As above if, nothing else based on logic and its dimensions.
Thank you.
Thank you.
T7 on medium pads please.
- Thread starter DukeIronHand
- Start date
It fits on the medium pad, but it's a little too tall for the medium hangar.
Here's an alternative: they gave the T9 a buff back in January. They added an extra class 8 slot. They could do something similar for the T7. Maybe they turn the top two class 6 slots into class 7.
Currently, a T7 carries a max of 308t without shields, or 244t if you put a shield in a class 6 slot.
If they turned the top two slots into class 7 the max cargo would be 436t without shields, or 404t with a shield.
That's pretty reasonable for a large ship. But I can suggest something further: they could create a T7mkII that has the same configuration as the current one, but change the model ever so slightly so that it fits in a medium hangar.
So you'd have a medium ship carrying 244t shielded (for comparison, a shielded Python carries 228t) and a large ship carrying 404t shielded (same as a shielded Conda)
Here's an alternative: they gave the T9 a buff back in January. They added an extra class 8 slot. They could do something similar for the T7. Maybe they turn the top two class 6 slots into class 7.
Currently, a T7 carries a max of 308t without shields, or 244t if you put a shield in a class 6 slot.
If they turned the top two slots into class 7 the max cargo would be 436t without shields, or 404t with a shield.
That's pretty reasonable for a large ship. But I can suggest something further: they could create a T7mkII that has the same configuration as the current one, but change the model ever so slightly so that it fits in a medium hangar.
So you'd have a medium ship carrying 244t shielded (for comparison, a shielded Python carries 228t) and a large ship carrying 404t shielded (same as a shielded Conda)
Some good ideas there![yesnod]
Yes. 1.5 meters too tall someone calculated which, IMHO, is a ridiculous design error. Think I can park three of them side-by-side on a large pad. Anyone with sense would have put it on Medium pads.
Buff the T7.
New Zorgon ship to fill the medium pad gap?
Something different.[yesnod]
From a lore standpoint it makes sense that another company would exploit the gap that Lakon missed. Also, Elite is seriously lacking in the non-Lakon hauling ship department.
Really liked the T-7 when I used to fly it (mostly for the VR view), but I agreed it should have been a medium pad. It felt like it was really slim pickings for cargo ships at that price range. between the 17 mill for a T7 and the 77 mil for a T9, you have 6 or 7 combat/multi-purpose ships, but for cargo focused you just have this guy at a little over 300T max and then next jump up is the 788T max T9.
I feel like the current T7 really SHOULD be a medium ship, AND it would probably make sense to have a T8, which IS large, but carries like 400T or so, and comes in around the 35 million credit mark.
I feel like the current T7 really SHOULD be a medium ship, AND it would probably make sense to have a T8, which IS large, but carries like 400T or so, and comes in around the 35 million credit mark.
Last edited:
+support
T7 needs to be edited to fit on a medium pad.
T7 needs to be edited to fit on a medium pad.
There are already medium-pad Lakons anyway - the Type-6 and the Keelback are medium-pad ships as are the Chieftain and Challenger, so the "missing a niche" argument is invalid.
I quite like the fact that the Python is the medium-pad king. It feels right that this ship has the Clyde Puffer's ability to go where large specialised cargo ships can't dock - a T7 as a Clyde Puffer just feels wrong.
I quite like the fact that the Python is the medium-pad king. It feels right that this ship has the Clyde Puffer's ability to go where large specialised cargo ships can't dock - a T7 as a Clyde Puffer just feels wrong.
Last edited:
I bet there's an interesting and funny story behind this that someone at FDev would love to reveal. Maybe the guy who modeled the ship forgot to add landing gear, and when they were added later, the ship no longer fit in the hangar. I hope that one day we get to hear the story.
I mean yeah, sure, I agree. A whole new ship would be awesome. But the reason I suggested a "T7 mkII" instead of an entirely new ship is that it's much less work for FDev, and thus (I assume) a higher chance it'll actually get done.
You know, I'd forgotten about this but that actually did buff the T7 around the same time they buffed the T9. While they added an additional class 8 to the T9 (which makes it a great ship, finally), the way they buffed the T7 was to make it lighter. What happened was, this inadvertantly made it the best option for exploration. Since that wasn't FDev's intent, they reverted the change.
The point is, there is evidently interest within FDev to fix the T7. They're also open to the idea of ship variants based on the same model (the two Vipers for example). So, maybe this idea will be palatable to them:
- a cargo buff to the existing T7 resulting in a large ship with 436t max cargo.
- a new ship based on the T7's model, named T7mkII, that fits on a medium pad and has 308t max cargo.
