Ironclad vs Caterpillar: Which Drake Freighter Should You Choose?

The Drake Ironclad and Drake Caterpillar share more DNA than most cargo ships in Star Citizen.

Both are large Drake freighters. Both use an asymmetric industrial design. Both support physical cargo handling, both can carry more than standardized freight alone, and—after the Ironclad's release—both now use the same Command Module implementation.

They are not, however, interchangeable.

The Caterpillar's official RSI technical overview publishes 576 SCU, Crew Size 4, 130 m/s SCM, and a 111.5-meter length. Current Alpha 4.10.1 version-locked vehicle data provides the additional build-specific fields used in this comparison, including cargo-grid count, maximum speed, shield HP, ship HP, and current tractor hardpoints.

The Ironclad carries 2,200 SCU across its current version-locked cargo grids, while CIG separately publishes 2,204 SCU. It is a larger heavy-freight platform with more cargo-handling infrastructure, a much larger logistics workload, and a $600 reference pledge value.

For most owners, the central question is simple:

Do you want a more manageable Drake multicrew freighter, or do you actually need Ironclad-scale logistics?

Ironclad vs Caterpillar Specifications

Specification	Drake Ironclad	Drake Caterpillar
Role	Heavy Freight	Medium Freight
Status	Flight Ready	Flight Ready
Cargo capacity	2,200 SCU*	576 SCU
Cargo grids	9	14
Dimensions	117 × 50 × 25 m	111.5 × 39.5 × 13.4 m
Crew	CIG publishes 7; current top-level field malformed as 7-6	CIG publishes Crew Size 4
SCM speed	110 m/s	130 m/s
NAV / max speed	900 m/s	900 m/s
Ship-level shield HP	144,000	144,000
Ship HP	258,000	91,500
Cargo handling	Multiple Size 2 tractor positions	Left/right tractor-beam hardpoints in current data
Command Module	Shared current Drake Command Module	Shared current Drake Command Module
Reference pledge value	$600	$330

*The current Alpha 4.10.1 Ironclad cargo grids total 2,200 SCU. CIG separately publishes 2,204 SCU. The reason for the four-SCU discrepancy has not been established, so the two figures are kept separate rather than reconciled.

Exact Alpha 4.10.1 fields such as the nine and fourteen cargo-grid counts, 900 m/s maximum speeds, shield HP, ship HP, and current tractor hardpoints come from version-locked vehicle data rather than being presented as permanent first-party RSI specifications.

The scale difference is substantial.

The Ironclad carries 1,624 SCU more cargo than the Caterpillar, or roughly 3.8 times the Caterpillar's current capacity.

The Caterpillar counters with a smaller cargo workload, lower published crew figure, higher SCM speed, and a much lower reference pledge value.

Cargo Capacity: 2,200 SCU vs 576 SCU

For maximum enclosed freight, the Ironclad wins by a wide margin.

Its current Alpha 4.10.1 nine-grid layout totals:

• 720 SCU;
• 720 SCU;
• 360 SCU;
• 360 SCU;
• five separate 8-SCU grids.

CIG separately publishes 2,204 SCU for the Ironclad. The source of the four-SCU discrepancy has not been established, so this comparison uses 2,200 SCU when discussing the current version-locked grid total while retaining 2,204 SCU as CIG's separately published specification.

The Caterpillar's official RSI technical overview publishes 576 SCU. Its current Alpha 4.10.1 vehicle record distributes that capacity across 14 cargo grids.

That means the ships approach freight organization differently as well as operating at different scales.

The Ironclad concentrates most of its capacity into four large grids with smaller dedicated sections.

The Caterpillar divides a much smaller total across a larger number of grid segments associated with its long multi-section cargo body.

Using the current version-locked totals:

Ironclad: 2,200 SCU

Caterpillar: 576 SCU

Difference: 1,624 SCU

The Ironclad carries approximately 3.8 times the Caterpillar's cargo capacity.

That advantage becomes useful when 576 SCU repeatedly forces additional journeys. If a route only provides a few hundred SCU, the Ironclad's unused capacity does not create additional productivity by itself.

For the Ironclad's exact grid layout and loading workflow, see the Star Citizen Ironclad Cargo Guide.

The Caterpillar Is Still a Serious Cargo Ship

The Caterpillar's 576 SCU should not be dismissed simply because the Ironclad is much larger.

More than 500 SCU remains enough for substantial freight runs, especially for an owner who does not regularly need organization-scale cargo capacity.

The Caterpillar also creates a smaller physical handling job.

A full 576-SCU load still requires planning and container movement, but it is far less freight than a full 2,200-SCU Ironclad.

