Step 1: Prior to TNG, during an era of extended peace, the "peace dividend" is used to convert Starfleet to an essentially non-military role, so that capital warships will eventually be reduced to ignominious tasks such as ferrying VIP's from place to place like glorified interstellar limousines (I'm not making this up; watch TNG).
Step 2: As part of the "peace dividend", huge numbers and varieties of weapons from Kirk's era are retired. Starfleet standardizes on a handful of hand phasers.
Step 3: Military planners (none of whom were old enough to live through the last war and many of whom are openly contemptuous of the generation that did) co-operate with designers (all of whom are scientists rather than engineers or end-users) to design a new generation of weapon which will make any individual Federation soldier into a walking, self-contained infantry squad. This weapon will combine anti-personnel, crowd control, light demolition, and auto-targeting capabilities into a compact package. Older critics angrily denounce the new weapon as an unreliable, overcomplicated toy with inadequate ammunition capacity and inferior performance compared to specialized weapons and devices. They are dismissed as "hawks" who do not understand the new astro-politics and the new face of Starfleet.
Step 4: For many years, this approach seems to bear up, for the simple reason that Starfleet troops rarely engage in ground combat.
Step 5: As the Dominion War begins, the longstanding complaints of front-line personnel about weapon unreliability and performance begin to mount up. It is even rumoured that during the Bajoran War of Independence, Bajoran rebels preferred not to use the Federation weapons that were secretly smuggled to them. Apparently, the auto-targeting system rarely works in the field, and its propensity for firing off-axis at the wrong target or being confused in high-ECM environments is being increasingly blamed for preventable casualties.
Step 6: Starfleet starts deploying weapons which shoot straight, and whose continuous-fire capability has been removed or made optional in favour of burst-firing which is not as wasteful of ammunition.
I can see where Alyeska's coming from: this scenario is not inconceivable. It implies great stupidity on the part, but people can be stupid, so this is hardly unreasonable.
I hestitate to call auto-targeting useles, or at least completely useless. However the above speculation fits the observed information and is reasonably well thought out.
I myself would like to create a nice speculation bit on the phasers, however just as the above we don't really have anything directly supporting this, just indirect information. I REALLY would like to get some military competent person to write a manual for Trek weapons and redesign them for beyond Nemesis.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Alyeska wrote:I REALLY would like to get some military competent person to write a manual for Trek weapons and redesign them for beyond Nemesis.
Assuming that the Trek franchise survives 'Nemesis'
"everytime a person is born the Earth weighs just a little more."--DMJ on StarTrek.com
"You see now you are using your thinking and that is not a good thing!" DMJay on StarTrek.com
"Watching Sarli argue with Vympel, Stas, Schatten and the others is as bizarre as the idea of the 40-year-old Virgin telling Hugh Hefner that Hef knows nothing about pussy, and that he is the expert."--Elfdart
TNG-era pistol phasers are about the most un-ergonomic weapons to aim. At least my phaser TV-Remote doesn't aim well.
What the trek prop guys need to do is what the Star Wars prop guys did.
Take existing real weapons and 'dress them up'.
Then you don't have to worry about sights. They're already on the weapon.
Ergonomics are already taken care of.
It looks like a weapon instead of a toy.
You don't have to worry about keeping track of the props between movies. You just rent the guns and dress them up again.
Holsters and accessories are commercially available and don't have to be made up specifically for the movie.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."- General Sir Charles Napier
Darth Wong wrote:You have to think about the logic of this thing: if the auto-targeting system exists, then how can it be so shitty as to miss an object the size of a man from a range of 20 metres?
This "off-axis" firing doesn't prove auto-targeting: we know that phaser emitters can do that (from shipboard emitters), and so it either indicates an absolutely horrendous auto-targeting system, or a weapon with poor construction quality control.
This thing, if it existed, might actually be a detriment to a competent soldier. He could conceivably point it directly at someone, and the piece of shit gun might fire at some blinking light behind him. Worse yet, the enemy might figure out how to scramble its sensors so the Feddies are all aiming and missing. I can just see it now: "I had him lined up, but it fired off to the right! WTF?!?!?"
