My only thought on this is that perhaps the glow is the phaser charging and ready to fire a bolt (e.g. a series of fields is the only thing keeping the bolt from discharging out of the the weapon). Perhaps these phasers need to be constantly on (with a forcefiled enveloping the bolt) in order to instantly fire. This appears to be different technology than the TOS and TNG stream (continuous beam) phasers.
Those new hand phasers (*SPOILERS*)
- Thread starter Surefire
- Start date
My only thought on this is that perhaps the glow is the phaser charging and ready to fire a bolt (e.g. a series of fields is the only thing keeping the bolt from discharging out of the the weapon). Perhaps these phasers need to be constantly on (with a forcefiled enveloping the bolt) in order to instantly fire. This appears to be different technology than the TOS and TNG stream (continuous beam) phasers.
They requisition the colorblind guys the red shirts; things are already going to be messy, and they don't even know it.
True.
And on thing that always irked me about the old phasers is that noone EVER performed a sweep with the beam except Scottie to cu through some doors. It seems to me that that would be a useful technique, but it never happened. I like the phaser blast as more authentic if less dramatic than the phaser beam.
X
I agree, I also prefer the blast.
It may also be more practical, as a continous stream may heat the phaser up more quickly, accelerating wear, and likely also consumes more "ammo" (energy).
I would kinda agree. It makes the phaser look more dynamic (especially the toy version), but it doesn't make logical sense.
D'oh! Well that's cool then.
^Considering that they have to wear "gun belts" to carry the current phaser (along with the communicator and tricorder, of course), I'd hope so. Would make going into a situation which could turn nasty a bit easier, i.e., not sowing blatant force by wearing a phaser pistol at your hip. In no way shape or form do I ever want to see Jim Kirk stuff a a phaser pistol in his waist band at the small of his back. Too action film-ish for me.
Although, if the cricket phaser is based off of the cech used for the films phaser pistols...then incorporating a stun and kill setting might be an issue. I doubt you'd want something that small held in your hand to move. Might drop it or something.
Although, if the cricket phaser is based off of the cech used for the films phaser pistols...then incorporating a stun and kill setting might be an issue. I doubt you'd want something that small held in your hand to move. Might drop it or something.
I liked them, they still retained elements of the TOS pahsers but they were considerably altered and more futuristic looking.
I liked the barrell flip idea, adds a bit of physical interest to the design.
Its a simple amd quick way of telling the audience the settings are being changed rather than have a pointless close up on a control panel with power levels etc.
Not too sure on the pule look/sound however, but who cares, theyre cool.
I liked the barrell flip idea, adds a bit of physical interest to the design.
Its a simple amd quick way of telling the audience the settings are being changed rather than have a pointless close up on a control panel with power levels etc.
Not too sure on the pule look/sound however, but who cares, theyre cool.
I liked the new phaser/comm/tric designs. Different but familiar. I like the flip tip of the phaser. Not as cool as real TOS hardware, but interesting and clever. I wish they had showed the tricorder a bit more.
My guess is a type 1 phaser in this alt universe version of trek only has 2 settings, light stun and heavy stun (or possibly just one setting: heavy stun). Such a device the size of a cell phone would probably be too small to rotate barrels for a kill setting, as the larger phaser did. More serious, there is a serious safety issue carrying something the size of a cell phone in a pocket that could instantly kill if a button is grazed (I assume it would have a safety, but even safeties fail).
^Have we ever seen safeties on phasers? I mean, they don't have trigger guards...so there's a high chance that you could have an accidental discharge, even if it's set to stun. As shown in ST VI, stun can still kill. On the other hand...I really did like seeing Spock and Kirk hold their weapons in a teo handed grip. Seemed more realistic to me, because it actually looked like they were aiming. Most of the time, we see people just fire from the hip, or torso height and hit their targets. It was nice, for a change, to see the phasers being treated as actual weapons. Held/stabilized for correct aiming. Even if they don't have sights, I'd assume that actually knowing that the weapon is pointed...oh I don't know...at your target...seems helpful.
Agreed about the holding techniques.
And... realistically, they really SHOULD have sights on phasers. Hitting without sights is hit and miss beyond a few yards.
I remember in DS9, they actually showed sights on the phaser rifles.
Here's my thoughts on sights for phasers...
Starting chronologically, the EM-33, and EM-42, although not phasers, had sights. I'd assume that is because the plasma bolt they fired acted like a bullet, and arrived a fraction later than it was fired, while also falling victim to other problems faced by projectiles, like gravity, wind, etc.
Anything later than that, phase pistols, phasers, etc, did not have any sights, and I'd assume that's because the weapons fired a beam, instead of a pulse. The beam hit exactly where the weapon was pointed. And, the pistol variants of the weapons seemed to be intended for close range anyway. Most phser rifles we've seen have had sights, as far as I know.
