Blaster, Laser or Turbolaser?

[Bob the Gunslinger]

I've noticed in the SW movies that there are these three types of ship weapons. Are they distinct weapons, each with their own working principles, or just different names for the same weapons used in different theaters of conflict?

For example, land/air vehicles fire blasters. (As in, "That armor's too strong for blasters.") We've also seen lightsabers deflect speeder-bike blasters, just like blaster-rifle shots.

TIEs, and I assume all fighters, shoot lasers. ("That wasn't a laser blast--something hit us!") Are these just more powerful blasters named "lasers" due to some galactic tradition (like calling a blaster-rifle a rifle, even if the barrel isn't rifled)? Can a lightsaber deflect a TIE laser, or would it be suicide to try?

And then TLs are the weapons used on/against cap-ships. Are Turbolasers just big lasers?

These things have just been bothering me.

[Crazedwraith]

genrally blasters/lasers/Turbolasers are all the same thing just different power ranges.

blasters x-y
lasers y-a
turbolaser a-b

etc.

[General Zod]

this has been covered before i believe. it's already been concluded that turbo lasers are not, contraty to popular belief, simply lasers.

[Crazedwraith]

this has been covered before i believe. it's already been concluded that turbo lasers are not, contraty to popular belief, simply lasers.

I beleive he means are turbolaser just big versions of SW lasers as in thoose mounted on fighters not are they conventional lasers.

[Elheru Aran]

I always think of low-powered TL's like those on the Falcon and starfighter-size blaster-based weapons as "laser cannons"... I know it's not a laser, but it would be a reasonable enough term, with enough to differentate it from either "blaster" or "turbolaser".

Aside from that minor nitpick, yeah, most of the above posts are correct. Although I have to wonder under which category guns like the E-Web would come under... blaster? In which case, here's what I think-- (z to a scale, with A being highest)

Hand blasters (up to rifle size): z-x

Heavy blasters (about E-web to snowspeeder weapon size): x-u

Laser cannons (starfighter-size, small turrets): u-c

Turbolasers: c-a

There are probably a few exceptional weapons, such as the "superlaser" turrets used on the LAAT's in AOTC, but I'm not sure where those would go...

[YT300000]

I've noticed in the SW movies that there are these three types of ship weapons. Are they distinct weapons, each with their own working principles, or just different names for the same weapons used in different theaters of conflict?

For example, land/air vehicles fire blasters. (As in, "That armor's too strong for blasters.") We've also seen lightsabers deflect speeder-bike blasters, just like blaster-rifle shots.

TIEs, and I assume all fighters, shoot lasers. ("That wasn't a laser blast--something hit us!") Are these just more powerful blasters named "lasers" due to some galactic tradition (like calling a blaster-rifle a rifle, even if the barrel isn't rifled)? Can a lightsaber deflect a TIE laser, or would it be suicide to try?

Tenel Ka did it in the sixth Young Jedi Knights book. But it knocked her down.

[General Zod]

this has been covered before i believe. it's already been concluded that turbo lasers are not, contraty to popular belief, simply lasers.

I beleive he means are turbolaser just big versions of SW lasers as in thoose mounted on fighters not are they conventional lasers.

the OP wasn't too clear about what he was referring to. i just wanted to clear it up.

[Lord of the Farce]

the OP wasn't too clear about what he was referring to. i just wanted to clear it up.

Are they distinct weapons, each with their own working principles, or just different names for the same weapons used in different theaters of conflict?
-snip
Are these just more powerful blasters named "lasers" due to some galactic tradition (like calling a blaster-rifle a rifle, even if the barrel isn't rifled)?

On-topic, I'm a supporter of the "same type of weapon, with different names for different fire-power levels" theory

[Super-Gagme]

Well they aren't the same since we know Turbolaser is lightspeed weapon while a blaster is not.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

I always think of low-powered TL's like those on the Falcon and starfighter-size blaster-based weapons as "laser cannons"... I know it's not a laser, but it would be a reasonable enough term, with enough to differentate it from either "blaster" or "turbolaser".

Right. I figured that lasers were fighter-sized/"caliber" turbolasers (not coherent light, but just a jargon word for what comes out of a SW gun barrel), but I wasn't sure if maybe blaster cannon used a different operating function, since they seem to be specifically used in an atmosphere/on land vehicles.

