First pic of *edit* full-sized toy props....

[M'Sharak]

To have the "wrong barrel go off and vaporize" someone, though, requires that the source of energy be contained betweent the two barrels.

No it doesn't; all it requires is that the power get piped into the unit that houses the barrels. If there's a fault with whatever doodad controls which barrel gets the energy fed to it...bye-bye redshirt.

Now, if I were designing this phaser, I'd have some mechanical hookup inside there that actually disconnects the rearward-facing barrel so it's physically impossible for it to fire; that seems the safest.

This last part would be the only way to design it that made sense.

 

[Major Chord]

^ That, or ( bear with me, as I am by no means an expert in trecknology, or real technology for that matter) the unused barrel is used as a conduit for the energy to go through to the barrel that is in use. So, the raw energy would be created/supplied/originated from the phaser body, behind the barrels, and then piped through the unused barrel. That'd require a pretty tight seal between the unused barrel and the phaser body ( so no energy leaks), and it would also require that energy be able to travel both ways through the barrel assemblies. It would, however, make it impossible for the unused barrel to fire when not intended to.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Do people actually think that Starfleet would allow this phaser to go into action if there was a danger of those who use it to shoot themselves while it rotates or whatever it is that it does ??

It has obviously been sufficiently tested in various conditions and scenarios, it was designed with safety of the user in mind and it more than likely has several safeguards in place so it can not fire in the wrong direction...

 

[trekkerguy]

Do people actually think that Starfleet would allow this phaser to go into action if there was a danger of those who use it to shoot themselves while it rotates or whatever it is that it does ??

It has obviously been sufficiently tested in various conditions and scenarios, it was designed with safety of the user in mind and it more than likely has several safeguards in place so it can not fire in the wrong direction...

Exactly.

I've been trying to figure out just what they're talking about...

I don't see any way one would shoot themselves with it unless
they were actually holding it backwards.

 

[NiteTrek]

I've been trying to figure out just what they're talking about...

I don't see any way one would shoot themselves with it unless
they were actually holding it backwards.

When I made the comment about redshirts accidentally shooting themselves, it was more or less a joke about the spinning nozzle design. Some people are way too serious here.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Do people actually think that Starfleet would allow this phaser to go into action if there was a danger of those who use it to shoot themselves while it rotates or whatever it is that it does ??

It has obviously been sufficiently tested in various conditions and scenarios, it was designed with safety of the user in mind and it more than likely has several safeguards in place so it can not fire in the wrong direction...

My thinking was that Starfleet isn't real and that, therefore, some of that testing may not have actually occurred.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Do people actually think that Starfleet would allow this phaser to go into action if there was a danger of those who use it to shoot themselves while it rotates or whatever it is that it does ??

It has obviously been sufficiently tested in various conditions and scenarios, it was designed with safety of the user in mind and it more than likely has several safeguards in place so it can not fire in the wrong direction...

My thinking was that Starfleet isn't real and that, therefore, some of that testing may not have actually occurred.

The supposed redshirts that would shoot themselves were not real either. Nor are any phasers real.

But if we are going to talk about fictional weapons and fictional people dieing from them, I think I am entitled to bring a fictional organization responsible for all this into the discussion.
Am i not ?

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

My thinking was that Starfleet isn't real and that, therefore, some of that testing may not have actually occurred.

Hush, Sam. You might give some people fanboy strokes.

 

[SalvorHardin]

My thinking was that Starfleet isn't real and that, therefore, some of that testing may not have actually occurred.

Hush, Sam. You might give some people fanboy strokes.

See my answer above...No strokes here, just some discussion going on.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Do people actually think that Starfleet would allow this phaser to go into action if there was a danger of those who use it to shoot themselves while it rotates or whatever it is that it does ??

It has obviously been sufficiently tested in various conditions and scenarios, it was designed with safety of the user in mind and it more than likely has several safeguards in place so it can not fire in the wrong direction...

My thinking was that Starfleet isn't real and that, therefore, some of that testing may not have actually occurred.

The supposed redshirts that would shoot themselves were not real either. Nor are any phasers real.

But if we are going to talk about fictional weapons and fictional people dieing from them, I think I am entitled to bring a fictional organization responsible for all this into the discussion.
Am i not ?

Sure, I can play it your way, too.

But now, using your own argument, Abrams could put bananas in their hands and call them phasers, and you would have to say that those bananas were not only safe, but also effective as weapons because Starfleet would have tested them and would not have let them use those bananas, otherwise.

 

[trekkerguy]

Sure, I can play it your way, too.

Or the way of the conversation, which is about fictional weapons and the
fictional people using them, all of a sudden talking about the Federation and
the people who make it having a little bit of common sense is being too
fanboyish?

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Sure, I can play it your way, too.

Or the way of the conversation, which is about fictional weapons and the
fictional people using them, all of a sudden talking about the Federation and
the people who make it having a little bit of common sense is being too
fanboyish?

My point is that it is not a strong argument to say that a design used in a film is a good design and/or a safe design because a fictional agency that exists within that film would have vetted it in advance.

By that logic, Kirk and Spock could be flying around in a giant basketball and using sombreros for communicators. Those must be good designs and ideas, because Starfleet wouldn't have chosen them for use in their organization otherwise.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Sure, I can play it your way, too.