PS. How do you tell it what to target?
Mike, you just asked a very good question that also raises a question with one of your own ideas. How to target it? How does the user tell the rifle to fire off axis like you suggest they do? When its been done that way, we have seen them apparently busy just fighting.
And yes, there have been misses. But at the same time, they are showing greater then 50% accuracy. Yes, they do miss, however they HIT more often then not. And its concievable that such jamming or other things could be incorperated, but that is why the rifles have all had a sight of one sort or another for back up use.
Mike asked a very good question indeed about how to tell the weapon what to target. But it could be something along the lines of eye position sensing, a technology which is currently available:
So perhaps the user of the "rifle" could select his target by eye in the scope/viewfinder, and the weapon would then know what the target was?
The matter of the <100% hit rate could be explained by saying that the user had not been sufficiently trained in the use of this technology. Obviously an eye-controlled targetting system would have to be learned by the operator to avoid haphazard targetting. He would need to be very focussed under stressful battle conditions to employ it properly.
May the Force be with you, and remain with you... always.
I finally got a hold of the quote from Kira in the DS9 episode Return to Grace in which she describes the Type-3 rifle.
“Now this is an entirely different animal. It's Federation standard issue. A little less powerful, but with more options... sixteen beam settings... fully autonomous recharge... multiple target acquisition... gyrostablized... the works..”
This explains both the high accuracy, the ability to fire while moving the rifle, and the off-axis beam shots from the emitter.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
(Edit) This is my most updated version of the essay.
Ok, this is my first essay of sorts on my analysis of the technology shown in Nemesis. For this particular essay I shall be detailing the Type-3 phaser rifle seen in the movie.
First some history is required. There are a variety of phaser rifles that have been shown in Star Trek since TNG and they have a variety of capabilities. The first rifle of note is the Type-3 rifle. This rifle was first seen in TNG and has made more appearances in DS9 then it did in TNG. This rifle seems to be an extension on the Type-2 design currently in use with the same firepower, but greater power storage. The main way to aim the rifle seems to be through a flip-up scope. To assist with aiming the rifle could also have a flashlight attached, though it conflicted with the scope. The somewhat strange thing is that most people did not seem to use this scope, but they still maintained a relatively high level of accuracy when firing against enemies even as far away as 100 meters. This is somewhat explained in the DS9 episode Return to Grace. Major Kira explains to Tora Zial (Dukats daughter) that the Cardassian phaser rifle is a very rugged but useful weapon to use with only two power settings. She then goes on to describe the Type-3 phaser rifle: “Now this is an entirely different animal. It's Federation standard issue. A little less powerful, but with more options... sixteen beam settings... fully autonomous recharge... multiple target acquisition... gyrostablized... the works..” It has 16 power settings as well as auto targeting features. This would indicate that the rifle can aim for itself and that would actually explain why beams fired from Type-3 rifles do not always line up on axis with the weapon itself. The last thing known about the Type-3 is that it is a relatively simple and rugged design. Simple in that it is smaller and uses fewer systems then newer rifles, rugged in that it seems capable of taking relatively high levels of abuse. This is shown when the weapon is used to deflect bladed weapons by both Klingons and Jem’Hadar. Because of these two high points it seems this is why the Type-3 is still in production or heavy use even with the existence of the Type-3a and Type-3b rifles.
The next rifle is that of the Compression Phaser Rifle. This rifle has been shown to fire both pulses and beams. For the purpose of this essay we will refer to it as the Type-3VGR because of its appearance on that series. We saw it for the most part on Voyager, limited views in VGR Message in a Bottle, and to an extent also on the Equinox as well. The USS Equinox was lost before Voyager (had to because it was also abducted by Caretaker). We see the Type-3vgr on the Equinox while we see the Type-3VGR as well as the Type-3a and Type-3b on Voyager. The Type-3VGR seems to be made with combat in mind while the Type-3 is more general use for not just in combat. Its rare use and only being put on certain ships indicates that this is possibly a prototype weapon.
