Simple question - since I'm writing the page for it right now - can the phaser cannon thingy on the Argo's jeep in Nemesis be considered a Type-IV phaser?
Now, the DITL page defines one thus: The type 4 phaser is a medium sized device fitted to small vehicles such as shuttlecraft.. Nothing there, then, to contradict such a theory; however, does the entry in the TNGTM bear this out? My copy has been packed in a box since the move, and I can't check it.
One thing - I now have some caps of the beast in question which show the prop itself was built partly from the Isomagnetic Disintegrator in Insurrection. Which could imply they operate on similar principles, in which case the Jeep Cannon needn't necessarily be a phaser at all.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Is that what Worf's shoulder canon was? An isomagnetic disintegrator!?! When was that given a name!?!
I think something like that would be a type IV phaser. Although it shot pulses like a disruptor - didn't it?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Well, you've never visited my site, obviously. 8)
As for firing pulses, so did the First Contact rifles, and the Compression Phaser Rfiles.
Posted by CaptainMike20X6 (Member # 709) on :
canonically, the Type IV phaser was mentioned in an episode, Riker was describing he specs of the shuttle and stated that it was equipped with type-IV phasers.. the TNG TM mirrors this observation.. its possible that these phasers are mounted on other vehicles too with different emitters than seen on the type6 shuttle design, but thats all theoretical at this point
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
Dunno why people get so excited about phasers firing pulses. Absolutely hate it when people call Defiant's phasers the first pulse phasers in Federation service. Ent-nil have been firing pulsed phasers since TOS, SFX error or not.
As for that thing on the Argo's Rover being a Type-4, that would seem about right. Mind you, I think it'd be a bit bigger than a Type-4 in some ways, because a Type-4 on shuttles only occupy the limited space within the nacelle nosecap. That space obviously can't fit the contraption on the rover, but then, a shuttle's phaser mount won't need independent gyrostabilizers, non-central cooling, maybe batteries, etc.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I suppose it all comes down to what one thinks the whole classification system could be based on. I don't see how it can be power because, let's face it, what would be the point when a Type-I can do pretty much the same things as a Type-II, the latter just has a larger energy source?
But then, look at what we have:-
Type-I - small hand phasers
Type-II - larger hand phasers
Type-III - phaser rifles
Type-IV - small-vehicle mounted phasers
Type-V -
Type-VI -
Type-VII -
Type-VIII -
Type-IX -
Type-X - big fuck-off ship mounted phasers
Type-XI -
Type-XII - even bigger fuck-right-off planetary defence phasers
That leaves quite a gap. What's in there? "slightly larger but still quite small-vehicle-mounted phasers?" "Frigate-mounted phasers?"
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Perhaps phaser types that are no longer widely in use, having been supplanted by the newer types?
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:That leaves quite a gap. What's in there?
Type VIII phasers used aboard the Excelsior-class for example.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Perhaps in this case, type is just an expression of size. The phaser equivalent to calibre maybe?
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lee: I suppose it all comes down to what one thinks the whole classification system could be based on. I don't see how it can be power because, let's face it, what would be the point when a Type-I can do pretty much the same things as a Type-II, the latter just has a larger energy source?
But they don't. A Type-I has levels 1 through 8, while a Type-II has levels 1 through 18. That's a huge difference. I think you might have been thinking of the difference between Type-II and Type-III.
Maybe it's not just power, but the emitter's overall performance and size that determines it. Power is a component, but not the only one.
Posted by Styrofoaman (Member # 706) on :
Wasn't it 16 power settings not 18?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
1 through 9, and then up to 16 on the Type-II. And I hadn't forgotten, I just ignored it because I don't see why having extra 'Broil' and 'Chargrill' settings should make that much difference. Remember I said they do "pretty much" the same things. . . But, if it makes you happier, then the diference between the Type_II and -III instead. 8)
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
Oops, my bad. TNGTM is packed away right now.
Anyhoo, IMO, the difference vapourizing humanoids and explosively decoupling a few hundred kilograms of rocks is pretty big.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Well, yeah, but put like that then, the greatest difference in functions come between the lowest two types; why then go up to 12? How much more can the various higher types do? If it was a logical progression, then a Type-XII would pack about the same punch as the Death Star!
(oops, I mentioned the Wars. Let's hope this doesn't degenerate into a ST-v-SW thread. . . Scott, not a word from you!)
Unless the various types are categorised according to a logarithmic scale like the warp scale!
Quite frankly, I'm not really expecting it to make sense. After all, 37 years and we still don't know how registries work, so why shouldn't phaser types be equally hard to pin down? 8)
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
Well, people probably have put a lot more thought into the damned reg system than phaser types...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)