To the Lane Hackers - Printable Version

Good afternoon, Mr. Ivankov. I will be taking over this matter from here.

Apparently your messages have been rerouted to my systems, for reasons presently unbeknownst to me. I'm not familiar with the technical credentials of those who came before me, but what you've outlaid is a severe undertaking indeed. Allow me to explain.

Large ships require more crew to control various aspects of the spacecraft. Sometimes, this is for redundancy - while all of these things could be controlled from a central location on the vessel, crew are localised to the equipment to reduce the risk of signal transmission failure or delay, or in the event of damage to the signal transmission system, ensure the control strata remains intact. Alternatively it may be important to have crew present not simply for redundancy, but to improve their ability to respond to fluctuating needs for physical intervention on equipment, temporary repairs and the like - stations at which it is vital to have crew present.

Now, systems in which crew are only staffed for redundancy are easier to manage in this proposal - no crew need actually be there, but control infrastructure like electrical systems simply need installation to allow for remote control of the ship system itself. In the event of damage to this network, the system will fail, but in a non-time-critical salvage operation, this is an acceptable risk. The alternative is that the system requires frequent thought-out intervention in order to maintain functionality. In this case, a crew member is necessary. Otherwise, even assuming an intact control interface or undamaged micro-electrical components, nothing short of an artificial intelligence could respond to evolving issues within the specific system.

Then there is the matter of cultural design differences. The variety of ships you've listed have near-completely different architecture, engineering, interface design, system design, electronic architecture, and software design. Each of these would be a project unto itself, essentially. Despite that they share some common components, or more than that, common design elements, each ship and at the least, each manufacturer, would require analysis and customisation of a solution by us.

It would also inevitably be the case that some hardware-based intervention would be necessary by our operatives. Depending on the complexity of the intervention, being from implementing a soft solution, rewiring or rigging equipment, or adjusting motorised servomechanisms for application to a control interface, varying degrees of our involvement would be required.

This all depends on that the critical systems of a ship are not so damaged as to be un-service-able and that non-critical systems are to be left disabled during salvage. Circumvention of security software and safety mechanisms are certainly possible as these are always controlled by software in modern spacecraft, and are tied into core systems central to the ship, if they are still intact - but control infrastructure is another matter. While none of this is outside our capability, it would have to be tailored to each ship selected for salvage. It would also be hypothetically possible for us to develop a solution that would be able to, as remotely as possible with a damaged ship, inject, elevate and assume control of all systems, critical and otherwise, and then remotely control systems requiring logical human intervention, automating with an advanced computer program as much as can possibly be done, all accommodating the numerous differences between ship designs. This however, would not be a small undertaking, would be one of the most powerful tools in Sirius, and would not be easily accessible to so much as business partners.

Not to mention after all this, that due to our involvement with the owners of a number of the ships you have suggested for salvage, we would require you to promptly gain their permission and blessing for salvage of their ships, from which, I imagine, you intend to profit.

All in all, I would think towing these void masses both simpler, and much more your speciality, as much as it is crude and slow. However, I will make a proposal. These ships still need security and safety mechanisms disabled to allow you to ensure the safe shutdown of their reactors and access to the ship, and to prevent security-based self-destruct sequences, which could easily obliterate all ships of yours in attendance. We would be able to provide these services - services, not products. In return, we would like the time to retrieve and download software, design and intelligence information, and in limited cases, sections of electronic hardware, from these salvages, for our analysis and use in developing better solutions, which may in future be able to address some of your needs.

Do let me know of your thoughts.