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*
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
posted
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."
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
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.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
posted
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).
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
In Star Trek? *faints* ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
