Warp Battles

[Deks]

Ideally, phasers should be pretty useless at warp and photon/quantum torpedoes would be the only viable FTL weapon, IMO. But because they just had to have phasers behave at warp the same way they do at sublight, we have to assume that a ship's warp field is as conveniently big as the plot of a story requires it to be in order for phasers to hit an enemy vessel in another conveniently compatible warp field.

Unless the ship firing phasers projects an elongated beam of a warp field around the phaser beam (a beam inside a beam) to be able to fire them outside the warp field at a target at Warp that's a fair distance away but still within say 300,000 km - that can help explain how ships can fire energy weapons usually meant for STL combat in FTL... at least it helps explain a few instances where ships weren't close enough to merge Warp fields.

Once they are within range, Warp fields merge, and you can use phasers without having to elongate warp field around a beam (although this also seems to be the most likely explanation how Phasers and energy weapons are used at Warp).

Also, on the notion of evading phasers at Warp... generally that doesn't happen because course corrections at warp are not recommended and could fracture the hull.

Usually, ships tend to execute minor and careful course corrections while at Warp, but otherwise tend to travel in more or less a straight line.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Unless the ship firing phasers projects an elongated beam of a warp field around the phaser beam (a beam inside a beam) to be able to fire them outside the warp field at a target at Warp that's a fair distance away but still within say 300,000 km - that can help explain how ships can fire energy weapons usually meant for STL combat in FTL... at least it helps explain a few instances where ships weren't close enough to merge Warp fields.

If you plan on firing & hitting ships that are traveling at Warp that are anywhere within the upper range of 3 km - 300,000 km long distance range, that sounds like it would require a "Special set of dedicated Warp Coils" wrapped around the muzzle of the beam emitter to even do that, otherwise the beam should veer off like crazy.

It's definitely a "Zany Idea" or "Wonder Weapon" if there ever was one for the 24th century.

You've seen my justification for the "Close Enough" w/o merging Warp Bubbles, only merging Warp Fields; but the other reason the Nebula Class was probably able to fire at warp besides being close enough is probably their "Navigational Deflector" + it's own Warp Field should provide a Assymetrical Shaped Space around it that allows firing directly ahead w/o Warp Field distortions affecting it. Given how short range the "Navigational Deflectors" are and how powerful they are, it makes sense that there's a small extended frustum of space ahead of your vessel that you can control via positioning to shoot at each other if you get "Close Enough". Something both the pursuer & evader controls by controlling the distance between the two. We all saw how close the Nebula-class was too the Prometheus-class when it fired it's phasers.

At any other greater distances, the beams would either get affected by the spatial distortions from the Warp Drives or not be affected, but still have to deal with time/space lag even if you're shooting out of the broad-sides of the warp field/bubble where it's relatively distortion free.

Once they are within range, Warp fields merge, and you can use phasers (this seems to be the most likely explanation).

I concur, but at that distance, you're definitely in knife fight territory since you can easily make out the details on the others hull by looking through a window with your natural eyes.

Also, on the notion of evading phasers at Warp... generally that doesn't happen because course corrections at warp are not recommended and could fracture the hull.

Usually, ships tend to execute minor and careful course corrections while at Warp, but otherwise tend to travel in more or less a straight line.

Different Warp Nacelle types offer different amounts of FTL Manueverability, there's a reason why StarFleet went with Paired Parallel Warp Nacelles instead of Warp Rings.
On average, the Warp Ring configuration was 17% more Energy Consumption Efficient than Twin/Multi Warp Nacelle designs
The Coleopteric Warp Drives was Notice-ably more Energy efficient, but MUCH less manueverable at High Warp speeds.
StarFleet abandoned the design becaues they needed the flexibility of manueverability at High Warp speeds.

I can definitely see the "Coleopteric Warp Drives" dominating the commercial FTL landscape due to it's Natural "Energy Efficiency", 17% more Energy Efficiency over Paired Parallel Warp Nacelles is "Too Good" on a economic/resource efficiency level.

