Speed of a Blaster Bolt

[defanatic]

Okay... So how fast is a blaster bolt from a droid handgun or an E-11 blaster? Slower than light? Can we get a definite speed in metres a second? Has this already been discussed?

Sorry if this is common information, BTW.

[Murazor]

Considering that turbolasers are supposed to be just upscaled blasters with tibanna gas being some kind of tracer, the canonicity of the ICS lightspeed turbolasers and assorted evidence, I think that the official reply is that the damaging parts of blaster bolts moves at c.

[NoXion]

Considering that turbolasers are supposed to be just upscaled blasters with tibanna gas being some kind of tracer, the canonicity of the ICS lightspeed turbolasers and assorted evidence, I think that the official reply is that the damaging parts of blaster bolts moves at c.

Really? Then how are Jedi able to deflect blaster bolts, considering that they have to move their lightsabre to deflect the actual bolt? Surely they would be instantly fried no matter how superhumanly fast their reflexes are? It gets even worse when you have multiple bolts being fired at you from different directions (I'm thinking of the battle in the arena on Geonosis)

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Precognition.

[NoXion]

Precognition.

But footage clearly shows them being fired at, not being being hurt, then deflecting the visible bolt - even with procognition, you still need to move to deflect a bolt, and I've never seen evidence that Jedi can move at C.

Edited to add: Even better, we see battledroids being hit by deflected blaster bolts, and no damage occurs until the bolt actually hits. And the bolts obviously do not travel at C.

[weemadando]

Indeed - I agree that turbolasers do travel at c, but the over-whelming amount of visual evidence would seem to indicate that blaster bolts don't.

[nickolay1]

Blaster bolts appear to have speeds less than or approximately equal to those of typical modern bullets.

[defanatic]

Hmm... I'll get a DVD and find the distance between a blaster bolt in two frames, and the number of frames a second. From there, I can work out the approximate speed.

[Ghost Rider]

It's sad that HDS no loneger has the site up, but the calcs have garnered from the low end a blaster goes about 150 m/s to 1500m/s within the movies.

The low marker I believe was the speed within ANH, the High is with AoTC.

[Elheru Aran]

Small question relating to the above: Do the speeds vary with the same weapon (i.e., shots from Han's gun move slower in one scene than they do in another), or do they seem to have different speeds per weapon (i.e., clonetrooper rifle generally shoots faster than stormtrooper blaster, that kind of thing)? Just curious, as this could indicate (possibly) that blaster bolt speeds are adjustable...

[Cykeisme]

Since many blasters apparently have variable power settings, perhaps bolt propogation velocity is related to the power setting? Unfortunately I don't have the means for analysing this myself..

I'd reckon that bolt speed was simply dependent on the particular weapon, though.

[Lord Sabre Ace]

Since many blasters apparently have variable power settings, perhaps bolt propogation velocity is related to the power setting? Unfortunately I don't have the means for analysing this myself..

I'd reckon that bolt speed was simply dependent on the particular weapon, though.

Like the muzzle velocity of a pistol vs the muzzle velocity of a rifle.

[defanatic]

WIth or without a suppressor, to simulate different power settings.

[Gil Hamilton]

Small question relating to the above: Do the speeds vary with the same weapon (i.e., shots from Han's gun move slower in one scene than they do in another), or do they seem to have different speeds per weapon (i.e., clonetrooper rifle generally shoots faster than stormtrooper blaster, that kind of thing)? Just curious, as this could indicate (possibly) that blaster bolt speeds are adjustable...

The problem is that Clonetrooper Blasters also shoot slow moving bolts when the target is standing right in front of them. Plenty of examples in RotS, but what comes to mind immediately is Aayla Secura being back shot by her Clonies and you could easily see the blaster bolt travel in a distinct time, even though they were standing right over her.

[Shroom Man 777]

The rifles and pistols could be "smart". Not surprising though, given their tech level.

[Gil Hamilton]

The rifles and pistols could be "smart". Not surprising though, given their tech level.

That begs the question of "Why bother?". Making a gun that shoots slower when the target is closer seems needlessly complicated and even unhelpful.

[Elheru Aran]

You're forgetting Occam's Razor there, Shroomie...

[The Silence and I]

Well let's see here, blasters are clearly not c propagating, have variable velocities--based on distance to target--are fired from a hollow barrel, have a well-synched (mostly) relationship between visible bolt and damaging component, bounce of grass at times, shiny metallic surfaces at others, are sometimes translucent, sometimes opaque, sometimes uniform in bolt shape, sometimes exhibiting thick/brighter blotches along the bolt's length, appear to damage thermally, don't heat the air much, at times travel slower than bullets but don't drop in a gravity field, etc. And people call phasers funky weapons

My personal theory is that they are something of a mix between a particle weapon and a projectile weapon. Due to the common availability of materials with funky properties I'd not be too far fetched I hope in assuming there are materials that can be made to rapidly store large quantities of energy and then do something with it. In the TPM ICS (IIRC) there is mention of energetically charged bullets fired by the Droid Tanks. They appear much or just like blaster bolts and are more damaging that a bullet with the same shape, mass and speed due to the energy field around it. Proton Torpedoes and Concussion Missiles also exhibit similar visual effects due to an energy field around them (perhaps some form of shielding). The mechanism used in the bullets is arguable very simple and cheap to mass produce, so why not scale it down to the size of a hand blaster? If you have a very small "bullet" charged just before launch emitting a short duration but powerful flavor of ray shield you would have a low recoil (low mass projectile) bullet that does thermal damage. We know that anti gravity technology can be scaled down (it is based on very small particles IIRC) quite a bit, especially if you go for one-time use, limited functionality (essentially programed to maintain straight flight--going up consumes power, but nothing noticeable).