Next is the Type-3a. This rifle was first seen in First Contact and has also been shown on VGR. This particular weapon is listed in the DS9 TM as a Compression phaser rifle. This is supported by the fact that we have only ever seen it fire pulse shots. However given that both the Type-3VGR and the Type-3b rifles fire both pulses and beams, it seems much more likely this rifle can fire both. It seems to be a much more heavily combat orientated design, possibly a production model over the Type-3VGR. The rifle features such things as a combo scope and flashlight as well as retracting sling and a trigger guard.
The newest rifle before Nemesis is the Type-3b. This rifle as stated by the DS9 TM “The type-3b also boasts a new seeker/tracker, possessing both passive and active EM and subspace detectors.” Combined with the previous information it would seem part of how Phaser Rifles work is that they use some sort of auto tracking capability and that the Type-3b has the best auto tracking capability. The rifle looks visually similar to that of the Type-3a, but has a different barrel to the weapon that is smoother and more rounded, also somewhat smaller. This rifle also has performance differences. In VGR this rifle has been shown to fire beams while in First Contact and Insurrection it fired pulses. At first I would have written this off to being a VFX mistake but then Nemesis changed this. The Reman rifle in Nemesis fired both pulses and beams. This is two completely different weapons have similar properties. I am inclined to agree now that the Type-3b is a multi use rifle that can fire both beams and pulses. This would also be why the Type-3b is not listed as a Compression rifle while the Type-3a was. It would seem that design properties were combined from the Type-3 and Type-3a into the Type-3b. It should be noted that the Type-3a, 3b, and 3VGR all had to have a similar design period and construction with maybe a few months separating them for Voyager to have had a stock of the 3b and 3VGR. Something else should be noted about the Type-3a and 3b designs. They can take sustained shock damage from close combat when smashing them against Borg drones with Klingon level strength or using them to smash combat drones like the Sona use while the rifle shows no visible damage.
The newest rifle shown is that in Nemesis. Upon first inspection the rifle seems identical to the Type-3b except it has a targeting sight. However there are enough differences that this should be considered a new subclass just as the 3b is to the 3a. This rifle for now will be called the Type-3c. The Type-3c has one immediately obvious difference from the 3b. This rifle now sports a red targeting sight positioned behind and slightly above the flashlight. Also the Flashlight is of a new and seemingly more powerful design as its shape has changed to allow a larger flashlight point. The less obvious changes are the power and charge indicators on top of the rifle just behind the flashlight. There also seems to be a battery charger handle that is pulled to “cock” the rifle. Possibly this has to do with the power clip or is merely a way to check that the rifle is fully powered. Additionally the rifle has a slightly altered emittion tip. First looking at the rifle one would think that targeting sight is for a backup somewhat similar to the Type-3 incase the targeting capabilities are compromised. However combat performance of the rifle indicates this is either untrue or the rifle has altered capabilities for that particular combat. Throughout the movie Nemesis the Type-3c was seen in combat twice and both times it had similar shown capabilities. The rifle was firing a slightly different looking pulse and had a different sound then the 3b did in Insurrection and First Contact. Additionally the rifle was firing at much higher rates of fire. The most shown was a three shot burst in the space of less then a second. The rifle also did not have the accuracy levels of ANY of the previous rifles. There are three possible explanations for this. The first is that the auto targeting feature was removed to allow for greater refire. This explains why the red sight was installed. The second is that auto targeting can not be used with the high refire rate, which again is why the red sight was installed. The third option is that the Type-3c is a shipboard model of the phaser rifle. Accurate fire is very important for longer range combat whereas close combat uses higher rates of fire. An example of this is the MP5 compared to the M-16. High rates of fire can cause the enemy to take cover allowing you to advance. Any option seems reasonable, though I am inclined to go with the third because the rifle is used for the most part on the ship itself. It seems they traded off one capability for another. If this is the case then its likely the 3b is still a main production model and this is merely another variant rifle for different uses. Another thing should be noted in Nemesis is that Picard used the 3c to hit a Reman over the head twice. The rifle broke cleanly in half and was bent at a bad angle. Possible explanations for this is a faulty weapon because of a random flaw in the construction. This seems plausible because faults do happen by accident. The other is that when the rifle went into main production cheaper materials were used. However the second is unlikely for two reasons. Compared to other governments the Federation seems obsessed with safety and they have an insane number of safety measures, like 2nd emergency coupling and the sort. It seems unlikely they would compromise the design this way. Secondly is that this is a new design variant off the other rifle and it does not seem to be in full production yet so the design can not yet be altered. Its possible this design is even in testing still.
