Reply to bigbomr's ideas:
Article 1: Bound Parties
*Who you guys think would and wouldn’t abide by this treaty?
The small players, factions that fear getting trampled by the big powers. The heavyweights would only comply if they think it would hinder their rivals more than themselves.
Using your thoughts, I added in three of the major factions with reservations (they can break the treaty in certain ways if they want) and one minor faction without reservations.
Article 2: Definitions
Military Utility Craft (MUC)
*A MUC meets all limitations placed by this treaty, and has an explicit military purpose. Examples include (but are not limited to) troopships, prison vessels, ammunition carriers, spy vessels
General Purpose Utility Craft (GPUC)
Differences between GPUC and a cargo vessel? And what would the difference between cargocraft shipping munition and ammunition carriers be? And wouldn't prison vessels be considered civilian craft, since they're more related to law enforcement than warfare. Unless those prison vessels are explicitly for prisoners of war, but how would you even differentiate?
If a cargo vessel has a cannon, then its a GPUC, if it is unarmed, then it is a plain civilian craft. Im not quite sure how to answer your second question...maybe cargocraft have to have a tracker, while ammo carriers don't? For prison vessels, I suppose nobody would want to target them anyway (your own guys are probably on it), so I will change them over to a GPUC.
*A GPUC meets all limitations placed by this treaty, and does not have an explicit military purpose.
Mining Vessel (MV)
*A MV meets all limitations placed by this treaty, with the exception of modules to be used for mining. (Ex: mining lasers)
The only difference between a mining laser and a combat laser is range, which is determined partially by optics. Since you might wish telescopes on some mining ships, those are combat capable.
Article 3: Limitations
-Subsection 1: Limitations on missiles
*Under 1km of Delta-V, no nuclear weapons
Why the limited delta-v? Noone is going to abide by that. No nukes makes sense, but this will likely not last forever.
The limited delta-v was to limit the max range (yeah, I know that missles can be dormant for a while). The no nukes part was addressed by the reservations for major factions (they most likely won't use nukes until they need them)
*Limited to only defense
Missiles are better at offense than defense though. And how else are you going to hit targets below thick atmosphere?
Thats the point of limiting their use. That way you don't waltz into an enemy shipyard with a ton of missles and blow stuff up (at least you aren't supposed to)
-Subsection 2: Limitations on lasers
*Full ban with exceptions listed in Article 6
You can forget this. Lasers in space will be a thing for mining, asteroid defense, interplanetary communications and orbital patrol/law enforcement. They're to useful, versatile and likely to be commonplace not to be used.
Removed this section because you are right
-Subsection 3: Limitations on conventional weapons
*Under 12.7kJ projectile energy (same energy as 33mm cannon)
Limits on KE seem unrealistic. Larger rounds (beyond a certain point) aren't much more destructive, and larger rounds are easier to track in case thay miss, which makes traffic control without hitting a stray round fired long ago easier. Projectiles with a sufficient velocity to escape their body also don't contribute as much to Kessler syndrome. If there would be treaties for KE weapons, I'd expect it to impose minimum projectile sizes and/or velocities.
I used projectile energy as a starting base because it was the only thing I could think of. I like your points though, so I tried to reflect them into the modified version.
-Subsection 4: Limitations on coilguns/railguns
*Under 12.7kJ projectile energy (same energy as 33mm cannon)
See above. And high velocities is the entire point of EM cannons.
See above. Also, the limited energy was to prevent a supposedly limited ship from blowing everything up.
Article 4: Use in Warfare
*Use of any craft falling into the categories listed in this treaty for a first-strike operation is to be considered a crime.
Considering every military first-strike, even after provocation a war crime devaluates the meaning of the term. This might inadvertently lead to a broader acceptance of war crimes.
Removed this part
*The targeting of Military Utility Crafts and Mining vessels is left up to the discretion of a ship’s captain; however, the targeting of a General Purpose Utility Craft without provocation is to be considered a crime.
This assumes the ranking officer of a spacecraft to be captain, or means that if several captains are on board, any can give the order to open fire. GPUC could be valid millitary targets though, depending on their loadout. Furthermore, rules of engagement are typically dictated by people a lot higher on the totem pole.
Changed so that the fleet commander is responsible. Also, a note: if a GPUC has a loadout that would make it a valid target, then it should be classified as a MUC. (Not sure how to make that classification yet though.
Article 5: Exceptions
