Dustbuster phaser appreciation thread

[RapidNadion]

And how the heck do you aim those damn things? It's like trying to get a laser-pointer exactly on target with the first try - only lives are at stake!

This is what, in my eyes, makes the "assisted targeting software" theory so believable. I have one of those limited edition type 2 cobrahead phaser laser pointers ... and it's amazing how difficult it is to hit a target with it.

For the same reason, I'm much more willing to forgive the actors for their mis-aiming that necessitates the post-production beam adjustments. Well, that reason, as well as the fact that many of those phaser shots were probably done in five or six takes, and continuity people are only so good.

 

[Tomalak]

A better solution is that the phaser's aim is calculated using the trajectory of the users eyes. So, within a given range, one need only look at their target for precise accuracy.

Yeah, I suppose they could have a HUD thing that's called up on a contact lens they pop in before an away mission. Or maybe they wear them all the time, which is why they know what all those hundreds of identical LCARS buttons do on the ship.

 

[GalaxyX]

My personal opinions:

1. I don't hate the dustbuster, but it does look too "portable vacuum like".

2. I like the second incarnation with the harder edges. (I have a model of the hard edge one, and it does feel strange holding it, I'm sure the dustbuster "feels" better)

3. I do however hate the 3rd incarnation where they look like cobra heads (the 29th century ones are even worse)

4. If a starship has a phaser strip that can fire virtually from anywere along its path and be targetted with computer accuracy, I don't see why the portable phasers can't do the same (on screen evidence is conflictive on this though)

5. I LOVE the idea of a Phaser being just another tool in the arsenal, but unfortunately as a previous post mentioned, handguns are designed that way because they are so easy to hold and point at a target.

6. I *HATED* the fact that practically all Phasers ever shown in Star Trek have that "piss" like effect of a stream of energy slowly moving toward a target. Energy moves at relativistic speeds, so Phaser Blasts should reach their target virtually instantaneously no matter how far away they are (Enterprise seems to have gotten the closest to approaching this model, the new Star Trek movie did a 180 and became the worst offender for Phaser blast realism)

 

[Doug Otte]

6. I *HATED* the fact that practically all Phasers ever shown in Star Trek have that "piss" like effect of a stream of energy slowly moving toward a target. Energy moves at relativistic speeds, so Phaser Blasts should reach their target virtually instantaneously no matter how far away they are (Enterprise seems to have gotten the closest to approaching this model, the new Star Trek movie did a 180 and became the worst offender for Phaser blast realism)

I didn't notice the time lag on the 2009 movie phasers, because I was too busy cringing at the old-timey Western sound they made - like a pistol shot ricocheting off the rocks. "Kkkhhh-pewwwww!"

Doug

 

[Sisko_is_my_captain]

Although the idea of an electronic IFF or Identify Friend from Foe feature on phasers sounds cool, and would be cool, there's a problem with it. It's the same problem as having a power limit controlled by a computer, or an electronic aiming feature. All of those features are subject to electronic countermeasures that could allow an enemy to disable a phaser or, worse, flipflop the IFF so that phasers targeted the good guys instead.

OTOH, I think that's exactly what we're shown on the shows: how else can you explain the wretched aim exhibited by so many people? Clearly, when the Romulans or Klingons are shooting at the Starfleeters, the Starfleet crew has electronic countermeasures in place that are messing up the targeting computers in the enemy disruptors. Because otherwise, it's just embarassing.


And if you want to see an embarassing cobra-headed phaser, don't forget the zat gun of SG-1 fame:
http://www.treksf.com/podcast/zat1.jpg

 

[Timo]

All of those features are subject to electronic countermeasures that could allow an enemy to disable a phaser or, worse, flipflop the IFF so that phasers targeted the good guys instead.

That's only a problem if the automatics are unreliable, though.

There is no real reason to think that the automatics of the 24th century would be unreliable. It is perfectly possible that they are at least as reliable as the human brain - and that if the enemy possesses gear that can make a smart weapon act incorrectly, he will also automatically possess gear that can make Riker murder Picard in cold blood and laugh, then dance a silly little polka and finally shoot himself in the head.

