LEX ASTRA ACADEMY CT 340 / The command conference Lex Astra · Command Studies programme Teaching edition 2956.3 / Tabletop ———————————————————————————————————————————————— LEARNER WORKSHEET For command candidates chairing fleet, industry and civil planning. 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 Chair a planning conference where fleet, industry and civil concerns change the plan when the evidence warrants it. COURSE CONTEXT Lex Astra’s five fields meet at the command conference because their limits differ. The chair must reconcile those limits rather than demand agreement with an impossible plan. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— ENTRY Complete: CT 320 One completed specialist certificate or an independently approved equivalent outcome portfolio, with evidence reference and reviewer. Reasoned command recommendation or independent entry review; no insider sponsor is required. Equipment: A specialist-role panel and the case brief. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— CASE: The conference cannot promise six places 1. Fleet can move six equal case units in the available window. 2. Civil reception can accept four. Industry says splitting the load will require another handling session. 3. Command must decide the first movement and preserve the unresolved handling consequence. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE AND GAME SKILLS Coordinate specialists around one operational picture Practical instruction revision 1 / 9 October 2026 Ask for constraint-bearing reports Have the pilot report fuel and landing limits, engineering report lost systems, medical report required care tier and logistics report usable capacity. Ask what each limitation prevents, not just whether the station is “green.” A ship can fly while lacking the bed or handling access that gives the mission its purpose. Resolve resource conflicts explicitly When a medic requests a diversion and a cargo lead requests the original destination, compare urgency, supported care, route and fuel. State which service is deferred and where its people or cargo remain. Do not bury a critical clinical-game or flight constraint in an average score across unrelated preferences. Issue one synchronised amendment Read the changed destination and task sequence to all affected leads. Have each confirm its consequence: revised map route, receiver, cargo custody or casualty care. Preserve an urgent-report channel while the conference continues so a new warning is not lost under discussion. Close only when the resulting tasks have accepted owners. PRACTICAL DRILL Chair a short conference using conflicting pilot, medical and cargo reports. Choose a feasible sequence, issue the amendment and check each specialist’s actual next action. OBSERVED-SKILL CHECKS Reports identify the mission consequence of each limitation. My action / observed result / assistance / evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ Live, simulated or unobserved: ____________________________________________________________ The decision preserves essential flight and care constraints. My action / observed result / assistance / evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ Live, simulated or unobserved: ____________________________________________________________ Every affected station acknowledges the same amended sequence. 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 — Engineering https://starcitizen.tools/Engineering Engineering terminals, components, fuses, heat and fires. This community overview is incomplete; verify each interaction and vessel’s support in the session. Star Citizen Wiki — Cargo https://starcitizen.tools/Cargo SCU, container geometry, grids and ownership. The page also contains obsolete automatic-loading descriptions and future design intentions; these are not instructions for the present cargo interface. Star Citizen Wiki — Quantum drive https://starcitizen.tools/Quantum_travel Spooling, calibration, obstructions, orbital markers and interdiction. Its proposed quantum-boosting section is not used as a live procedure. Official LIVE release check: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/patch-notes ———————————————————————————————————————————————— METHOD 1: Give specialists a decision to examine Send the objective, planned resources, open assumptions and decision needed before the conference. Ask each service to test the part it knows. A speech about mission importance does not replace a plan they can check. Circulate the decision question early enough for specialists to check their own constraints. Ask for a recommendation and its evidence, not a general statement of support. The conference should spend its attention on contested assumptions and interfaces between services rather than repeat facts everyone has already accepted. Practise: Prepare a short conference brief. Ready when: Participants can identify the proposed decision and assumptions they are being asked to test. My action and observed result: ____________________________________________________________ Evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— METHOD 2: Hear the consequence of an objection Ask what the concern would change, what supports it and what alternative is possible. Repeat the concern accurately before accepting or rejecting the advice. Do not turn a service’s limited capacity into a test of loyalty. Test an objection by asking what would happen if it were ignored and what evidence would resolve it. Record dissent accurately even when the decision goes another way. A chair who rewards only agreement will receive fewer warnings, not a more feasible plan; disciplined disagreement is part of the conference’s work. Practise: Chair a review with fleet, industrial and civil roles. Ready when: You record each material objection, supporting