Human input in Trek spaceship battles

[JuanBolio]

That's all well and good, except for the fact that except under special circumstances (Star Trek V?) we KNOW that photon torpedoes are warp-propelled matter/antimatter warheads. As such, it makes absolutely to sense no limit the yield of the warhead to such a tiny potential yield.

Yes, a kinetic energy missile, if it is impacting the hull alone and cannot be deflected or intercepted would do a lot more damage than anything but a direct hit/internal detonation with an antimatter warhead. Absolutely, without question. However... a photon torpedo is not a kinetic missile. In fact, we've never seen such a weapons used in ship-to-ship combat in all of Trek. Obviously they must be fairly easily defended against. I'm thinking navigational deflectors designed to deflect objects at relativistic speeds would do the job nicely.

Photon torpedoes are matter/antimatter devices, as has been stated many, many times. To deal with them honestly, you have to deal with them on that level. Do what I do with the special effects when they don't make sense - reject them utterly and substitute your own. The only way to make a matter/antimatter warhead really effective in space (if we're trying to destroy a ship, not knock out its comm array), would be to scale it up to something resembling a thermonuclear bomb. I realize that 90 or 95 percent of all photon blasts on Trek look nothing like what an antimatter blast would truly look like in space, but that's Hollywood for ya. Ironically, TOS with its more primitive special effects actually got a lot closer to the mark.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

That's all well and good, except for the fact that except under special circumstances (Star Trek V?) we KNOW that photon torpedoes are warp-propelled matter/antimatter warheads. As such, it makes absolutely to sense no limit the yield of the warhead to such a tiny potential yield.

First of all, how do we know this from Star Trek V? Second of all, we don't need to limit the warhead to those tiny yields, they are ALREADY limited by plot logic and special effects.

If Enterprise firing a torpedo at "God" produced a nuclear-style blast and a giant mushroom cloud, we might have something. As it stands, it produced nothing of the kind. The only other possible option is that we have never actually seen photon torpedoes fired at maximum yield, which makes their upward potentials a moot point.

However... a photon torpedo is not a kinetic missile. In fact, we've never seen such a weapons used in ship-to-ship combat in all of Trek.

That we know of. Arguably, Batris' "ancient merculite rockets" and even NX-01's spatial torpedoes might fall into that category.

Obviously they must be fairly easily defended against.

Tell that to the Borg.

I'm thinking navigational deflectors designed to deflect objects at relativistic speeds would do the job nicely.

Assuming you're firing at the ship from directly in front of it. OTOH, that may be what DEFENSIVE deflectors are for in the first place: pushing projectiles away from the ship. Of course, they have a limited power supply, so if you shot enough torpedoes at the enemy ship you just might overwhelm its deflector systems.

Another question we have to answer is how the Narada's torpedoes were able to easily penetrate Starfleet shields but weren't powerful enough to completely obliterate their ships with the first shot. Probably, they were projectile weapons tipped with neutronium, giving them a huge amount of mass and therefore alot more kinetic energy than a deflector shield can feasibly repel.

Photon torpedoes are matter/antimatter devices, as has been stated many, many times. To deal with them honestly, you have to deal with them on that level.

Indeed: a kinetic energy missile powered by matter/antimatter reactions would be able to move pretty damn fast.

Do what I do with the special effects when they don't make sense - reject them utterly and substitute your own.

But then you have to substitute plot logic too, like the extremely close photon torpedo detonations in ST-V and a few instances of extremely close-range use in Voyager.

The only way to make a matter/antimatter warhead really effective in space (if we're trying to destroy a ship, not knock out its comm array), would be to scale it up to something resembling a thermonuclear bomb.