Indeed, given the prevalence of powerful telepaths in Star Trek, perhaps all weapons are highly automated so that their easily corruptible users cannot be made to use them for evil?

Energy moves at relativistic speeds, so Phaser Blasts should reach their target virtually instantaneously no matter how far away they are.

There's no law of physics that would require "energy to move at relativistic speeds".

And if I had something as powerful as a phaser beam at my disposal, I would readily accept the price of the beam being the same speed as Robin Hood's arrows. Phasers demonstrably work just fine even though their beams travel at a tiny fraction of the speed of light. We don't abandon firearms in disgust today because their bullets "only" travel at the speed of sound, now do we?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Forbin]

What always killed me was when a character was clearly NOT pointing his phaser in the right direction, but SFX made the beam fly true to the target anyway, even if it meant having it come out of the phaser at an angle. I recall Sisco being guilty of this a few times.

 

[Doug Otte]

Energy moves at relativistic speeds, so Phaser Blasts should reach their target virtually instantaneously no matter how far away they are.

There's no law of physics that would require "energy to move at relativistic speeds".

And if I had something as powerful as a phaser beam at my disposal, I would readily accept the price of the beam being the same speed as Robin Hood's arrows. Phasers demonstrably work just fine even though their beams travel at a tiny fraction of the speed of light. We don't abandon firearms in disgust today because their bullets "only" travel at the speed of sound, now do we?

Timo Saloniemi

Ha! Good point, Timo. I missed that statement about energy and relativistic speeds. Further, the beam is not made of energy; it's already been converted to some kind of matter by the time it's emitted. If it were energy, and it could be magically pushed through the air, what would it do when the energy hits the target? Nothing, I'd guess.

However, despite my interest in physics, I'm not too smart at it, so the above paragraph of mine could be complete nonsense (my specialty on the Web).

Doug

 

[GalaxyX]

There's no law of physics that would require "energy to move at relativistic speeds".

And if I had something as powerful as a phaser beam at my disposal, I would readily accept the price of the beam being the same speed as Robin Hood's arrows. Phasers demonstrably work just fine even though their beams travel at a tiny fraction of the speed of light. We don't abandon firearms in disgust today because their bullets "only" travel at the speed of sound, now do we?

Timo Saloniemi

We know they fire particle beams as mentioned several times during the series. We know from the tech manual that they fire "nadion" particles, which are some type of exotic energy particles.

Now, show me an energy particle that doesn't travel close to the speed of light. Even if a particle only traveled at 10% of the speed of light, it would still be thousands of times faster than the speed of sound.

Now if you look at on screen evidence, it seems that in the TOS and TNG eras, Phaser beams traveled at roughly the same speed as paintballs do today (usually paintballs guns are capped at 250ft/s). I used to be an avid paintball player, and I could dodge oncoming paintballs almost every single time I saw them coming.

That is a pitiful speed for an energy beam weapon.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

I always thought it was funny that the kinder, gentler dustbuster design has more in common--ergonomically--with Klingon disruptor pistols than the old phaser designs.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

I always thought it was funny that the kinder, gentler dustbuster design has more in common--ergonomically--with Klingon disruptor pistols than the old phaser designs.

Perhaps as a symbol of the cooperation between the Klingon Empire and the UFP. Or some such fanwank.

 

[Doug Otte]

There's no law of physics that would require "energy to move at relativistic speeds".

And if I had something as powerful as a phaser beam at my disposal, I would readily accept the price of the beam being the same speed as Robin Hood's arrows. Phasers demonstrably work just fine even though their beams travel at a tiny fraction of the speed of light. We don't abandon firearms in disgust today because their bullets "only" travel at the speed of sound, now do we?

Timo Saloniemi

We know they fire particle beams as mentioned several times during the series. We know from the tech manual that they fire "nadion" particles, which are some type of exotic energy particles.

