StarDestroyer.Net BBS

So I just finished reading the star trek TOS novel savage trade and in the book near the beginning the enterprise got into a battle with some pirates called the Lrah'hane. In the book it the Lrah'hane were thought to be wiped out by the twenty second century but of cores were not and they still used there ships of that era. The book describes them at one point of using lasers though the author MIGHT subscribe to the no lasers argument it was clear that these ships were less advanced than the enterprise and there for a less powerful power generation plant to power the weapons.

What I was wondering is why did star fleet switch to phasers for there ship board weapons when phasers are much more unreliable and have more limitations. My personal theory is that they think they would get more bang for there buck with the NDF chain reaction. I'm curious to hear what you guys have to say about this. Also if anyone has read savage trade im curious to what your thoughts are. I personally kind a liked it.

How on earth can you make a statement like "phasers are much more unreliable and have more limitations"?

What unreliability do phasers have beyond what we see of laser weaponry? What limitation do they have compared to swiss army phasers than can be used as heating tools, mining equipment and surgical implements!

I agree - in what way are phasers unreliable in the Trek universe?

They seem to do more damage than a laser would, can vapourise, they don't over-heat or need cooling that we can see (even the hand units)... they can be set on "wide beam" (which a laser can't, by definition), you have stun, heat, kill and vapourise (or levels 1-16) and something capable of vapourising can be concealed in your hand (type 1 phaser). They don't jam, either.

They have ranges of 300k km+, can be fired FTL and thanks to NDF abilities, continue to damage and vapourise even after they've stopped being fired.

in what way are they unreliable or have more limitations?

DarthPooky wrote:So I just finished reading the star trek TOS novel savage trade and in the book near the beginning the enterprise got into a battle with some pirates called the Lrah'hane. In the book it the Lrah'hane were thought to be wiped out by the twenty second century but of cores were not and they still used there ships of that era. The book describes them at one point of using lasers though the author MIGHT subscribe to the no lasers argument it was clear that these ships were less advanced than the enterprise and there for a less powerful power generation plant to power the weapons.

What I was wondering is why did star fleet switch to phasers for there ship board weapons when phasers are much more unreliable and have more limitations. My personal theory is that they think they would get more bang for there buck with the NDF chain reaction. I'm curious to hear what you guys have to say about this. Also if anyone has read savage trade im curious to what your thoughts are. I personally kind a liked it.

Cores is the center of something, the word you're looking for is course.

There is a place. Their is speaking about belonging to someone.

Starfleet is one word, not two.

I'm has an apostrophe in it.

Now, to answer your question, we see in Enterprise(the TV show), that Earth regularly uses 'phase cannons' for their beam weaponry. Most books, if not all, are non-canon, and have no standing on the Star Trek universe. Lasers also can only cut or melt heat up an object. Phasers can do a multitude of tasks, including vaporization or disintegration.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I meant ship mounted phasers. As for there limitations I'm referring to the chain reaction and material dependent nature of phasers which gain there energy from the targets own mass and which includes the fact that they don't have that much fire power as opposed to a DET weapon like a laser. As for being less reliable there are all those instances were they are rendered inoperable by certain types of radiation as well as the presence of certain materials.

Now, to answer your question, we see in Enterprise(the TV show), that Earth regularly uses 'phase cannons' for their beam weaponry

I was referring to why they switched from lasers from pikes era to phasers.

Most books, if not all, are non-canon, and have no standing on the Star Trek universe.

I know perfectly well that the trek books are not canon. I just mentioned it because that was what made me wonder about this subject.
I apologies for the spelling and grammar errors they have never my strong suite.

DarthPooky wrote:I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I meant ship mounted phasers. As for there limitations I'm referring to the chain reaction and material dependent nature of phasers which gain there energy from the targets own mass and which includes the fact that they don't have that much fire power as opposed to a DET weapon like a laser.

And you know that because...? Your evidence that actual laser would do better given the same underlying technology is?
Phasers do things no real laser could ever do, like NDFing away stuff that's in your way without having to worry about where that material is going. And I'd like a canon source saying phasers actually gain energy from the target mass.

As for being less reliable there are all those instances were they are rendered inoperable by certain types of radiation as well as the presence of certain materials.

And since all of those are completely technobabble, you know they won't affect lasers because...

Now, to answer your question, we see in Enterprise(the TV show), that Earth regularly uses 'phase cannons' for their beam weaponry

I was referring to why they switched from lasers from pikes era to phasers.

When it's patently obvious that Pike's 'lasers' weren't the real thing either.

The only fact I know about lasers... is that they can be blocked the the E-D's navigational deflector. Therefore, the E-D can block the Death Star's main weapon it is just a giant laser

DarthPooky wrote:[...] As for being less reliable there are all those instances were they are rendered inoperable by certain types of radiation as well as the presence of certain materials. [...]