Right, and that would instantly nullify half of the storylines in the Trekiverse that require ships to take direct hits even with their shields down. It would completely invalidate Year of Hell, TUC, TSFS, and TWOK in its entirety. Furthermore, it would hopelessly outclass phaser weapons, whose effects are nowhere near that powerful and force starships to rely on photon torpedoes exclusively as their only effective space weapon; this, too, would invalidate the REST of Trek combat where starships fight with phasers more often than torpedoes (and would make a mockery of DS9 "Emissary," as the station would literally waste all six of its most effective weapons just as a show of force).

Logic requires photon torpedoes CANNOT be scaled up to those yields, because they are NEVER USED at those yields, nor does plot logic ever imply that they could be if necessary.

 

[JuanBolio]

First of all, how do we know this from Star Trek V? Second of all, we don't need to limit the warhead to those tiny yields, they are ALREADY limited by plot logic and special effects.

If Enterprise firing a torpedo at "God" produced a nuclear-style blast and a giant mushroom cloud, we might have something. As it stands, it produced nothing of the kind. The only other possible option is that we have never actually seen photon torpedoes fired at maximum yield, which makes their upward potentials a moot point.

No, no, you misunderstand. I was suggesting that perhaps the torpedo in TFF had its warhead removed and was programmed for a simple kinetic energy strike.

As for plot logic vs. scientific logic, I'll take the latter every time, even if it means re-working some episodes and events mentally. I simply cannot accept that interstellar fleets capable of enormous power generation are armed with weapons that, in terms of raw destructive power, are outclassed by those we have today.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

First of all, how do we know this from Star Trek V? Second of all, we don't need to limit the warhead to those tiny yields, they are ALREADY limited by plot logic and special effects.

If Enterprise firing a torpedo at "God" produced a nuclear-style blast and a giant mushroom cloud, we might have something. As it stands, it produced nothing of the kind. The only other possible option is that we have never actually seen photon torpedoes fired at maximum yield, which makes their upward potentials a moot point.

No, no, you misunderstand. I was suggesting that perhaps the torpedo in TFF had its warhead removed and was programmed for a simple kinetic energy strike.

I'll buy that.

Question is, when have photon torpedoes ever appeared more impressive than this?

As for plot logic vs. scientific logic, I'll take the latter every time

I would prefer to construct a scientific basis that is consistent with plot logic, not the other way around.

Star Trek, let's face it, is incredibly bad at this: start with a scientific premise that is otherwise solid, but at the same time nullifies anything even resembling a coherent storyline.

Just saying: sometimes you have to sacrifice scientific spectacle for dramatic necessity. Better off dreaming up some technobabble reason why those weapons don't nullify the required plotlines instead of pretending that they do and then ignoring the fact that they don't.

I simply cannot accept that interstellar fleets capable of enormous power generation are armed with weapons that, in terms of raw destructive power, are outclassed by those we have today.

Interestingly, alot of the weapons we use now are outclassed by weapons used by armies a hundred years ago in terms of raw firepower. The only real difference is portability and efficiency.

 

[Myasishchev]

Another question we have to answer is how the Narada's torpedoes were able to easily penetrate Starfleet shields but weren't powerful enough to completely obliterate their ships with the first shot. Probably, they were projectile weapons tipped with neutronium, giving them a huge amount of mass and therefore alot more kinetic energy than a deflector shield can feasibly repel.

This wouldn't be real neutronium, right? Because degeneracy pressure doesn't permit it to exist outside of extremely high gravities (like 8+ solar masses compressed to 20km or something like that).

Question is, when have photon torpedoes ever appeared more impressive than this?

Maybe "The Die Is Cast"? I think they fire off some torps, although with the Romulans they could just as easily be nuclear "plasma" weapons. But the point is they tear the crust off a planet, so they probably are pho-torps.

 

[JuanBolio]

Question is, when have photon torpedoes ever appeared more impressive than this?

Many, many times, though I'm not an encyclopedia of Trek episodes. General Order 24 as mentioned in TOS is an order to obliterate the entire surface of a planet.

Also in TOS, photon torpedoes are repeatedly used as proximity weapons that produce blinding flashes when detonated.

