Spoilers marsh8472's Consolidated Continuity Thread
- Thread starter marsh8472
- Start date
Different types of phaser? It looks like the ships on Discovery use a type of pulse phaser similar to what was used by the Refit Enterprise, Reliant and later the USS Defiant.
A single continuous beam is hitting the target with a lot more energy than a bunch of individual pulses. The continuous beam is also indicative of more advanced technology in terms of power generation, heat regulation, targeting, and so forth. Pulses rely on throwing out a barrage at a general area and hoping that a certain number of the "bolts" hit the sensitive spot you're aiming for, while a continuous beam must constantly track and adjust to remain fixed on the target.
Last edited:
Someone important thinks it looks better. They're basically blue versions of the Kelvin universe Enterprise phasers with worse sound effects, so maybe Kurtzman?
I'm not quite seeing "faster", and of course a beam has an infinite rate of fire compared to pulses. 
Basically all of Trek does the same thing with rayguns: it takes a set number of frames for the beam to cross the screen, utterly regardless of distance. DSC isn't really different here, as per those clips. The pulses fly from A to B in about the same amount of time as the tip of the beam gets from A to B in TOS, TNG or ENT.
Faster than that and the audience can't see motion (Disney's Black Hole did instantaneous rayguns, which looked cool in their own fashion, but everybody else in the eighties took the Star Wars lead and hasn't let go ever since).
Timo Saloniemi
Basically all of Trek does the same thing with rayguns: it takes a set number of frames for the beam to cross the screen, utterly regardless of distance. DSC isn't really different here, as per those clips. The pulses fly from A to B in about the same amount of time as the tip of the beam gets from A to B in TOS, TNG or ENT.
Faster than that and the audience can't see motion (Disney's Black Hole did instantaneous rayguns, which looked cool in their own fashion, but everybody else in the eighties took the Star Wars lead and hasn't let go ever since).
Timo Saloniemi
Exactly. And because it's a reboot, that's why.
I'm not seeing how DIS is faster than TOS. Having it done in pulses than a continuous beam certainly gives the illusion of being faster.
But I get it, Marsh needs to look for more things to bitch about as he already did a lousy job over complaining about background extras not having dialogue.
But I get it, Marsh needs to look for more things to bitch about as he already did a lousy job over complaining about background extras not having dialogue.
What do you mean you don't see how they're faster? They're fired like machine guns.
Standard beam phasers usually have a pause in pre-fire and post-fire stages. Beet- REEEEEEEEEEEE beet. Where as these just seem to fire off like point defense systems on modern navy ships. Gatling-gun phasers.
I just wish they would actually do the same job, intercepting Torpedos ala Trek 2009.
That depends on what you define as "standard". In "The Cage" the phasers are shown to hit targets instantaneously whereas in TNG's "Conspiracy" Jean-Luc Picard was able to physically dodge a slow moving phaser beam.
Realistically, any beam should move at the speed of light.
Realistically, any beam should move at the speed of light.
Exactly. That's also one of the things I hate about this show; it's basically using the Star Wars technology. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Trek ships never had pew pew phasers. (well, there were some exceptions, I think, in that TNG episode "Peak Performance", when they had that war-game exercise, but those were not real phaser weapons) That kind of firing mode was never part of the Trek universe. It showed up in the reboot movies for the first time. I do like watching Star Wars, but it's definitely wrong to use Star Wars stuff in Star Trek. What's next, light sabers as part of the standard Star Fleet equipment?
That makes the most sense. Retcon the Klingons is one thing but if this is supposed to be what standard weapons look like it changes the weapon capibilies. It would be like replacing pistols with fully automatics for everyone in a western series because its cooler.
The original poster correctly used two different expressions:
1) higher rate of fire
2) faster
The former means there are more shots per second. Solid beams win, then - because there are infinitely many shots per second in those.
The latter means the beam "moves" from A to B at higher speed. We can only see this if the beam has a beginning or an end. The pulses have both, the beams typically have the former. Neither is particularly faster nor slower than the other in the examples provided.
The capabilities here and in TOS and TNG are approximately the same anyway: the weapons find their targets with approximately 100% accuracy, cannot kill with one shot or one volley, and are only used at close ranges and at intervals, with strange pauses between bursts/beams.
Except they didn't quite achieve that - they only ever killed torps aimed at third parties.
Why waste power on phasers that can miss, when you can put it into shields that are absolutely certain to hit the torpedo? Shields, too, have an infinitely high rate of fire. But they use no ammo unless making a hit...
Timo Saloniemi
Still, those are rather exceptions. It's widely known, from hundreds and hundreds of episodes of Star Trek series (as well as movies, not including the reboot ones), how ship phasers fire (at least Star Fleet phasers).
I think it's fair to say that phasers can be fired in both pulses and beams. There is no one or the other. FIRST CONTACT most famously featured both.
Oh my cock, even I don't give a damn about this one at all.
Similar threads
