As we see in STII:TWOK, the Reliant shoots at Enterprise using her rollbar mounted phaser weaponry and photon torpedoes. The Reliant, as we can plainly see, has the same number of saucer mounted phaser banks as the Enterprise as well as the rollbar mounted weapons. My question is: why didn't Reliant use the hull phasers rather than the rollbar mounted phasers? Any opinions?
Reliant's weaponry in STII:TWOK
- Thread starter therritn
- Start date
...Khan only had so much crew and decided to concentrate his fighting assets? Since he's also using the torpedoes, which are located in the same "roll bar" structure, perhaps he assigned crew and resources exclusively to a putative roll bar control facility, having none to spare for saucer phasers.
The "real" reason I guess is that Khan was a villain, always hitting Kirk under the belt by positioning his ship below Kirk's. The Enterprise is visually more "vulnerable" from below, as the "shield" of the saucer offers no protection to the "body".
Hovering above Kirk might be more menacing, but the choice had been made to place the nacelles of the Reliant below the saucer for visual distinctiveness, and the phaser firing angles downward might be more limited, a limitation the VFX folks didn't want to suffer from when they didn't have to.
It might have been dramatically appropriate to have Khan's ship fire phasers from every corner just to demonstrate how he really "outguns" Kirk as stated. But Khan not being able to do that makes plot sense, too.
Timo Saloniemi
The "real" reason I guess is that Khan was a villain, always hitting Kirk under the belt by positioning his ship below Kirk's. The Enterprise is visually more "vulnerable" from below, as the "shield" of the saucer offers no protection to the "body".
Hovering above Kirk might be more menacing, but the choice had been made to place the nacelles of the Reliant below the saucer for visual distinctiveness, and the phaser firing angles downward might be more limited, a limitation the VFX folks didn't want to suffer from when they didn't have to.
It might have been dramatically appropriate to have Khan's ship fire phasers from every corner just to demonstrate how he really "outguns" Kirk as stated. But Khan not being able to do that makes plot sense, too.
Timo Saloniemi
I don't know if it's based on anything intended by the designers of the model, but many fandom blueprints in the years following referred to them as "megaphaser cannons", with more punch to them than regular phaser banks.
Actually the Reliant was originally designed with the nacelles above the saucer. It was to look like a compact version of the Enterprise. When Bennett saw the preliminary design, he saw it upside down and approved that. It was redesigned to reflect that.
I don't know, but the damn thing seem pretty well armed for a smaller ship, doesn't it?
This maybe wrong, because I am not up on blueprints and such, but my understanding is Enterprise cannot shoot torpedoes back and only has the 6 banks of 2 phasers on the saucer and maybe a cluster of 2 or four on the bottom of the secondary hull that can shoot backwards, but they are never shown.
Where as Reliant is like a effin porcupine in comparison, it can shoot torpedoes in both directions and has the 6 phaser guns on the saucer and the multiple phasers, not sure of the number, on the "weapons strut"
King Daniel I've seen hull designs that were similar to Reliant in blueprints that had the "megaphaser cannons" but they are big things sticking out like guns on an Iowa class battleship, I don't think that's what is depicted in the movie. Not saying you are wrong, but that's not my interpretation of it. Even the phaser animation is identical to Enterprises phasers, so they don't seem remarkable to me, just phasers.
http://www.orionpressfanzines.com/starships/Orion_Press_Lexicon_Appendix_IA2-Starfleet.pdf
Sorry, that's a big pdf, but there's a Churchill class and others that have what I'm talking about. I don't know if they are what you were refering to.
Edit: On further browsing, I saw this:
http://www.orionpressfanzines.com/starships/Orion_Press_Lexicon_Appendix_IA3-Starfleet.pdf
Which does say the back phasers are Megaphasers, but doesn't have the long barrel like the other megaphaser bearing ships?
I also find it a little strange that they changed the phasers from a steady long beam to a rapid fire pulse type of weapon in this movie.
This maybe wrong, because I am not up on blueprints and such, but my understanding is Enterprise cannot shoot torpedoes back and only has the 6 banks of 2 phasers on the saucer and maybe a cluster of 2 or four on the bottom of the secondary hull that can shoot backwards, but they are never shown.
Where as Reliant is like a effin porcupine in comparison, it can shoot torpedoes in both directions and has the 6 phaser guns on the saucer and the multiple phasers, not sure of the number, on the "weapons strut"
King Daniel I've seen hull designs that were similar to Reliant in blueprints that had the "megaphaser cannons" but they are big things sticking out like guns on an Iowa class battleship, I don't think that's what is depicted in the movie. Not saying you are wrong, but that's not my interpretation of it. Even the phaser animation is identical to Enterprises phasers, so they don't seem remarkable to me, just phasers.
http://www.orionpressfanzines.com/starships/Orion_Press_Lexicon_Appendix_IA2-Starfleet.pdf
Sorry, that's a big pdf, but there's a Churchill class and others that have what I'm talking about. I don't know if they are what you were refering to.
