Publication and delivery
This course is published for study. Publication does not confirm an available class, appointed instructor or completed practical validation. Before booking, obtain a session brief naming the organiser, instructor and assessor, equipment access and any independent review arrangements.
Before live assessment, the organiser must record the current LIVE build, validation date, ship and equipment used, tasks checked and any known limitations. If a required mechanic is unavailable, defer the affected assessment rather than certify an unobserved outcome. A material game update calls for a check of affected tasks, not cancellation of earlier academic achievements.
Your brief
For watch leaders learning to replan and conduct fair incident reviews.
Command Studies requires the leader to examine the instructions they supplied. A common crew error may reveal a common source rather than several independent failures.
The crew followed the wrong brief
Practice case · CT 380 · 2956 teaching edition
- The issued brief names Receiving A. A planning note names B but was never circulated.
- The crew correctly read back A and began the movement.
- The leader discovers the mismatch while one crew member reports overload.
Before you begin: entry and equipment
Complete these courses
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.
Bring or arrange
A participating crew, evaluator and independent stop authority.
The organizer must confirm equipment access before booking. No ship purchase, pledge tier or donation is required.
Technical knowledge and game skills
Practical instruction revision 1 · 9 October 2026
Incident recovery without hindsight or blind resets
Stabilise and preserve the state
After a failed approach, casualty or cargo incident, account for people and move to a recoverable condition before investigating. Record the current flight mode, location, component or medical indications and latest command. Do not destroy useful evidence by repeatedly toggling every system or overwriting the manifest to make it balance.
Distinguish operational error from game interruption
Reconstruct what the player could see at the time. Compare their action with the available indication and the instructed procedure, not with knowledge acquired later. A delayed marker or unusable interaction may invalidate part of the observation without proving poor judgment. Test a suspected fault with a small, controlled reproduction only when safe.
Convert the finding into another performance
Replace “communicate better” with a repeatable action such as calling the go-around before the descent limit or confirming a bed tier before loading. Rehearse the corrected action under the same relevant conditions, then vary one condition to check transfer. Preserve unresolved causes instead of presenting a confident but unsupported explanation.
Practical drill
Review a recorded or instructor-supplied game incident, distinguish observations from later knowledge, and run a small corrective rehearsal without recreating the original uncontrolled hazard.
Observed-skill checks
- Immediate recovery precedes analysis.
- The finding uses information available at the original decision point.
- The corrective action is observable and demonstrated in a fresh rehearsal.
Use these checks to document the technical evidence supporting the course outcomes in your agreed role. Record what you personally performed, what assistance you needed and what remains unobserved. A discussion or simulated action does not certify live equipment handling; Crew Support evidence does not confer Pilot qualification.
Game references and build-sensitive details
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 — 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.
- Star Citizen Wiki — 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
Engineering terminals, components, fuses, heat and fires. This community overview is incomplete; verify each interaction and vessel’s support in the session.
- RSI — Official patch notes
Primary release index for the instructor’s build check, not evidence that a particular interaction has been tested by the Academy.
Check the official LIVE release notes and record the session build, equipment and observed limitations before practical sign-off.
Learn the method
1. Name the assumption that failed
Compare the observed situation with the plan’s required conditions. State which condition no longer holds and what work it affects. Continuing to protect the appearance of success gives the next watch a larger problem.
Reconstruct what was knowable at each decision point. Later evidence may explain the outcome without having been available to the original leader. Judge the decision against the information, authority and alternatives then present; otherwise incident review teaches hindsight rather than a method for making better decisions under uncertainty.
- Practise
- Identify the point where the original plan stops fitting.
- Ready when
- You cite the observation and the relevant change or stop condition.
2. Reassign with the receiving crew
Ask what the crew can now cover, then reduce or redistribute tasks. Give each changed assignment a clear limit and confirm acceptance. Leave room for another challenge; revising the plan once does not make it immune to new evidence.
Replanning must account for the cost of changing direction. Ask what work is already committed, which tasks can pause and who must receive the amendment first. Protect a channel for urgent reports while issuing the revised brief so the act of reorganising does not make the crew blind to another developing limitation.
- Practise
- Rebrief after a resource loss and overload warning.
- Ready when
- The new tasks are feasible and their owners acknowledge the limits and open work.
3. Review the cause before choosing the remedy
Separate a faulty brief, unavailable equipment, a learning gap and an allegation of misconduct. Tie the correction to the evidence. A learning review can assign better instructions or practice; it does not replace a fair disciplinary process.
Write an improvement as an action that can be checked: amend the receiving check, assign its owner and rehearse it in the next movement. Distinguish a cause from a contributing condition and avoid claiming certainty the evidence cannot support. A review is complete only when someone accepts the follow-up, not when the report sounds decisive.
- Practise
- Write a finding, correction and check of whether it worked.
- Ready when
- Each finding has evidence and a proportionate action with an owner.
A worked decision
A crew follows an inaccurate brief. The review corrects the material and rehearses the missed check rather than blaming every operator for the same planning error.
- Hold the affected action and establish which instruction the crew actually received. Do not blame them for failing to follow an unseen note.
- Confirm the supported destination and redistribute the overloaded task before issuing one corrected brief.