In Arena photon grenades were dangerous to Kirk & party even when detonated more than 1,000 yards away.

In several episodes of TNG photons were stated to be dangerous to the Enterprise, even with raised shields, if detonated closer than a few kilometers - I believe one episode, the one with the soliton wave, even had areas of the ship evacuated due to radiation damage from rear-fired and close-detonated photon blasts.

In Skin of Evil a photon torpedo launched from orbit against a shuttlecraft and the Armus creature on a planet's surface produced a fireball anywhere from tens to hundreds of miles across, depending on the radius of the planet.

In DS9, space mines stated to be similar to photon torpedoes lit up half the sky when detonated, and inflicted severe damage and radiation burns on Klingon ships caught nearby.

Also in DS9's The die Is Cast, as Myasishchev mentioned, we see a fleet of Romulan and Cardassian ships firing on the surface of a planet, probably including something similar to starfleet's photon torpedo, but if not surely comparable in yield. We heard reports on the bridge of a Romulan ship regarding a large percentage of the planet's crust being destroyed in the opening volley. Granted, the lifesigns on the planet were illusions, but the crew hardly seems surprised about their weapons doing that much damage.

In Voyager and TNG we saw photon torpedoes obliterating asteroids so large that they posed significant threats to populated planets.

Also in Voyager, in the episode where a copy of the Doctor is reactivated in an alien museum hundreds of years in the future among a culture that view Voyager and its crew as genocidal monsters, a single torpedo was stated to be capable of destroying a major city.

We also hear talk of a torpedo's warhead, being scaled up by only a few hundred percent, jokingly being referred to as being capable of "blowing up a small moon".

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Another question we have to answer is how the Narada's torpedoes were able to easily penetrate Starfleet shields but weren't powerful enough to completely obliterate their ships with the first shot. Probably, they were projectile weapons tipped with neutronium, giving them a huge amount of mass and therefore alot more kinetic energy than a deflector shield can feasibly repel.

This wouldn't be real neutronium, right? Because degeneracy pressure doesn't permit it to exist outside of extremely high gravities (like 8+ solar masses compressed to 20km or something like that).

Whatever it is in Treknobabble "neutronium" actually is, something incredibly dense and heavy that is just about impossible to deform. Probably isn't actual neutronium, just some kind of precipitate that forms on the surface of neutron stars, like a crystalized form of metallic hydrogen or something.

Question is, when have photon torpedoes ever appeared more impressive than this?

Maybe "The Die Is Cast"? I think they fire off some torps, although with the Romulans they could just as easily be nuclear "plasma" weapons. But the point is they tear the crust off a planet, so they probably are pho-torps.

But they also use disruptor weapons for this, which--given the comparative yields of the two--would be downright silly; it would be like the Enola Gay shooting .50 Caliber bullets at Hiroshima just before dropping Little Boy.

I figure the bombardment was probably more of a seismic event than gross nuclear-style blast damage. Sort of like the "drilling phasers" in "Legacy" and "A Matter of Time" to dig deep into the mantle to trigger volcanic eruptions near the surface. The torpedo weapons would be used the same way: not a nuclear airburst to flatten cities, but as a high-speed projectile slamming into the ground and kicking thousands of tons of ejecta into the atmosphere; this not only destroys everything near the blast point but would also ruin the planet's climate with the proverbial nuclear winter.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Question is, when have photon torpedoes ever appeared more impressive than this?

Many, many times, though I'm not an encyclopedia of Trek episodes. General Order 24 as mentioned in TOS is an order to obliterate the entire surface of a planet.

Seems to me this would be similar to Kirk's order in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" to flood the valley with deadly radiation. That would seem a much more efficient way to sterilize an entire planet than simply carpet bombing the whole thing.

Also in TOS, photon torpedoes are repeatedly used as proximity weapons that produce blinding flashes when detonated.

Are they, though? This is assumed to be the use in Balance of Terror, but the "proximity blast" is never mentioned again for either weapon.

