaDE's reality. Astrogation is already heavily calculated with computers today, so that's one job to merge with others. Sensor data is already heavily processed before reaching the eyes of the operator, and the game assumes a vast amount of micro sats scanning space, so, battlefield information doesn't seem to be a problem. Communication is a little trickier, as we have two types: immediate comms with ships orbiting the same body add you, and light lag comms with far away entities. But then, the time scale helps I this regard. Most of the time, comms aren't very time critical.
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Mar 3, 2017 21:05:44 GMT
Let's talk specifics. What jobs would you cut, and what realistic ways could they be cut. Remember no AI. So no, you cannot replace a nuclear tech with a robot/ computer. I keep my initial opinion. Reactor techs would be also radiator techs. As our engines are also just reactors with nozzles, then they could be engine techs too. Training someone on that shouldn't be very hard, and as I said before, reactor technology is already common stuff in CoaDE's reality. Astrogation is already heavily calculated with computers today, so that's one job to merge with others. Sensor data is already heavily processed before reaching the eyes of the operator, and the game assumes a vast amount of micro sats scanning space, so, battlefield information doesn't seem to be a problem. Communication is a little trickier, as we have two types: immediate comms with ships orbiting the same body add you, and light lag comms with far away entities. But then, the time scale helps I this regard. Most of the time, comms aren't very time critical. I feel like light-lag comms would be text based anyway. Like highly advanced emails. Something the Captain or Yeoman could probably handle.
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Mar 3, 2017 21:06:10 GMT
Great, do me a favor. I mean this sincerely. Ask them if the average person with no training and a manual could fix some problem they often encounter in the course of their jobs perhaps ever, let alone in a timely manner, and tell me what they say.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 3, 2017 21:06:38 GMT
Look this is way too much theory for me. We don't have to guess that a bunch of untrained people mucking around with million dollars of equipment in order to save on a handful of techs makes zero sense.
This conversation is not what I was hoping for. In the real world, you get the best people you can, and you train them the best you can. You don't throw untrained people in situations they can't handle because they will almost always fail.
I want fact based data based arguments, using real world data and tech and specific proposals of how our crew can be reduced, not wild eyed pipedreams, about untrained people learning to fix nuclear reactors from reading manuals.
|
|