LEX ASTRA ACADEMY CS 220 / Evacuation and limited-capacity transport Lex Astra · School of Civil Practice Teaching edition 2956.3 / Hybrid ———————————————————————————————————————————————— LEARNER WORKSHEET For cradleFleet coordinators planning staged movement. This is a private working copy. Downloading submits nothing and records no completion. Use exercise identifiers, not private player information. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— SESSION DETAILS Learner identifier: ____________________________________________________________ Instructor / assessor: ____________________________________________________________ Session date / agreed role or variant: ____________________________________________________________ Vessel, configuration and equipment: ____________________________________________________________ LIVE build / capability test date / tested by (if practical): ____________________________________________________________ Stop signal / recovery contact / communication arrangement: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— PURPOSE Allocate CradleFleet’s available berths and keep everyone still waiting on the movement record. COURSE CONTEXT The case develops CS–3’s limited-berth problem with a supplied priority rule, so the learner must implement a fair plan rather than invent one mid-exercise. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— ENTRY Complete: CS 115, CS 180 Equipment: The case priority list and volunteer transport or a tabletop board. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— CASE: Four seats, six people still on the list 1. P-01 through P-06 are waiting at the agreed point. The case priority is ascending identifier order; it is not a clinical triage rule. 2. The initial transport plan has six berths. A withdrawal reduces confirmed capacity to four. 3. A second flight is possible but neither a crew nor vessel has confirmed it. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE AND GAME SKILLS Evacuation loading and casualty transport capacity Practical instruction revision 1 / 9 October 2026 Count usable positions Inspect seats, beds, access widths and the route from pickup to receiving facility. A nominal passenger capacity does not establish that an incapacitated character can be transferred into every position. Distinguish ambulatory passengers, people needing assistance and bed-dependent casualties using reported game state. Test the supported transfer method before promising a lift. Sequence loading around access Keep the ramp approach clear, designate one loading caller and load those needing the most controlled transfer without blocking later access. Account for escorts and medical crew in the same capacity calculation. Maintain a waiting group under an assigned coordinator; sending everyone towards the ship at once makes headcounts and emergency access worse. Reassess care during a delay If capacity falls, review current condition and destination needs rather than preserving yesterday’s queue mechanically. Have the medical operator recheck symptom duration and drug state where relevant. Do not substitute an unsuitable lower-tier bed merely because it is nearby. Give those waiting a confirmed next action and transport status, not an unsupported departure promise. PRACTICAL DRILL Allocate a mixed simulated group across a transport with fewer usable positions than requests. Walk the loading path, demonstrate one transfer and revise the order after losing a bed or seat. OBSERVED-SKILL CHECKS Capacity reflects usable positions and transfer access. My action / observed result / assistance / evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ Live, simulated or unobserved: ____________________________________________________________ Loading maintains an open work path and an accurate aboard count. My action / observed result / assistance / evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ Live, simulated or unobserved: ____________________________________________________________ The reduced-capacity plan preserves the appropriate medical destination and a supported waiting arrangement. My action / observed result / assistance / evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ Live, simulated or unobserved: ____________________________________________________________ Apply the technical checks in the agreed role. Discussion and simulation do not certify live handling; Crew Support evidence does not confer Pilot qualification. GAME REFERENCES The linked pages were read for this revision. Community references mix release eras; each source note identifies what is used and what is excluded. Technical explanations below are an Academy synthesis, and drills and performance checks are Academy-designed. Before practice, compare the named actions with the installed LIVE build and actual equipment. Bind actions by name rather than copying old default keys. Research is not an in-game validation. Star Citizen Wiki — Medical https://starcitizen.tools/Medical Body-part injuries, Hemozal, symptom medication, BDL, bed tiers and regeneration. Ship tables, resource costs and ranges change; inspect the actual bed and tool. Star Citizen Wiki — Controls https://starcitizen.tools/Guide:Controls Control categories, movement axes and targeting concepts. The page contains legacy bindings and flight-system descriptions; use the installed game’s bindings, not its key table. Official LIVE release check: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/patch-notes ———————————————————————————————————————————————— METHOD 1: Apply the published movement priority Read the case priority before allocating seats. Explain how it applies and record any exception with the person authorized to decide it. Do not replace a stated rule with an improvised judgment about a passenger. Define a defensible allocation rule before scarcity becomes personal. Use the case’s stated needs and movement constraints, then specify how equal-priority requests are ordered and who may approve exceptions. Explain the decision without publishing private information. A priority is a reason for sequencing, not a judgment of a passenger’s worth. Practise: Allocate seats using the case priority. Ready when: The list follows the published priority and explains any approved exception. My action and observed result: ____________________________________________________________ Evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— METHOD 2: Track each stage of movement Use waiting, assigned, boarded and received