Non OTU: "Sealing" Ship's Weapons

[SpaceBadger]

A common SF trope is that in "civilized" systems the government insists on a monopoly on armed spacecraft and requires any armed merchants or foreign naval spacecraft to "seal" their ship's weapons while in-system.

What ideas do y'all have as to what methods are used to seal weapons, and do any of y'all use this idea IYTU?

I thought of a few possibilities:

- at the extreme end of restrictiveness, ships entering the system might be required to stop at a station and have weapons physically removed from the ship, to be returned when the ship is leaving the system

- along the same lines, critical components for fire control might be removed

- or a control program inserted into the ship's computer (and any separate gunnery computers) preventing usage of weapons while in-system (and of course we trust them to remove the restrictions and not leave any backdoors when we leave the system, right?)

- on the other end of the trust spectrum, the "seal" might be purely symbolic, an acknowledgement by the ship's captain that they will not use ship's weapons in-system, with the understanding of severe criminal penalties if this seal is violated

Any other ideas? What about some sort of middle ground in terms of trust vs control?

 

[Cynnewulf]

Perhaps the seal could be a large tamper-evident adhesive-backed polymer sheet placed across or over a component that must be psychically moved in order to operate each weapon, like a bay door or turret to hull interface point. You know, like the warranty void stickers in RL, but sized appropriately for use and ease of inspection.

Perhaps some other technology that mimics the effect. Could also be tied to a detector and signalling device; breaking the seal causes some sort of very difficult, very distinctive colored staining agent to spray a reasonable sized area of the ship and triggers a beacon on a reserved frequency band. Jamming the beacon would only draw the same attention that the beacon would summon anyway.

It should be very difficult to remove, and practically impossible to put back on and still pass a reasonably attentive inspection.

 

[McPerth]

I thought of a few possibilities:

- at the extreme end of restrictiveness, ships entering the system might be required to stop at a station and have weapons physically removed from the ship, to be returned when the ship is leaving the system

- along the same lines, critical components for fire control might be removed

- or a control program inserted into the ship's computer (and any separate gunnery computers) preventing usage of weapons while in-system (and of course we trust them to remove the restrictions and not leave any backdoors when we leave the system, right?)

- on the other end of the trust spectrum, the "seal" might be purely symbolic, an acknowledgement by the ship's captain that they will not use ship's weapons in-system, with the understanding of severe criminal penalties if this seal is violated

Any other ideas? What about some sort of middle ground in terms of trust vs control?

I see the first two possibilities as too time consuming, so unapplicable if you want to keep commerce running. The third one needs tampering with ship's computers, so I guess some merchants (at least) will shun the planet that applies it. See also that all of them would make the weaponry unusable should it appear a real need for it

So I guess the sealing is mostly symbolic, just the captains being honor bound not to use it (unless in self-deffense against pirates, etc), and being liable of many crimes (up to the High Justice one of piracy) if the rule is disobeyed.

 

[Reban]

In low tech instances sealing was binding the sword into the scabbard, In the Old West you turned your revolver in at the Sheriff's office.

With high tech weapons at space ranges undertaking not to power up your active targeting sensors effectively works to show you are refraining from any hostile action.

Its also easy for the authorities to monitor without boarding the vessel so it preserves the sovereignty of the vessel and the pride of its owners by not having to emasculate their weapons systems.

 

[BytePro]

IMTU, systems where it matters (most with starports), all weapon systems must be 'safed and locked', unless under evident threat. Ships are subject to scans and boarding. All armed vessels are required to report their arms inbound and register them with port authorities - and are generally subject to search as well as special orbiting/docking/berthing requirements. Power-up signatures and undeclared weapons may be considered an act of aggression and trigger immediate response. Likewise violations of interdiction zones setup to ensure sufficient standoff for a response.

It is also illegal to land (and thus refuel) in the wild on most populated worlds - as a ship itself can amount to a lethal weapon...

 

[HG_B]

IMTU, systems where it matters (most with starports), all weapon systems must be 'safed and locked', unless under evident threat.

Considering that this can be undone in a moment, how does this help?

 

[Reban]

Considering that this can be undone in a moment, how does this help?

Even so it would be good practice.

All weapons systems onboard might/should have a master "safe" and lock probably located on the ships bridge for such occasions as landing at the Starport or docking at a station or ship.

You're right that it can be undone in a second but from a legal stand point it places the responsibility of securing the ship's weapons on the Captain or Officer-of-the-deck.

It doesn't mean much if the Starport ends up a smoking crater, but it does mean there will be a line of redress (Lawyers: from Space!).

It also stops the drunk Gunner returning from shoreleave from locking himself in the turret and taking pot shots at ground crew

 

[Vladika]

It also stops the drunk Gunner returning from shoreleave from locking himself in the turret and taking pot shots at ground crew

Sounds like almost any Western Film I ever saw growing up (let's assume, for arguments sake, that I have grown up...)

 

[Fritz_Brown]

All armed vessels are required to report their arms inbound and register them with port authorities - and are generally subject to search as well as special orbiting/docking/berthing requirements.