<snip>
Hand blasters (up to rifle size): z-x
Heavy blasters (about E-web to snowspeeder weapon size): x-u
Laser cannons (starfighter-size, small turrets): u-c
Turbolasers: c-a

So it is entirely based on the size or output of the weapon?

There are probably a few exceptional weapons, such as the "superlaser" turrets used on the LAAT's in AOTC, but I'm not sure where those would go...

Yeah, where do those fit in? And is there an in-SW-universe term for the beam weapons used to down TF ships in AOTC? Are they blasters with sustained fire or maybe modified superlasers?

I think they look just like the beam weapons that the Japanese Defense Force is always using on Godzilla to corral him into power lines and volcanoes and such.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

Well they aren't the same since we know Turbolaser is lightspeed weapon while a blaster is not.

What scenes give us that information? I thought blasters and TLs were both slower than light.

[Lord of the Farce]

Well they aren't the same since we know Turbolaser is lightspeed weapon while a blaster is not.

What scenes give us that information? I thought blasters and TLs were both slower than light.

IIRC, both has demonstrated the target-hit-before-bolt-arrive property, though it does seem to be rarer among blasters.

As for the LAAT's guns, I would say that they are scaled down version of the superlaser, though too small to see the pulses like you can with the full scale version.

[Mad]

The distinction may be more than just power-level. Turbolaser bolts and fighter laser bolts have been shown to be re-aimed while still in flight (the bolt changes course for no discernable reason). Nobody has shown evidence of hand-blaster bolts doing this, however. Turbolasers have been described as lightspeed weapons and there is evidence to support this, while evidence shows (or at least very strongly suggests) that hand-blasters are distinctly slower-than-light weapons.

This has been discussed rather recently in several threads (one of the more recent being the "Blaster bolt speed" thread).

On the other hand, the distinction may be power-level related, but the terms being used to describe a range of related weaponry (with the STL and lightspeed weapons somehow being considered "related"). I believe somebody noted snowspeeder blaster bolt redirection, for instance, though I'm not sure.

[Elheru Aran]

Right. I figured that lasers were fighter-sized/"caliber" turbolasers (not coherent light, but just a jargon word for what comes out of a SW gun barrel), but I wasn't sure if maybe blaster cannon used a different operating function, since they seem to be specifically used in an atmosphere/on land vehicles.

Well, I think the Guide to Vehicles and Vessels, by Bill Smith, describes some small ships as having "blaster cannons", but I generally take the Essential Guides with a very large grain of salt, seeing as they're mainly inspired by the WEG stats. I don't really think blaster cannons use a different projectile or whatever; the only difference is in power, and possibly in guiding the shots (although I don't believe I recall seeing shots change direction... I've never watched the movies on DVD though, so I don't know).

So it is entirely based on the size or output of the weapon?

Well, I don't know for sure, but as a rule of thumb, yeah. However, bear in mind that this may not be entirely accurate-- for example, snowspeeder guns are at least as long as X-wing laser cannons, but they obviously have less power. It just depends on the particular weapon, is all, I reckon...

Of course, it's obvious enough that as size goes up, so also does power and amount of damage, but this only applies to the cannons. Hand blasters can have plenty of damage per shot despite their size; Han's blaster isn't much bigger than a large pistol, but it can blow out the proverbial torso-sized chunks in concrete. Other hand blasters, despite being larger than Han's gun, have less power (stormtrooper carbines). But when one thinks about it, it makes sense-- some pistols have more power than many rifles (Desert Eagles, for instance). Han's a smuggler; he needs to be certain that his shots will get a guy down, and keep him down. There's a pretty good bit on hand blaster power in Darth Wong's main site.

As for the rest of your questions, well, what's this board for but providing answers, eh?

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Actually, the website this board is attached to is for answering questions.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

Actually, the website this board is attached to is for answering questions.

Whoa! Zing!

How icily precise you are.

(No insult intended. I have read the site... about a year ago.... so I suppose it was dumb of me to ask...)

[Howedar]

In all fairness though, Mike's section on turbolaser nature and operation is probably overdue by several revisions. Due to new data and new theories, current opinion on the board does not jive with the main site.

Unless there was a phantom update I missed.