for different stages. Move a passenger to the next stage only on the appropriate report. This prevents a promised seat from becoming a false arrival when several crews update the same board. The movement board is a state record: waiting, assigned, boarded and received. Each transition needs a report from the role able to observe it. Give changes a time and an author so two coordinators can reconcile conflicting updates without treating the most recent edit as automatically the most accurate observation. Practise: Maintain the board through two movements. Ready when: Every passenger has a supported state and a responsible receiving role. My action and observed result: ____________________________________________________________ Evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— METHOD 3: Replan without deleting people When capacity falls, count the remaining seats and apply the same priority to the revised load. Tell the waiting group and receiver who will move now. Keep the deferred passengers on the board with a follow-up decision. When berths fall from six to four, first establish who has actually boarded. Revise unfulfilled assignments under the same rule and tell deferred passengers when they will receive another update. Check the next movement’s confirmed transport and reception before promising a departure time; reassurance must not become an unsupported commitment. Practise: Reallocate after a transport withdraws. Ready when: The revised load fits and every passenger still waiting remains assigned for follow-up. My action and observed result: ____________________________________________________________ Evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— WORKED DECISION Six berths become four. The coordinator moves the first four under the case rule and leaves two on the waiting list for the next confirmed transport. 1. Apply the supplied rule: assign P-01 through P-04 to the confirmed movement. Leave P-05 and P-06 waiting. 2. Tell the waiting passengers and reception role that the second flight is unconfirmed. Name who will seek it and give the next update condition. 3. Move each assigned passenger to boarded and then received only on the corresponding confirmation. Preserve the waiting pair through the final handover. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— YOUR EXERCISE Build the board, announce the changed load and hand over the two unmet movements. Do not promise an immediate second departure. WHAT CHANGES One transport withdraws before boarding. My decision and reason: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— YOUR WORKING RECORD Case priority / passenger identifier / current movement state ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Confirmed seats / assigned load / waiting passengers ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Next transport request / responsible contact / update condition ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— CHECK YOUR REASONING Two passengers have seat assignments when capacity is lost. Should their entries remain boarded? My answer before consulting the explanation: ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— EVIDENCE TO KEEP A movement board, allocation explanation and revised transport plan. Criterion 1: The list follows the published priority and explains any approved exception. Individual evidence / finding / assessor's reason: ____________________________________________________________ Criterion 2: Every passenger has a supported state and a responsible receiving role. Individual evidence / finding / assessor's reason: ____________________________________________________________ Criterion 3: The revised load fits and every passenger still waiting remains assigned for follow-up. Individual evidence / finding / assessor's reason: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— FINDINGS AND NEXT ATTEMPT Demonstrated: observed work meets the criterion. Further practice required: an observed gap needs a specific practice task. Interrupted: conditions prevented valid assessment; not a failure. Not assessed: enough evidence has not yet been collected. All three criteria need individual evidence. A team result or quiz cannot replace an unobserved practical. Practice variant for a fresh attempt: Supply a different published priority and one confirmed second-flight crew. Apply the same accounting rules to the changed facts. My next practice task: ____________________________________________________________ Review contact: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— COMPARE AFTER ANSWERING No. An assignment is not boarding. Correct the state, explain the change and give the affected passengers a next update rather than leaving a misleading progress label. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— SOURCE AND EDITION Case CS–3: one berth remaining /academy/archives/reception-case Civil Practice case issued by CDR Yuki Tanaka-Reis in 2956. These variants use present-day service responsibilities and new training lists; they are not transcripts of the Pyro Station Alpha response. The lessons are current Academy teaching, not newly discovered historical records. Lex Astra opened in 2891. Historical sources keep their original issuer and date; all case callsigns, quantities, times and conditions are supplied for practice. Course text revised 8 October 2026; fictional teaching edition 2956.3. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— PROFESSIONAL REFERENCES Instruction revised 9 October 2026. Lex Astra cases supply the teaching situations. Professional references inform communication, decision-making and instructional design; they do not confer external qualifications. LIVE capabilities remain subject to the recorded session check. AHRQ · structured team communication https://www.ahrq.gov/teamstepps-program/curriculum/communication/index.html Sphere · accountability and continuity in relief cases https://www.spherestandards.org/handbook/ RSI · verify release notes before live delivery https://robertsspaceindustries.com/patch-notes ———————————————————————————————————————————————— INSTRUCTOR CHECK Try the exercise with the ship and equipment you will use. Brief station assignments, callsigns, channel and recovery point. Explain the command “Stop exercise” before starting. If a bug prevents completion, repeat the affected task when it works. Ask before recording the session; use player handles in your notes. Review rules: /academy/archives/academy-ordinance Teaching basis: /academy/framework#research