But generally, similar to going fast while flying in the air, your course corrections are over very broad distances, it isn't "Sudden Movements" like you would see with a Newtonian Focused 3D Thrust Vectoring Space Superiority Fighter in STL maneuvers.

 

[blssdwlf]

Curious, if warp combat is so impractical (excluding TOS) how does tracking and scanning ships and objects work while at warp? In both instances you are sending energy from a ship at warp to an object at warp (or not) that is well beyond your warp bubble/field.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Curious, if warp combat is so impractical (excluding TOS) how does tracking and scanning ships and objects work while at warp? In both instances you are sending energy from a ship at warp to an object at warp (or not) that is well beyond your warp bubble/field.

You know how light distorts and refracts when it hits water in a clear glass cup?
It should be a FAR more complicated problem when you're at warp.

1) Depending on what angle you're shooting out of around your own Warp Bubble, the refraction index should change, even on a Dynamic basis relative to the speed you're traveling along with acceleration factors.
2) Then you have to account for FTL lag for Super-Luminal Sensors.
3) Then you have to account for leading of the target that is at a great distance away.
4) Account for any Spatial Distortions in the local space between the path you expect the beam to travel, any spatial phenomena or anomalies that will screw up your calculations?
5) Then you have to account for the Refraction Index of the targets Warp Bubble/Field based on what angle you expect your beam to hit.

That's ALOT of complexity & calculations to deal with just to fire beam weapons at Warp Speeds compared to forcing them out of Warp by De-Stabilizing their Warp Bubble (Worf/Kor could do it easily enough with a simple "Graviton Pulse" when chased by 10 Jem'Hadar Fighters) and fighting them at STL speeds.

 

[blssdwlf]

You know how light distorts and refracts when it hits water in a clear glass cup?
It should be a FAR more complicated problem when you're at warp.

1) Depending on what angle you're shooting out of around your own Warp Bubble, the refraction index should change, even on a Dynamic basis relative to the speed you're traveling along with acceleration factors.
2) Then you have to account for FTL lag for Super-Luminal Sensors.
3) Then you have to account for leading of the target that is at a great distance away.
4) Account for any Spatial Distortions in the local space between the path you expect the beam to travel, any spatial phenomena or anomalies that will screw up your calculations?
5) Then you have to account for the Refraction Index of the targets Warp Bubble/Field based on what angle you expect your beam to hit.

That's ALOT of complexity & calculations to deal with just to fire beam weapons at Warp Speeds compared to forcing them out of Warp by De-Stabilizing their Warp Bubble (Worf did it easily enough when chased by Jem'Hadar) and fighting them at STL speeds.

I get that there are complexities in non-TOS warp combat. However, the question is how do the Super-Luminal Sensors work outside of TOS? Ships at warp are also sending out energy beams to track targets well outside of a ship's warp bubble/field yet they are able to maintain their tracking.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I get that there are complexities in non-TOS warp combat. However, the question is how do the Super-Luminal Sensors work outside of TOS? Ships at warp are also sending out energy beams to track targets well outside of a ship's warp bubble/field yet they are able to maintain their tracking.

Super-Luminal Sensors seem to work well enough that you can easily detect:
- where ships are
- how fast they're going
- what direction they're going
- All in real time with minimal latency
- And ID the target to a reasonable accuracy.

However their Super-Luminal Sensors work, it works well enough that they can figure stuff out FAST.

 

[blssdwlf]

Super-Luminal Sensors seem to work well enough that you can easily detect:
- where ships are
- how fast they're going
- what direction they're going
- All in real time with minimal latency
- And ID the target to a reasonable accuracy.

However their Super-Luminal Sensors work, it works well enough that they can figure stuff out FAST.

Then what is holding back firing energy weapons at warp when energy sensors work just fine?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Then what is holding back firing energy weapons at warp when energy sensors work just fine?

It's one thing to know where the target is at, it's another to calculate the Refraction Index Factor of every layer your beam has to traverse.