Take the modules, power, engines, loadouts, everything of the T7 and make up new exterior and interior 3d models for it, one Empire styled, one Alliance styled and one Federation styled. Easily get some variety into the game with 4 different looking T7s the new ones can be built under licence to the main factions and they could then squeeze onto medium pads. Lakkon could do an upgrade/rebuild on current T7s too if you wanted to keep the traditional styling.
shave 1.5m off the ship and have done with it
could have the landing gear go shorter so no model change if really necessary after all you're not going to need the 1.5m clearance under the ship to get your SRV out in the hanger!!!! simples
Yeah. That's my idea as well. Looking at the schematic, I don't think you could trim the bottom of the ship easily. You could trim that hump from the top, but you'll also need to move the engines down:
I suppose you could also cut some space out of the middle:
But I don't think that will look good (as if the ship looks good right now). I think the first option is probably better. Plus, you have to keep in mind, according to FDev the internal arrangement is already mapped out. If we're trying to limit the amount of work FDev has to do (in order to increase the chances of this change happening), trimming the minimum from the top of the ship is probably safer than cutting out the middle.
I don't know man. In game it looks like the gear is barely two meters. I think you probably have to change the model.
I agree with OP.
Based on the current -> Elite-Dangerous Ship Chart V3.0 the T7's dimensions are:
Length: 82 meters (Python is 88 meter)
Width: 56 meter (ASP Scout and Alliance Chieftein both 59 meters)
Hight: 25 meters (Federal Gunship is 23 meters, ALMOST as tall)
Considering that various ship-kits clip through the ceiling of the hangar-bays, anyway, I vote for the Type 7 to be re-classified as Medium ship, thus becomming a suitable alternative to the Python (which is the current best cargo ship in the Medium ship range.)
I vote against creating a Type 7 MKII, as this will not solve the problem of the original Type 7, but just add another ship.
(If something is broken you either fix it, or replace it - you don't buy something new while keeping the broken thing.)
Instead re-design the hangar bays to be a bit taller (actually, the pad only needs to be lowerd a few meters, thats all)
As far as I am concerend, no other fix for the Type 7 is needed.
(That being said: the Type 6 could easily fit on a small pad: the Dolphin is 2 meters longer, the Cobra MKIV is 11 meters wider, and the Diamondback Explorer is just 1 meter less tall - but I am digressing.)
Based on the current -> Elite-Dangerous Ship Chart V3.0 the T7's dimensions are:
Length: 82 meters (Python is 88 meter)
Width: 56 meter (ASP Scout and Alliance Chieftein both 59 meters)
Hight: 25 meters (Federal Gunship is 23 meters, ALMOST as tall)
Considering that various ship-kits clip through the ceiling of the hangar-bays, anyway, I vote for the Type 7 to be re-classified as Medium ship, thus becomming a suitable alternative to the Python (which is the current best cargo ship in the Medium ship range.)
I vote against creating a Type 7 MKII, as this will not solve the problem of the original Type 7, but just add another ship.
(If something is broken you either fix it, or replace it - you don't buy something new while keeping the broken thing.)
Instead re-design the hangar bays to be a bit taller (actually, the pad only needs to be lowerd a few meters, thats all)
As far as I am concerend, no other fix for the Type 7 is needed.
(That being said: the Type 6 could easily fit on a small pad: the Dolphin is 2 meters longer, the Cobra MKIV is 11 meters wider, and the Diamondback Explorer is just 1 meter less tall - but I am digressing.)
Makes sense, from Lakon's perspective:I think FDEV made a typo on the T6 & T7 pad size requirements, but are too praud & stubborn to admit it.
T6 was supposed to be small pad & T7 medium pad ship, while T9 takes large, methinks.
Offer one ship for each of the 3 pad sizes!
I think FDEV made a typo on the T6 & T7 pad size requirements, but are too praud & stubborn to admit it.
T6 was supposed to be small pad & T7 medium pad ship, while T9 takes large, methinks.
This is my thinking.
This has been asked for numerous times. The T7 should never have required a large pad in the first place - imho.
However I seriously doubt that FDev will 'correct' this, so I simply hope for a T8*. A trading ship targetting the niche that the Python holds, holding more cargo and fitting a medium pad. And if that makes the T7 irrelevant, well, it already is (ymmv).
* But only after we get hula-girl/boy bobble-heads. Pretty please!
However I seriously doubt that FDev will 'correct' this, so I simply hope for a T8*. A trading ship targetting the niche that the Python holds, holding more cargo and fitting a medium pad. And if that makes the T7 irrelevant, well, it already is (ymmv).
* But only after we get hula-girl/boy bobble-heads. Pretty please!
Last edited: