It looks Klingony..Okay, this time it really, honestly, is the real phaser prop from the film. Not the toy, not a knockoff...the real deal.
From the RPF, via HobbyTalk:
According to the sources on the RPF who've seen the film, the two-tone finish is more obvious in better light; the blue-gray paint is more of a weathered effect on the upper part of the phaser.
First thoughts: I like it much, much better than the toy. The Playmates version was surprisingly accurate to the overall shape, but this has a much more "serious" look about it. I'm especially glad that the red barrel is anodized alluminum, and the other barrel is either not colored or fits inside a housing in the body so the unit looks more integrated.
I assume the button on the side of the handle works the stun/kill setting, but where's the trigger? Is it the whole front of the handle?
First photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
- Thread starter Gepard
- Start date
- Status
Well, I think the point of that in today's logic is that it shouldn't be easily visible.
Then again, the Starfleeters ARE wearing bright red, gold and blue uniforms!
I guess in this timeline there either isn't a smaller phaser, or it's an entirely separate unit, not one that mounts onto a base to create the more powerful pistol version. Doesn't seem to be anything on this new one that can be deatched and still operate as a phaser.
...unless one of those angular top parts is going to surprise us.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Which is cool until you actually try to handle of the damned things. If you raise the sight and try to look at it, there's no good way to look through it and get your finger on the trigger without feeling like you're going to drop the thing.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Okay, this time it really, honestly, is the real phaser prop from the film. Not the toy, not a knockoff...the real deal.
From the RPF, via HobbyTalk:
According to the sources on the RPF who've seen the film, the two-tone finish is more obvious in better light; the blue-gray paint is more of a weathered effect on the upper part of the phaser.
First thoughts: I like it much, much better than the toy. The Playmates version was surprisingly accurate to the overall shape, but this has a much more "serious" look about it. I'm especially glad that the red barrel is anodized alluminum, and the other barrel is either not colored or fits inside a housing in the body so the unit looks more integrated.
I assume the button on the side of the handle works the stun/kill setting, but where's the trigger? Is it the whole front of the handle?
Yes, this looks definitely much better than the toy-version.
The TUC and the ENT weapons still look better
but this is a very nice variation of the TOS-design.I like the rotating feature: it's what Pike had on his laser-phaser-stunners, and what Kirk might have had on his phaser rifle. Overall, this gun could be older and more dependable tech than the weapons that Shatner's Kirk wielded, but no less destructive...
As for the trigger thing, I trust we won't see the hand action close enough to be able to tell whether the long forward part of the handle is a safety mechanism or an actual trigger. We might then decide that one of the other, single-finger buttons is the actual trigger.
Single-handed action? Dunno. The prop loses something if the actor cannot pronouncedly use his other hand to adjust a doohickey!
Timo Saloniemi
I have three main complaints about this weapon.
And, by the way, I have less of a problem with changing props, or even uniforms, than I do with the ship. Because you can replace weapons or whatever regularly... much less of an issue than rebuilding a ship. Heck, throughout TNG, how many different phaser variations did we see? And uniform variants?
So, my issues with this phaser prop are:
1) The handle is polished stainless? BAD IDEA. Ya 'ever try to handle something like that with sweaty hands? Phasers'll be dropping all over the place. There's a REASON that real weapon grips are textured and made from insulating materials (wood, plastic, etc). And it's obviously no longer a swappable power-pack, huh?
2) The "swapping barrel" idea is dumb. I see what they were trying to do... give a "visual indication" (to the dumb audience members) that the thing is going from "stun" to "kill"... and also add "artsy visual interest." Maybe they were even trying to pay homage to the "Cage" and "WNMHGB" laser/phaser-rifle designs. But this simply makes no mechanical sense. It's a very likely point-of-failure, a major source of potential misalignment... and imagine if (somehow) the wrong "barrel" actually fires! No, this is BAD DESIGN, done to look cool, not to be practical.