Now, show me an energy particle that doesn't travel close to the speed of light. Even if a particle only traveled at 10% of the speed of light, it would still be thousands of times faster than the speed of sound.

Now if you look at on screen evidence, it seems that in the TOS and TNG eras, Phaser beams traveled at roughly the same speed as paintballs do today (usually paintballs guns are capped at 250ft/s). I used to be an avid paintball player, and I could dodge oncoming paintballs almost every single time I saw them coming.

That is a pitiful speed for an energy beam weapon.

Thanks for your detailed post. I can't argue with the speeds you mention; just with equating a particle with energy. In quantum terms, an object can be either energy or matter, depending upon how it's observed.

In regard to the phaser beams, though, aren't we talking about particles? Of course, energy is used to propel them, but energy itself doesn't move. It causes objects to move.

So, if we assume that the beam is comprised of particles, and if those particles can travel up to the speed of light, then I guess I'm agreeing with you that they could appear faster in Trek.

However, the on-screen evidence points to particles that move much slower than that.

Doug

 

[Timo]

...show me an energy particle that doesn't travel close to the speed of light.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1311/542328101_b9bfbe967f.jpg

As said, there's no such thing as an "energy particle". All sorts of low-speed jets carry energy and can be used as weapons. We see phasers behave essentially like super soakers, down to the effect of the beam splattering and sploshing when it hits the target. Essentially, phaser beams seem to be jets of some relatively light substance that travel at the speed of sound when fired by a sidearm, but faster when fired by a more powerful gun. The substance glows while in flight, thus emitting light perpendicular to its trajectory (unlike a coherent beam of radiation would do), and persists even when the gun ceases to fire (so the beam travels through space with a definite and visible forward and aft end).

That's what we see. How we explain it is up to us; nobody is telling us how these nadions "should" behave, apart from what our eyes tell us.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[GalaxyX]

^^^^ If that is truly what a Phaser is, then it's a pityful weapon, and I will have no choice but to join the FN P90 worshippers

 

[Forbin]

... and persists even when the gun ceases to fire (so the beam travels through space with a definite and visible forward and aft end).

Actually, when the gun ceases to fire, we often see the beam retreat back into the emitter!

Figger THAT out in real-world physics!

 

[swaaye]

I thought we were supposed to be appreciating the Dustbuster, not yet again engaging in circular yapping trying to hopelessly translate cool-looking imaginary sfx into cold hard physics.

Did you guys know that the Dustbuster was misrepresented in the tech manuals? The actual prop wasn't quite the same.

 

[GalaxyX]

I just wanted realistic phaser beams that fired instantaneously as they are supposed to. The FX teams apparently thought "slow streams" looked cooler. Even in some of the fx sequencer in older TNG episodes, it looks as if the beam is waving, like it was a water jet being shaken.

As presented in Trek, Phaser Beams really hold no practical advantages to real life guns of today. I've always hated that.

 

[Forbin]

Yeah, in the last few seasons and on into DS9 and V'ger, the magic of the "ray gun" was really lost. Phasers were so much more impressive in TOS with the vaporizing effects and the green-flash stun. Modern Trek usually just gave us a zap and a sparkly squib on the actor.

 

[Tomalak]

As presented in Trek, Phaser Beams really hold no practical advantages to real life guns of today. I've always hated that.

You can't set a Colt .45 to stun, or use it to burn through a wall, or heat a rock. Phasers aren't just for killing people, whereas that's the raison d'être for a gun.

 

[T'Girl]

Now, show me an energy particle that doesn't travel close to the speed of light. Even if a particle only traveled at 10% of the speed of light, it would still be thousands of times faster than the speed of sound.

Depends on the medium, in a vacuum it's 299,792 km per second, in air it's 299,704 km per second, in water it's 224,900 km per second. The plasma in a bolt of lightning moves at 148,800 km per second. It would seem obvious that what ever the phasers are shooting, it isn't photons or plasma. I came across a explaination years ago that the hand phaser induces a harmonic vibration in the target. Using a (relatively) slow particulate stream.