Remember, even if you have perfect sensor data from your own Sensors + Warp Drive, you have "Space Itself" & it's numerous issues since you're moving so fast and numerous Spatial Anomalies + other factors can always throw off your shot. The faster you travel the harder it is to calculate, especially in areas you've never been through.
Then you have to deal with their Warp Field, which at long range, you probably don't know enough data to calculate their Refraction Index at the point of beam entry due to lack of Sensor Resolution + Range.
The only thing you know is where they're at, as for the details of their warp field, you probably have to be so close that you might as well be in a StarShip Knife fight, at that point, it's a moot issue.

Just go blast each other at close range if you have to get that close to calculate real time sensor data that dynamically changes.

In the end, I'd rather just send a Graviton Pulse, knock them into STL battle and continue.

Knocking a ship out of warp or getting knocked out of warp is a "Unpleasant Experience" and the first to do it will have "First Movers Advantage".

So you might as well force them into a STL battle and continue.

 

[blssdwlf]

It's one thing to know where the target is at, it's another to calculate the Refraction Index Factor of every layer your beam has to traverse.

Remember, even if you have perfect sensor data from your own Sensors + Warp Drive, you have "Space Itself" & it's numerous issues since you're moving so fast and numerous Spatial Anomalies + other factors can always throw off your shot. The faster you travel the harder it is to calculate, especially in areas you've never been through.
Then you have to deal with their Warp Field, which at long range, you probably don't know enough data to calculate their Refraction Index at the point of beam entry due to lack of Sensor Resolution + Range.

That doesn't make any sense. If your sensor energy beam can reliably reach a target outside of the warp field then a weapon energy beam can do the same since both are traveling through the same writer-imposed complex layers.

It isn't a calculation of anything limitation, IMHO. A better argument would be phaser range is severely curtailed while at warp due to power being used for warp engines and shields or something like that. YMMV.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

That doesn't make any sense. If your sensor energy beam can reliably reach a target outside of the warp field then a weapon energy beam can do the same since both are traveling through the same writer-imposed complex layers.

If you understand how Radar works, detail & accuracy are inversely proportional to range.

To get useful sensor data off the EM spectrum, something beyond where you are, where you're going, details like the target's Warp Field's energy fluctuation and energy output would require you to be "Much Closer".

That's why you have sensor systems of different resolution and use the appropriate sensor type.

It's the same with anybody who does engine calibration IRL, you only get the detailed sensor readings when it's either in a test rig, or you have detailed specialized sensors flying right next to the emitters to validate data.

It's not something you can pull details hundreds of thousands of meters away, much less light seconds.

It isn't a calculation of anything limitation, IMHO. A better argument would be phaser range is severely curtailed while at warp due to power being used for warp engines and shields or something like that. YMMV.

It's not a computational limit, it's a limitation based on the type of sensor resolution that you can get, and to get that kind of detail; you need to be very close with specialized engineering sensors designed for that.

We've seen them firing at Warp speeds, so it's not a power issue, sensors aren't unlimited, most sensors in ST are modified versions of IRL ones, just extrapolated for a future FTL scenario.

E.g. IRL we have Radio waves we can manipulate; in ST, they have Subspace Radio of various types that can be used to communicate in real time at FTL speeds.

We have various types of Radar, they have some form of Super-Luminal EM sensors that function in similar ways.

 

[blssdwlf]

If you understand how Radar works, detail & accuracy are inversely proportional to range.

To get useful sensor data off the EM spectrum, something beyond where you are, where you're going, details like the target's Warp Field's energy fluctuation and energy output would require you to be "Much Closer".

That's why you have sensor systems of different resolution and use the appropriate sensor type.

It's the same with anybody who does engine calibration IRL, you only get the detailed sensor readings when it's either in a test rig, or you have detailed specialized sensors flying right next to the emitters to validate data.

It's not something you can pull details hundreds of thousands of meters away, much less light seconds.

Pulling details has nothing to do with delivering energy onto a target. If you can get sensor tracking data from your sensor energy beam on a target outside of your warp field then you can send some extra energy to it with a weapon energy beam.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Pulling details has nothing to do with delivering energy onto a target. If you can get sensor tracking data from your sensor energy beam on a target outside of your warp field then you can send some extra energy to it with a weapon energy beam

It's not always about just amplifying Sensor Energy and expect it to magically solve things.