3) Finally... most people look at the TOS phaser and don't realize just how well-thought-through Wah Chang's work on it was. Every bit... including the "trim lines" on the sides... had a real, FUNCTIONAL purpose.
a) Twist the barrel... the emitter tip extends. This allows selection of tight-beam or wide-beam emission.
b) The side-knob up-front was the main setting feature... think of it as a "safety-plus"... turning the thing on/off, or setting it to continuous beam or pulsed-beam mode.
c) The top-aft knob was the mode setting feature... selecting various preset modes (various stun levels, heat, disintegrate, etc).
d) Below that was a heat-rejection device... properly placed so it would be unlikely to come into contact with the skin.
e) Along the sides, under the Ph-1, were lines which are in-line with the emitter barrel. These serve as "iron sights"... hold the weapon at arm's length and you can sight down these to visually target. Nearly as effective as conventional "dot-in-v" iron sights handguns have today... useful for quick "snap-shooting."
f) On top of the Ph-1 body is a pop-up targeting display... with the targeting sensor on the front of the Ph-1 body (the emitter is the little round bit, the targeting sensor is the rectangle above it).
If I were going to redesign the "TOS" phaser, the only thing I'd do would be to remove the "combining" aspect and have the Ph-1 and the Ph-2 be independent, sharing common features.
I'd keep it black... but have it be "gunmetal" black (like modern firearms tend to be).
I'd keep the TOS design almost exactly, but remove the Phaser-1 and just fill in that space. I'd have the top of that area have the targeting pop-up and a little "data-display" for charge level, setting, etc. I might put a "guard" over the emitter barrel. I might add a more "grippy" element to the power-pack/grip (textured rubber panels?). I'd alter the trigger button (that one's a given, I think) to be more ergonomic. I'd have the whole thing be a non-glare, tactically-suitable color... something that can be done on a metallic surface by deposition (say, dark grey anodized aluminum?). But I would NOT change the general shape, or the functionality, at all.
And, by the way, I have less of a problem with changing props, or even uniforms, than I do with the ship. Because you can replace weapons or whatever regularly... much less of an issue than rebuilding a ship. Heck, throughout TNG, how many different phaser variations did we see? And uniform variants?
So, my issues with this phaser prop are:
1) The handle is polished stainless? BAD IDEA. Ya 'ever try to handle something like that with sweaty hands? Phasers'll be dropping all over the place. There's a REASON that real weapon grips are textured and made from insulating materials (wood, plastic, etc). And it's obviously no longer a swappable power-pack, huh?
2) The "swapping barrel" idea is dumb. I see what they were trying to do... give a "visual indication" (to the dumb audience members) that the thing is going from "stun" to "kill"... and also add "artsy visual interest." Maybe they were even trying to pay homage to the "Cage" and "WNMHGB" laser/phaser-rifle designs. But this simply makes no mechanical sense. It's a very likely point-of-failure, a major source of potential misalignment... and imagine if (somehow) the wrong "barrel" actually fires! No, this is BAD DESIGN, done to look cool, not to be practical.
3) Finally... most people look at the TOS phaser and don't realize just how well-thought-through Wah Chang's work on it was. Every bit... including the "trim lines" on the sides... had a real, FUNCTIONAL purpose.
a) Twist the barrel... the emitter tip extends. This allows selection of tight-beam or wide-beam emission.
b) The side-knob up-front was the main setting feature... think of it as a "safety-plus"... turning the thing on/off, or setting it to continuous beam or pulsed-beam mode.
c) The top-aft knob was the mode setting feature... selecting various preset modes (various stun levels, heat, disintegrate, etc).
d) Below that was a heat-rejection device... properly placed so it would be unlikely to come into contact with the skin.
e) Along the sides, under the Ph-1, were lines which are in-line with the emitter barrel. These serve as "iron sights"... hold the weapon at arm's length and you can sight down these to visually target. Nearly as effective as conventional "dot-in-v" iron sights handguns have today... useful for quick "snap-shooting."
f) On top of the Ph-1 body is a pop-up targeting display... with the targeting sensor on the front of the Ph-1 body (the emitter is the little round bit, the targeting sensor is the rectangle above it).