As a end note there is one last rifle. This is the Type-3EVA as I call it. This rifle was also featured in First Contact. Its design follows the Type-3a more closely, except this rifle has been optimized for EVA type combat. It has a forward grip to allow for easier aiming and quicker use. The trigger guard has been removed. There is no sling, and the stock has been “hollowed” out. There are also two magnetic points on the rifle that allow it to be placed down in a zero-G environment. Other then the mostly cosmetic outer changes its operational patterns are identical to the Type-3a.
Further end note. The DS9 TM states that the Bajoran Phaser rifle are technologically similar to Starfleet units. Given that for the majority of DS9 the Type-3s were used and Bajoran weapons never fired pulses, the comparison seems clear. As stated by the DS9 TM: “The Rifle also contains a seeker/tracker, which operates primarily on IR and amplified biogenic fields. During the occupation, some early rifle units were outfitted with target discriminators: Bajoran fighters using coded biogenic transponders, in theory, would not be hit by friendly fire.” The implication of this statement is quite clear. Bajoran weapons used Friend/Foe systems as well as varying targeting programs. These rifles are stated similar to the Type-3s. The 3a, and 3b are more advanced then the Type-3 and likely have superior capabilities in this regard. This would explain the high accuracy of the 3a and 3b rifles even when fired from the hip.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Darth Wong wrote:Older critics angrily denounce the new weapon as an unreliable, overcomplicated toy with inadequate ammunition capacity and inferior performance compared to specialized weapons and devices.
Pretty much what Kira thought of Federation phasers in DS9...
Edit:
Oh I see you covered that part too
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
Alyeska wrote:I finally got a hold of the quote from Kira in the DS9 episode Return to Grace in which she describes the Type-3 rifle.
“Now this is an entirely different animal. It's Federation standard issue. A little less powerful, but with more options... sixteen beam settings... fully autonomous recharge... multiple target acquisition... gyrostablized... the works..”
This explains both the high accuracy, the ability to fire while moving the rifle, and the off-axis beam shots from the emitter.
Didn't she also say it was too loaded with complicated crap that made the rifle unreliable?
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
Alyeska wrote:I finally got a hold of the quote from Kira in the DS9 episode Return to Grace in which she describes the Type-3 rifle.
“Now this is an entirely different animal. It's Federation standard issue. A little less powerful, but with more options... sixteen beam settings... fully autonomous recharge... multiple target acquisition... gyrostablized... the works..”
This explains both the high accuracy, the ability to fire while moving the rifle, and the off-axis beam shots from the emitter.
Didn't she also say it was too loaded with complicated crap that made the rifle unreliable?
No. She was saying that for a rugged weapon the Cardassian weapon was better. Because of their use in the resistance. For a properly supplied ground assault the Type-3 works just fine (as evidence in multiple episodes).
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Alyeska wrote:Actually the Jem'Hadar had both rifles and pistols. And you can tell its 100+ yards because you see the formations that they are near to, then you see from the Jem'Hadar position. The range was very far.
FYI you might have to remove the http:// from the picture to view it.
Because the first shots were all forward and put up a cloud of dust that made it difficult to see through. Then the next 6 shots were directly on target and 5 of them hit perfectly while the 6th missed by a bare margin. You don't have three different people all miss teribly, then suddenly score perfect on the next shot.
But you do have three different auto-aiming systems all miss terribly, then hit on the next shot? If this is an auto-aiming system, it must require a calibration shot, which does not speak well of its quality of manufacture.