Otherwise, Radar would scale linearly, but it doesn't.

Delivering Beam Weaponry at range isn't the problem, delivering it accurately is.

There are certain pieces of sensor info that aren't practical to get in real time for combat.

Knowing the basics of where your enemy is, along with where they're heading is hard enough.

Please take the time to do some basic research on how IRL radars work, it's COMPLICATED.

And you can't just magically whip up more sensor resolution by shoving more energy out of it, there are limits along with limitations based on physics of how Radio waves propagate.

I'm pretty sure the Super-Luminal EM sensors would function along a similar trajectory.

 

[Deks]

You know how light distorts and refracts when it hits water in a clear glass cup?
It should be a FAR more complicated problem when you're at warp.

1) Depending on what angle you're shooting out of around your own Warp Bubble, the refraction index should change, even on a Dynamic basis relative to the speed you're traveling along with acceleration factors.
2) Then you have to account for FTL lag for Super-Luminal Sensors.
3) Then you have to account for leading of the target that is at a great distance away.
4) Account for any Spatial Distortions in the local space between the path you expect the beam to travel, any spatial phenomena or anomalies that will screw up your calculations?
5) Then you have to account for the Refraction Index of the targets Warp Bubble/Field based on what angle you expect your beam to hit.

That's ALOT of complexity & calculations to deal with just to fire beam weapons at Warp Speeds compared to forcing them out of Warp by De-Stabilizing their Warp Bubble (Worf/Kor could do it easily enough with a simple "Graviton Pulse" when chased by 10 Jem'Hadar Fighters) and fighting them at STL speeds.

The computer likely handles these complex calculations as I suspect they'd be too difficult for humanoids to keep track of on a regular basis.
If torpedoes aren't available for whatever reason, you need to have access to phasers to do the job for you instead.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

The computer likely handles these complex calculations as I suspect they'd be too difficult for humanoids to keep track of on a regular basis.
If torpedoes aren't available for whatever reason, you need to have access to phasers to do the job for you instead.

True, but trying to use them in situations they weren't designed to do is a recipe for disaster and just wasting resources.

That's why Worf thought it was better to destabilize the 10x Jem'Hadar fighters and bring the fight to STL, let Kor + Skeleton crew hold them off.

The fact that you can choose (When/Where) to fight at STL is a better solution than taking pot shots at each other with phasers at FTL in the hope of knocking them out of FTL or destroying them with a few random blasts.

 

[blssdwlf]

It's not always about just amplifying Sensor Energy and expect it to magically solve things.

Oddly, you are claiming that you cannot accurately deliver energy to a target because of complicated warp layers and such being in the way but you are dodging the fact that sensors are doing just that.

And you can't just magically whip up more sensor resolution by shoving more energy out of it, there are limits along with limitations based on physics of how Radio waves propagate.

This is what your argument would sound like in an episode of TNG...

WORF: Alien warship at 300,000 kilometers paralleling us at Warp 2.
RIKER: Lock onto that ship and fire phasers!
DATA: We have locked on but we are unable to fire because our sensors cannot resolve the shapes of their antennas. We need more sensor resolution first.
RIKER: So we can't fire because we need more sensor resolution when we already have a lock? What about power?
GEORDI: Apparently we have plenty of power available. But the computers can't give us a firing solution without more sensor details.
RIKER: Even though we are tracking them right now and our computers make far more complex calculations with just us using the transporters? Who designed this system?
DATA: I have the computational power... if you would just ask me.

 

[Henoch]

From Memory Alpha: Phaser technology used by Starfleet was preceded by phase-modulated particle weapons in the mid-22nd century, including such weapons as the hand-held phase-pistol and ship-mounted phase cannon.