[Slartibartfast]

I think they're the same thing, just bigger, and I like the theory that the "bolt" is just some sort of thingy that goes along the trail of the beam, which isn't instant (just like a Star Trek "phaser" only the beam is invisible except for a section of it at a time), kinda explaining the inconsistency of damage before/after the bolt, which might depend on the resilience of the target.

[vakundok]

Off topic question: Couldn't be the TL damage before/after hit explained only by movie inperfection, like the lightsabre damage before hit in RotJ?

[McC]

Off topic question: Couldn't be the TL damage before/after hit explained only by movie inperfection, like the lightsabre damage before hit in RotJ?

Nope. The SoD hounds are going to come down on you very hard for this Basically, thanks to SoD, we must accept the frame-by-frame presentation as exactly what happened, not an error (which we understand it probably is in the real world). As such, any theory must incorporate this damage-before-impact thing. I actually had an STL thought on why we might see damage-before-impact, but I promised not to post anything that actually contributes to the debate until I came back with my analyzed footage of all blaster/laser fire sequences in the entire saga, which I've only been able to make a very tiny amount of time for thus far. So, I'll tell you later.

[Darth Wong]

Nope. The SoD hounds are going to come down on you very hard for this Basically, thanks to SoD, we must accept the frame-by-frame presentation as exactly what happened, not an error (which we understand it probably is in the real world).

Which "real world" is this? One in which the special effects technicians did not construct those effects frame-by-frame, even though we know they did?

You make it sound as if those effects were created in real-time, and were "never meant" to be examined frame by frame. They were CREATED frame by frame, you moron.

[vakundok]

Nope. The SoD hounds are going to come down on you very hard for this Basically, thanks to SoD, we must accept the frame-by-frame presentation as exactly what happened, not an error (which we understand it probably is in the real world). As such, any theory must incorporate this damage-before-impact thing. I actually had an STL thought on why we might see damage-before-impact, but I promised not to post anything that actually contributes to the debate until I came back with my analyzed footage of all blaster/laser fire sequences in the entire saga, which I've only been able to make a very tiny amount of time for thus far. So, I'll tell you later.

Thanks for the answer and good luck to your project.
frame 1
frame 2
frame 3
frame 4

[McC]

Which "real world" is this? One in which the special effects technicians did not construct those effects frame-by-frame, even though we know they did?

You make it sound as if those effects were created in real-time, and were "never meant" to be examined frame by frame. They were CREATED frame by frame, you moron.

Replace error with imprecise if you want. Unless someone from the ILM crew specifically comes out and says, "Yeah, we meant for there to be a lag," I'm going to chock it up to putting in the effect a bit imprecisely. Unless you want to argue that ILM conciously said, "Okay, we want it to blow up before the bolt gets there and we want it to purposely redirect." The redirect argument, IMO, is even more obviously an effects "hiccup" than the damage-before-impact bit. The DBI is harder to explain as a hiccup, since one would assume they'd just reverse-roto the frames from the flash point back in order to paint the effect on. Unless they did something funny with the way they composited everything together...

Incidentally, they weren't ever meant to be examined frame by frame. They were created that way, but they weren't meant to be watched that way. No effects artist builds effects with the thinking that they'll be examined frame-by-frame. Why would they? Most people watch movies at 24 (or 25 or 30) fps. The number of people who actually do anything frame-by-frame is ludicrously small.

And I know how they were created, "you moron." I don't question your credibility in materials science because of your qualifications, so I'm fairly insulted that you'd implicate that I don't know what I'm talking about with visual effects when I've been doing effects-type stuff for seven and a half years, Mike. Ditch the moron shit because I'm not just some wanker who's making crap up -- I do this kind of stuff. It's what I've done for years before college and it's what I'm doing now in college.

[Illuminatus Primus]

On the other hand, the distinction may be power-level related, but the terms being used to describe a range of related weaponry (with the STL and lightspeed weapons somehow being considered "related"). I believe somebody noted snowspeeder blaster bolt redirection, for instance, though I'm not sure.

The view from Luke's snowspeeder as it strafes the AT-AT.

Almost all cases of fightercraft weaponry are akin to turbolasers. Slave 1 seems to be the exception.

[His Divine Shadow]

Slave-1 is an exception? Could you indicate more closely where so I could take a look?