- Preserve both versions. Assign a briefing-control correction and rehearse the changed handover; refer any misconduct allegation separately with evidence rather than embedding it in the training finding.
Try it yourself
Lead the correction, confirm the new assignments and write an after-action finding with an owner and check for improvement.
What changes during the exercise
A team member challenges the revised plan and reports overload.
Keep this record
- Original instruction / observed event / failed assumption
- Corrected plan / workload change / acceptance
- Cause supported by evidence / corrective action / owner and verification
Plain-text worksheet with this case, your working fields and the assessment criteria. Fill it in privately; downloading does not submit work or record completion.
Check your reasoning
The crew made the same mistake. Is repeating the course for everyone the first answer?
Compare your reasoning
Check whether the brief, demonstration or equipment caused the common error. Correct the cause and reassess the affected work; do not prescribe punishment or blanket repetition without evidence.
Answer first, then compare. In a later session, explain the decision using a changed case without referring to this answer.
How completion is judged
Observed replanning and an evidence-based improvement record.
The assessor checks your own work against all three “Ready when” criteria above. Use the observed-skill checks in the technical chapter to establish the applicable game-handling evidence in your agreed role. A successful team result does not replace an action they did not observe.
Findings, another attempt and review
- Demonstrated
- Your observed work meets the criterion in the agreed role.
- Further practice required
- The assessor identifies the observed gap and the specific practice needed.
- Interrupted
- Equipment, staffing or personal circumstances prevented a valid assessment. This is not a failure.
- Not assessed
- There is not yet enough evidence for this outcome.
A fresh attempt
Supply a correct brief but introduce a demonstrable read-back gap. Choose feedback appropriate to that different cause.
Reassess the missing outcome, plus any linked skill that needs new evidence. For prior learning, compare existing work with the same criteria and observe any missing practical action.
Ask for the reasons behind a finding. Reviews must be handled by someone independent of the original decision; defer the review if that person is not available.
Read the Academy Ordinance and review rulesFor instructors
Session setup and coaching
Prepare the session
A participating crew, evaluator and independent stop authority.
Assign crew stations and tell each learner what they will practise. The instructor must be able to hear the calls and see the action being assessed. Brief the callsigns, channel, route and expected duration. Replace the example locations with the places you will actually use.
- Ask the learner to explain the relevant earlier procedure without notes; correct any gap before the practical.
- Teach and demonstrate the technical chapter using the actual game indications. Run its drill with feedback before connecting those skills to the three methods and worked decision. Use the observed-skill checks to identify missing handling evidence.
- Let the learner complete the normal procedure first, then introduce the change described in the exercise. Give them time to respond without coaching. Keep unrelated failures out of this attempt.
- Record the learner's action against each criterion. Give one specific next step for any gap and transfer unfinished operational work before closing.
What to watch for in CT 380
Ask whether the learner’s proposed remedy changes the cause. Repeating the same inaccurate brief more firmly is not a correction.
If another attempt is needed
Supply a correct brief but introduce a demonstrable read-back gap. Choose feedback appropriate to that different cause.
Running the exercise
Before the crew assembles, try the exercise in the ship you intend to use. Check station access, equipment and the route. Brief the crew on any faults that affect the task. If a bug prevents someone completing it, repeat that part once it works; do not record a failure for a broken mechanic.
Brief the command “Stop exercise” before starting. On that call, cease the drill and tell the instructor what needs attention. For weapons practice, identify the participating ships and crew; anyone else entering the area is a reason to hold fire.
Session administration: use player handles in your notes. Ask before recording voice or video, and agree when the recording will be deleted. Academy rules and review procedure.
Reading into practice
MCDP 1 · Warfighting · United States Marine Corps (1997)
Read: Chapter 4, The Conduct of War: Decisionmaking and Philosophy of Command.
Revise the plan when its assumptions fail, not merely because a new report arrives. Explain which observation changed your judgement. In the debrief, compare what the crew knew at the time with what became clear afterwards.
Crew exercise
A transport cannot use the planned pickup point. The crew is still together and a second site may be usable. Ask for the reports needed to choose between moving the crew, sending another ship or cancelling the pickup. Issue the revised order. In the debrief, reconstruct the sequence of reports and decisions.
Debrief
- Which assumption failed, and what evidence showed it?
- What did the crew need to know immediately?
- Which preparation or rehearsal would improve the next attempt?
Applying the source aboard ship
Do not invent a rescue capability to complete the scenario. If the available ships cannot perform the recovery, identify that limit and change the task.
This is a supplementary discussion exercise, not an additional completion requirement. Use the source to examine the decision; the course criteria above remain the assessment standard.
Sources and edition
Lex Astra · Command Studies programme
Course CT 380 · edition 2956.3 · 2956 teaching edition · revised course text.
Case CT–2: relieving an unavailable commander
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?
Professional references and instructional revision
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.
Editorial context and teaching basis
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.
Your session brief names the instructor, the crew assignments and the equipment provided. Contact the teaching office above to arrange a place.
Course-text revision: 8 October 2026. Educational references were reviewed for the framework on 8 October 2026; they inform the teaching approach, not external accreditation or current game-capability claims.
Teaching research and its limitsWhere this leads
Command Studies requirementsCourses that use this work
Course records retain the edition and role assessed. New teaching text does not erase earlier achievements.