I'm watching Call to Arms and it seems like Worf is the one responsible for targeting and firing every weapon on the station... While this is appropriate for the Starships, who generally engage single targets and aren't stationary, would it not make more sense for there to be multiple gunners responsible for firing weapons at different positions throughout the station?
Even so, with a 360 degree 3d firing arc, it would be more efficient for multiple people to take multiple targetting vectors. One person, even with the aid of computers and sensors, would be severely limited in what they can do!
I'm not sure, but I think Worf would have just given the OK-to-fire command. The computer picks targets and lets 'em fly!
^^^ Yeah, I think most tactical systems have automated targeting systems, but still require an operator to give them authorization to fire. There may be instances in which manual targeting may have to be used if auto-targeting is offline or has been impaired, but these instances may be rare, IMO...
Let's face it, it was pretty hard to miss. They were just delaying the Dominion for as long as possible and destroying as many ships as possible, whilst the Feds and the Klingons attacked the Cardassian shipyards.
Actually, I'd think there would be needless overlap and conflict if multiple people were allowed to control the weapons piecemeal. A computer would do that better than any team of personnel, handing over a given target from the lower 2nd pylon to the upper 4th at just the right moment without the need for time-consuming negotiations. How is this done in the real world? Any AEGIS operators around here? How many men are actually in the loop during a multitarget engagement? My own AAA background is on radar-controlled two-gun batteries which indeed each have their own fire control personnel instead of an integrated, automated network, but many modern AAA batteries do converse electronically with each other (and not just internally) and cooperate fairly effectively that way. And modern mobile SAM systems network a lot across platforms, local or sectored man-in-the-loop fire control being used in desperate emergencies only. Timo Saloniemi
I do know that in "The Way of the Warrior," Sisko gives the order "Weapons stations, fire at will." He definitely says "stations," plural. So that would seem to imply that there was some sort of weapon station other than Worf's.
Spoiler: Secrets of Federation Sub-Systems. Flight is Computer Controlled/Aided Tactics are Computer Controlled/Aided Targeting is Computer Controlled/Aided
I would much prefer human controlled "turrets" in DS9. alot of battle scenes depict DS9 firing wildly at everything. hitting things only once and moving on. human controlled phaser banks and photon banks would allow several places on the station to concentrate on a certain number of threats to either disable, or eliminate them. Everything is Computer Controlled/Aided Why even have personnel in ships? make drones and send them at the dominion. ships are destroyed in battle WAY to easily. one good volley and a galaxy class 1/4mile long goes down in seconds. ship is made of paper?
Good point. It might be that at that point, the new weapons installations were not yet completely integrated to the central fire control system, so there were multiple control stations - one at Ops, others at "in situ" locations where local operators heard Sisko's announcement and acted accordingly. By the time of "Call to Arms", the systems would have been brought up to fully centrally commanded standard. Timo Saloniemi
@Neoshade: You have a good point. It seemed NOBODY thought of that. (Save those random Delta Quadrant folks with their Automated Personnel Units.)