This can make the Caterpillar more appropriate for players who want multicrew Drake cargo gameplay without turning every full load into a major logistics event.

The Ironclad becomes compelling when Caterpillar capacity is repeatedly an operational constraint.

Cargo Layout: Large Ironclad Hold vs Caterpillar Segments

The ships also organize their freight differently.

Ironclad

The Ironclad is centered around a vast enclosed cargo area with:

• large primary cargo grids;
• smaller secure grids;
• a retractable roof;
• multiple dedicated tractor positions;
• enough volume for mixed cargo and suitable vehicles.

The layout favors high-volume freight consolidation.

Caterpillar

The Caterpillar's body is divided into a series of cargo sections.

Its current Alpha 4.10.1 vehicle record exposes 14 separate cargo grids, reinforcing the segmented nature of the ship rather than treating its 576 SCU as one uninterrupted warehouse.

Historically, CIG has positioned these sections around the Caterpillar's broader modular identity.

That design history should be kept separate from current implementation.

The Caterpillar's long-term concept emphasizes interchangeable cargo sections and role flexibility, but this comparison does not assume that every historically discussed module is currently implemented simply because the ship was designed around modularity.

Cargo-Handling Differences

The standard Ironclad was designed around moving very large quantities of physical freight.

Its current Alpha 4.10.1 vehicle data includes multiple Size 2 SureGrip tractor-beam entries.

CIG's DefenseCon 2956 Q&A separately explains that the Ironclad's tractor beams are the same size but mounted in different positions and able to move, providing multiple loading and unloading angles.

The retractable roof adds another major access route.

Instead of pushing every container through a conventional side or rear opening, a crew can approach large parts of the cargo area from above when the environment allows it.

Those tools make sense on a ship carrying more than 2,000 SCU, but they do not eliminate the workload associated with that amount of freight.

Caterpillar cargo handling

The Caterpillar's current Alpha 4.10.1 vehicle record also exposes cargo tractor-beam hardware, including left and right tractor-beam hardpoints.

The comparison should therefore not be reduced to “Ironclad has tractor beams; Caterpillar does not.”

The difference is scale and layout.

The Caterpillar uses its tractor equipment around a smaller segmented cargo operation.

The Ironclad combines dedicated tractor positions with a much larger central hold and roof access intended for heavier freight handling.

Speed and Physical Scale

RSI's Caterpillar technical overview publishes a 130 m/s SCM speed and 111.5-meter length.

The current Alpha 4.10.1 Ironclad vehicle record lists:

• 110 m/s SCM
• 900 m/s NAV / maximum speed
• 117 × 50 × 25 m

The current Caterpillar record lists:

• 130 m/s SCM
• 900 m/s maximum speed
• 111.5 × 39.5 × 13.4 m

The Caterpillar therefore has a 20 m/s SCM advantage in the current comparison, while both current vehicle records list the same 900 m/s maximum speed.

Their lengths are surprisingly close: only 5.5 meters apart.

The bigger physical difference is overall volume.

The Ironclad is wider and dramatically taller, helping explain how a ship of roughly similar length can provide almost four times the cargo capacity.

Moving from Caterpillar to Ironclad is therefore not simply buying a slightly longer Drake freighter. It is stepping into a much bulkier logistics platform.

Equal Shield HP Does Not Mean Equal Survivability

Current Alpha 4.10.1 version-locked vehicle data reports:

• Ironclad: 144,000 ship-level shield HP
• Caterpillar: 144,000 ship-level shield HP

Those are current extracted build values, not a claim that the ships have identical total durability.

The same records list:

• Ironclad: 258,000 ship HP
• Caterpillar: 91,500 ship HP

Ship HP and shield HP still do not establish how long either ship will survive in an actual combat encounter.

The ships differ in armor behavior, hull geometry, component placement, defensive positions, damage location, and available crew response.

CIG currently positions the Ironclad as a durable industrial heavy hauler, while the Caterpillar's identity is more strongly tied to flexible multicrew freight and modular design.

Equal current shield HP should therefore remain one comparison field rather than being converted into a universal survivability conclusion.

The Command Module Is Now Shared

This comparison changed substantially when CIG implemented the current Command Module system.

CIG's DefenseCon 2956 Ship Q&A explicitly states that the Ironclad and Caterpillar now share an identical Command Module.

The same current source says the design retains important features of the Caterpillar's original module concept, including:

• beds;
• drop seats;
• the ability to serve as a life raft.

That means the Caterpillar Command Module should no longer be described as merely a future or concept-only feature.

Historical concept vs current implementation

There are three evidence layers worth keeping separate.

Older Caterpillar material established the original detachable Command Module concept.

