Okay, if anyone has the time and capability, it'd be cool if we could get a look at the new weaspons on the Enterprise-E. I haven't been able to isolate the new pylon phaser mounts, but I'm fairly sure that the first beauty shot of the Enterprise after the wedding shows at least one of the new torpedo tubes on the forward dorsal. Has anyone capped these yet?
I only see some of the launchers Eaves drew . . . the forward-most one on the forward dorsal seems to be absent. The forward dorsal one on the terraces may be there, but it is never seen to fire. That's cap #1 and #2.
Cap #3 shows the new upper aft launcher, as well as the "sealed hole" in the location where I believe the aft torps from Insurrection were launched (at the back of the "horseshoe" strongback of the engineering hull). You can also see one of the pylon phasers.
Cap #4 could use a little brightening, but you can see the side-view of the forward terrace launcher.
Cap #5 and #6 give a view toward the rear keel launchers. Same for #11.
Cap #7 shows the pylon phasers in use. Same for #9.
#8 shows that any aft launcher above the rear shuttlebay would probably hit the light.
#10 shows the forward keel launcher in action.
#12 shows a pylon phaser and a view of whatever might be over the shuttlebay, though some of it is in shadow.
#13 and #14 (which are in backward order, sorry) show the launch point and torpedo of the aft keel launcher.
#15 shows a possible hole under the bottom of the shuttlebay, though the image at present is a bit too small to make it out all that well. I'll try to retake the pic and zoom appropriately.
Hope these help.
[ June 04, 2003, 12:15 AM: Message edited by: Guardian 2000 ]
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
They must've carried a very symbolic amount of photons (courier/transport mode, not battle) in order for the magazines to be exhausted as quickly as they were?
They weren't rigged for battle, otherwise they would've filled it to the brim with hardpoints, right?
I remember one time hearing a figure on the photon compliment on the 1701-D (400 or so?), the Sovereign can't be much worse off, especially now that it has eight launchers?
Oh, and are there any plans of releasing a Nemesis-DVD with more content than the current version?
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
quote: Oh, and are there any plans of releasing a Nemesis-DVD with more content than the current version?
There hasnt been anything officially stated yet, as Berman isnt a fan of *bonus* or *deleted scenes* we should count our lucky blessings to get what we got.
Oh, I think it was mentioned in so other Nemesis link, but some WS Nemesis DVDs came with a *bonus* CD-Rom with some additional HQ desktop pictures and Romulan IPIX environments on it...
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
Incidentally, that Insurrection launcher I mentioned is visible here:
It's the thingy casting the big fat shadow.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
I take it that's a quantum launcher, due to the large size and seemingly hexagonal shape of the muzzle? If not, why put two more photon launchers over the shuttlebay if it's just more of the same??
Oh, and Guardian 2000? Half of those screencaps are extremely vague, could you please draw some thin, red circles around the launchers in question? For those of us who don't know where to look???
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nim: [QB] I take it that's a quantum launcher, due to the large size and seemingly hexagonal shape of the muzzle? If not, why put two more photon launchers over the shuttlebay if it's just more of the same??
Why, for shooting down your own shuttles for fun, of course. Silly question.
It is the best place for an aft Quanton launcher though. Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Quanton? Are you implying a hybrid multi-launcher? :-)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I actually meant "won-ton launcher"....for when they run out of torpedos.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
How about a tauntaun launcher? Would scare the hell out of them superstitious remans.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
a redshirt is crushed by tauntauns
"how sad it hadnt even been milked"
"run away!"
Posted by blssdwlf (Member # 1024) on :
Is there even internal room for all those launchers? Seems like if they were all where they were, a lot of stuff would get displaced and ammo stores would be limited per new launcher except for the original locations.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
For Nim and others, here are the Eaves drawings to serve as a guide:
That's a total of 8 launchers, 4 forward and 4 aft, with the tube-count being 5 forward, 6 aft.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Ah yes, now it makes more sense. I saw those schematics before, just didn't save them to the harddrive.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Now, it's basically up to us to determine how many of these additions were actually made...
We have seen the new aft dorsal and only one of the forward dorsal launchers on the saucer, and it looks doubtful that the more-forward launcher was installed. There *is* at least one VFX shot where aft photorps are launched from the shuttlebay area on the secondary hull, but I haven't been able to freeze-frame it to determine where exactly. I think they never got around to adding the fore-fore launcher... We should be able to see SOMETHING when the Enterprise rams the Scimitar, which we should check. Mind you, that sequence was done in part with a physical model, so it may not be completely accurate.
There are multiple examples of the new pylon-mounted phasers being used, which is odd since theorhetically all of the aft arc is covered already by the existing saucer mounts, except for at point blank range. I wonder if there's a tech explanation for this. Lots of people equate longer strips with more power, and that's semi-reasonable... I personally am in favor of having two or more classes of phasers mounted a la DS9, with the new aft strips being of equal power as the main saucer mounts. The secondaries would be used for defensive fire, anti-fighter (smaller craft are more common these days), and so forth.