In Arena photon grenades were dangerous to Kirk & party even when detonated more than 1,000 yards away.

Which were not actually referred to as photon grenades. Actually, these could well have been tricobalt devices considering how quickly the Gorn scrammed when it went off.

In several episodes of TNG photons were stated to be dangerous to the Enterprise, even with raised shields, if detonated closer than a few kilometers - I believe one episode, the one with the soliton wave, even had areas of the ship evacuated due to radiation damage from rear-fired and close-detonated photon blasts.

Indeed: Riker says there are "gaps" in the shields and that some areas would be flooded with ionizing radiation. Note that in this case, the torpedoes are detonated only a handful of kilometers away.

Funny that said radiation didn't cause any physical damage to those areas, it merely irradiated them; Worf and Riker were standing only a few feet away from one of those areas at the time of detonation.

In Skin of Evil a photon torpedo launched from orbit against a shuttlecraft and the Armus creature on a planet's surface produced a fireball anywhere from tens to hundreds of miles across, depending on the radius of the planet.

Which an antimatter detonation would not cause unless its yield was in the thousands of megatons.

But a dense metal projectile the size of a photorp could easily wipe out the dinosaurs if you gave it enough velocity.

In DS9, space mines stated to be similar to photon torpedoes lit up half the sky when detonated, and inflicted severe damage and radiation burns on Klingon ships caught nearby.

If you're referring to the self-replicating minefield, the description as "similar to photon torpedoes" isn't canon, and nowhere is there reference to these devices inflicting "radiation burns" on any Klingon ships.

In Voyager and TNG we saw photon torpedoes obliterating asteroids so large that they posed significant threats to populated planets.

Which, believe it or not, is exactly what first got me thinking of photon torpedoes as kinetic energy weapons. It has recently been pointed out to me that a nuclear detonation--which a m/am detonation would be similar to--wouldn't actually SHATTER the asteroid, it would just vaporize the surface facing the blast and heat up some of its softer internal components, like a comet getting too close to the sun.

The only way to break apart a large celestial object is to hit it at high speed with another much harder celestial object.

Also in Voyager, in the episode where a copy of the Doctor is reactivated in an alien museum hundreds of years in the future among a culture that view Voyager and its crew as genocidal monsters, a single torpedo was stated to be capable of destroying a major city.

Is this the same episode where the inhabitants described Voyager as a heavily armed battleship bristling with weapons and painted Starfleet as being more militaristic than Klingons?

We also hear talk of a torpedo's warhead, being scaled up by only a few hundred percent, jokingly being referred to as being capable of "blowing up a small moon".

I would say this is either a joke, or another play on the fact that--as I have stated repeatedly and it bears repeating again--X-RAYS DO NOT SHATTER THINGS.

Photon torpedoes wouldn't "blow up" a small moon in this way; COOK them, yes, irradiate the surface and liquify part of its outer crust. But if you want to shatter an asteroid, you don't try to roast it with high energy photons, you hit it with something hard fast and dense and break it into a million pieces.

Let's put that another way: a laser beam may be more technologically advanced, but some jobs still require a HAMMER.

 

[JuanBolio]

But they also use disruptor weapons for this, which--given the comparative yields of the two--would be downright silly; it would be like the Enola Gay shooting .50 Caliber bullets at Hiroshima just before dropping Little Boy.

I figure the bombardment was probably more of a seismic event than gross nuclear-style blast damage. Sort of like the "drilling phasers" in "Legacy" and "A Matter of Time" to dig deep into the mantle to trigger volcanic eruptions near the surface. The torpedo weapons would be used the same way: not a nuclear airburst to flatten cities, but as a high-speed projectile slamming into the ground and kicking thousands of tons of ejecta into the atmosphere; this not only destroys everything near the blast point but would also ruin the planet's climate with the proverbial nuclear winter.

