Incremental Infrastructure

Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

Brockpaine

The Shadow

Posts: 15,109

Tuesday, December 16th 2008, 8:07am

Incremental Infrastructure

From here

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Size Type Length (m) Length (ft) Cost Turnaround time
0 Slip 70m 230ft 0.5IP 1 week
0 Dry-dock 70m 230ft 1IP 1 week

.5 Slip 95m 312ft .75IP 1 week
.5 Dry-dock 95mft 312 1.5IP 2 weeks

1 Slip 120m 393ft 1IP 2 weeks
1 Dry-dock 120m 393ft 2IP 2 weeks

1.5 Slip 145m 476ft 1.5IP 2 weeks
1.5 Dry-dock 145m 476ft 2.5IP 3 weeks

2 Slip 170m 557ft 2IP 3 weeks
2 Dry-dock 170m 557ft 3IP 3 weeks

2.5 Slip 195m 640ft 2.5IP 3 weeks
2.5 Dry-dock 195m 640ft 3.5IP 4 weeks

3 Slip 220m 721ft 3IP 4 weeks
3 Dry-dock 220m 721ft 4IP 4 weeks

3.5 Slip 245m 804ft 3.5IP 4 weeks
3.5 Dry-dock 245m 804ft 4.5IP 5 weeks

4 Slip 270m 885ft 4IP 5 weeks
4 Dry-dock 270m 885ft 5IP 5 weeks

4.5 Slip 295m 968ft 4.5IP 5 weeks
4.5 Dry-dock 295m 968ft 5.5IP 6 weeks

5 Slip 320m 1049ft 5 6 weeks
5 Dry-dock 320m 1049ft 6 6 weeks

Was this suggestion accepted, shot down, or just condemned to die a slow quiet death in archive-land? Don't want to be a pill about it: I can handle a 'no' answer, but I would like to know if I choose to work on infrastructure sometime soon.

Points:
- Does not alter existing infrastructure
- Permits further options for slip and dock lengths
- Matches existing half-factory rules

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Brockpaine" (Dec 16th 2008, 8:08am)

Go to the top of the page

Hood

Ugly Aircraft, Inc

Posts: 8,155

Tuesday, December 16th 2008, 1:36pm

I'd like this clarified too, I couldn't even find the original post!

I vote yes, I see no problems with this proposal and as Argentina it will help alot.

We don't limit ship lengths so why limit dock lengths?

Go to the top of the page

Hrolf Hakonson

Scooby-Doo

Posts: 6,178

Tuesday, December 16th 2008, 1:47pm

I'm in favor of it.

Go to the top of the page

perdedor99

Sage

Posts: 4,026

Tuesday, December 16th 2008, 1:50pm

Could help Bharat in the future. So I vote yes.

Go to the top of the page

Earl822

King of the Nords

Posts: 1,351

Tuesday, December 16th 2008, 1:54pm

I see no serious issues

Go to the top of the page

Red Admiral

Italian Stallion

Posts: 7,019

Tuesday, December 16th 2008, 2:03pm

My only concern would be to keep it at 0.5 intervals so you can't end up with a Type 1.1 Slip that is 125m long. It would complicate things a bit too much.

Go to the top of the page

Brockpaine

The Shadow

Posts: 15,109

Tuesday, December 16th 2008, 4:05pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
My only concern would be to keep it at 0.5 intervals so you can't end up with a Type 1.1 Slip that is 125m long. It would complicate things a bit too much.

I can live with that.