Re: Carrier landing platform graphic wanted for mo
 

That's what the existing bays already appear to be. As long as you have space suits and some supporting technologies, I don't see why you couldn't land on the surface. There would be pros and cons to either approach.

PvK

Re: Carrier landing platform graphic wanted for mo
 

Transparant Force Feilds.

Re: Carrier landing platform graphic wanted for mo
 

This strikes me as wrong somehow as well. But it's really just an asthtetic issue.

If you are going to have some sort of exterior docking surface for fighters operating in zero-gee then the size and shape could be anything you want. It wouldn't need to be long and rectangular like a wet navy carrier deck. There's no reason for it. You don't need a long deck for launching and recovering the craft. When you want to launch craft you simply unclamp them, or turn off whatever artificially generated magnetic field or force field that is holding them down. Landing would simply be clamping them back down or turning the force field/electro-magnet back on.

All you need is a platform big enough for however many fighters you'd want on the exterior at any one time. You could make the platform in whatever shape you wanted or was most efficent based on the size and shape of your carrier and the fighters themselves.

Think of the various carriers used now for vertical takeoff aircraft like helicopters and Harriers jets.

You could make it long and rectangular if you wanted, but it wouldn't have to be that.

Re: Carrier landing platform graphic wanted for mo
 

Wouldn't the ship, generally speaking, have an AG field going?

Re: Carrier landing platform graphic wanted for mo
 

Well sure, that's a fairly common sci-fi assumption. That wouldn't affect the size or shape of an external landing area for fighters though. It might mean you wouldn't need a separate force field or clamps for holding down the fighters. The process of landing/taking off would still be the same though.

Re: Carrier landing platform graphic wanted for mo
 

Yes, I don't think fighters would need to take off sideways, so it wouldn't need to be long. However it is visually iconic of what it is.

I do think it's a meaningful distinction between interior and exterior bays, though:

Pros of each:
* Interior bays are protected from direct harm by the rest of the ship, and can more easily be sealed from vacuum.
* Exterior pads can use exterior space to store things, provide easier access for launching and landing (especially by fighters that may not fly so well due to damage), and may uncomplicate interior ship design.

Cons of each:
* Interior bays only have so many launch tubes linking them to the exterior, so you need devices to swap fighters in and out to share them, which is probably going to require more machinery and launch/recover fighters more slowly. They also require the rest of the ship interior to be designed around them.
* Exterior bays take up otherwise-potentially-useful surface area (where you might prefer to have, say, weapons, sensors, comms, thrusters, etc.), and of course expose the fighters and pads to immediate harm.

As for force field bubbles keeping air in them, that could be used, or not. Air isn't needed to land, and pilots can have suits. Pilots, supplies, and fighters can then go in and out through conventional systems such as airlocks or elevators, as required.

PvK