| Subject: Re: Phasers vs. Blasters |
Author:
capn hayes
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 13:40:23 08/31/02 Sat
Author Host/IP: NoHost/207.14.48.2
In reply to:
Wild Karrde
's message, "Re: Phasers vs. Blasters" on 04:22:33 08/31/02 Sat
>>>>>3.Due to problems 1 and 2 it's range is drastically
>>>>>reduced because it lacks any kind of sighting
>device
>>>>>and it's crappy handgrip make it very difficult to
>>>aim
>>>>>at far away targets.
>>>>
>>>>Of course, we've seen there are absolutely no
>>problems
>>>>aiming at targets some distance away in such
>exampels
>>>>as DS9 the circle/the siege, FC, and DS9 Rocks and
>>>>shoals
>>>
>>>To bad this is proven wrong in ST:I when Worf drops
>>>his phaser riffle in favor of a shoulder fired energy
>>>weapon (which I might add had less firepower than a
>>>modern hand grenade) to hit enemy troops no more than
>>>several hundred meters away. This proves that phaser
>>>riffles are usless at even several hundred meters
>>>distance.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>4. The only reason phasers make people disappear is
>>>>>due to their NDF effect allowing them to be very
>>>>>effective against organic materials not because
>they
>>>>>have enough power to actually vaporise someone. It
>>>>>should also be noted that against dense materials
>>>such
>>>>>as armour their effectiveness drops drastically.
>>>>
>>>>However, Phasers do have a basic "raw power" of just
>>>>over 1MW (as per TM and TNG The Mind's Eye).
>Anything
>>>>else is just an added bonus
>>>
>>>Too bad the TM aren't canon by Paramount's official
>>>policy and are thus worth nothing.
>>>
>>>Also about the TNG episode example:
>>>------------------------------------------
>>>TNG Season 4, Ep# 98: "The Mind's Eye"
>>>
>>> DATA: Energy flow is within normal parameters...
>>>from the prefire chamber... to
>>> the emission aperture.
>>> GEORDI: Rapid nadion pulse is right on target...
>>>beam control assembly,
>>> safety interlock, both check out ... beam width and
>>>intensity controls also
>>> responding correctly.
>>> DATA: Energy cell usage remains constant at 1.05 MJ
>>>per second ... curious,
>>> the efficiency reading on the discharge crystal is
>>>well above Starfleet
>>> specifications.
>>> GEORDI: Yeah... by quite a bit... 94.1%
>efficiency.
>>> DATA: Our most efficient discharge crystal
>typically
>>>fires with 86.5% efficiency.
>>>
>>>
>>>Ground Combat: in addition to naming numerous
>>>components of a phaser rifle, this scene establishes
>>>that Geordi and Data measured the energy drain of its
>>>battery to be 1.05 MW. It seems logical that this
>test
>>>was probably performed at maximum power, where small
>>>differences would be magnified and therefore more
>>>easily detected.
>>>
>>>We can confirm that the weapon is at or near its
>>>maximum power output by examining its stated
>>>efficiency rating. If the discharge crystal normally
>>>fires with 86.5% efficiency as per Data's
>explanation,
>>>then the remaining 13.5% has nowhere to go, does it?
>>>It's not going into the beam, so it must be
>dissipated
>>>to its environment in the form of heat (which can be
>a
>>>combination of radiation, convection, and waste
>>>matter).
>>>
>>>Therefore, if Geordi and Data are to be believed, a
>>>phaser rifle at full power will normally heat its
>>>environment to the tune of more than 140 kW! That's
>>>easily enough to kill its user, and that would
>explain
>>>why Geordi had to set up a special fixture for the
>>>rifle (presumably with active cooling), instead of
>>>simply holding it in his hands. It seems reasonable
>to
>>>imagine that this power setting is rarely used in
>>>the field, or perhaps it's even locked out so it
>can't
>>>be used except under very specialized conditions such
>>>as this test. Even if we imagine that the weapon
>dumps
>>>the heat in the same direction as its beam, it would
>>>still heat its environment and cause destructive
>>>thermal effects to its target which are wildly out of
>>>proportion to what we've seen in the show.
