This is topic TOS Enterprise Armament in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/1028.html

Posted by Constellation of One (Member # 332) on :
 
My apologies if this has been discussed before, but I was watching "The Doomsday Machine" (I think that was the ep) on the Sci-Fi Channel last week. After Commodore Decker assumed command of the Enterprise while Kirk was stuck aboard the Constellation (love those shaking nacelles!) he ordered the bridge crew to ready "main phaser banks." Does this imply that the Enterprise possessed lesser phaser banks? Secondary armament, perhaps?

I could understand an order to raise the main defense shields; it would make sense for there to be backup shielding somewhere aboard ship. But, backup phasers?

Any ideas?

Robert


------------------
Everything in life I ever needed to know I learned from The Simpsons.
 


Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
 
It could be a simple reference to the phasers that they use the most often - ie. the forward banks. In three years, the Enterprise only ever fired forward in some arc.

Mark

------------------
"Why build one, when you can have two at twice the price?"

- Carl Sagan, "Contact"



 


Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
 
SEEN to fire, Mark. Dialogue has Kirk ordering "midships phasers" at one point, and I think I remember an order for aft phasers, but don't hold me to that.

--Jonah

------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."

--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH

 


Posted by colin (Member # 217) on :
 
The episode "Balance of Terror" defined the armaments of the USS Enterprise as being on the starboard, port, rear, and front of the saucer. (Rf. Chapter 2)

------------------

takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory
 


Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
 
Rear of the saucer? Difficult firing arc. What is the source of this info...? Remember we had Kirk order phaser banks one and two, and saw VFX from the bottom front of the saucer, and then banks three and four, and saw VFX from the bottom front of the saucer. So even if we know the LOCATIONS, we still don't know the numbers for sure -- but there are at least four forward ventral phaser banks, whatever might be elsewhere.

--Jonah

------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."

--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH

 


Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
"Balance of Terror" also referred to torpedo tubes 4 and 6, suggesting at least six such weapons aboard.

One wonders if the armament of the Enterprise was organized so that a great many "phaser generators" would all fire though a single common emitter. If that emitter was steerable enough (and the ventral saucer spot did offer rather good coverage, assuming a corresponding weapon was placed on the aft dorsal surface of the saucer), and building of emitters was expensive yet building of generators was cheap, then this sort of weaponry would make sense.

Personally, I'm all for "creatively interpreting" the visuals and saying that the ship had a more varied armament roughly on the lines of the usual fanfic view: emitters around the top and bottom vertices of the saucer, and possibly some more at the bottom of the secondary hull or atop the shuttlebay as in the refitted ship. We just happened to blink when those weapons fired. Or Kirk ordered starboard phasers to fire, and they did - and the camera was late in catching this, so by the time we got exterior view, Kirk had already ordered "cease fire on starboard banks, switch to forward banks". Which we never heard since we were already out of the ship.

Timo Saloniemi
 


Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
 
It's a long shot, but can anyone extrapolate anything from the Fire Control Room in "Balance of Terror?"

------------------
"I rather strongly disagree, even if I share the love of Dick. Speaking of which, that would be the most embarrasing .sig quote ever, so never use it."

- Simon Sizer, 23/01/2001

 


Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
 
All we conclude from that room is that Enterprise thinks she's a submarine. From what we can see, the phaser control room only has buttons. So to fire a phaser you need to radio down to this room and have someone there push a button. Why can't they just put the same buttons on the bridge? It's not as if you have to physically load a packet of photons into a tube and pull a firing trigger.

------------------
When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum



 


Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
Or, considering that the phasers overloaded rather easily in that episode, we might say that these weapons were really prissy primadonnas. Perhaps there would have been a risk of the entire ship blowing up if the phasers were fired in sub-optimal condition? So a man-in-the-loop system was created, in which a person sitting next to the machinery had to okay each and every firing.

The "point man" would coordinate with a phaser crew dedicated to constant repairs and pampering of the weapon, and would decide when and whether to execute the firing orders, based on how his phaser crew was currently managing with the finicky thing.

Timo Saloniemi
 


Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
And speaking of "main phasers" - the only other time I remember hearing that terminology was in connection with the Stargazer in TNG "The Battle". That ship did have apparent primary and secondary guns - the primaries would have been the twin emitters mounted dorsally and ventrally, while the secondaries would probably have been the five single emitters on the dorsal side.

Since the Enterprise-refit had twin and single emitters, too, and only used the twin ones in the movies, one might say the single ones were secondary. Extending this to the TOS ship and her invisible phaser emitters, it would mean that the saucer phasers were the main ones and the putative ones on the secondary hull perhaps "auxiliary phasers".

