RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,267
Posts: 5,349,678
Members: 24,609
Currently online: 627
Newest member: robyn

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Insight Editions Announces Three Trek Books For 2015
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

To Be Takei Review by Spencer Blohm
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Mulgrew: Playing Red
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Hallmark 2015 Trek Ornaments
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Funko Mini Spock
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23


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.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Tech

Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 8 2012, 06:26 PM   #1
lurok
Commodore
 
lurok's Avatar
 
Location: Lost in the EU expanse with a nice cup of tea
DS9 weapons

This is really just mild curiousity after watching DS9:

*is there a good canon explanation for why the DS9 era Excelsior/Miranda class (or similar) ships don't have those cool circular phaser arrays? (other than real-life reason that vfx couldn't be arsed to change models or cg )

*if I recall, Starfleet found a counter to the Breen dampener. Did the Breen ever come up with a new/improved version, or did it just become a defunct weapon?

thanks
__________________
"Anál nathrach, orth’ bháis’s bethad, do chél dénmha"
lurok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8 2012, 10:43 PM   #2
Unicron
Continuity Spackle
 
Unicron's Avatar
 
Location: Cybertron
Send a message via ICQ to Unicron
Re: DS9 weapons

For the first question, I'd just assume it had to do with the older structures being incompatible with the phaser strips. Mounting improved point defense weapons was fine, and the DS9 TM says that a number of the station's newer weapons were recycled from older vessels slated to be decommissioned.
__________________

"My dream is to eat candy and poop emeralds. I'm halfway successful."


Catbert, Evil Director of Human Resources
Unicron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 9 2012, 08:43 PM   #3
Mark_Nguyen
Commodore
 
Mark_Nguyen's Avatar
 
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Re: DS9 weapons

Re: Phaser arrays, it's not like slapping an onion ring on top of a beef patty. Everything under the ring has to be able to support the mass, volume, and energy requirements of the actual array. The older ships probably just didn't have the infrastructure to support the larger weapons, so they just improved the ones they DID have with the ability to fire continuous orange beams instead of pulsey pink ones or solid blue ones, or whatever. Up close, the older arrays are supposed to be basically spherical turrets with a single emission barrel that is swiveled around as needed. Given that such detail is rarely built into the models of the show, and basically impossible to view on TV anyway, it's easy enough to think that they replaced the swiveling turret with a bump that could fire in any direction in a 180-degree arc, without any need to physically traverse the array.

Re: Breen Beams, I'm sure that once they learned Starfleet had defeated the weapon's effectiveness, the Breen immediately started working on ways to distrupt the anti-disruptor. However, the war was over a matter of days or weeks after that, so it's pretty much a moot point. The Breen seem to have survived the war with very little lost compared to pretty much every other party in the conflict, so logistically I can see them continuing to tinker away on creating a better version, unless the victors imposed a ban on further development on such weapons (as well they should, and this sort of thing happens today).

Mark
__________________
Mark Nguyen - Producer
The 404s - Improv Comedy Group

Oh, I like that Trek thing too...
Mark_Nguyen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2012, 09:27 AM   #4
Bry_Sinclair
Commodore
 
Bry_Sinclair's Avatar
 
Location: Along the border of Talarian space
Re: DS9 weapons

Even with the old-style phaser banks, the Lakota received upgrades that gave her phasers a good punch when going up against the Defiant.

Seeing how many Excelsior's and Miranda's remained in service by the time of the Dominion War, refitting them would be a big job. Besides their existing weapons work just fine (if it ain't broke, don't fix it ).
__________________
Avatar: Captain Susanna Leijten, U.S.S. Silverfin NCC-4470, Border Service Third Cutter Squadron
Manip by: FltCpt. Bossco (STPMA)
Bry_Sinclair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2012, 10:47 AM   #5
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: DS9 weapons

Like Mark said, it might be impossible to see that some of the hardware is completely uprooted and replaced by modern equipment of roughly the same shape and size. But conversely, we have seen some elements of the Miranda and the Excelsior undergo a prominent visual change even though the models weren't retouched: the warp engines now glow an intense blue, unlike in their original 23rd century appearances. Perhaps some major refitting has taken place, but it does not manifest on the outside?