Ok, I just viewed it in detail. We see a total of ten approaching the area, though we only see nine in the charge. I am going to assume one of them was the Vorta who wanted to live. Anyway with the 9 charging, we see 13 shots fired. The first two miss causing a large cloud of dust. Then we see three people fire four shots but no view on the targets. Then we see 5 remaining Jem'Hadar attacking and 6 shots rain down on them killing the 5. Then someone shoots one of the dead Jem'Hadar for good measure.
The first two people who missed shot at very similar locations. There was a large rock there so it could be they were trying to blow it up to cause dust. Regardless, I do not think it was a calibration shot. If you can use autotargeting, it stands to reason you can go without it as well. But if you want we can factor in these two misses. We have one more miss durring the battle, then we have a over zealous person firing on a dead Jem'Hadar, but that takes accuracy to do that. So we have 10 hits and 3 misses. Thats an average of 77%.
If your gonna miss your target on the first shot, your gonna miss your target on the second shot.
And how does this fit in with "auto-aiming?"
I was pointing out that it is very unusual for two different weapons to miss at the same location. It seems much more plausible that they were firing at the dirt to cause a distraction in the Jem'Hadars vission.
Regardless, if they were trully missing then the three shots should have been spread out, as in infront, inbetween, behind, to the side, etc... Instead the first 3-4 shots were all fired foward putting up a significant cloud and then the rest of the shots were perfect or almost perfect.
They miss half their shots, but the ones that hit are "perfect"? It's amazing how you can achieve perfection through selective analysis.
Well I just gave you the full run down on the entire combat sequence this time. 13 shots, 10 hits.
As for the drones in Insurrection, please post an estimate of their range. "Far" isn't very useful.
Thats going to take a bit, give me some time.
The range evidence from "Rocks and Shoals" would also be useful. A shot of O'Brien's face does not exactly help us establish range.
Already posted above.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
OK, in the picture Nog is about 24 times bigger than the JH. If we assume a JH is twice as tall as Nog in that position, this means they're about 50 times farther away from the camera than Nog is. So what's the distance between the camera and Nog?
More to the point, is it possible to be that accurate with those guns from that range despite not using them properly? Contrary to your description, they're not literally firing from the hip; O'Brien and Nog both hold them up and attempt to sight down the barrels, as best they can given the limited ergonomics. How much skill would it take to score hits at 100 metres that way?
And how do you know how exactly many shots were fired and missed, given the camera changes?
PS. What would be the point of hitting the rock in front of them in order to blind their vision, unless the JH are limited to the Mark 1 Eyeball rather than fancy toys in their guns for "target acquisition?" And if they're limited in that manner, why were they able to score a kill despite their inferior tactical position?
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Darth Wong wrote:OK, in the picture Nog is about 24 times bigger than the JH. If we assume a JH is twice as tall as Nog in that position, this means they're about 50 times farther away from the camera than Nog is. So what's the distance between the camera and Nog?
Given Nog's small stature, I would say maybe a couple feet away.
More to the point, is it possible to be that accurate with those guns from that range despite not using them properly? Contrary to your description, they're not literally firing from the hip; O'Brien and Nog both hold them up and attempt to sight down the barrels, as best they can given the limited ergonomics. How much skill would it take to score hits at 100 metres that way?
Firing a weapon without a working sight is almost impossible. You would be lucky to hit a stationary target at 100 meters. O'Brien and Nog tried sighting down the barrel, but you can see by their angle that its going to be a hapazard sighting at best. If they were trully firing by their skill, their accuracy would have been abismal.
And how do you know how exactly many shots were fired and missed, given the camera changes?
When there was a camera change I timed between the shots before and imediately after the camera change. There are two shots we see fired, then we switch to the Jem'Hadar and two shots come in with the same time lag. From there it switches back to the Starfleet forces and we see 4 shots fired with varrying time lags, then we go back to the Jem'Hadar and we see 5 remaining Jem'Hadar and 7 more ships that don't match the previous 4 on time. So we get to see the start and end of two of the shots, but the rest are portrayed either at their firing, or their impact, not both.