So you have a tiny bullet in your magazine which is pumped full of energy when the trigger is squeezed. The "simple" machinery creates an energy field around the bullet and energizes the antigrav particles. A range finder tells the gun how far the shot has to go, and if the distance is great then less energy goes to the bullet's battery and more to its kinetic energy, and vice versa. In the event the energy field strikes an object of the right nature at the correct angle nothing happens and the physical bullet strikes the object, bouncing off its energy field unperturbed. Some bullet models generate an energy field that vibrates somewhat randomly, creating bulges in the bolt we see, others don't. Some energy fields are opaque for reasons best left to the scientists of Star Wars, and for similar reasons some fields bend light (poorly) around the projectile, creating the illusion that nothing is inside the translucent bolt.

I think I've covered all the bases except the example of damage before impact we see with Luke's hand in ROTJ. I'm willing and eager to call that a mistake by the effects team...

Any dang way, this theory probably makes Occam cry bloody tears but I have never seen a simpler theory that, you know, works. I think what I've proposed is possible, given other examples of technology, but I am not oblivious to the fact it sounds kinda complicated what with mini shield generators and anit grav snuggled in a bullet sized object, to say nothing of the battery and the likelyhood the bullet is smaller than the barrel diameter suggests (it is hard to fit dozens to hundreds of bullets that size in a gun that size).

So uh, this was supposed to be an explanation why a blaster might want to fire slower shots at closer targets (more energy to give the bullet's mechanisms which for whatever reason is a better trade off than putting it into KE). I had to provide a background for my reason though, hence the above. Sorry about the length...

[defanatic]

I remember reading somewhere that blasters shot ionisaed gasses. Which would probably shorten their range quite a bit (dissipation?). Ah well. However, let's say at 100 metres, how fast does it go (find each blaster bolt and how far it went, and average). But first, I'm going to have to get the movies.

[Noble Ire]

I remember reading somewhere that blasters shot ionisaed gasses.

That is suggested at least by the old EG for Weapons and tech. It shows a blaster pistol with a clip of volitile gas rather than projectiles.

Which would probably shorten their range quite a bit (dissipation?).

The fact that blaster aren't glorified flame-throwers indicates that they have found a way of containing and stabilizing the bolts. They may disipate, but probably not quickly enough to make them less range-effective than a bullet.

[Stark]

Blaster bolts don't dissipate onscreen. Whatever they are is robust enough to survive being deflected without major upset. Plasma weapons are easily one of the stupidest ideas ever, and since there is evidence that blaster bolts don't have mass, they are clearly not fucking plasma. It's easily arguable (for the EU completists) that tibanna is used in blasters (cooling, power, etc) but isn't fired.

What's the current TL theory on different speeds for different ranges? Clearly non-SoD we're looking bolts taking similar time-to-target regardless of actual range, but there doesn't seem to be any sensible reason in-universe. Perhaps blasters are more exotic than they appear and bolts take approximately the same time, regardless of distance?

[Connor MacLeod]

The rifles and pistols could be "smart". Not surprising though, given their tech level.

That begs the question of "Why bother?". Making a gun that shoots slower when the target is closer seems needlessly complicated and even unhelpful.

Peharps they reduce the velocity to decrease recoil, and to allow for the possibility of increased ROF (they only seem to use "auto fire" when its fairly close as it is, anyhow.) Longer-range shots already appear to be semi-automatic as it is (the REbel blaster rifles on Hoth or the Clone rifles on Geonosis, both of which are multi-km ranges and hypersonic velocities.)

Edit: Lets not forget Zam Wessel's rifle.

[Connor MacLeod]

Anyhow, I get a little tired of having to repeat the same idea over and over when it crops up. There are more than one kind of blaster weapon. Some are massless beams, some are particle/plasma beams, and some are projectiles. There's more than enough ample evidence onscreen and off for each, even if they appear to have the same glowy visible effect. And this goes for personal weapons, vehicle/ground artillery, and fighter/capital ship weaponry.

[Stark]

Thats a good example: Wessels weapon fired a guided projectile, but it appeared the same as a regular blaster bolt.

[Cykeisme]

Peharps they reduce the velocity to decrease recoil

This makes sense.. since blasters do appear to have recoil, it would make sense that the velocity of the bolt (regardless of its nature) would be related to the recoil impulse, yes?