The original Ironclad Q&A later described compatibility between the Ironclad and Caterpillar Command Modules and confirmed independent quantum capability.

DefenseCon 2956 provides the newer implementation-level statement: the current Ironclad and Caterpillar use the same Command Module.

The Ironclad's advantage is therefore not exclusive access to a detachable command craft.

Its advantage is the much larger logistics platform attached to it.

For detailed detachment, claim behavior, cargo limits, and current implementation boundaries, see the Star Citizen Ironclad Command Module Guide.

The Command Module Is Not Extra Cargo Capacity

The current Alpha 4.10.1 Command Module vehicle record lists 0 SCU cargo capacity.

The module does not allow a Caterpillar or Ironclad owner to detach standardized freight and complete a smaller cargo delivery.

Its role is personnel movement, command functionality, emergency separation, and operational flexibility.

CIG's original Ironclad Q&A separately confirms that the Command Module has its own quantum drive for independent quantum travel.

The freight remains a parent-ship responsibility.

Caterpillar Modularity Needs a Current-vs-Planned Boundary

Modularity has always been central to the Caterpillar's identity.

Historical RSI material describes its cargo sections as configurable and presents the ship as a platform capable of serving several roles. That remains valid design history.

It should not be used to imply that every historically discussed module is implemented in current Alpha 4.10.1 gameplay.

The Caterpillar's current comparison case can stand on what is already supported:

• 576 SCU;
• segmented cargo space;
• Crew Size 4;
• current tractor hardware;
• the shared current Command Module;
• a smaller logistics workload than the Ironclad.

Future modular expansion can remain additional potential rather than being required to justify the ship today.

Vehicle and Mixed-Logistics Use

Both ships can participate in vehicle logistics, but the Ironclad has far more physical capacity to trade between freight and vehicles.

Historical Caterpillar material specifically describes the front cargo section as capable of housing smaller open-canopy vehicles such as the Dragonfly.

The Ironclad's much larger cargo volume provides more room for mixed logistics involving suitable vehicles, equipment, and freight.

This comparison does not assign fixed vehicle counts to either ship where authoritative sources do not establish them.

The practical distinction is scale.

The Caterpillar can combine cargo with selected vehicles.

The Ironclad can dedicate much more internal volume to vehicles while still retaining substantial freight capacity.

Capacity and Route Utilization

A larger hold is valuable only if cargo exists to fill it.

This is one of the Caterpillar's strongest practical arguments.

A 576-SCU ship can reach a high utilization rate on cargo opportunities that would leave most of an Ironclad empty.

The Ironclad becomes more attractive when the owner repeatedly encounters:

• contracts larger than one Caterpillar load;
• enough commodity supply to fill substantially more than 576 SCU;
• multi-stop freight worth consolidating;
• organization logistics requiring several Caterpillar-scale loads.

When repeated journeys become the actual bottleneck, the Ironclad's 2,200-SCU grid total can consolidate almost four Caterpillar loads into one ship.

That is the operational reason to move up in scale.

Price: $600 vs $330 Reference Pledge Value

Current version-locked vehicle records list:

• Ironclad reference pledge value: $600
• Caterpillar reference pledge value: $330

These values should not be interpreted as confirmation of current standalone availability at exactly those prices.

They are also separate from:

• Warbond pricing;
• CCU pricing;
• secondary-market pricing;
• in-game aUEC purchase prices.

The $270 reference pledge value difference is substantial.

The Ironclad provides roughly 3.8 times the cargo-grid capacity, but that additional value also comes with a larger ship, more cargo to manage, and heavier crew and logistics demands.

The Caterpillar gives up capacity in exchange for a much lower reference pledge value and a more manageable operating scale.

Solo, Small-Crew, and Organization Use

The workload difference between these ships matters as much as the cargo figures.

Solo

One pilot can physically fly either ship.

That does not make either vessel fully crew-independent.

The Caterpillar is easier to manage around solo use primarily because 576 SCU and the surrounding ship workload are smaller than the Ironclad's 2,200-SCU heavy-logistics operation.

A solo Ironclad owner can still fly, load, and unload the ship, but every task becomes sequential and full utilization requires much more cargo handling.

Small crew

The Caterpillar's official RSI specification lists Crew Size 4, which makes it a more proportional platform for a small regular crew.

That figure is not being converted into a claim that exactly four players are required for every flight.

The Ironclad needs more careful crew wording.

CIG publishes Crew 7, while the current extracted Alpha 4.10.1 top-level field is malformed as 7-6. It should not be normalized into an invented “6–7 crew” range.

Current extracted data also exposes six crew stations and seven beds. Those remain separate metrics rather than a replacement for CIG's published Crew 7.