^ It would do even more to punch through the crust and let out a few petatons on energy just beneath it.

Also, who says disruptors can't be WMDs as well?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

But they also use disruptor weapons for this, which--given the comparative yields of the two--would be downright silly; it would be like the Enola Gay shooting .50 Caliber bullets at Hiroshima just before dropping Little Boy.

I figure the bombardment was probably more of a seismic event than gross nuclear-style blast damage. Sort of like the "drilling phasers" in "Legacy" and "A Matter of Time" to dig deep into the mantle to trigger volcanic eruptions near the surface. The torpedo weapons would be used the same way: not a nuclear airburst to flatten cities, but as a high-speed projectile slamming into the ground and kicking thousands of tons of ejecta into the atmosphere; this not only destroys everything near the blast point but would also ruin the planet's climate with the proverbial nuclear winter.

^ It would do even more to punch through the crust and let out a few petatons on energy just beneath it.

Sure, but converting that energy into THRUST would accomplish the same job without loosing half that energy as neutrinos and gamma rays that won't be explosively absorbed by the crust.

Also, who says disruptors can't be WMDs as well?

They're not that much more powerful than phasers, so probably not.

 

[Longinus]

They're not that much more powerful than phasers, so probably not.

And you believe that the phasers are not powerful because..?

 

[JuanBolio]

Seems to me this would be similar to Kirk's order in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" to flood the valley with deadly radiation. That would seem a much more efficient way to sterilize an entire planet than simply carpet bombing the whole thing.

Funny Scotty making mention of the "fire control system", then.

Are they, though? This is assumed to be the use in Balance of Terror, but the "proximity blast" is never mentioned again for either weapon.

"Full spreads" of torpedoes are a term used quite often, and the resulting special effects imply the saturation of a wide area with torpedoes.

Which were not actually referred to as photon grenades. Actually, these could well have been tricobalt devices considering how quickly the Gorn scrammed when it went off.

Now "tricobalt devices" are a weapon that makes no sense whatsoever. Such devices would only be good for producing a lot of dirty nuclear fallout and rendering a planet's surface uninhabitable.

Indeed: Riker says there are "gaps" in the shields and that some areas would be flooded with ionizing radiation. Note that in this case, the torpedoes are detonated only a handful of kilometers away.

Which would imply a yield of at least kilotons, if not megatons.

Funny that said radiation didn't cause any physical damage to those areas, it merely irradiated them; Worf and Riker were standing only a few feet away from one of those areas at the time of detonation.

It might have baked a good deal of the ship's hull - it was never shown. You can easily stand just a few feet from intense gamma shine, as long as there's a shield between you and it. They moved from an unshielded area to a shielded one - simple.

Furthermore, the fact that there's ionizing radiation involved in photon detonations implies that M/AM would be a prime candidate for what fuels their destruction, as opposed to being kinetic energy slugs. Actually, the fact that they're "detonated" at all goes pretty far to disproving that.

Which an antimatter detonation would not cause unless its yield was in the thousands of megatons.

Easily achieved by any Starship, if necessary.

But a dense metal projectile the size of a photorp could easily wipe out the dinosaurs if you gave it enough velocity.

Perhaps not driven by a warp field, though, as warp apparently imparts no inertia. Otherwise you'd have psychotic or drunken freighter captains ramming planets with their ships at warp 5 every other week.

If you're referring to the self-replicating minefield, the description as "similar to photon torpedoes" isn't canon, and nowhere is there reference to these devices inflicting "radiation burns" on any Klingon ships.

Nope, not that episode at all. Different one, different minefield. I think the mines may have actually been Klingon in origin.

Which, believe it or not, is exactly what first got me thinking of photon torpedoes as kinetic energy weapons. It has recently been pointed out to me that a nuclear detonation--which a m/am detonation would be similar to--wouldn't actually SHATTER the asteroid, it would just vaporize the surface facing the blast and heat up some of its softer internal components, like a comet getting too close to the sun.

