Considering that a Constitution Class will appear on Enterprise soon, I just want to be clear on what sort of weapons does the ship have. I can only recall two forward firing phasers and two photon torpedo launchers ever being used on the show. I also know of some schematics that show two pairs of phasers on either side of the ventral saucer as well as ventral torpedo launchers below the bridge dome, but these weapons were never used on the show. Has there been any speculation on weapons somewhere else on the ship? Considering Enterprise NX-01 seems to fire phasers from arbitrary points on its hull, their going to need to do better than 2 forward phasers for a connie-class.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
It's an earlier thread on the weapons that the original Enterprise had.
Posted by armageddon (Member # 1504) on :
information about the weapons compliment of the constitution class was kept vague so that they could invent new weapons and placements when ever the opertunity arose but never did so heres what i know from the star trek fact files sulu could aim and fire the weapons from the helmsmans position the enterprise had 2 phaser banks fitted to the underside of her saucer section just above the sensor dome she also had a torpedo tube but its location is not mentioned and can not be seen on an of the stills i have from the show but she did fire torpedos from the underside of the saucer she only had the one because she only fired one torpedo at a time hope that helps
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Thanks. You know i've always accepted the kindness of strangers:)
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
But we know from dialogue that the Enterprise, at least, had multiple tubes. And I don't see how we can tell how many phaser banks it had, but, again, per dialogue, there were more I think than two.
One wonders how this will be handled should the Defiant have to shoot at anyone (as I imagine it will). I wouldn't mind retractable weapons ports, myself. Something that looked a bit like a cross between the NX-01's phase cannons and the refit 1701's banks would be, as I hear the kids outside always saying, sweet, at least in my opinion. Since the phasers get less and less "gunlike" as time goes on, having something a bit like the refit turrets only with barrels would seem to suggest an intermediate stage.
Incidently, this is the sort of question Timo should be all over. Has anyone heard from him lately?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
A nice compromise between the NX-01 and the Connie would be to have the hemisphere phaser emitters of the TOS Connie retract into the hull when not in use.
I also think the Defiant could have some rear-facing weaponry to distinguish it from the Enterprise (which seems to have nothing covering the aft quarter).
After all, we did not see too much of the Defiant onscreen in TOS. Posted by thesonofodin (Member # 1025) on :
I disagree Jason about needing to be different from Enterprise. Retracting phasers would make the Defiant look too old, not contemporary with all Connie's.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
So what's the score? I havn't gotten around to seeing IaMD yet, so I still don't know how beefed up the defiant is.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
$$$ Spoilers for "In a Mirror Darkly, Part 2" below.
Well, the Defiant used two forward facing phasers and two aft facing phasers. She also used a forward photon torpedo launcher and an aft photon torpedo launcher.
The forward phasers were on the ventral surface of the primary hull above the the ring around the lower sensor dome (which is where they appeared to be fired from on the original Enterprise). There were two tiny protrusions there. The aft phasers came from two identical tiny protrusions mounted above the hangar deck on either side of the dome/beacon. The forward torpedoes seemed to be fired from the ring around the lower sensor dome on the ventral surface of the primary hull. The aft torpedoes appeared to be fired from the beacon/dome above the hangar deck. Both the phaser blasts and the torpedoes were blue, if you're interested.
There are pictures in the "In a Mirror Darkly, Part 2" tech thread in this forum.
$$$ Spoiler for "In a Mirror Darkly, Part 2" above.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Very interested, thanks Siegfried. I'll have a shufty and see if I can find the photos.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
A "shufty?" Oh, come off it! And then, what? You'll 'ead up the apple and pears to put on your whistle and toot, guv'nor? As Senior British Officer here at Stalag Flare III, I am shocked and appalled. 8)
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I've said "shuftie" before, although I spelt it like that. And you are only officer of the ginger brigade. Which I guess includes TGB. Have fun.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
I always thought it was whistle and flute. Anyway, I'd rather be off to the old rub-a-dub than up the apples and pears, but that's me.
Moving swiftly on, the new and improved Defiant certainly makes up for my unfortunate use of colloquialisms. I can�t wait for channel 4 to catch up with the rest of the world � I think this Sundays episode is Hatchery. D'oh! Damn landlords, not letting us get cable�
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"I've said 'shuftie' before, although I spelt it like that."