What I suspect is that Starfleet trains it's officers to use a certain part of the weapon as the "sight", when held properly, similar to the front bead of a shotgun. There has been training like this before in our own time as well. I believe the US Army used Daisy Red Ryder bb guns without any sights to train their men in "instinct shooting". As long as the weapon is held a particular way, you can use a certain part of the weapon as a "focal point", analogous to a sight, to aim your weapon. For instance, the Type II phaser used during TNG, perhaps the indentation formed by the two raised surfaces on the front of the weapon was used as a sight. As long as the weapon is held correctly, that indentation can act as a reference point to where your shot will go.
http://www.phasers.net/2360/p2-2366a.jpg
And, practically speaking, phasers, as we have seen them used are a point and shoot type of weapon. If the weapon is on stun, as long as you hit your target, which can be accomplished by pointing the weapon at them, they'll be stunned. Regardless of where they're hit, so it seems. Same with the kill/vaporize setting used. If they're hit, they're dead.
So, I'd imagine that it's a matter of training, rather than the need to fine tune your aim. If you the weapon fits in your hand the same way every time you pick it up, and you know where your shot will go when the weapon is held that way, then there really is no need to aim. Just point and shoot.
Starting chronologically, the EM-33, and EM-42, although not phasers, had sights. I'd assume that is because the plasma bolt they fired acted like a bullet, and arrived a fraction later than it was fired, while also falling victim to other problems faced by projectiles, like gravity, wind, etc.
Anything later than that, phase pistols, phasers, etc, did not have any sights, and I'd assume that's because the weapons fired a beam, instead of a pulse. The beam hit exactly where the weapon was pointed. And, the pistol variants of the weapons seemed to be intended for close range anyway. Most phser rifles we've seen have had sights, as far as I know.
What I suspect is that Starfleet trains it's officers to use a certain part of the weapon as the "sight", when held properly, similar to the front bead of a shotgun. There has been training like this before in our own time as well. I believe the US Army used Daisy Red Ryder bb guns without any sights to train their men in "instinct shooting". As long as the weapon is held a particular way, you can use a certain part of the weapon as a "focal point", analogous to a sight, to aim your weapon. For instance, the Type II phaser used during TNG, perhaps the indentation formed by the two raised surfaces on the front of the weapon was used as a sight. As long as the weapon is held correctly, that indentation can act as a reference point to where your shot will go.
http://www.phasers.net/2360/p2-2366a.jpg
And, practically speaking, phasers, as we have seen them used are a point and shoot type of weapon. If the weapon is on stun, as long as you hit your target, which can be accomplished by pointing the weapon at them, they'll be stunned. Regardless of where they're hit, so it seems. Same with the kill/vaporize setting used. If they're hit, they're dead.
So, I'd imagine that it's a matter of training, rather than the need to fine tune your aim. If you the weapon fits in your hand the same way every time you pick it up, and you know where your shot will go when the weapon is held that way, then there really is no need to aim. Just point and shoot.
Some of the most recent advanced police training regimens include placing black tape over the iron sights and drawing and firing the gun in a single motion, without wasting time aiming (and consequently letting your mind screw with your muscle memory). The idea is that you train your self to put your hands out towards your target, with minute corrections for head shots or center of mass, and fire once the gun is in position. If you are holding the gun correctly, it becomes a snap to hit targets almost flawlessly at average shoot-out ranges (between 10-15 feet). It's also easier to keep your weapon on target if you don't open fire immediately - you "know" where you're aiming without thinking about.
Two police officers just trained in the technique in my hometown were recently confronted by a suspect who tried to draw down on them from about 12 ft away ... they fired off fifteen shots between them before his gun cleared his waistband and they only missed twice. Every single shot was either through the ten ring or a head shot. The two misses were because he fell backwards as he was being shot. That percentage of hits in a real-life encounter is pretty much unheard of. That each shot alone was enough to kill the suspect outright is insane. When the ESU guys secured their weapons as evidence, they were shocked to discover the iron sights hand been black-taped. The two officers had just left the training range before coming on-duty that night. Guess the badguy chose the wrong two cops to draw down on.
Two police officers just trained in the technique in my hometown were recently confronted by a suspect who tried to draw down on them from about 12 ft away ... they fired off fifteen shots between them before his gun cleared his waistband and they only missed twice. Every single shot was either through the ten ring or a head shot. The two misses were because he fell backwards as he was being shot. That percentage of hits in a real-life encounter is pretty much unheard of. That each shot alone was enough to kill the suspect outright is insane. When the ESU guys secured their weapons as evidence, they were shocked to discover the iron sights hand been black-taped. The two officers had just left the training range before coming on-duty that night. Guess the badguy chose the wrong two cops to draw down on.
Well, it's been somewhat proven that grips similar in angle to the Phaser's fit and point quite naturally in the hand (think the Luger P08), and from owning a replica of the original TOS phaser, I can say that it points quite naturally. You don't need to adjust it once it's in your hand. The new phaser looks to be the same way.
I have to disagree. I spent nine years in the Army. I'm a combat Vet and an expert with many weapons. You always use your sights. Shooting from the hip Rambo style is hollywood and is not a military or police tactic.
Similar threads