A smaller group can still operate an Ironclad, but more cargo and ship responsibilities will remain sequential or uncovered.

Organizations

The Ironclad has the clearer advantage when freight volume becomes organization-scale.

Its 2,200-SCU cargo-grid total can consolidate several Caterpillar-sized shipments, while multiple players can work on cargo, ship systems, and logistics simultaneously.

The Caterpillar remains useful for smaller independent teams and routes where dispatching the larger ship would be unnecessary.

The two therefore occupy different useful scales rather than making one another obsolete.

Is the Ironclad a Direct Caterpillar Replacement?

Not necessarily.

The ships overlap heavily, but the Ironclad does not make the Caterpillar's operating scale irrelevant.

A Caterpillar can remain useful for loads that do not justify dispatching the larger ship.

An organization might reasonably use Caterpillars for medium-volume independent hauling and Ironclads for consolidated heavy logistics.

The shared Command Module also means the Caterpillar remains part of the same current Drake operational ecosystem.

The cleaner distinction is:

Caterpillar = smaller multicrew Drake logistics.

Ironclad = high-volume Drake heavy logistics.

Who Should Choose the Caterpillar?

The Caterpillar makes more sense when:

• 576 SCU covers most regular shipments;
• a smaller multicrew workload is preferable;
• a small regular crew is more realistic than an Ironclad-scale logistics team;
• the lower reference pledge value matters;
• segmented cargo space fits the operation;
• current Command Module functionality is appealing without needing 2,200 SCU;
• the owner values the Caterpillar's modular design identity without relying on unimplemented modules for the current purchase case.

It is the more proportionate choice when the owner needs a large Drake freighter but does not regularly need thousands of SCU.

Who Should Choose the Ironclad?

The standard Ironclad makes more sense when:

• 576 SCU regularly forces additional trips;
• more than 1,000 SCU is routinely available to move;
• multiple players can divide cargo and ship responsibilities;
• retractable-roof access and heavier tractor infrastructure benefit the workflow;
• vehicles and freight need to share a much larger logistics space;
• the owner wants a heavy-freight platform rather than a medium-freight multicrew ship.

For broader crew, weapons, price, solo-use, and ownership considerations, see the Star Citizen Ironclad Guide.

Final Verdict

The Caterpillar is the more manageable Drake multicrew freighter, while the Ironclad is the stronger choice when cargo volume has genuinely moved into heavy-logistics territory.

The Caterpillar carries 576 SCU, officially lists Crew Size 4 and 130 m/s SCM, and has a $330 reference pledge value. It also now participates in the same current Command Module implementation as the Ironclad.

The Ironclad carries 2,200 SCU across its current Alpha 4.10.1 cargo grids, adds heavier cargo-handling infrastructure and roof access, and is built around much larger freight operations.

Choose the Caterpillar when 576 SCU is sufficient and a smaller Drake multicrew logistics platform fits the operation.

Choose the Ironclad when repeated Caterpillar-scale loads have become the capacity problem you are trying to solve.

FAQ

How much cargo does the Ironclad carry compared with the Caterpillar?

Current Alpha 4.10.1 extracted cargo grids total 2,200 SCU for the Ironclad, while RSI publishes 576 SCU for the Caterpillar.

CIG separately publishes 2,204 SCU for the Ironclad. The reason for the four-SCU discrepancy has not been established, so the two Ironclad figures are kept separate.

Which is easier to solo?

The Caterpillar is easier to manage around solo use because its cargo and overall operational workload are smaller.

One pilot can physically fly either ship, but that does not make either vessel fully crew-independent.

Do the Ironclad and Caterpillar use the same Command Module?

Yes. CIG's DefenseCon 2956 Q&A states that the current Ironclad and Caterpillar use an identical Command Module.

Older Caterpillar material established the original concept, while the original Ironclad Q&A later described compatibility. DefenseCon 2956 is the stronger current implementation source.

Can the Command Module carry cargo?

The current Alpha 4.10.1 Command Module vehicle record lists 0 SCU.

It is an independent personnel and command craft rather than a detachable cargo shuttle.

Is the Caterpillar modular?

Modularity is a long-standing part of CIG's Caterpillar design identity.

Historical RSI material describes configurable cargo sections, but this article does not assume every historically discussed module is implemented in current Alpha 4.10.1 gameplay.

Is the Ironclad better than the Caterpillar?

Not universally.

The Ironclad is better suited to very high-volume freight and consolidated heavy logistics.

The Caterpillar is easier to justify when 576 SCU already covers the operation and a smaller multicrew Drake freighter is more appropriate.