If I were going to redesign the "TOS" phaser, the only thing I'd do would be to remove the "combining" aspect and have the Ph-1 and the Ph-2 be independent, sharing common features.
I'd keep it black... but have it be "gunmetal" black (like modern firearms tend to be).
I'd keep the TOS design almost exactly, but remove the Phaser-1 and just fill in that space. I'd have the top of that area have the targeting pop-up and a little "data-display" for charge level, setting, etc. I might put a "guard" over the emitter barrel. I might add a more "grippy" element to the power-pack/grip (textured rubber panels?). I'd alter the trigger button (that one's a given, I think) to be more ergonomic. I'd have the whole thing be a non-glare, tactically-suitable color... something that can be done on a metallic surface by deposition (say, dark grey anodized aluminum?). But I would NOT change the general shape, or the functionality, at all.
I was going to post a long answer to this but one of your points sums it up to me:
And that's why it's a winner - something went wrong with Trek fandom when they decided that people shouldn't do things because they were cool. I go to the cinema to see cool things not to get a lecture on make-up bullshit. I can look out of the window for realism.
Who fucking cares? It's a ray gun in a blockbuster movie - it's not real. Are kids going to want to run around with those going "zap zap!" - I think the answer is yes.
And that's why it's a winner - something went wrong with Trek fandom when they decided that people shouldn't do things because they were cool. I go to the cinema to see cool things not to get a lecture on make-up bullshit. I can look out of the window for realism.
This thing couldn't possibly look as impractical as the TOS phasers did - they were charming designs in the sense of being able to look at them and guess "oh, this does this and that does that," which I think is one strong appeal of a lot of TOS design, but a lot of the detail was either poorly thought out or is outdated now.
Like I really want to fiddle with that little battery indicator during a gunfight, yeah.
Like I really want to fiddle with that little battery indicator during a gunfight, yeah.
I buy it because I can envision the type of "rays" needed to "stun" and "vaporize" require some physical difference in the emitters, collimators, lenses, etc. What if the "primary rays" need to pass through Crystal Type A and produce Secondary Radiation Type A to yield "stun rays" and be focussed correctly? What if a different crystal, collimator, whatever is needed to yield "vaporize matter" rays? That means some sense to me... at least as much sense as being able to twist a knob to change from "stun human" to "vaporize rock."
Damn. They were so close to getting it right.
Isn't that the Commando 8000 from the former Yugoslavia, for use only on circus elephants?
And endorsed by the late Anna Nicole Smith, yes. God bless her, she loved her sex toys.
The weapon of choice when your only option is to never give up, never surrender.
I see now, it's a squeeze grip trigger! *enjoys shiver down back* Tentacled crewmembers should have no trouble using it.
It may have a detachable palm phaser. Look at this link provided by Starship Polaris http://www.saucersoverhollywood.com/prop58.JPG See the wheel on top of the palm phaser, it matches a wheel on the new phaser posted by Gep Malakai http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3495/3227506042_aeb3fa6f75_o.jpg
Though not easily distinguishable, nor does it appear to be as comfortable to hold as the original, that wheel is present on both so, while not conclusively proven, a small palm phaser which plugs into the rear main body may be present here.
Re: Fisrt photo of phaser prop...for real this time.
Yeah, you gotta hold the darn thing forward in your palm with your thumb and three digits on the side, and your pointer finger on the trigger. (I just tested this with my AA unit.) Oh, well. It's still my fave.
Yeah, you gotta hold the darn thing forward in your palm with your thumb and three digits on the side, and your pointer finger on the trigger. (I just tested this with my AA unit.) Oh, well. It's still my fave.
I've had the Art Asylum TOS phaser for a month, and in that time I've had several occasions of wanting to have a good, long, talk with whatever fictional Starfleet entity it was that greenlit some of the features o nthag thing. The P1 in particular in virtually unusable--if I hold it so I can use the setting dials, I can't use the sight, and if I hold it so I can use the sight, my fingers are mashing all over the setting dials and I can't use them either. And in both cases, pushing the "fire" button on the bottom of the unit is awkward.
- Status
Similar threads
