Do you prefer Phaser beams or bolts?
- Thread starter ED-209
- Start date
No Cut-Paste or ParaPhrasing, =(
fine..
During the TOS era & Refit TOS era: The Phaser Array Systems were Individual Emitters, working in pairs generally placed at various coverage points along the hull.
With the start of TNG, the new Phaser Systems are linked in a contiguous 2D Array composed of individual 'Phaser Emitter Segment Units'. The Galaxy-class employed Type-X Phasery Array systems during the lifetime of the USS Enterprise-D. The Sovereign-class employed Type-XII Phaser Array systems.
Each 'Phaser Emitter Segment Unit' is linked in the 2D Array such that they can pass along the Phaser energy down the array to combine Directed Beam Energy Output power to be greater than what one single 'Phaser Emitter Segment Unit' can generate.
The Dorsal Phaser Array on the Saucer section of the Galaxy-class had 200x Segment Units within the array. That means the Ventral Phaser Array on the Saucer section also had 200x Segment Units.
That means if you were unlucky to be in that optimum firing arc zone in between the Dorsal & Ventral Phaser Array units, you could be hit with the energy output of both Array's.
The Phaser Array receives it's primary energy feed in the form of Electro Plasma generated by the M/A-M based Warp Core. That Electro Plasma is delivered along the EPS (Electro Plasma System) conduit network to each individual Phaser Emitter Segment Unit. That means each 'Phaser Emitter Segment Unit' can receive power simultaneously from the EPS grid.
The current limitation (During the TNG-era) in the 'Phaser Emitter Segment Unit' is the amount of energy EPS grid can efficiently & safely deliver to each 'Phaser Emitter Segment Unit' before it gets "Rectified" into a Nadion based Particle stream. During the TNG-era, according to the "ST:TNG Technical Manual", it was limited to 5.1 MW's of power per Segment Unit. At full power, one array from the saucer section can deliver 1.02 GW's of power for a brief period of time before it needs to briefly pause to cool down and recharge.
But since each 'Phaser Emitter Segment Unit' is linked, it passes the "Rectified" Nadion Particle stream down the array and joins at a optimum firing point chosen by the targeting computer. That chosen "Phaser Segement Emitter Unit" then emits the Energy Stream from and fires at the target. Full power firing endurance is rated at 45 minutes according to the "ST:TNG Technical Manual".
The problem isn't passing the "Particle Energy" stream down the array, the amount of energy it can handle is obviously much higher, the limitation is the EPS Conduits passing along the Electro Plasma energy down to each Phaser Emitter Segment Unit simultaneously and how fast the Liquid Nitrogen can cool everything to keep the units running in optimum temperature range. Solving that can increase the total amount of Energy Output in each 'Phaser Emitter Segment Unit' simultaneously. That is probably solved in later versions of the Phaser System like the Type XII Phaser Array Systems.
As the Phaser technology evolves, I expect more energy output from multiple parts of the Phaser Array simultaneously since each emitter can handle ALOT more power, hopefully they upgrade the EPS Grid to handle it and have backup batteries incase the EPS Grid goes down.
I think it should be a setting. Just like an automatic rifle can be set to semi-auto, auto, or 3-round burst, I think phasers should have stun settings, beam settings, and pulse settings. The latter would be more energy efficient than the beam settings, because it's delivering 'pulses' (bolts) of energy rather than a continuous output, like a faucet turned on. Stun, realistically, would have two options: wide area and single-target pulse. (Similar to the SW ring-bolt stun setting) A phaser set to disintegrate should use a beam setting, because that requires a larger energy output.
For shipboard phasers, it depends on the technology level.
If your phaser banks are some sort of collimator ring or 'phased array', then beams are the order of the day. If they aren't, and you are tracking a moving target, then the bolts (like TWOK) make more sense. But in TOS we saw ship-fired phasers track moving targets, implying they had the technology for beam-tracking emitters as far back as TOS. So my final verdict on shipboard phasers is... BEAMS!
I like this thread.