Timo Saloniemi
 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
Balance of Terror also tells us that the weapons crew don't know the differences between "phasers" and "torpedoes".

(Yeah, I know the shots didn't look exactly like Photon Torps, but they shore has hell didn't look like either of the two regular phaser shots, one of which had been seen before this episode.)

------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
 


Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
 
Not to be a critic, (but aren't we all?), but who is to say that a single emitter is less powerful than a double? Just because there happen to be two at one location doesn't mean a thing, really. It just means that one particular location is more strategic than another. Besides, regardless of how many emitters there were, they all look the same. Sort of like little balls inset into the hull.
 
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
There's no particular reason to say that single ball-turrets are weaker than double ones - or that short phaser strips are weaker than long ones. It's just convenient to think that the Stargazer had a two-tier phaser system since the dialogue implies this, and the most obvious division would be into twin and single emitters.

We have seen the short phaser strips of TNG-era ships fire about just as often as the long ones, and there hasn't been any mention of them being "secondary" weapons. They fire when the target is at an angle optimal for their use (a situation we mostly see in Voyager, since TNG did not have quite as violently maneuvering opponents and DS9 did not feature strip-phaser ships in a central role).

In contrast, single-ball turrets almost never fire. The only time these "secondary" weapons have been seen firing IIRC was DS9 "Paradise Lost" where the modified-Excelsior USS Lakota used her ventral phasers (which consist of four single turrets). Then again, the Lakota also fired phaser beams from at least three locations that did not have phaser emitters of any sort!

Timo Saloniemi
 


Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
 
And we all know the reason for that, dont we? ;-)

Remember the TNG episode (don't recall the name) where the Ent-D was firing phaser pulses out of the forward torpedo tube!!?

------------------
RIMMER [as Ace]: "Stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for Christmas."

 


Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
 
"Darmok". Strangely, the phasers were also blue. Hmm.

TO be fair, the Lakota was suppossed to have been heavily upgraded. They could have added new phaser emitters.

------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles
 


Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
And with two out of the three "invisible" emitters, this holds water - we never saw the Lakota so up close in "Paradise Lost" that we could have definitely stated "There is no phaser emitter on the side of the impulse nozzle!" or "There is no phaser emitter between the impulse crystals!". Only the backstage photos of the model show that these emitters were not added to the model.

Alas, we did see the topside of the ship's aft hull clearly enough to observe that when the Defiant flies between the nacelles, a beam fires from the big hump at the pylon stems, and then ceases firing, revealing a smooth surface devoid of emitters... Hmm. Perhaps the clever TOS rapidly-extendable-and-retractable-emitter (or cloaked-emitter?) technology hasn't been entirely forgotten.

Timo Saloniemi
 


Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
Which reminds me...

Probably the lack of visible weapons on the TOS ship would best be explained by saying that the emitters were covered by hatches or "gunports". These ports would be an anachronism from the time when shields were primitive and starship hulls were coated with physical armor (a possible Romulan war era practice - remember the physical-armor "shields" of the Neutral Zone outpost in "Balance of Terror"?). For any ship built after the 2240s, these gunports would be omitted since they would no longer serve any practical purpose.

Then we could have the TOS ship, *and* the myriads of TOS-era fanfic designs with FJ-style visible, paired emitters. Those fanfic ships (at least the versions seen, if not their original pre-TOS prototypes) would simply date from after the 2240s. Or whatever date one chooses for the abandoning of gunports. Big and fancy ships like Constitutions might retain this feature longer than others, for decorative purposes.

Timo Saloniemi
 


Posted by Psi'a Meese on :
 
Purrrr....

Something rarely mentioned-or considered-is that the phaser banks actually were coupled. Via the lit up dome on the bottom of the saucer. In theory, the dome phaser's might function as a predecessor to the phaser array strips of TNG.

Of course a lit dome is also atop the bridge, which would give a clear, aft firing arc. I know, I know. The bridge is there... Who knows how the actually emitter's are fed power? Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with the concept. At least where the bridge is concerned, we don't need a Phaser Control Room.

Beyond "what we see" in TOS, nothing really substantiates or eliminates this possibility. The technology is so vaguely defined for TOS anyway.

More modern, TOS movie starships clearly redefine the approach to weapon arrangement. Not to mention the domes having been redefined as part of the Navigational Sensor System. For the sake of discussion, it is possible that the leaps in technology could be that dfferent by TMP.

[This message has been edited by Psi'a Meese (edited February 14, 2001).]
 


Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
Interesting, to say the least. Where is it said that the TOS domes had something to do with phasers? it would be great to have the ventral dome as one big single phaser turret, miniaturized and multiplied in numbers for the TMP era ships. The top dome of the TOS ship seems to be a big window, though.

Also, where is it stated that the dome in the TMP ship was a navigational sensor array specifically? Granted, this makes sense, but the thing could also be a planetary survey sensor array (since it doesn't enjoy a very good view forward) or even an auxiliary nav deflector system (or a primary one for those ships that lack the big blue dishes, like Miranda or Constellation).

Timo Saloniemi
 


Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
 
AAAAGH!! A window?!? Where did this come from? Are you talking about the dome on top of the bridge module? That is not a window. Cannot be. According to what we have seen, the ceiling of the bridge is solid with no window there at all. Anyone can feel free to dispute me, but technically it just doesn't work and makes absolutely no sense. And there cannot possibly be another deck on top of the bridge.

Again, where is it documented that the main phaser arrays on the bottom of the saucer are coupled through the lower dome? It's an interesting idea, yes, but I would like to know your source.

The majority of noncanon sources list the domes on the priamry hull of the TMP Enterprise as the "upper and lower navigational domes/sensor arrays." I have a feeling they are NOT deflectors. How would they operate? Timo, you yourself say they do not have a very good view forward, so if they aren't good as sensor arrays, they'll be less effective as deflectors.
And those lighted things the domes sit on on the TMP ship are just that, lights. Not anything else. In case people didn't know.

I'm sorry if this is a bit critical or ranting.
 


Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
 
I think the window idea comes from the first pilot episode, "The Cage." In the opening, the camera looks in from the top of the ship through the dome into the bridge. But since the set didn't have a ceiling they could never show the reverse angle. Didn't there also a broken window in the room of the bridge in the EntD crash?

------------------
When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum



 


Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
 
The Enteprise-D DOES have a window in the ceiling. The original Enterprise does not. There is never any indication in the series that the dome over the bridge is a window. If it WERE a window, don't you think a lot of the crew would be looking up most of the time? It would be about 15+ feet in diameter.

In conclusion, there is NO WINDOW on the bridge module of the original E. And as I said before, there isn't enough room under the dome for it to be a completely transparent walled second deck. That doesn't even make any sense.

And for those of you who are really nitpicky and want to go on about that bright white square on the bridge module of the very original model, that CAN'T be a window as the actual inner wall of the bridge is about 5 to 10 feet in from the exterior wall.
 


Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :
 
The people on the bridge of the E-D didn't seem to be looking up a lot....

------------------
"One's ethics are determined by what we do when no one is looking" Nugget
Star Trek: Gamma Quadrant
Star Trek: Legacy
Read them, rate them, got money, film them

"...and I remain on the far side of crazy, I remain the mortal enemy of man, no hundred dollar cure will save me..." WoV


 


Posted by Psi'a Meese on :
 
Purrr...

Timo/Daniel:

Thank you for your comments.

According to the TMP blueprint's, designed by Andrew Probert, the dome's both below and atop the bridge, function as a 'navigational dome'. I assume they are components of the Warp Celestial Guidance system also referred to in the same blueprints.

Regarding the domes function as part of the TOS design? Unless my misplaced copy of "The Making of Star Trek" (Roddenberry's writer's guide is part of that book) does say, there is nothing written (i.e. a source) that establishes their function. I merely suggest that since the lower dome is "lit", and we do see the weapons discharge from that area, that there may (or may not) be a connection of some kind. If I am correct, than I further suggest that multiple emitter's (or turrets) are mounted within the dome. It would account for primary and secondary phaser banks that have been mentioned above.
The upper dome is also "lit" and therefore might (or might not) be a component of some kind that is mounted upon the roof of the bridge module.

Unless there is a source that I am unaware of, the 'window' shown in "The Cage" was nothing more than a clever way to show the viewer where the nerve center of Pike's Enterprise is. Since the bridge actually has no windows.
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
Okay, look, for real. What is with the purring? I don't get the gimmick.

------------------
"...screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" - Omega.

Irony ensues.

Free Jeff K

 


Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
 
It's cute? Thanks for the source, P'sia Meese. The idea that the entire lower dome is a phaser array does make some sense, but that is one freakin' big phaser. But it also does away with the "fire banks one and two" thing, so I don't know . . .
 
Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
 
P.S. Oops. I put the apostrophe in the wrong place. Sorry.
 
Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
You should be. He might scratch your eyes out.

 
Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
 
Yipes.
 
Posted by Psi'a Meese on :
 
Ultra Magnus, I am a Caitan from the felinoid world of Cait. We all purr.....

