What happens to all that debris?

cthia wrote:My problem with that entire notion is this. If the damn system can't tell if a pod is occupied or not, then it can't tell if it is partially occupied. As in, someone half in and half out, or clothing caught in it, resulting in someone being dragged. Hopefully it won't launch unless closed. But in light of launching empty, I ain't banking on nothin'!

It ought to be easy to tell that a pod is occupied (was the door shut from the inside?), so I do not think that is a reason for sending out empty ones. But then, I cannot think any good reason for sending out empty ones.

tlb wrote:It ought to be easy to tell that a pod is occupied (was the door shut from the inside?), so I do not think that is a reason for sending out empty ones. But then, I cannot think any good reason for sending out empty ones.

What if it was closed from the outside by someone who put an injured crewmember inside? And what if the seat pressure sensor was defective, so it concluded the pod was still empty?

I suppose the person on the outside closed the pod and placed it on the "armed for launch" position, instead of "free."

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

tlb wrote:It ought to be easy to tell that a pod is occupied (was the door shut from the inside?), so I do not think that is a reason for sending out empty ones. But then, I cannot think any good reason for sending out empty ones.

What if it was closed from the outside by someone who put an injured crewmember inside? And what if the seat pressure sensor was defective, so it concluded the pod was still empty?

I suppose the person on the outside closed the pod and placed it on the "armed for launch" position, instead of "free."

That's a pretty good explanation, and a real possibility I suppose. But the problem with that notion is statistics. Textev says there were over forty pods that either launched empty, or the occupants were already dead. Since empty is the first possibility listed in the passage, I'm going to assume at least half of them were found empty. Even if only a quarter, then the same mistake all ten times?

tlb wrote:It ought to be easy to tell that a pod is occupied (was the door shut from the inside?), so I do not think that is a reason for sending out empty ones. But then, I cannot think any good reason for sending out empty ones.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:What if it was closed from the outside by someone who put an injured crewmember inside? And what if the seat pressure sensor was defective, so it concluded the pod was still empty?

I suppose the person on the outside closed the pod and placed it on the "armed for launch" position, instead of "free."

Why didn't they get in also?

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

tlb wrote:It ought to be easy to tell that a pod is occupied (was the door shut from the inside?), so I do not think that is a reason for sending out empty ones. But then, I cannot think any good reason for sending out empty ones.

What if it was closed from the outside by someone who put an injured crewmember inside? And what if the seat pressure sensor was defective, so it concluded the pod was still empty?

I suppose the person on the outside closed the pod and placed it on the "armed for launch" position, instead of "free."

I was actually thinking of a similar scenario. These aren't single occupant pods, so it's entirely possible that crew assisting the injured with evacuation would put one or two into a pod, and go back to help more injured evacuate. The hatch presumbably wouldn't be closed because they'd expect to be back shortly to finish filling the pod. But if the commanding officer then realizes the ship is about to be destroyed and sent a command for remote pod launches you'd want that partially occupied pod to slam its hatch close (if still open) and go!


So I tend to feel a simple hatch open/close isn't a good indicator of occupancy. Still it should be simple enough to make a more sophisticated sensor to determine whether the pod's occupied or not; and opt out of normal remote launches when it's empty. But it seems the RMN didn't decide to take that route; even though empty pods cause a bit more work for SAR teams and occasionally if you were wrong about quite how soon the ship would be obliterated the unlaunched pods might save a few more crew.

tlb wrote:

tlb wrote:It ought to be easy to tell that a pod is occupied (was the door shut from the inside?), so I do not think that is a reason for sending out empty ones. But then, I cannot think any good reason for sending out empty ones.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:What if it was closed from the outside by someone who put an injured crewmember inside? And what if the seat pressure sensor was defective, so it concluded the pod was still empty?

I suppose the person on the outside closed the pod and placed it on the "armed for launch" position, instead of "free."

Why didn't they get in also?

Well, I can see that happening. Someone who feels they already have fatal injuries can spend their dying breaths hauling someone else's ass there, placing them in the pod, then collapsing. If it is two people who are skirting Article 119, then the other may get out to die with them, or try and get them in anyway to save the body for family. But that shouldn't be the case some twenty plus times.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

tlb wrote:It ought to be easy to tell that a pod is occupied (was the door shut from the inside?), so I do not think that is a reason for sending out empty ones. But then, I cannot think any good reason for sending out empty ones.

What if it was closed from the outside by someone who put an injured crewmember inside? And what if the seat pressure sensor was defective, so it concluded the pod was still empty?

I suppose the person on the outside closed the pod and placed it on the "armed for launch" position, instead of "free."

Jonathan_S wrote:I was actually thinking of a similar scenario. These aren't single occupant pods, so it's entirely possible that crew assisting the injured with evacuation would put one or two into a pod, and go back to help more injured evacuate. The hatch presumbably wouldn't be closed because they'd expect to be back shortly to finish filling the pod. But if the commanding officer then realizes the ship is about to be destroyed and sent a command for remote pod launches you'd want that partially occupied pod to slam its hatch close (if still open) and go!