I thought Phasers are some sort of particle (nadion?) beam weapon, so, thinking in terms of "energy only" is incomplete. The sensors may be 100% energy based (including subspace sensors), but the phaser cannot send its particles via the same channel. I have no real theory on how any of this works at FTL, so thank you technobabble.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

There being differences in the composition of two beams, for example because they are composed of different types of particles and/or different kinds of energy, means it's more than plausible that they'll behave differently. Just because a sensor beam can do something, it does not follow necessarily that a phaser beam can do the same thing.

I thought Phasers are some sort of particle (nadion?) beam weapon, so, thinking in terms of "energy only" is incomplete. The sensors may be 100% energy based (including subspace sensors), but the phaser cannot send its particles via the same channel. I have no real theory on how any of this works at FTL, so thank you technobabble.

Yeah, this.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Oddly, you are claiming that you cannot accurately deliver energy to a target because of complicated warp layers and such being in the way but you are dodging the fact that sensors are doing just that.

Just curious, do you have ANY idea of how IRL RADAR / Radio Transmission Systems work?

This is what your argument would sound like in an episode of TNG...

WORF: Alien warship at 300,000 kilometers paralleling us at Warp 2.
RIKER: Lock onto that ship and fire phasers!
DATA: We have locked on but we are unable to fire because our sensors cannot resolve the shapes of their antennas. We need more sensor resolution first.
RIKER: So we can't fire because we need more sensor resolution when we already have a lock? What about power?
GEORDI: Apparently we have plenty of power available. But the computers can't give us a firing solution without more sensor details.
RIKER: Even though we are tracking them right now and our computers make far more complex calculations with just us using the transporters? Who designed this system?
DATA: I have the computational power... if you would just ask me.

It's not about "Computing Power".

It's about gaining useful insights out of the data you get back from your sensors.

Using a simpler analogy:

At certain points, you can't "Enhance" a 2D picture, unlike what TV Show's or Movies would have you believe.

There is only so much data you can get from a certain resolution picture.

You can't Zoom/Enhance forever to magically get the detail you want.

Short of physically moving closer to the target and getting your best/highest resolution camera.

The same would apply to very sensitive sensor systems that detect minute fluctuations like Warp Fields.

At close range, your ships personal sensors pointing outwards to scan your own Warp Fields would be close enough.

But it's literally located on the outside of your hull.

You can't expect a similar resolution / detail sensor analysis from the enemies Warp Field at long distance.

That's not how sensors work.

 

[blssdwlf]

Just curious, do you have ANY idea of how IRL RADAR / Radio Transmission Systems work?

Yes I do, which is why I find your logic is not correct. Since you are arguing that you need more sensor resolution it would suggest to me that you do not understand the question I presented.

Ask yourself this, if you are tracking a ship with sensor beams what is happening? Logically you know the direction to the target in 3D space and you know the range. And since you are tracking the ship you already know it's vector. You have enough information to fire on the ship if you are in range.

But you are not arguing that your energy weapon needs to be closer to be in range (your quote below). Instead you are arguing that you need to reduce the distance to increase the resolution on a target that you are already tracking. Again, if you are already tracking the target you can get a firing solution. There is nothing preventing you from firing an energy beam weapon at the target unless you add in a complication that @Henoch brings up

It's not about "Computing Power".

It's about gaining useful insights out of the data you get back from your sensors.

Using a simpler analogy:

At certain points, you can't "Enhance" a 2D picture, unlike what TV Show's or Movies would have you believe.

There is only so much data you can get from a certain resolution picture.

You can't Zoom/Enhance forever to magically get the detail you want.

Short of physically moving closer to the target and getting your best/highest resolution camera.

The same would apply to very sensitive sensor systems that detect minute fluctuations like Warp Fields.

At close range, your ships personal sensors pointing outwards to scan your own Warp Fields would be close enough.

But it's literally located on the outside of your hull.

You can't expect a similar resolution / detail sensor analysis from the enemies Warp Field at long distance.

That's not how sensors work.

I thought Phasers are some sort of particle (nadion?) beam weapon, so, thinking in terms of "energy only" is incomplete. The sensors may be 100% energy based (including subspace sensors), but the phaser cannot send its particles via the same channel. I have no real theory on how any of this works at FTL, so thank you technobabble.