[This message has been edited by Psi'a Meese (edited February 15, 2001).]
 


Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
 
Woohoo! A Username Role Player!

The world always needs more of those!

------------------
"...screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" - Omega.

Irony ensues.

Free Jeff K

 


Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
The "top dome is a window" idea is based on two things: "The Cage" and (IIRC) "Requiem for Metusaleah" where Flint shrinks the ship and places it in lucite, and Kirk peers into the ship through the top as if he could actually see inside.

Of course, both cases can easily be explained away. In "The Cage", the motion-control work did not integrate seamlessly into the shot of the bridge interior, so the "peering through a window" impression was very weak. And in "Requiem", Kirk could simply have been positioning himself so that he'd be the most visible to the top sensors, and the part about him being able to "see" the bridge crew would be a mere psychological effect, with Kirk imagining how the lilliputian crew must look like.

In turn, the lower sensor dome base "lights" being nav deflectors is a theory based on the fact that TNG ships have saucer-mounted auxiliary deflectors that aren't much different from the forward "light" of the Enterprise-refit. Having these specific lights be deflectors would allow one to expand the light/deflector connection further: the Oberths would finally gain deflectors in the form of those three lighted openings on the saucer (too small to be real shuttlebays, and not indicated as bays in the "Hero Worship" MSD), and the TOS ship's three rounded bow lights could then also be deflectors (helping immensely with those fanfic ships that lack the dish antennas but have these three circles).

As for the shape of those light things, I can see a zillion applications to deflectors pointing off the axis of the ship. The usefulness of an aft-pointing deflector is a bit questionable, of course, since it would just hit the neck of the ship.

Timo Saloniemi
 


Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
 
I agree that the forward facing light on the bottom of the Enterprise-refit saucer is most likely a secondary navigational deflector. It would be perfect for when the saucer separates and would also be the best possible location on the Miranda-class. And like you wrote, it's a very similar location to the secondary arrays on the Galaxy and Sovereigns.

Of course, it's still highly debatable what the lower dome itself actually is for. It would seem to be either a sensor, a phaser emitter, or both. Some things worth noting are:

1. We've never seen the original Enterprise fire from the lit (lower part of the) dome.

2. The Saratoga in "Emissary" fired multiple phaser blasts from the lower surface of it's dome.

3. The little dome on top of the Defiant's bridge must be a phaser emitter, as seen in "Paradise Lost" and "Shattered Mirror".

------------------
"Life's too short to be pissed off all the time." (Danny Vinyard, American History X)
Dax's Ships of Star Trek

[This message has been edited by Dax (edited February 16, 2001).]
 


Posted by Psi'a Meese on :
 
______________________________________________________
And in "Requiem", Kirk could simply have been positioning himself so that he'd be the most visible to the top sensors, and the part about him being able to "see" the bridge crew would be a mere psychological effect, with Kirk imagining how the lilliputian crew must look like.
______________________________________________________

I understood this view of Kirk to be on the Main Viewer of the bridge... Also, the dome on the bridge is solidly lit from within-exactly as with the lower-dome.

______________________________________________________
1. We've never seen the original Enterprise fire from the lit (lower part of the) dome
______________________________________________________

Okay, at this point I become confused. I have always understood from watching TOS, that the phasers always appeared to come from the the lower dome on the primary hull. This was the only reason for the 'theory' that I have postulated above. I guess it's a matter of personal perspective.

_______________________________________________________
In turn, the lower sensor dome base "lights" being nav deflectors is a theory based on the fact that TNG ships have saucer-mounted auxiliary deflectors that aren't much different from the forward "light" of the Enterprise-refit.
_______________________________________________________

In reference to the refit Enterprise, I had not considered that possibility. It never crossed my mind before about what becomes of that saucer should it separate. Not a bad idea!

 


Posted by colin (Member # 217) on :
 
Additional information-
The "MSD" of the first U.S.S. Enterprise, seen on the bridge, has the forward most turbolift ending on a deck above the dome. The dome appears to be the same height as the bridge dome. This raises two possibilities-the lower deck is inaccessible to the crew, or the lower deck is accessible by ladders, like the lower decks of the engineering hull.

------------------

takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory
 


Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
 
Meese: I didn't say the Ent-nil didn't fire from the bottom dome - it obviously does. What I wrote is that the Ent-nil never fired from the lighted part of the dome. The lit part is below where the weapons banks appear to be.

------------------
"Life's too short to be pissed off all the time." (Danny Vinyard, American History X)
Dax's Ships of Star Trek
 




© 1999-2024 Charles Capps

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3