|
Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions. If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name. |
|
|||||||
| Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#16 |
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: phasers - why only short bursts?
In most situations, the targets they faced were quite mobile, and even with FTL weapons, it would be problematic to compensate for sudden changes in trajectory. Against enemies such as the Borg though and races that are able to induce feedback pulses quickly through sustained beams ... it's also possible SF is using shorter bursts to prevent such a scenario.
__________________
We are who we choose to be but also have predefined aspects of our personalities we are born with, and make art that defines us. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Commander
Location: New Jersey, USA
|
Re: phasers - why only short bursts?
I'm also surprised that after with all of the "fight a cloaked ship" scenarios Starfleet could have planned for, there's no setting on the torpedoes to follow an enemy's impulse plasma (sorry, wrong movie), or better yet get informed by a phaser "tag" and change course. This latter capability we could do with a drone today with little difficulty. I know, i know, they wanted a cool crash scene. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |||||
|
Vice Admiral
Location: England's green and pleasant land.
|
Re: phasers - why only short bursts?
Heck - if you wish to rationalise some more it is possible it is actually something that takes a few seconds to start the engines and have them get to full power. This is as opposed to an adjustment in trajectory in combat sufficient to avoid getting hit by a beam fired from several kilometres away (or realistically a lot more) by someone who only has an educated guess at your course anyway.
As for the second point - a single shot tells you precisely nothing about an enemies course, just the point where it was when the shot was fired. You would need a minimum of three and probably at least a dozen shots to correctly track a curving course which was kept constant. With manoevering in the equation as well it becomes almost impossible.
__________________
I believe in a better world, so I love Star Trek. I have to live in this one, so I love Battlestar Galactica. |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Admiral
|
Re: phasers - why only short bursts?
Whether they were also midcourse-guided by the pool of systems is unknown, as they always missed by the slightest of margins after a virtually straight flightpath. If a straight path was almost good enough for a hit, then we cannot readily argue that the lack of curvature in the path proves that the torps didn't maneuver. They probably just didn't need to maneuver much even when they could; high-gee corkscrewing would not have improved the results, and thus its absence doesn't establish that midcourse steering was absent. As for tracking of impulse exhaust, it's clearly something that a starship's own sensors cannot consistently do even in ST6. That is, the cloaked ship doesn't leave a simple trail of exhaust that could be sensed and plotted - at most, it burps out a whiff of plasma here, another there, and a suitably configured torpedo has a small but finite chance of locking onto such a whiff at just the right time and place. Mostly, such a torpedo would spend time spinning in confused circles, as happened in ST6. Not to mention that the technique might not work at all within an exotic nebula that has already been polluted by the engines and weapon fire of four vessels. Timo Saloniemi |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Chief of Staff, Starfleet Command
|
Re: phasers - why only short bursts?
I just want to point out that when we use terms like "hit" and "miss" for torpedoes, we must remember that they are area-effect weapons that detonate as close to the intended target as they can--after making some complicated determinations about whether or not the usage of reactants from missing the target on that pass, turning around, and maneuvering for a closer pass would be likely to result in a greater or lesser force delivered to the target. The cloak on Scimitar, the effect of the rift on torpedo guidance systems, and maybe some other factors meant a lot of these torpedoes were blowing themselves up at "best guess" moments that probably didn't end up representing very good guesses at all. (I must admit to being a bit awed when Data reported the ship had used up all of its torpedoes; I didn't care for the design or name of Scimitar or the conclusion of the battle, but that little data point and the "Kirk-Epsilon" business were pretty neat.) Also possibly relevant: the Technical Manual and Encyclopedia suggest that the effective range of phasers is typically limited to one light-second. If this is the case, I imagine many, if not most, torpedo launch scenarios (taking place at much greater ranges) would not be able to make effective use of phaser "tagging" for torpedo guidance as was mentioned above. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Admiral
|
Re: phasers - why only short bursts?
Timo Saloniemi |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 | ||
|
Vice Admiral
Location: England's green and pleasant land.
|
Re: phasers - why only short bursts?
However a computer link enabling information from every weapons hit from all three ships to be used for targetting the weapons of all three ships with very little delay would help a great deal.
__________________
I believe in a better world, so I love Star Trek. I have to live in this one, so I love Battlestar Galactica. |
||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| phasers, technobabble |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:24 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.

