There being differences in the composition of two beams, for example because they are composed of different types of particles and/or different kinds of energy, means it's more than plausible that they'll behave differently. Just because a sensor beam can do something, it does not follow necessarily that a phaser beam can do the same thing.

Agreed, this line of reasoning is a lot more plausible than the inability to calculate a firing solution due to a lack of sensor capability if the target is already being tracked.

@Henoch - if you quoted further from Memory Alpha:

"Even though the phaser beam was canonically established as not a beam of pure EM energy but a particle beam of nadions, the 1998 reference book Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual still goes on to describe the phaser beam as an EM energy beam. According to page 84 of the Manual, a phaser beam can be delivered at warp speeds due to an annular confinement beam jacket and other advances in subspace technology. These are stated to be new inventions in the late-24th century. However, considering that first on-screen uses of phasers at warp occurred as early as the first season of The Original Series, this timeline for the invention would be inconsistent with canon. Furthermore, according to page 92 of the Manual, when phasers are fired by a ship with deflector shields active, the beam is frequency locked to the second-order harmonics of the shield emissions. This prevents the beam impacting on the shields and overloading them, or rebounding back at the firing ship."​

Interestingly, Voyager's episode, "Maneuvers", seems to have leaned into the same idea when Torres states that the Maquis commonly use their transporter's annular confinement beam "synced to the warp core frequency" to transport people that are stationary while the transporting ship is flying by at high warp. The intention of the episode was to beam out Chakotay once in transporter range as Voyager flew by at high warp. That would qualify as moving particles while at warp and doing very fine tracking with their targeting scanners presumably at a range outside of the warp bubble, no?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Yes I do, which is why I find your logic is not correct. Since you are arguing that you need more sensor resolution it would suggest to me that you do not understand the question I presented.

You're assuming we're using the exact same sensors for the same thing. I've stated before that sensors for tracking ship position that is similar to RADAR isn't the same sensor units you would be using for calculating Warp Field Harmonics along with any perturbances.

Ask yourself this, if you are tracking a ship with sensor beams what is happening? Logically you know the direction to the target in 3D space and you know the range. And since you are tracking the ship you already know it's vector. You have enough information to fire on the ship if you are in range.

Yes, we know the location, velocity, and trajectory. That doesn't factor in the effects of the Warp Field of the target for "long range beam combat".

But I've stated before that Warp Fields themselves have a way of distorting the angles of beams if fired upon the wrong angle or out of a bad angle on your side if you're at great distance.
That's the entire point of knowing the details of the enemies warp field and how it works. StarShips traveling at FTL via traditional Warp Drive will warp 'Local Space' itself; that inadvertently works as a form of defense against incoming beam projectiles based on what angle you hit the targeted ship at.

But you are not arguing that your energy weapon needs to be closer to be in range (your quote below). Instead you are arguing that you need to reduce the distance to increase the resolution on a target that you are already tracking. Again, if you are already tracking the target you can get a firing solution. There is nothing preventing you from firing an energy beam weapon at the target unless you add in a complication that @Henoch brings up

I'm arguing that you need to be closer so that you can calculate the opponents Warp Field details to calculate their Distortion/Refraction Index. Which is largely a pointless operation when you can easily just get close to the enemy or force them into a STL battle.

Ships at FTL, using Warp Drive, have a somewhat natural defense against beam weapons at long range, the distortion of local space would (deflect / distort / curve) incoming beams away.
Ergo short of knowing what you're dealing with on the opponents end for their warp field
1) it becomes either "Random luck" and you spam beam fire semi randomly and hope something hits or enters a weak spot in the Warp Field
2) You can just get up close & personal, then attack each other at close range, distortions don't matter when you're that freaking close.
3) Force them into STL like Worf did with 10x Jem'Hadar Fighters and fight them in normal space.

2 out of the 3 scenarios are far easier to execute and more reliable, there's almost no reason to ever attempt scenario #1 and fight at long distance while at Warp Speeds.