The strip phasers might also be considered a fad whose time came and went, and really modern phasers are very small and are being predominantly installed on ships the most severely lagging behind in firepower, and (not so coincidentally) incapable of receiving other sorts.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26 2012, 02:58 AM   #6
KamenRiderBlade
Lieutenant Commander
 
KamenRiderBlade's Avatar
 
Re: DS9 weapons

As far as the Phaser Arrays vs turrets on older ships. I think it has to do with the way the weapon slots were built into the hull along with all the support wiring that comes with it. Think about it, ship mounted Phasers need Power, Electronic communications, internal access room / space for maintenance.

If your hull wasn't designed for it in the first place, having to shove it on would be a major refit. You could probably be in space dock for who knows how long.

Especially in war time, you do what is fast and efficient. You can't have a ship sitting there for months or weeks.

Get the latest turret versions of the same phasers, install it, call it done.

Upgrade your shield systems to the latest model, same with engines and computers. Call it done.

Look at our real world US examples.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Midway_%28CV-41%29

USS Midway started at the end of WWII and was decommisioned in 1992.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Excelsior_class

Excelsior and Miranda classes getting upgrades lasted over 90 years.

Any ship that is well designed and maintained can probably last several centuries with technological upgrades backing it.
KamenRiderBlade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 9 2012, 09:07 PM   #7
chrinFinity
Commander
 
chrinFinity's Avatar
 
Location: Scmocation
Re: DS9 weapons

I agree with the majority here. Starfleet tech has always been depicted as modular. Jettison this, replace that, upgrade this, refit that. The ships can be taken apart and put back together with new parts around their long-serving spaceframes even over the course of several decades.

Also, the arms race in Star Trek has never really been about raw power, it seems to me more about frequencies, modulations, "phase" adjustments and other such babble.

It's not usually "our shields are more powerful than their disruptors, fullstop" it's more about "they're using some kind of oscillating nadion pulse to realign the cycle of their particle phase discriminators, and it's creating an interferametric feedback loop building to an overload faster than our frequency modulation generators can keep up." So it's not really about who can punch harder with blunt force or put up a stronger energy field, it's about making the energy systems learn to blink, twist, flip, dance, focus and re-focus faster such that the energies applied translate through your enemy's technologies in ways their designers haven't accounted for yet.

Similarly with warp speed... I don't get the impression that 24th century warp cores are much "more powerful" than 23rd century or even 22nd century equivalents, realistically it's always going to be about matter/anti-matter reaction rates which would give a fixed amount of output according to the mass of the combined reactants. Technological progress in this area has always seemed to be about how efficiently this energy can be harnessed and used. ie. How focussed is the reaction (advancements in the dilithium crystal assembly), how effectively can the warp field dynamic be calibrated and still maintain a stable warp field (probably nacelle design and super structure come into play here), how to maintain structural integrity fields necessary to protect the ship from the stresses of warping faster (like learning how to treat the Defiant just right so she doesn't shake herself apart, or how the Kelvans were able to shore up the fields protecting the Enterprise so she could sustain super-high warp to Andromeda).

The actual weapon emplacements on the ships are little more than blunt devices simply designed to emit focussed energy in a block of frequency ranges as directed in real time by a computer system. It is not entirely unreasonable that a phaser emitter from, say, fifty years ago might be able to be significantly "upgraded" with nothing more than faster computers, and newer firmware that comes with up-to-date Starfleet "technobabble tricks."

Photon Torpedo launching systems probably haven't changed much in 200 years; it's the ordnance themselves which are constantly upgraded and re-designed. As long as it's tube shaped, they can launch it. The Torpedo really does the rest.

To give you a really mundane contemporary analogy, we have technology today that can generate the same brightness (in lumens) using much less energy (in wattage), but the new bulbs still screw in and fit the old lamp fixtures. Am I right?
__________________
i hate everything
chrinFinity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2012, 01:08 PM   #8
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: DS9 weapons

...Plus, modern torpedoes, mines, missiles and decoys are still being built to 21 inch caliber in navies that otherwise have been Metric since the Great War at least, and despite there being really good reasons for adopting larger or smaller calibers. Continuity across decades, and soon across centuries, is good for weapons export, and secondarily for one's own general logistics...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.