Can you provide a list with »all those instances were they are rendered inoperable by certain types of radiation as well as the presence of certain materials«. You make it sound as if the ship mounted phasers are highly unreliable.

WATCH-MAN wrote:

DarthPooky wrote:[...] As for being less reliable there are all those instances were they are rendered inoperable by certain types of radiation as well as the presence of certain materials. [...]

Can you provide a list with »all those instances were they are rendered inoperable by certain types of radiation as well as the presence of certain materials«. You make it sound as if the ship mounted phasers are highly unreliable.

Mmm

I can't actually recall an instance off the top of my head of phasers not working on a ship - other than no power available to them or the capacitors have run out of charge.

There was a Klingon disruptor in ST4 which Chekov (possibly jokingly) said "must be the radiation" when it wouldn't work.

And the TR rifle from DS9 was said to have been developed to help in environments where phasers wouldn't work (not that I can really remember one) - however regenerative phasers (or something along those lines) meant it wasn't needed any more.

But those are both hand-held examples and twice now the OP has said he isn't talking about those but ship-mounted phasers.

We have no idea what energy input is being delivered to ship mounted phasers, let alone how much destructive energy is being delivered to make any comparison with comparably powered laser weaponry. The fact that everyone either uses disruptors or phasers and no one but primitives use lasers would strongly imply that there are key advantages to using either disruptors or phasers. Hell for all we know their just cheaper to build and operate than lasers of that magnitude which would require massive amounts of chemicals and refrigeration.

From what we do see of phaser based weapons... ie blowing chunks off Borg Cubes then we can make a fair assumption laser weapons would be massively less useful for causing such damage unless you can use one to drill through to something flammable or explosive.

Off hand, in "Blood Oath", Jadzia Dax renders an entire base's energy weapons useless by using tetryon energy from their dinky Bird of Prey. This allows three century old Klingons and one young woman to slaughter the base and kill the infamous Albino.

In "To the Death", the Iconian Gateway seems to cause a dampening field, rendering their energy weapons useless, meaning that they're forced to use melee weapons to fight the rogue Jem'Hadar.

FaxModem1 wrote:Off hand, in "Blood Oath", Jadzia Dax renders an entire base's energy weapons useless by using tetryon energy from their dinky Bird of Prey. This allows three century old Klingons and one young woman to slaughter the base and kill the infamous Albino.

In "To the Death", the Iconian Gateway seems to cause a dampening field, rendering their energy weapons useless, meaning that they're forced to use melee weapons to fight the rogue Jem'Hadar.

You may have noticed that we are speaking of ship-mounted phasers and not of hand-held phasers.

In both of your examples only hand-held phasers were affected.

The Iconians are an advanced precursor race, as illustrated by their gateway technology (which is strongly superior to conventional Star Trek transporters). It is no surprise that a facility containing Iconian technology might contain some means of neutralizing 'conventional' energy weapons.

Also, the Blood Oath incident seems to have been a one-off that cannot be used to judge overall effectiveness.

I mean, you know what else probably can't be rendered useless by "tetryon energy?" A handgun! But you don't see people in Star Trek carrying them, even though this is clearly a realistic option for them and we DO see that they are aware of normal chemical-propellant firearms.

I would infer that the means to neutralize phasers and disruptors is rare. Probably even rarer than technology that would neutralize lasers or slug-throwing firearms.

Sometimes one technology is phased out in favor of another, simply because it is more effective than the necessary improvements required to make the current technology perform at a comparable level. Simply put, it may have gotten to a point where, in order to get more performance out of lasers, it would require too much in the way of power generation, cooling, focusing apparatuses, and so on. Meanwhile, phasers work off of a different mechanism, which don't suffer from these drawbacks.

So out of maybe a thousand or so instances of phasers being fired over the years, from ships, can we name any instances where phasers "jammed" (for lack of a better term) ? Other than a power outage, which would also affect lasers, I mean.

Even if we can, I'm assuming it's only once or twice? In how many phaser shots?

That's a pretty low rate of failure.

Can you provide a list with »all those instances were they are rendered inoperable by certain types of radiation as well as the presence of certain materials«. You make it sound as if the ship mounted phasers are highly unreliable.

I thought there were some instances but I looked and I couldn't find any except hyperonic radiation from ensigns of command. I noticed a flaw in my logic however which is that I'm assuming trek lasers are the same basic tech as star wars lasers minus the firepower discrepancy which is core a logical fallacy that I caught my self doing.

Just for the record you are aware that neither franchises 'lasers' can be what the real world understands that term to mean, right?

Just for the record you are aware that neither franchises 'lasers' can be what the real world understands that term to mean, righ

Oh I realize that but for purpose of debate lets just assume they are.
Sorry for not posting in a wile life and all that.

DarthPooky wrote:

Just for the record you are aware that neither franchises 'lasers' can be what the real world understands that term to mean, righ

Oh I realize that but for purpose of debate lets just assume they are.
Sorry for not posting in a wile life and all that.

Let's assume squares are circles.