Or the way of the conversation, which is about fictional weapons and the
fictional people using them, all of a sudden talking about the Federation and
the people who make it having a little bit of common sense is being too
fanboyish?

My point is that it is not a strong argument to say that a design used in a film is a good design and/or a safe design because a fictional agency that exists within that film would have vetted it in advance.

By that logic, Kirk and Spock could be flying around in a giant basketball and using sombreros for communicators. Those must be good designs and ideas, because Starfleet wouldn't have chosen them for use in their organization otherwise.

And my point is that we can surely talk about it endlessly and find many pros and cons but in the end of the day I can suspend my disbelief while watching the movie and accept that the phaser has been tested and it is safe within the confines of the fictional Trek universe.

Especially since this design is nowhere near anything as absurd as those unfortunate examples of yours about basketballs and sombreros for communication devices or bananas for weapons. Please...

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

And my point is that we can surely talk about it endlessly and find many pros and cons but in the end of the day I can suspend my disbelief while watching the movie and accept that the phaser has been tested and it is safe within the confines of the fictional Trek universe.

On this we can agree. Suspension of disbelief is all that really matter in the end, for the individual. For Paramount, it's about getting as many people to suspend that disbelief as possible, which is where some sort of consensus becomes more relevant.

Especially since this design is nowhere near anything as absurd as those unfortunate examples of yours about basketballs and sombreros for communication devices or bananas for weapons. Please...

Absurd?

Do people actually think that Starfleet would allow those basketballs and sombreros and bananas to go into action if there was a danger of those who use them to harm themselves while they rotate or whatever it is that they do ??

They have obviously been sufficiently tested in various conditions and scenarios, they were designed with safety of the user in mind and they more than likely have several safeguards in place so they can not fire in the wrong direction...

 

[SalvorHardin]

Absurd?

Do people actually think that Starfleet would allow those basketballs and sombreros and bananas to go into action if there was a danger of those who use them to harm themselves while they rotate or whatever it is that they do ??

They have obviously been sufficiently tested in various conditions and scenarios, they were designed with safety of the user in mind and they more than likely have several safeguards in place so they can not fire in the wrong direction...

I stand corrected

I'm sure if there is a sequel your suggestions and thoughts will be incorporated in the movie.
And I will be the first to rejoice.

 

[cooleddie74]

Nice design! Like taking the original TOS type-2 phaser and meshing it with one or more of the TOS-era movie designs, such as the one seen in TFF and TUC. I really like the new phaser design even if this is just a toy representation.

 

[trekkerguy]

Sure, I can play it your way, too.

Or the way of the conversation, which is about fictional weapons and the
fictional people using them, all of a sudden talking about the Federation and
the people who make it having a little bit of common sense is being too
fanboyish?

My point is that it is not a strong argument to say that a design used in a film is a good design and/or a safe design because a fictional agency that exists within that film would have vetted it in advance.

By that logic, Kirk and Spock could be flying around in a giant basketball and using sombreros for communicators. Those must be good designs and ideas, because Starfleet wouldn't have chosen them for use in their organization otherwise.

Right, but that's completely disregarding the setting of the show and Universe.

Which we are not by suggesting the weapons would have been tested.
Here we are on a board with dozens of threads and topics about why
the Federation would build a Starbase with doors instead of forcefields etc etc...

And we're not supposed to assume the Federation would have tested
a Phaser design without smartass remarks about Bananas and Basketballs...

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Or the way of the conversation, which is about fictional weapons and the
fictional people using them, all of a sudden talking about the Federation and
the people who make it having a little bit of common sense is being too
fanboyish?

My point is that it is not a strong argument to say that a design used in a film is a good design and/or a safe design because a fictional agency that exists within that film would have vetted it in advance.

By that logic, Kirk and Spock could be flying around in a giant basketball and using sombreros for communicators. Those must be good designs and ideas, because Starfleet wouldn't have chosen them for use in their organization otherwise.

Right, but that's completely disregarding the setting of the show and Universe.

Which we are not by suggesting the weapons would have been tested.
Here we are on a board with dozens of threads and topics about why
the Federation would build a Starbase with doors instead of forcefields etc etc...

And we're not supposed to assume the Federation would have tested
a Phaser design without smartass remarks about Bananas and Basketballs...

Well, since SalvorHardin and I are now in agreement, you might want to rethink all of that.

 

[redcat1]

This was just posted over at Replica Prop Forum

http://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=51539&page=40

Still not crazy about it but it's much better than the toy.

Doug

 

[trekkerguy]

My point is that it is not a strong argument to say that a design used in a film is a good design and/or a safe design because a fictional agency that exists within that film would have vetted it in advance.

By that logic, Kirk and Spock could be flying around in a giant basketball and using sombreros for communicators. Those must be good designs and ideas, because Starfleet wouldn't have chosen them for use in their organization otherwise.

Right, but that's completely disregarding the setting of the show and Universe.

Which we are not by suggesting the weapons would have been tested.
Here we are on a board with dozens of threads and topics about why
the Federation would build a Starbase with doors instead of forcefields etc etc...

And we're not supposed to assume the Federation would have tested
a Phaser design without smartass remarks about Bananas and Basketballs...

Well, since SalvorHardin and I are now in agreement, you might want to rethink all of that.

Nope sorry, I'm not arguing for another poster, I still hold my point.