That second one is scary, though. He and I both used smileys. NOT EVEN FOUR YEARS AGO.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Oh, get a room already.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Hold me.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
The shuftie in the second one makes no sense though, since it translates to "unless it's 15inch, I'd look up 1024 x 768."
Also, "mate".
Also, Lee is not one to talk. "Dogbert asks to have a look at ity."
Also, why do some old posts contain the sigs that people were using at the time, and why do some use the sigs that are being used by them now? I did like that Trey Parker one, though.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
The amusing thing is, that little discussion used to come up quite prominently (probably still does) in any web searches for mentions of RJW (who I haven't worked for for four years; at one time that thread was embargoed for me by Charles to save my job). They did actually do a proper website in the end, which I ended up maintaining - and then quit when I was told in my appraisal that such work wouldn't be taken into consideration because it wasn't in my job description. They've re-done it since then. . .
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
And, I have no idea why I'd choose that singature. It means absolutely nothing to me. No feeling of recognition, no emotional connection, it doesn't even seem funny deprived of whatever context Lileks used it in.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Maybe you just had a thing for nipples.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Mmm. . . unlikely. You're a complete tit, and I don't feel anything for any part of you!
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Pft. You wouldn't know what to do with me if you had me.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
That much is true. . .
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"You wouldn't know what to do with me if you had me."
Liam, dear, I know you think so, but, really, you are no different down there than any other tit. Smaller, maybe, but not different. B)
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Here we go with the gay shit...
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Not gay, just British.
By the way, what the hell does "shuftie" mean, anyway? And is it a word I should incorporate in my day-to-day vocabulary to confuse my mom?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
"To have a shufty/ie" means "to have a look," essentially. I'm uncertain of the origin of the word. May be rhyming slang, may be not.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
quote:Originally posted by Siegfried: Not gay, just British.
Same Difference.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
As of this moment, I hereby replace "looksie" with "shuftie" in my vocabulary when speaking to my mother. I anticipate humor results including incredulous stares, rolling eyes, and being written out of the will.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
That's some pretty sketchy activity.
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
*rolleyes*
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I never could quite get used to that...
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
So, how does one pronounce thus "shuftie"? Does the 'u' sound like the one in "up"? Or like the "oo" in "book"? Assuming, of course, you're not from someplace where both those sounds are the same.
Or, even, is it like the "oo" in "moon"? Only, that doesn't sound right.
By the way, why has this been moved to the tech board only after the discussion moved from technology to British slang?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Umm, good point. Now, what to do with a good point?
Incidentally, TOS "Arena" has an actual verbal reference to aft phasers on NCC-1701. Either they are the same as on the Defiant, or then the same as shown in the Captain's Chair cutout, or then something else altogether. Quite possibly all Constitutions have identical aft weapons, including both the dorsal aft ones in ENT "IaMD" and the under-shuttlebay aft ones in Captain's Chair...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I pronounce it with the "u" from "up". Although there might be some people out there, madman with no regard for rhyme or reason, who would pronounce it with the "oo" sound. I say we leave them be and continue talking about rear-facing weaponry. Ooh er.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
You and your rear-facing weaponry.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
While I've never had occasion to use the word, I'd always thought it was pronounced with an -oo- sound. . . But then I've never heard anyone else use it either, so that impression comes purely from seeing the word written down. I speak Engleesh, I learn eet from a boook. . .
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
What have I begun!
I pronouce it 'shu' as in shut, and 'tea' as in the drink made by boiling leaves and adding cow lactation. I then add a 'FFF' to the middle, making 'SHUF-TY' (two syllables)
Also, I think that it comes from the word comes from the arabic.
Going back to the thread (oh no!) isn't it wierd the way that such an enormous ship (compared to the NX) has so few weapons hard points. Perhaps Earth Starfleet charter wasn't the same as the UFP Starfleet charter.
Or was all those nasty Vulcans telling the fraidy cat humans what a scary place the galaxy is?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Or a ship of exploration shold not double as a battleship.
Imagine Jaques Coustau sailing around in the USS Iowa.
Tough to announce your peaceful intentions while bristeling with weaponry.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
I can see Cousteau fishing off the fantail of the New Jersey using those special C4 lures.