>>>
>>>The low efficiency of phaser discharge crystals and
>>>the accompanying heat discharge might help explain
>why
>>>the Federation made a change to lower-powered pulse
>>>rifles several years later.
>>>
>>>PS. before someone proposes a cooling system as an
>>>explanation for ultra high power outputs in
>>>conjunction with 86.5% efficiency, I would like to
>>>point out that cooling systems only move energy
>around
>>>rather than eliminating it (remember the First Law of
>>>Thermodynamics), so they would only increase the
>>>overall heat output.
>>>------------------------------------
>>>The above is from star destroyer.net
>>>------------------------------------
>>>So sorry but your wrong. Your welcome to try again
>>>though.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Now let's take a look at blasters.
>>>>>
>>>>>3.A blaster has a longer range because it has
>sights
>>>>>and acutal hand grips that don't force it's user to
>>>>>hold it in an awkward position.
>>>>
>>>>Actually, no. Blasters do not have longer range.
>>We've
>>>>seen them used, and they miss people who are only a
>>>>short distance away. Their stated max range is
>>>>120m(pistols) and 300m(rifles) - clearly, comparable
>>>>with phaser pistols and rifles in actual useage
>(I've
>>>>ignored tripod-mounted weapons until we have a
>>>>comparable weapon from Trek, though the range of the
>>>>E-web is only 500m)
>>>
>>>Which is contradicted in AOTC when the clonetrooper's
>>>blasters fired on the droid army which was a hell of
>>>alot futher then just 500m. Name one instance where
>>>people were at close range with blasters and missed
>>>who were not already given orders to shoot and miss
>>>(the stormtroopers on the DS in ANH) or were under
>>>heavy fire and shooting from the hip. It doesn't
>>>matter how fucking accurate you or your gun is there
>>>is no such thing as 100% accuracy, sorry try again.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>4.All one has to do to see the blasters are more
>>>>>powerful than phasers is to is look at the scene in
>>>>>ANH where Han uses his blaster agaisnt the
>>>>>stormtroopers in the Mos Eisley spaceport where it
>>>>>blast torso-sized chunks out of the docking bay
>>walls
>>>>>showing it's knock down power is more like a
>grenade
>>>>>laucher than a handgun.
>>>>
>>>>Han Solo's blaster is rated at about 50kJ. Compare
>>>>with phasers rated at 1MW or more.
>>>>Even E-11 blaster rifles are less powerful than
>>phaser
>>>>rifles.
>>>>(ref www.trek-wars.info/swwpower.html)
>>>
>>>Which again is contradicted by canon evidence. As I
>>>mentioned above Han's blaster has shown to have the
>>>knockdown power of a grenade launcher. E-11's have
>>>also been canonly proven to be much more powerful
>then
>>>phasers:
>>>------------------------
>>>ANH novelization p.86
>>>
>>> Leaving Luke to gape at the parallel sets of
>tracks,
>>>Kenobi turned his attention to
>>> the sandcrawler. He pointed out where single
>>>weapons' bursts had blasted
>>> away portals, treads, and support beams.
>>>------------------------
>>> All the stormtrooper's had to inflict this damge
>were
>>>their E-11's. Compared to phasers which we've seen
>are
>>>stopped by metallic packing crates. Also your
>>>reference is worth shit seeing as how it's a site
>that
>>>was created by a rabid trekkie who lowers Star Wars
>>>firepower and rasies Star Trek's at every
>opportunity
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Phasers are more powerful than blasters.
>>>>Phasers, in actual useage of like-for-like weapons,
>>>>have comparable range to blasters.
>>>>
>>>>The upside is, Phasers have the added bonus of NDF,
>>on
>>>>top of their raw power.
>>>
>>>Phasers rely on soley on the NDF effect seeing as
>>>there are many canon examples that show they prouduce
>>>no thermal effects. It's not a bonus but a glaring
>>>weakness.
>>
>>and yes Paramount does endorse them as offical
>>material for series references.
>
>
>There is no "offical" for Star Trek Paramount's policy
>is only "live-action" trek is canon, invalidating the
>TMs.
Does Paramount include ST:V where the Enterprise goes to the center of the galaxy in 7 hours? If so then how does Paramount officialy explain the basic premise of Voyager!
Boy don't ya love "cannon" live action trek, not contradicting at all, is it!
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 