It would indeed shatter it, if it was detonated inside. The gamma rays would be absorbed by the rock and converted to heat, rapidly making the asteroid go boom.

The only way to break apart a large celestial object is to hit it at high speed with another much harder celestial object.

Nonsense. You can blow it up from inside or shoot it with some kind of beam that breaks apart its atomic structure or causes nuclear fission. Perhaps something like a phaser or a disruptor would do.

Is this the same episode where the inhabitants described Voyager as a heavily armed battleship bristling with weapons and painted Starfleet as being more militaristic than Klingons?

There very same, but that's no reason to think the power of the torpedo was in any way exaggerated. Any civilization that has the capacity to travel to space and blow up asteroids and create matter/antimatter reactors has the capacity to blow up a city.

I would say this is either a joke, or another play on the fact that--as I have stated repeatedly and it bears repeating again--X-RAYS DO NOT SHATTER THINGS.

Not if they're shined against the surface, no. If they're released in large quantities all at once from inside, where they're surrounded by matter on which to impart their energy...

Let's put that another way: a laser beam may be more technologically advanced, but some jobs still require a HAMMER.

And yet neither Starfleet nor any race which has been a threat to it has ever used railguns on screen. I guess shields and navigational deflectors go a long way, and that high-energy gamma rays are good at messing up both ships and shields.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

They're not that much more powerful than phasers, so probably not.

And you believe that the phasers are not powerful because..?

In "The Cage" we have Enterprise channeling the full power of the ship, just managing to sheer off the top of a hill.

In "The Alternative Factor" the Enterprise' main phasers are used to vaporize a two-meter space pod.

In TWOK, Enterprise is hit by phaser fire from Reliant at point blank range, which penetrates the hull and sets engineering in fire. Both ships later exchange similar weapons fire, Reliant's weapons incinerating the portside torpedo bay and Enterprise scoring a direct hit on Reliant's bridge.

There are all kinds of excuses you could use, but there are no datapoints that would peg phasers being dramatically more powerful than they appear.

 

[JuanBolio]

Actually, just because "The Cage" had the phaser cannon shearing off the top of a hill doesn't mean that's all it could do. Was there anything behind it? Perhaps the beam just sailed off into space after it got done with the rock.

Why would phasers vaporizing a two-meter space pod be a point against their being powerful?

TWOK is a problem. That's one of those things you just have to cringe at as being Hollywood pyrotechnics.

As for a data point pegging phasers as more powerful than they often appear - there is Riker in the insane asylum episode claiming his mere hand phaser would destroy half a large building on a high setting. That's the only one I'm typing up tonight, because its late and I'm tired. More tomorrow.

 

[Longinus]

In TWOK, Enterprise is hit by phaser fire from Reliant at point blank range, which penetrates the hull and sets engineering in fire. Both ships later exchange similar weapons fire, Reliant's weapons incinerating the portside torpedo bay and Enterprise scoring a direct hit on Reliant's bridge.

So, phasers can penetrate hull that is made of materials hundred of times more durable that what we have today. Sounds pretty powerful to me. *nod nod*

And that's really the bottom line. You assume that ships are not durable because they are not annihilated by weapons and weapons are not powerful because they do not annihilate ships.

Assuming that weapons are powerful and ships durable is circular as well, but then you do not need to ignore swathes of dialogue, nor assume that future technologies are not more efficient than those we have today.

 

[JuanBolio]

^ Kinda sorta yeah, and kinda sorta no. I have trouble with any kind of materials being able to hold up to those kind of forces with little or no damage. It strains my credibility almost to its breaking point.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It might have baked a good deal of the ship's hull - it was never shown.

It might have, sure. But photon torpedoes are almost never used for the purpose of BAKING their targets, now are they? They don't really seem to have this as their primary or even secondary effect, and it never seems to be an issue when the ship takes torpedo hits with its shields down.