PS. What would be the point of hitting the rock in front of them in order to blind their vision, unless the JH are limited to the Mark 1 Eyeball rather than fancy toys in their guns for "target acquisition?" And if they're limited in that manner, why were they able to score a kill despite their inferior tactical position?
The Jem'Hadar weapons have never shown the same capabilities as the Federation Type-3. Indeed when Kira was stating the difference between the Cardassian rifle and the Type-3 she said the Cardassian weapon has two settings and is rugged, then she went in detail on the Type-3. The Federation seems to have superior ground weapons in certain aspects. And as to scoring a kill. Those 9 Jem'Hadar fired maybe close to two dozen shots. I should think there is a reasonable chance they would score a single lucky shot. Besides, Jem'Hadar rifles have sights.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Darth Wong wrote:OK, in the picture Nog is about 24 times bigger than the JH. If we assume a JH is twice as tall as Nog in that position, this means they're about 50 times farther away from the camera than Nog is. So what's the distance between the camera and Nog?
Given Nog's small stature, I would say maybe a couple feet away.
Which would mean that the JH were perhaps 40 metres away, not 100 metres away.
Firing a weapon without a working sight is almost impossible. You would be lucky to hit a stationary target at 100 meters. O'Brien and Nog tried sighting down the barrel, but you can see by their angle that its going to be a hapazard sighting at best. If they were trully firing by their skill, their accuracy would have been abismal.
How about at 40 metres? They were able to understand each other verbally at that range, which is a bit dicey at 100 metres.
When there was a camera change I timed between the shots before and imediately after the camera change. There are two shots we see fired, then we switch to the Jem'Hadar and two shots come in with the same time lag. From there it switches back to the Starfleet forces and we see 4 shots fired with varrying time lags, then we go back to the Jem'Hadar and we see 5 remaining Jem'Hadar and 7 more ships that don't match the previous 4 on time. So we get to see the start and end of two of the shots, but the rest are portrayed either at their firing, or their impact, not both.
So you're making some educated guesses that certain shots we see before a camera change are the same ones we see afterwards. I dunno, it doesn't seem all that conclusive to me.
PS. What would be the point of hitting the rock in front of them in order to blind their vision, unless the JH are limited to the Mark 1 Eyeball rather than fancy toys in their guns for "target acquisition?" And if they're limited in that manner, why were they able to score a kill despite their inferior tactical position?
The Jem'Hadar weapons have never shown the same capabilities as the Federation Type-3. Indeed when Kira was stating the difference between the Cardassian rifle and the Type-3 she said the Cardassian weapon has two settings and is rugged, then she went in detail on the Type-3. The Federation seems to have superior ground weapons in certain aspects. And as to scoring a kill. Those 9 Jem'Hadar fired maybe close to two dozen shots. I should think there is a reasonable chance they would score a single lucky shot.
It takes more than pure luck to hit a guy who's hiding most of his body behind a rock.
Besides, Jem'Hadar rifles have sights.
Did they use them?
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Darth Wong wrote:Which would mean that the JH were perhaps 40 metres away, not 100 metres away.
I am a experienced marksman and I can tell that is at least 100 meters. I asked another marksman and he rated it 150-180 yards.
How about at 40 metres? They were able to understand each other verbally at that range, which is a bit dicey at 100 metres.
It is possible to verbalize at 100 meters. And as I said, the range is longer then 40 meters.
So you're making some educated guesses that certain shots we see before a camera change are the same ones we see afterwards. I dunno, it doesn't seem all that conclusive to me.
Well if we count impacts we got 9 dead Jem'Hadar and only 8 shots fired at them with only 5 hits...
It takes more than pure luck to hit a guy who's hiding most of his body behind a rock.
Actually several of them were kneeling and much more in view. It is possible for 9 people charging an enemy at roughly 100 meters to hit a target.
Besides, Jem'Hadar rifles have sights.
Did they use them?