So I tend to feel a simple hatch open/close isn't a good indicator of occupancy. Still it should be simple enough to make a more sophisticated sensor to determine whether the pod's occupied or not; and opt out of normal remote launches when it's empty. But it seems the RMN didn't decide to take that route; even though empty pods cause a bit more work for SAR teams and occasionally if you were wrong about quite how soon the ship would be obliterated the unlaunched pods might save a few more crew.

I too considered, but cringe at, the notion of an auto-closing mechanism. If it is a small child, or a small lithe crewman barely on her feet, seriously wounded and the mechanism slams shut on fingers, hands, legs, etc., the SAR teams won't have a problem finding them. The screams will lead them right there, even in a vacuum! OUCH!

Nevertheless, aboard a warship, that is highly likely the system's MO.

So, the age-old question, if someone screams in space, will anybody hear them? Ask the SAR teams, they will tell you, "HELL YEAH!"

tlb wrote:

Loren Pechtel wrote:The people evacuating won't know exactly how much time is left and have far more important things to do than watch a clock. There's also the problem that they're looking at the friend who is going to be 1 second too late--human nature means they would probably wouldn't launch in time and thus everyone dies (And if they did that's hell for the person who did it.) Better to not make them face that choice in the first place.

So this way they do not watch a clock and arrive after all the pods are gone? At least their problems will soon be over.

The only rationale that I can envision is that the pods are stacked in a chute; so as people get in randomly, there may be a mix of occupied and unoccupied pods. Then all the occupied pods are sent out (resulting in some unoccupied ones also being sent), but there are still some more pods until the supply is exhausted. We saw in some other thread that there are not enough pods for everyone, so it seems rather cruel to ever send out empty ones.

tlb gets the gold thus far.*

An emergency ship wide announcement can be given that the pods will launch in five seconds. I would think launching because of an impending containment failure wouldn't be necessary. Since all pods are located near the skin of the ship. They "may" simply be blown clear, albeit, probably not with enough velocity imparted that is ideal.

At any rate, I think tlb has the best explanation thus far, now that I think of it, but it depends on the design of the system. MaxxQ can help with this. And of course, if I'm digesting tlb's notion correctly. It seems tlb is positing a carousel type mechanism. Which may make sense if all of the pods in a section are to be launched out of the same chute. Think of the loading process of a Ferris Wheel. If the process is to use them in order, the human element—and, emergencies amidst real life situations—can screw up the manual. It makes me think of when someone used to stick their whole arm up the older vending machines and steal a sandwich. The carousel comes around dispensing you air for your cash. This type of system may be necessary if the skin of the ship has limited space for an ejection chute for each pod, like I was initially thinking. MaxxQ, we're playing you're song.

*With warning we reserve the right to pull a Steve Harvey and take away your crown. LOL

ThinksMarkedly wrote:And to make things even more complicated, you don't want to interpose your wedge. That would mean you're not rescuing anybody, just vacuuming debris. The SAR birds' sensors are probably not good enough to scan through the wedge and probably not nimble enough to rotate to take the wedge away from anything interesting it did find. In fact, it's entirely possible the wedges were down at this point and the SAR ships were moving only on reaction thrusters. The wedges might do more harm than good inside the debris field.

Especially if only a body in a skinsuit, without a pod, somehow got ejected with the debris. It's possible. I got the impression someone in just a skinsuit could survive for a while because of what happened to Ginger. I forgot the term that's used for a "runaway astronaut" whose tether has broken. Anybody?

This makes me consider the days Honor and Nimitz were "dirt poor" LOL and Tankersley traded an actual skinsuit he made for Nimitz to replace the lowtech shockcage for intimate favors. 'OUCH!'

Can you imagine Nimitz being lost in space in a skinsuit? I wonder if Honor would eventually be able to detect him if SHE were on an SAR shuttle.

.

Tlb posted this in the wrong thread, because I posted in the wrong thread. I'm transplanting it here . . .

tlb wrote:

cthia wrote:Especially if only a body in a skinsuit, without a pod, somehow got ejected with the debris. It's possible. I got the impression someone in just a skinsuit could survive for a while because of what happened to Ginger. I forgot the term that's used for a "runaway astronaut" whose tether has broken. Anybody?

This makes me consider the days Honor and Nimitz were "dirt poor" LOL and Tankersley traded an actual skinsuit he made for Nimitz to replace the lowtech shockcage for intimate favors. 'OUCH!'

Can you imagine Nimitz being lost in space in a skinsuit? I wonder if Honor would eventually be able to detect him if SHE were on an SAR shuttle.

A "Flying Dutchman"

If Honor's father can find the kidnapped Allison after a brief acquaintance, then I expect Honor and Nimitz would have no trouble finding each other. This made me wonder if the author is adjusting things as the stories have evolved, similar to the "great resizing". "Beauty and the Beast" made Alfred seem to be a stronger empath than even Honor was in any of the early stories. A promised future story will emphasize this even more, however maybe the Harrington mental ability has to grow with age.