So it seems more likely the radiation is a result of the soliton wave collapsing, not the torpedoes.

You can easily stand just a few feet from intense gamma shine, as long as there's a shield between you and it. They moved from an unshielded area to a shielded one - simple.

Sure: the shielded section of the ship was literally five feet away and around a corner.

Again: this isn't the kind of effect photon torpedoes normally have. In fact, it's not even the kind of effect that would be desirable in combat. Doesn't make much sense to blast your target with high-energy gamma rays and then go hide behind a rock for two weeks while you wait for him to die from radiation poisoning.

Furthermore, the fact that there's ionizing radiation involved in photon detonations implies that M/AM would be a prime candidate for what fuels their destruction, as opposed to being kinetic energy slugs. Actually, the fact that they're "detonated" at all goes pretty far to disproving that.

Other than the fact that matter and antimatter don't actually "detonate" on contact. And there's the little question of why exactly a burst of x-rays would have any effect on a soliton wave; that's like trying to stop a tsunami with a flashlight.

Easily achieved by any Starship, if necessary.

Ah. So now photon torpedoes are THOUSAND megaton weapons... when it is convenient for them to be.

Of course, if you're going to take VFX that literally, then you would already concede that 99% of photon detonations really are in the two to three thousand kilogram range.

Perhaps not driven by a warp field, though, as warp apparently imparts no inertia.

Nobobdy said anything about inertia. Warp fields do impart MOVEMENT, though, and it would certainly be pretty damaging for such a device to accelerate three-foot section of the target's hull to warp one.

Otherwise you'd have psychotic or drunken freighter captains ramming planets with their ships at warp 5 every other week.

Why do you think they invented synthehol?

Nope, not that episode at all. Different one, different minefield. I think the mines may have actually been Klingon in origin.

Then it's "Dramatis Personae." And it wasn't a Klingon minefield, it was--IIRC--some Gamma quadrant race.

It would indeed shatter it, if it was detonated inside. The gamma rays would be absorbed by the rock and converted to heat, rapidly making the asteroid go boom.

Only if the rock was sufficiently small and sufficiently low density that the torpedo could penetrate to the center of it. Anything larger than half a kilometer wouldn't even notice the blast.

U.S. nuclear underground tests produced fireballs about sixty meters in diameter and resulted in craters about two hundred meters on a side; this for 5 to 10 megaton warheads buried deep underground. A 100 Megaton blast would have, at most, a fighting chance against a kilometer-long rock. But not enough to shatter it, and certainly not enough to explosively shatter it.

Nonsense. You can blow it up from inside or shoot it with some kind of beam that breaks apart its atomic structure or causes nuclear fission. Perhaps something like a phaser or a disruptor would do.

X-rays would not. And "A beam that breaks apart its atomic structure or causes nuclear fission" already exists; that's exactly what ionizing radiation does. The problem with this theory is that ionizing radiation does not do this QUICKLY, and the result of said ionization is what is otherwise known as "irradiation."

You don't always need to disrupt an object's structure at the atomic level, though. Sometimes, it's simpler to just hit it really really hard until it breaks apart.

There very same, but that's no reason to think the power of the torpedo was in any way exaggerated. Any civilization that has the capacity to travel to space and blow up asteroids and create matter/antimatter reactors has the capacity to blow up a city.

Capacity, sure. That doesn't mean photon torpedoes were designed to do that. Not even arguing that they couldn't if need be, my overall point is that their NORMAL mode of operation is nothing anywhere close to this in terms of destructive power.

Mainly because photon torpedoes are designed to be used against starships, which are considerably smaller, more maneuverable and better defended than cities.

I would say this is either a joke, or another play on the fact that--as I have stated repeatedly and it bears repeating again--X-RAYS DO NOT SHATTER THINGS.

Not if they're shined against the surface, no. If they're released in large quantities all at once from inside

Then they irradiate most of the inside and create very small cavities below the surface.