evidence and proposed action. My action and observed result: ____________________________________________________________ Evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— METHOD 3: Issue one revised decision State the selected plan, the changes made and the objections still unresolved. Assign the next check for each open issue. Agreement to work under a decision does not mean every participant endorsed it. End with a decision record that separates approved action, deferred action and further inquiry. Name the owner and reporting point for each. Circulate the amended plan rather than leaving participants to combine the old document with their memories of the meeting; different interpretations should be corrected before crews commit. Practise: Write the decision and circulate the revised plan. Ready when: A reader can trace the changes and remaining objections to the conference. My action and observed result: ____________________________________________________________ Evidence reference: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— WORKED DECISION Civil staff report insufficient reception capacity. Command reduces the first movement while retaining Industry’s scheduling objection for the next decision. 1. Ask each role for the evidence supporting its number. Restate reception’s four-place limit before deciding. 2. Approve a supported first movement of four if the authority and priorities allow it. Tell Fleet which two remain and who owns the next decision. 3. Record Industry’s unresolved scheduling objection and the follow-up needed. Do not describe compliance with the decision as unanimous endorsement. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— YOUR EXERCISE Chair the discussion and issue a revised plan with the objections and next decisions still visible. WHAT CHANGES A specialist withdraws support for a critical assumption. My decision and reason: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— YOUR WORKING RECORD Decision needed / assumptions circulated ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Service / objection / evidence / proposed alternative ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Selected plan / unresolved dissent / assigned follow-up ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— CHECK YOUR REASONING Can the minutes say “unanimous” because nobody refused to proceed? My answer before consulting the explanation: ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— EVIDENCE TO KEEP The original brief, conference notes and revised decision with reasons. Criterion 1: Participants can identify the proposed decision and assumptions they are being asked to test. Individual evidence / finding / assessor's reason: ____________________________________________________________ Criterion 2: You record each material objection, supporting evidence and proposed action. Individual evidence / finding / assessor's reason: ____________________________________________________________ Criterion 3: A reader can trace the changes and remaining objections to the conference. 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: Give reception six places but remove Fleet’s second crew. The chair must respond to the new limiting service. My next practice task: ____________________________________________________________ Review contact: ____________________________________________________________ ———————————————————————————————————————————————— COMPARE AFTER ANSWERING No. Record the actual positions and the decision. People can carry out a decision while retaining a documented objection. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— READING INTO PRACTICE (SUPPLEMENTARY) MCDP 1 · Warfighting · United States Marine Corps (1997) Read: Chapter 1, The Nature of War: Friction and Uncertainty; Chapter 4: Decisionmaking. Separate the facts from the assumptions before choosing a course of action. An objection is useful when it identifies a consequence or offers a workable alternative. Decide with the information available and state what new report would change the decision. CREW EXERCISE An escort pilot reports contacts near the destination but cannot identify their intentions. The cargo pilot reports limited fuel; another pilot proposes a longer route. Chair the conference: establish each ship’s status, ask for the basis of each recommendation, and issue a decision to continue, divert or hold. DEBRIEF What was observed, and what has only been inferred? ____________________________________________________________ Which option can every assigned ship actually complete? ____________________________________________________________ Which new report would cause you to change the order? ____________________________________________________________ APPLYING THE SOURCE An unidentified contact is not automatically hostile. Use the agreed engagement rules and observed ship status; the exercise does not assume sensor capabilities the crew does not have. This discussion exercise adds no completion requirements; use the course assessment criteria above. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— SOURCE AND EDITION Case CT–2: relieving an unavailable commander /academy/archives/watch-relief-case Command Studies case issued by CDR Maren Haldorsen in 2956. The course variants develop its test: can the next leader continue without access to the original planner’s private assumptions? 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. FAA · crew resource management (2004 reference) https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_120-51E.pdf FEMA · objective-led exercises and improvement https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/national-preparedness/exercises/hseep ———————————————————————————————————————————————— 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