Ted C wrote:Meaning no offense Alyeska, I'm still going to pick your phaser article apart. We'll see if I find anything questionable in it.
Fair enough, constructive criticism is always welcome
I'm inclined to say that this is another typical example of Federation "jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none" design. They've apparently tried to design a weapon that can perform as both a rifle and as a submachinegun. Unfortunately, it's too big to make a good submachinegun (as you can tell by comparing the M-16 to the MP-5 in size). It may still be accurate enough to be a decent rifle, though, assuming that the auto-targeting feature comes into play if the fire-rate is cut back.
I have to both agree and disagree. First, I would love it the Type-3c was also auto targeting capable. I did leave that option open. However I had to go with the available information and thus I choose that this is probably another sub class that has no auto targeting feature. I believe this is both supported by the rifle having a much different targeting system above. Instead of an integrated scope/flashlight it now has a very powerful flashlight with a holographic site located above that. Combined with the shown accuracy of the weapon, I just have to say they removed the auto-targeting features for one reason or another.
As to the size. I whole heartedly agree that they made the rifle to big. Seeing the use of the weapon on the surface also indicates it was built for use in both ship board situations and planet bound. Given all information on the 3c, I have mixed emotions about it compared to the Type-3 and 3b.
We're dealing with a piece of equipment that probably came off a replicator. They can presumably get any past model they want if they don't purge old patterns from the system.
This is possible, but I tend to disagree. While I suspect that rifles can be replicated, they seemingly aren't, at least not often. In Deep Space Nine they primarily used the Type-3 rifle and only once had the Type-3b. I tend to think that to make production of the rifles cheap and with a comming war the Federation had a factory that was mass producing Type-3s. On the same line I think they were eventually getting the Type-3b into production. With the Type-3c being a newer weapon it is likely built rather then replicated.
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.
That assumes the rifle is replicated rather then constructed. I tend to think they are constructed because that is cheaper.
Would the "single-bit errors" found in replicated items be likely to result in this sort of mechanical failure? If not, this is probably not a random flaw. It could be a problem with the replicator pattern, which would mean that all phaser rifles produced from that pattern share the same flaw.
That remains a possibility, however as already stated I feel the rifle is more likely constructed.
After the number of warp core problems that Galaxy-class starships suffered with no apparent action on the part of Starfleet, not to mention the vast array of safety-related design problems that people have spotted in Star Trek equipment over the years, I find it hard to swallow that last statement. They didn't even put trigger guards on their weapons until First Contact.
The Galaxy is an anomoly in Starfleet. Just looking at the Wolf-359 graveyard scene you can see all the "intact" ships. The trigger guard issue is something else entirely though. This goes all the way back to TOS. Still, the Federation is stated to have more saftey systems on their ships then other governments.
It may in fact be a prototype, given the reckless nature of Federation testing procedures (see "New Ground" for a particularly annoying example of careless testing of new technologies).
That does fit in with the known information. It explains why the weapon is brand new. It also explains the Type-3VGR and Type-3a.
Again, we're looking at items that can be replicated as needed. Once the design work is done on a variant for use while wearing a space suit, all they really need to do is distribute the pattern.
And we still disagree on this point.
This would actually be an extremely handy feature in a submachinegun like the MP5, which is likely to be used at close quarters with relatively little aiming and a greater chance of friendlies being in the line of fire. If the IFF and auto-targeting features are included on the older models, then they would seem to be better suited to combat in boarding actions than the newer "Type-3c", which seems to lack their targeting abilities.
Agreed. At best the Type-3c is better at supression of the enmy by using its manual aiming and improved refire rate. But the Type-3 and probably the Type-3b would have been more suited for combat in Nemesis.
The disadvantage of the automatic targeting would be a lack of discrimination among valid targets. The auto-targeter is likely to choose the closest enemy in its "fire arc", even if a more distant enemy is actually more threatening (by virtue of having a better weapon or a superior position).
Indeed. However one would have to know exactly how the system works before knowing for sure. One theory being floated around (I find it interesting, but not workable) is that the rifle fires at the enemy you are directly looking at. This of course means the weapon somehow has to be able to note who you are looking at.
Get a job working for B&B! Those designs completely blow away all the other craptacular designs on the shows! They actually look like they have features that have a function.