And yet neither Starfleet nor any race which has been a threat to it has ever used railguns on screen.

That we know of. On the other hand, despite the continued existence of organized crime, nobody uses narcotics anymore either.

That we know of.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Actually, just because "The Cage" had the phaser cannon shearing off the top of a hill doesn't mean that's all it could do. Was there anything behind it? Perhaps the beam just sailed off into space after it got done with the rock.

Then what are you really arguing? That phasers can drill through miles and miles of just about anything? I'm sure they could; so could a sufficiently persistent oil platform, only not nearly as quickly.

Why would phasers vaporizing a two-meter space pod be a point against their being powerful?

Because they didn't instantly turn the spacepod into an expanding fireball two hundred meters in diameter, which would be a requisite for their having an as-yet unseen "WMD" mode.

As for a data point pegging phasers as more powerful than they often appear - there is Riker in the insane asylum episode claiming his mere hand phaser would destroy half a large building on a high setting.

Though he also specifies "wide field." Presumably, the phaser would very slowly melt the walls of his cell and deconstruct the rest of the building as the phaser tunneled through it, like Sisko did when he tore down the wall to B'hala.

It wouldn't happen quickly; I imagine the effect would be similar to a kind of extremely persistent flamethrower.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

In TWOK, Enterprise is hit by phaser fire from Reliant at point blank range, which penetrates the hull and sets engineering in fire. Both ships later exchange similar weapons fire, Reliant's weapons incinerating the portside torpedo bay and Enterprise scoring a direct hit on Reliant's bridge.

So, phasers can penetrate hull that is made of materials hundred of times more durable that what we have today.

"More durable" is just a marketing term unless you can identify what those materials do better than conventional ones. Higher heat of fusion? Higher melting point? Higher thermal distribution? Greater density? More reflective of nadion particles?

Hell, you can drill a hole in a modern naval vessel with the laser weapons we have TODAY; all it would take to render such a vessel immune to those weapons is to build it out of things that don't absorb infrared.

And that's really the bottom line. You assume that ships are not durable because they are not annihilated by weapons and weapons are not powerful because they do not annihilate ships.

No, I assume the weapons are not powerful because they do not annihilate ANYTHING ELSE. It's not just ships, it's also cars, trucks, buildings, airplanes, rock gullies... things made of ordinary materials against which those weapons are not THAT much more effective.

Assuming that weapons are powerful and ships durable is circular as well, but then you do not need to ignore swathes of dialogue, nor assume that future technologies are not more efficient than those we have today.

Dialog is vague enough to support either case. And "more efficient" does not mean "more powerful." A 19th century Colt Peacemaker has about the same stopping power as a modern .25 automatic, but the .25 is a lot more efficient and a bit more accurate.

Likewise: a civil war field gun is about as powerful as an RPG-7, but the RPG is a hell of a lot more efficient.

 

[Timo]

It seems a bit weird to derive meaning from the weakest demonstrations of Star Trek firepower, when an important aspect of all the weapons is their variable power.

It would only be meaningful to say "X is a weak weapon" if X were fired in a situation where maximum power was called for, and produced a weak effect. For example TWoK is not one of those situations: neither Kirk nor Khan wanted to kill when firing their phasers.

Generally speaking, both phasers and disruptors have been indicated to be strategic deterrents, weapons to level civilizations with. Photon torpedoes saw more limited use in TOS, but we never quite learned whether this was due to them being too weak, or due to them being too strong. Examples of weakish (and thus tactically useful) torpedoes abound in the movies, but there are also examples of strong torps, such as the TMP one that neatly removes a ship-threatening asteroid from the universe. TNG offers many examples of very powerful torpedoes, while VOY only seems to offer weak ones (say, "Alliances" and its triplet of torps fired as mere warning shots).

Since shortage of torpedo casings seldom seems to be a problem (even VOY got over it), future combatants probably are fully justified in firing a significant part of their torps with low yields...

Timo Saloniemi