It seems several did.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Darth Wong wrote:Which would mean that the JH were perhaps 40 metres away, not 100 metres away.
I am a experienced marksman and I can tell that is at least 100 meters. I asked another marksman and he rated it 150-180 yards.
And the two of you normally practice marksmanship while looking through a camera at the target instead of using the naked eye? Sorry, but this attempt to appeal to your personal (and inapplicable) experience is invalid. Given your estimate of the distance to the camera and the size of the various entities onscreen, that was 40 metres. The camera would have to be almost 10 feet behind Nog for them to be 150 yards away.
So you're making some educated guesses that certain shots we see before a camera change are the same ones we see afterwards. I dunno, it doesn't seem all that conclusive to me.
Well if we count impacts we got 9 dead Jem'Hadar and only 8 shots fired at them with only 5 hits...
Except that you're still assuming the only shots fired are ones we see hitting in the scenes where the camera is on the Jem'Hadar, even though many more could have hit during the portions of the scene where the camera is on the Starfleet people. Look at the shot of O'Brien firing, for example; the camera shows him from the front, with the sky in background and no other crewmembers visible. How do you know how many shots are fired by both sides during that scene?
It takes more than pure luck to hit a guy who's hiding most of his body behind a rock.
Actually several of them were kneeling and much more in view. It is possible for 9 people charging an enemy at roughly 100 meters to hit a target.
Let me get this straight: you figure it's possible for a man charging and firing on the run to hit another man who is partially obscured with a non auto-aiming weapon, but it's impossible for people in a stastic ambush position to score 6 kills without "auto-aiming" at that same range?
Besides, Jem'Hadar rifles have sights.
Did they use them?
It seems several did.
Did you see them doing this? Or is this supposition? And how accurately can a man fire while on the run?
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Darth Wong wrote:And the two of you normally practice marksmanship while looking through a camera at the target instead of using the naked eye? Sorry, but this attempt to appeal to your personal (and inapplicable) experience is invalid. Given your estimate of the distance to the camera and the size of the various entities onscreen, that was 40 metres. The camera would have to be almost 10 feet behind Nog for them to be 150 yards away.
Given the size of the Jem'Hadar that is why I estimate their distance at being 100 meters. Moving back or forward 10 feet from Nog's position will still keep the size of the Jem'Hadar in the distance basicaly the same size. Those Jem'Hadar are cleary a long distance off. Having experience with range such as this and practical knowledge with being on a measured point (football field) and I know that people do not look that small at only 40 meters. 40 meters is around 120 feet and people won't look that small at that range.
Except that you're still assuming the only shots fired are ones we see hitting in the scenes where the camera is on the Jem'Hadar, even though many more could have hit during the portions of the scene where the camera is on the Starfleet people. Look at the shot of O'Brien firing, for example; the camera shows him from the front, with the sky in background and no other crewmembers visible. How do you know how many shots are fired by both sides during that scene?
You can count the shots by listening to them. The Type-3s are heard every time they are fired. You hear the Jem'Hadar rifles even when not seeing their shots, but you only hear the Type-3s when you see the beams.
Let me get this straight: you figure it's possible for a man charging and firing on the run to hit another man who is partially obscured with a non auto-aiming weapon, but it's impossible for people in a stastic ambush position to score 6 kills without "auto-aiming" at that same range?
I am saying that 9 people while running have a reasonable chance (say 1 in 3) of hitting and killing a target with just ONE shot from everything they fire. I am also saying that its unreasonable to make 77% accuracy without sights while shooting at moving targets.
Did you see them doing this? Or is this supposition? And how accurately can a man fire while on the run?
We see one aim and fire, then start running.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Alyeska wrote:Given the size of the Jem'Hadar that is why I estimate their distance at being 100 meters. Moving back or forward 10 feet from Nog's position will still keep the size of the Jem'Hadar in the distance basicaly the same size.
Of course, but Nog's size onscreen will change as well, because the ratio is changing. The comparison of visible size ratios for objects of known size as a method of determing their proportionate ratios of distance WORKS, Alyeska. It's simple geometry. It may violate your subjective impression, but that is of little importance.