BTW, wasn't the whole concept of Connies not having aft weaponry based on the Starfleet Battles games as a way to level the playing field between the different ship types?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Imagine Jaques Coustau sailing around in the USS Iowa.
quote:Originally posted by WizArtist II: I can see Cousteau fishing off the fantail of the New Jersey using those special C4 lures.
So, was the Connie MSD shown in IaMD2 really the same as the Drexler rendering from The Captain's Chair? For some reason I remember thinking otherwise when I first watched the episode.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Or a ship of exploration shold not double as a battleship.
Imagine Jaques Coustau sailing around in the USS Iowa.
Tough to announce your peaceful intentions while bristeling with weaponry.
I agree, but you don't send in the Rainbow Warrior every time an outpost next door to enemy teritory goes mysteriously quiet do you?
Most weeks the E nil was either flying the flag for the federation, or carrying their big stick. While she may have been a ship built for exploration, she was still a ship of the line. Maybe she was a bit like the RN's HMS Leeds Castle, on the Falkland Islands patrol.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Although there might be some people out there, madman with no regard for rhyme or reason, who would pronounce it with the 'oo' sound."
Well, you live in Liverpool. Shouldn't you be used to that by now?
Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Imagine Jaques Coustau sailing around in the USS Iowa.
quote:Originally posted by WizArtist II: I can see Cousteau fishing off the fantail of the New Jersey using those special C4 lures.
BTW, the Calypso was originally a minesweeper, built for the Royal Navy in 1942 in the United States, BYMS-26, hull number J-826.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN: Well, you live in Liverpool. Shouldn't you be used to that by now?
Remembering that now doesn't impress me.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Ginger Beacon:
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Or a ship of exploration shold not double as a battleship.
Imagine Jaques Coustau sailing around in the USS Iowa.
Tough to announce your peaceful intentions while bristeling with weaponry.
I agree, but you don't send in the Rainbow Warrior every time an outpost next door to enemy teritory goes mysteriously quiet do you?
Most weeks the E nil was either flying the flag for the federation, or carrying their big stick. While she may have been a ship built for exploration, she was still a ship of the line. Maybe she was a bit like the RN's HMS Leeds Castle, on the Falkland Islands patrol.
Therein lays the flaw in both TOS and TNG- after a few seasons of 'alien of the week- never to be seen again" it gts old and the military side of Trek has to fill the void with guns ablaze.
If the Enterprises were really exploring (particularly the Galaxy version), dozens of people would comprise each landing party and the ship would stay in a system for weeks or months doing research untill relieved by a sciemce vessel.
It old not have been too difficult to pull off either- just start a new episode with the Captain's Log referring to the time spent (at their last localle) and how he's glad to be underway again...
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
That will grab the casual audience and make them keen to see the show.
"Anything good on, Billy-joel?"
"Nah ma. Oh, wait, Pikerd says here that they've been orbiting this thar planet for like 2 months, and they're just leaving!"
"Sweat Jesus no! Why didn't you say? Call new-pah down, we're gonna have ourselves a good old fashioned Trek-watching."
I have no idea what that was about. Sorry.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Yee-haw!
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Remembering that now doesn't impress me."
That was Simon who thought you still lived in London, not me.
Or, rather, you thought Simon thought that. I think.
Shut up.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: I have no idea what that was about. Sorry.
Freak.
Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lee: Yee-haw!
Hmmm... wouldn't that rather be Hee-Haw: The Next Generation? Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I was watching TV today and saw an annoying commercial for Ice Breakers (a kind of BB sized breathmint with gel inside it).
In the commercial, two pop stars (I have zero idea their names) are arguing over weither the product is solid or liquid or some shit as they check into a hotel- finally their beleagred bellhop screams "You're BOTH right!".
The guy seemed familiar and so when the commercial replayed (at the next break) I got a good look at him.
It's Christopher Shea- the actor that played Keevan on DS9!
I dont know why that's worth relating, but there you go....somrthing to look for during commercials.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
One of them is Hillary Duff of "Lizzy Maguire" fame and now average pop star.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Neither is particularly attractive and both come acrosss as pretty dim.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Neither is particularly attractive and both come acrosss as pretty dim.
I take it you've never seen Lizzy Maguire. Lucky sod.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
IIRC, the other was Jennifer Love Hewitt, who most certainly can be hot at times.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)