Edit: On further browsing, I saw this:
http://www.orionpressfanzines.com/starships/Orion_Press_Lexicon_Appendix_IA3-Starfleet.pdf
Which does say the back phasers are Megaphasers, but doesn't have the long barrel like the other megaphaser bearing ships?
I also find it a little strange that they changed the phasers from a steady long beam to a rapid fire pulse type of weapon in this movie.
Last edited:
I posted a thread about this a few months back. I LOVE the pulse effect. It adds a visceral feel to the film.
This is partially based on the misconception that the beams would be coming out of the ends of those cylinders. The ends are hollow pipes that appear more "heavy duty" than the phaser turrets elsewhere, lending support to the idea that the weapons would be heavier as well.
However, this isn't really the case. The cylinders each feature standard "dimple" phaser turrets on their sides, and the beams in ST2 come from the sides, not from the front or aft ends. The front end has a white glow instead; for what purpose, we don't know. (Might be the elusive navigational deflectors, as the cylinders-within-cylinders shape echoes the front end of the Constitution and thus the supposed location of that ship's navigational deflector system. Might be headlights.)
The beams from those cylinder flank "dimples" don't appear more or less destructive than Kirk's saucer-bottom phasers, but we also have to take into account several factors muddling the picture. In the first engagement, Khan doesn't shoot to kill; when Kirk fires back, it's with battery power only; and in the second confrontation, both ships are damaged and operating at reduced power.
Perhaps the pulse effect is related to this, too? Not in-universe, but in Paramount terms... Apparently, the VFX people in ST:ID thought it would be cool to have the phaser bolts curve and swerve madly during the warp chase, highlighting the exotic nature of warp travel, and were then told to keep the curving even during the subsequent sublight fight. Here, the VFX wizards might have been told to create phaser beams that look as if on the verge of failing, to show the dire straits of Kirk and his wounded starship - and it looked so cool that the effect was carried over to Khan's non-damaged weapons as well.
Timo Saloniemi
Some very good points, Timo. I wish they'd carried over the pulse style to other films. Heck we don't see ship's phasers again until, what? Generations? Of course the big D uses the completely different energy stream style. 
I wonder why they chose to use torpedoes in the Kirk vs. Kruge fight of ST3, rather than phasers. Sure, TOS had established that one needs crew in order to fire phasers, but we could assume this is doubly true for torpedoes, especially in light of the ST2 torpedo bay scenes. And it would have been easy to show how wounded the Enterprise was by having her fire phaser beams that fizzle and die after a promising start. Much more difficult to convey that with torpedo visuals...
Timo Saloniemi
Timo Saloniemi
Good question. I also wonder why the torpedoes seemed to cause electrical arcing on the hull rather then punching a hole and exploding like most other torpedoes have done.
It would make a cute sort of sense for this "Nazi submarine" invisible starship to be armed with "merchant raiding" weapons that disable rather than destroy...
This movie and others suggest that the BoP, like a WWII submarine, is a weakling of a combat vessel, and only a threat to big Starfleet ships thanks to its one weapon: invisibility, and a fanatical devotion to the Klingon fighting ethos. It might be a deliberate Klingon choice not to attempt (probably in vain) to put a potent anti-starship weapon aboard the midget raider, and instead concentrate on raiding-specific weaponry such as "stun torpedoes".
Timo Saloniemi
This movie and others suggest that the BoP, like a WWII submarine, is a weakling of a combat vessel, and only a threat to big Starfleet ships thanks to its one weapon: invisibility, and a fanatical devotion to the Klingon fighting ethos. It might be a deliberate Klingon choice not to attempt (probably in vain) to put a potent anti-starship weapon aboard the midget raider, and instead concentrate on raiding-specific weaponry such as "stun torpedoes".
Timo Saloniemi
I like your theory, but the two Enterprise shot seemed to do about the same to the BoP.
Besides that, wouldn't one think that a torpedo from a big ship like Enterprise would pack more of a punch than a smaller ship's?
Unless a torpedo is a torpedo is a torpedo, and the BOP has shields up (it is visible), while Enterprise's shields are "not responding".
OTOH, a torpedo explicitly is a variable-yield weapon in TNG, and displays quite a bit of variance in the TOS movies already.
"A torpedo is a torpedo is a torpedo" has never been true in the real world, because different navies install different warheads and guidance and propulsion systems (even if basically everybody uses 21 inch diameter). However, in TOS "The Changeling", our heroes use "our photon torpedo" as a unit of measurement for the destructive power of the alien spacecraft!