Finally, I see nothing wrong with them carrying and expending a full complement of torpedoes. The E-D carried 250 for two primary launchers... At full rate of fire, a Galaxy class ship could go through that in ten salvoes. The E-E was going nuts with the torpedoes for at least two rounds lasting several minutes each, only parts of which we saw. Even if the E-E was carrying 400 or more torpedoes, which is certainly possible, there is a good chance she burned through the lot.
Mark
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Though they saved the quantums for last, which was nice. A very nice summary there.
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: Lots of people equate longer strips with more power, and that's semi-reasonable... I personally am in favor of having two or more classes of phasers mounted a la DS9, with the new aft strips being of equal power as the main saucer mounts. The secondaries would be used for defensive fire, anti-fighter (smaller craft are more common these days), and so forth.
Wow, phaser emitters that allows strips to produce the same amount of firepower as the primary arrays for 1/20th the length! Imagine if we made a main array with those !
I've heard this sort of argument before, "the Defiant's warp core generates more power than that of a GCS, because it's smaller." Well, what would happen if you made a 'big' small core? You can't, you get a big core.
If length doesn't matter, then ships would have many shorter arrays at the front instead of one long one. They'd save space and money, and get basically the same arc and firepower.
And why would you need that much firepower for defensive fire, anti-fighter, etc?
Waits, fighters? In Star Trek? *faints* Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
But they DON'T have many shorter arrays stacked up front, so that can't be the answer. I am not saying in my argument that power is proportional to strip length; rather, that different strips can be of different types regardless of length. And that on a Sovereign, the big strips up front are the primaries, leaving a variety of less powerful placements to cover the other arcs (redundantly, in many cases). Inasmuch as a no battleship can turn its big guns in a 360 arc without bumping into conning towers and stuff, the big phasers need to be complemented with smaller antiship emplacements.
Mark
Mark
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
Um, I'm kind of lost now. I was saying that power is proportional to length... That's how I interpret the TNGTM's bit on phaser arrays.
In any case, we shouldn't be looking at length to determine this. You can in theory get an infinite number of lengths with array-type emitter setups. You just put one emitter after another, and have it go long or short as you need. One can measure each individual emitter to see if there are ones of different dimisions, and hope that the internal arrangement is not what's different.
The thing is, it doesn't make much sense for them to be a different type, if the difference is the emitter's firepower. If the shorter strip uses a weaker emitter, then they're just compounding the shortcoming of the length = power problem. Sure, you don't usually need much power in the aft arc, but if you can have it, why not? And if they use an emitter type that's stronger than the ones found in the primary arrays... Why aren't the primary arrays using those emitters, then? Plus it makes it unneccessarily confusing in terms of logistics. "We'll need 24 Type-XIII emitters, 8 Type-Xs, and a Type-VIII. I assume you know which one goes where."
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
"I assume you know which one goes where."
You have to peek under the Sovvie's skirt to find out. :-)
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nim: "I assume you know which one goes where."
You have to peek under the Sovvie's skirt to find out. :-)
So THAT'S where she's hiding deck 29!
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Isn't that terrifying? You have to look under a Sovvie's skirt for her missing deck.
Mark
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
No. What is terrifying is looking up her skirt and seeing a penis there after waking up in bed next the Sovvie after a wild night of drinking.
Not that I speak from experience or anything.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by Siegfried: No. What is terrifying is looking up her skirt and seeing a penis there after waking up in bed next the Sovvie after a wild night of drinking.
Not that I speak from experience or anything.
We said "deck", not "di..." . . . oh nevermind. Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
Whatever happened to drinking responsibly? It's only a matter of time before you wake up beside the Whale "Probe", at this rate.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Just don't stick anything into the peni...er...Planetkiller.
Now back to phasers: Firstly, the smaller phasers should not be a diffrent kind: that's silly.....but the argument that longer phaser strips are more powerful could be kinda right too. Longer phasers could allow for more power to be fired continously as opposed to the smaller phasers that, while no less powerful for short bursts, would be damaged or burnt out if that much power was channeled through the smaller arrays for more than a few seconds at a time.
As to the arc of fire on the soverign's phaser strips being redundant: well, it was the same way on the Galaxy class so it must be for multiple targets (remember that these are uber-battleships).
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Bringing closure to this thread (I guess), here's what Eaves himself said about the new weapons:
"And as far as weaponry go, right there we have a new single torpedo launcher," he says as he points to the area just in front of the bridge. "We've got a double launcher ? in the back of the back module, (another) single launcher (on the aft section), and we've got phaser strips on the top and the bottom of the struts."
From this interview on starfleetcom.net. I guess there are only three new launchers then, all dorsal, and the new phaser mounts.
Mark
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Actually, I did once find the aft ventral laucher on the fantail below the shuttlebay.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
In Star Trek? *faints* ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)