If your phaser banks are some sort of collimator ring or 'phased array', then beams are the order of the day. If they aren't, and you are tracking a moving target, then the bolts (like TWOK) make more sense. But in TOS we saw ship-fired phasers track moving targets, implying they had the technology for beam-tracking emitters as far back as TOS. So my final verdict on shipboard phasers is... BEAMS!
I like this thread.
Well now,
As complex as that block of made-up technobabble turned out to be, why would anyone be dismissive of a poster asking a simple question about it? Because frankly, there's not a thing intuitive about the answer or well-known enough about it that even a frequent viewer or dedicated Trek fan should know any of that.
I'm sure that @tafkats would have appreciated this answer more than the one you initially tendered.
Nobody is being dismissive about anything. I just thought Phasers were simple enough that most people understood what they were.
But answering this:
actually takes a bit more understanding of how the technological lore works.
Most users just accept the fact that beams converge along the Phaser Array & fires. He's the first person that I've seen ask why it happens & what purpose does it serve.I'm sure that @tafkats would have appreciated this answer more than the one you initially tendered.
Please, that's very disingenuous. Anyone who would open a Star Trek licensed technical manual book to read the technobabble description of how it works has implicitly asked those questions and is seeking to answer them by reading it.
Sure, I know exactly what a phaser is. Funky space-age laser.
Phased array technology exists. I assume - but don't know - that the technical advisors for TNG adapted the concept into the show. I have no preference as I'm more interested in storytelling and characterisation.
Phased array technology
Phased array technology
As seen on DS9 when that Galaxy fires 2 beams from the same array
All you have to do is look at "Star Trek: Prodigy" & look at the USS ProtoStar, that Deflector dish it has is really thin.
Looks like a very wide crescent shaped Phased Array dish to me.
And most of the 32nd Century Deflector Dishes look to be compact flat dishes, similar to Phased Array type Dishes.
They must've upgraded to Type-XII Phaser Arrays from the Sovereign Class =DAs seen on DS9 when that Galaxy fires 2 beams from the same array
Two directed beams from one array isn't unfeasible. A real-world phased array can be modulated so that the resulting antenna pattern has more than one lobe.
Both.
It depends on the ship. I love seeing the Enterprise in TWOK shooting the bolts and cutting up the Reliant. I can't imagine the Kelvin Enterprise shooting anything but bolts. I love seeing that Galaxy class ship in "The Sacrifice of Angels" shoot two beams from the one phaser array. I almost jumped out of my chair when the Defiant let loose with it's gatling gun phasers in "The Search Part 1" and carved up the Jem Hadar ship. I loved seeing the Odyssey or Enterprise-D firing their beam phasers, especially in "Yesterday's Enterprise" when the Enterprise blows up the Klingon ship. Even in TOS the original Enterprise fired bolts at least in "Balance of Terror" and beams other times.
It depends on the ship. I love seeing the Enterprise in TWOK shooting the bolts and cutting up the Reliant. I can't imagine the Kelvin Enterprise shooting anything but bolts. I love seeing that Galaxy class ship in "The Sacrifice of Angels" shoot two beams from the one phaser array. I almost jumped out of my chair when the Defiant let loose with it's gatling gun phasers in "The Search Part 1" and carved up the Jem Hadar ship. I loved seeing the Odyssey or Enterprise-D firing their beam phasers, especially in "Yesterday's Enterprise" when the Enterprise blows up the Klingon ship. Even in TOS the original Enterprise fired bolts at least in "Balance of Terror" and beams other times.
Oh, and how can a phaser, phase, when it's a bolt. 
One of the best all-round Bond films, but such a lame ending for the villain.
Stromberg should have been eaten by sharks after falling down his own lift shaft booby trap or drowned to death in the sinking Atlantis!
Stromberg is arguably the worst villain to appear in a really good or great Bond film. We've had amazing villains in mediocre Bond movies: Scaramanga. Zorin. But Stromberg is so disappointing compared to the fun and memorable film he's in it's distracting how inferior he is compared to his narrative surroundings.
Agreed. Particularly in comparison to Zorin, who was fantastic.
(Side note: I think the two best Bond songs is "Live and Let Die" and "A View To A Kill".)
(Side note: I think the two best Bond songs is "Live and Let Die" and "A View To A Kill".)
Similar threads
- Poll