Those Jem'Hadar are cleary a long distance off. Having experience with range such as this and practical knowledge with being on a measured point (football field) and I know that people do not look that small at only 40 meters. 40 meters is around 120 feet and people won't look that small at that range.
And how do you gauge size when it's being viewed through a television camera instead of the naked eye? What is "small?" I pointed this out already; your method of gauging distance is flawed. I have already explained the reasoning behind my scaling; you must now defend yours with something better than "it looks that way to me, so there".
You can count the shots by listening to them. The Type-3s are heard every time they are fired. You hear the Jem'Hadar rifles even when not seeing their shots, but you only hear the Type-3s when you see the beams.
So the beam moves so slowly that you can have a scene-change before it covers 50 metres? I guess it wouldn't be the first time.
I am saying that 9 people while running have a reasonable chance (say 1 in 3) of hitting and killing a target with just ONE shot from everything they fire. I am also saying that its unreasonable to make 77% accuracy without sights while shooting at moving targets.
If they're close enough to hit on the run, even with a lot of shots, they're close enough for the enemy to score multiple hits from an ideal position.
Did you see them doing this? Or is this supposition? And how accurately can a man fire while on the run?
We see one aim and fire, then start running.
So you're figuring that this one shot was the kill? Because they're certainly not going to improve their accuracy by charging like idiots.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
You can count the shots by listening to them. The Type-3s are heard every time they are fired. You hear the Jem'Hadar rifles even when not seeing their shots, but you only hear the Type-3s when you see the beams.
So the beam moves so slowly that you can have a scene-change before it covers 50 metres? I guess it wouldn't be the first time.
Possible, or that there was a time distortion. One of the shots had the Jem'Hadar running in slow motion.
I'll address the rest later.
ISo you're figuring that this one shot was the kill? Because they're certainly not going to improve their accuracy by charging like idiots.
Its possible. All I am really saying is that given the volum of fire they have a reasonable chance to hit one. We already know that one of their shots came within a foot or two of the female officer.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Actually I got a request. Mike, could you host those two pictures for me? I would like to be able to actually post them as a picture rather then a hard to use link.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Why, in "Rocks and Shoals" didn't they just take FULL cover behind the boulders and hold the alleged "auto targeting" rifles out onto the field? Do these "auto targeting" weapons have IFF sensors on them?
"Brian, if I parked a supertanker in Central Park, painted it neon orange, and set it on fire, it would be less obvious than your stupidity." --RedImperator
Is it me or is Worf's phaser beam moving independently from his arm movement? If you use the scroll bar and move it very slowly while he is firing, you can see the phaser beam angle is moving down while the phaser itself remains level. Doesn't seem to be very accurate though, . But the one where the bald guy shoots down the hall is dead straight.
Who's the more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? -Obi-Wan Kenobi
"In the unlikely event that someone comes here, hates everything we stand for, and then donates a big chunk of money anyway, I will thank him for his stupidity." -Darth Wong, Lord of the Sith
Why, in "Rocks and Shoals" didn't they just take FULL cover behind the boulders and hold the alleged "auto targeting" rifles out onto the field? Do these "auto targeting" weapons have IFF sensors on them?
Your two movies do not pertain to the debate at hand. They are useless.
Poe, we don't know how the auto targeting works, but it seems the person firing it must be aiming in the general direct AND looking at their intended target. That seems to be the only requirement for the auto-targeting to work properly.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
IRG CommandoJoe wrote:Is it me or is Worf's phaser beam moving independently from his arm movement? If you use the scroll bar and move it very slowly while he is firing, you can see the phaser beam angle is moving down while the phaser itself remains level. Doesn't seem to be very accurate though, . But the one where the bald guy shoots down the hall is dead straight.
They had a real problem with that in TNG. That is why they switched from the TNG type phasers to the newer ones that first showed up in First Contact. Makes it easier to line up where the actor is aiming.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Doesn't seem to be very accurate though, 