Yet "The Changeling" is a definite outlier. The unit of measurement used there is incompatible with other TOS episodes, as the Enterprise absorbs 90 photorpfuls and is stated to be able to take some 350-400 more... Perhaps we should see the episode rather as further evidence for variable yield, and Spock's statement about "90 of our torpedoes" as referring specifically to the current status of the Enterprise torpedoes (they were armed a few moments before the statement).
Timo Saloniemi
"A torpedo is a torpedo is a torpedo" has never been true in the real world, because different navies install different warheads and guidance and propulsion systems (even if basically everybody uses 21 inch diameter). However, in TOS "The Changeling", our heroes use "our photon torpedo" as a unit of measurement for the destructive power of the alien spacecraft!
Yet "The Changeling" is a definite outlier. The unit of measurement used there is incompatible with other TOS episodes, as the Enterprise absorbs 90 photorpfuls and is stated to be able to take some 350-400 more... Perhaps we should see the episode rather as further evidence for variable yield, and Spock's statement about "90 of our torpedoes" as referring specifically to the current status of the Enterprise torpedoes (they were armed a few moments before the statement).
Timo Saloniemi
That works for that situation. Perhaps I could be more clear this way; Without a crew to control the variable yield of the torpedoes on Enterprise, they're all still set to what they were last loaded with. As seen in ST:II, that is enough to do significant damage, but not completely destroy. The BOP is loaded with single-load torpedoes that can't be changed, large enough to destroy smaller craft, and Grissom as well due to a 'lucky shot'. But this load isn't enough to destroy a big cruiser class like Enterprise, while the BOP has shields up and is protected to a degree from the Enterprise's not-maxed-out torpedoes. A reasonable speculation, surely.
After all, the ships fly around at the speed of plot.
After all, the ships fly around at the speed of plot.
That's what I thought, too.
But Chang had (fake or Cartwright-provided?) Starfleet torpedoes, so that he could frame the assassination on Kirk.
If Cartwight provided those torps, they probably were weaker than their regular Starfleet equivalents: Chang only initially had use for a disabling yield, and Cartwright might make sure the torps were incapable of taking bigger yields. If the Klingons manufactured them themselves, then their lack of expertise might have limited the torps to disabling yields, explaining the drawn-out final fight.
It might be that a crewless ship is limited to injecting a minimal amount of AM into the torps, and supervising crew would be required (if not for practical reasons, then at least by the regulations) for increasing the yield, and Scotty didn't think of removing the programming blocks that enforce these limiting regulations.
Or it might be that Kirk's torpedo system is inherently weak: much of the automation has been ripped out or shut down to give the trainees more to do, and for their own good the potency of the weapons has been ramped down a lot, too.
Personally, I favor the idea that TOS movie torps are as powerful as TNG ones, more or less - and as lethal to their own users if fired point blank at high yield. So Scotty chose a low yield, more or less sufficient for knocking out the BoP without harming the weakened Enterprise, and erred ever-so-slightly on the side of caution.
We never see Khan fire one of his own torps in murderous anger: the first fight involves him wanting to wound Kirk, then he wants to warn Kirk of entering Mutara, and then when he finally would have a motivation to fire at lethal yield, he misses. So we can't readily compare the torps of the two starships, thankfully enough.
Timo Saloniemi
If Cartwight provided those torps, they probably were weaker than their regular Starfleet equivalents: Chang only initially had use for a disabling yield, and Cartwright might make sure the torps were incapable of taking bigger yields. If the Klingons manufactured them themselves, then their lack of expertise might have limited the torps to disabling yields, explaining the drawn-out final fight.
Hmm. I sort of doubt torpedoes can be kept loaded for very long, as what they are loaded with is antimatter. The big starships struggle to contain their antimatter stores; the tiny, expendable torps might do more poorly in that respect.
It might be that a crewless ship is limited to injecting a minimal amount of AM into the torps, and supervising crew would be required (if not for practical reasons, then at least by the regulations) for increasing the yield, and Scotty didn't think of removing the programming blocks that enforce these limiting regulations.
Or it might be that Kirk's torpedo system is inherently weak: much of the automation has been ripped out or shut down to give the trainees more to do, and for their own good the potency of the weapons has been ramped down a lot, too.
Personally, I favor the idea that TOS movie torps are as powerful as TNG ones, more or less - and as lethal to their own users if fired point blank at high yield. So Scotty chose a low yield, more or less sufficient for knocking out the BoP without harming the weakened Enterprise, and erred ever-so-slightly on the side of caution.
We never see Khan fire one of his own torps in murderous anger: the first fight involves him wanting to wound Kirk, then he wants to warn Kirk of entering Mutara, and then when he finally would have a motivation to fire at lethal yield, he misses. So we can't readily compare the torps of the two starships, thankfully enough.
Timo Saloniemi