This is similar to the procedures in a lot of seaports in RL today. Many have very high Law Levels when it comes to the weapons - to the point that huge numbers of ships don't carry even small arms, anymore. (The only reason a couple of morons in a rowboat can seriously be considered "pirates" at all.) In some places, the idea that you have locked your weapons away in a safe while pulled up to the dock is considered inadequate (unless you have paid for the proper licenses and paperwork, of course).

all weapon systems must be 'safed and locked', unless under evident threat. Ships are subject to scans and boarding. [SNIP] Power-up signatures and undeclared weapons may be considered an act of aggression and trigger immediate response.

I think this would be similar to the Age of Sail where the gunports would be closed. If the ship sails into harbor with its gunports open, then folks get nervous. With them closed they could still pop them open quickly and begin firing, but that would be considered treacherous. (And, the guys who *do* have their gunports open - the folks defending the harbor - can start shooting you as soon as your gunports start opening, slightly increasing your risk.)

 

[atpollard]

Strictly IMTU, but ...
We don't need turret locks on ships.

My starport has Bay Weapon emplacements to defend it from "all enemies, foreign and domestic".
So if your ship really wants to trade shots between your armor 0 turrets and my armor 10 bay weapons ...
... at point blank range ...
... then go for it.

 

[McPerth]

IMTU, systems where it matters (most with starports), all weapon systems must be 'safed and locked', unless under evident threat.

As I understand them, all ship's weaponry is so wherever you are. Not doing it is as walking with a gun cocked with its safe off.

 

[HG_B]

It also stops the drunk Gunner returning from shoreleave from locking himself in the turret and taking pot shots at ground crew

:rofl: True!

 

[BytePro]

As I understand them, all ship's weaponry is so wherever you are. Not doing it is as walking with a gun cocked with its safe off.

If jumping into a known hostile system, I wouldn't think so... cocked, locked and ready rock.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Smoke 'em, if ya got 'em!

If jumping into a known hostile system, I wouldn't think so... cocked, locked and ready rock.

I with the Pro on this one. I safe the weapons when my ship is safe.

 

[Timerover51]

I have only run into the idea of weapons being sealed in the James Schmitz story, Witches of Karres. However, I assume that weapons on a starship or spaceship exist because of a need for them, and clearly in the Schmitz universe that includes Karres, Heinlein's universe of Citizen of the Galaxy with his version of Free Traders, and Andre Norton's Free Traders idea, weapons are needed. The only time for attack in the Traveller universe in when a ship is in-system, proceeding to its jump point. Therefore, sealing a ship's weapons while still in space is going to be a non-starter for a ship's captain. I can see securing a ship's weaponry while landed at a spaceport, probably by some means of keeping the turret/turrets from traversing while grounded, but only doing so after landing and then releasing them prior to departure.

As for ship's locker weaponry, and the crew and passenger personal weapons, that is going to be dictated by the law level of the planet when they are on the ground or in orbit. I cannot see operating a ship in any Traveller-type of universe, or many literary universes, without some form of available weapons.

I have done some work developing weaponry to get around the Real World restriction on ships weapons.

 

[MCEvans]

Sounds like almost any Western Film I ever saw growing up (let's assume, for arguments sake, that I have grown up...)

Hey, I'm a"Toy's 'R Us kid" too

If jumping into a known hostile system, I wouldn't think so... cocked, locked and ready rock.

Define "known hostile" with some system's customs it's safer to jump unarmed into a battle zone.

 

[BytePro]

...Define "known hostile" with some system's customs it's safer to jump unarmed into a battle zone.

- Yeah, there are Pirates...

... and then there are 'the authorities'.​

:devil:

 

[McPerth]

If jumping into a known hostile system, I wouldn't think so... cocked, locked and ready rock.

And will you then obbey the sealing weapons orders then?

I assumed the sealing weapons was for non-hostile systes where you call in good will (to trade, make repairs, jsut visit, etc...), but I've never thought they will apply to known hostile systems...

 

[Timerover51]

And will you then obbey the sealing weapons orders then?

I assumed the sealing weapons was for non-hostile systes where you call in good will (to trade, make repairs, jsut visit, etc...), but I've never thought they will apply to known hostile systems...

Put very simply, if I were a ship captain, and was informed that I had to "seal" my ships weapons all of the time I was in-system, that would be the last trip I would make to that system, assuming that I got in and out safely. If I had to land, I would, otherwise, find a Gas Giant or nice ice moon or asteroid for refueling, and head out right away.

 

[McPerth]

Put very simply, if I were a ship captain, and was informed that I had to "seal" my ships weapons all of the time I was in-system, that would be the last trip I would make to that system, assuming that I got in and out safely. If I had to land, I would, otherwise, find a Gas Giant or nice ice moon or asteroid for refueling, and head out right away.

And if the usual custoum was to "seal" (as much symbolic as it was) weaponry when you enter a system in a zone because they are considered secure, will you shun this zone for trade?