Automatic Phaser-firing

[Sela]

I don't know what an E-Web repeating blaster from Star Wars is, except that which I've guessed from context clues. That said, a consistent criticism of Star Trek weapon technology is a lack of machine-gun like technology. Often the episode of DS9 is brought up as an example of where a single stationary automatic weapon would have been incredibly useful, and its non-use is taken not as a sign of stupidity but as a sign that such a weapon doesn't exist.

Without getting too deep into the already-dead debate (it doesn't really matter in terms of shifting the odds in an ST vs SW battle, after all); what has been said about the automatic phaser in "Final Mission" (S04, Ep09 of TNG)? In this episode as part of a strategm Wesley is told to set his phaser to 'automatic fire' and when they carry out the ploy we get to see his phaser acting as a lone turret.

Any thoughts? And for the record, I did search before posting and didn't find previous discussion on this point; if it's there please point me in the direction.

[Batman]

I don't know what an E-Web repeating blaster from Star Wars is, except that which I've guessed from context clues. That said, a consistent criticism of Star Trek weapon technology is a lack of machine-gun like technology. Often the episode of DS9 is brought up as an example of where a single stationary automatic weapon would have been incredibly useful, and its non-use is taken not as a sign of stupidity but as a sign that such a weapon doesn't exist.
Without getting too deep into the already-dead debate (it doesn't really matter in terms of shifting the odds in an ST vs SW battle, after all); what has been said about the automatic phaser in "Final Mission" (S04, Ep09 of TNG)? In this episode as part of a strategm Wesley is told to set his phaser to 'automatic fire' and when they carry out the ploy we get to see his phaser acting as a lone turret.
Any thoughts? And for the record, I did search before posting and didn't find previous discussion on this point; if it's there please point me in the direction.

There hasn't been any discussion because that was the wrong kind of automatic weapon. When 'automatic weapons' are mentioned in these discussions it's not about weapons that can fire all by their lonesome. It's about weapons that can fire repeatedly very quickly and/or continuously for a reasonable amount of time (like MODERN DAY automatic weapons). Wesley's jury-rigged Type II did nothing like that.

[Ghost Rider]

Slotting into Trek, given the nature of the question has nothing to do with SWvsST but is an ST tech question instead.

[Darth Wong]

It's easy to forget, in a board where weapons terminology is commonly used, that not everyone knows what "automatic weapon" normally means.

In any case, the Feds do have some automatic weapons. Sisko used one once. They also have some guns that can do a continuous beam, but that's going to use up energy at a hideous rate compared to a repeating burst-fire weapon. It's no wonder they went to pulse-firing weapons when the war started. Even the coolest gun is pretty much worthless once the ammo runs out.

[Zed Snardbody]

It's easy to forget, in a board where weapons terminology is commonly used, that not everyone knows what "automatic weapon" normally means.

In any case, the Feds do have some automatic weapons. Sisko used one once. They also have some guns that can do a continuous beam, but that's going to use up energy at a hideous rate compared to a repeating burst-fire weapon. It's no wonder they went to pulse-firing weapons when the war started. Even the coolest gun is pretty much worthless once the ammo runs out.

When did Sisko use one?

[Questor]

It's easy to forget, in a board where weapons terminology is commonly used, that not everyone knows what "automatic weapon" normally means.

In any case, the Feds do have some automatic weapons. Sisko used one once. They also have some guns that can do a continuous beam, but that's going to use up energy at a hideous rate compared to a repeating burst-fire weapon. It's no wonder they went to pulse-firing weapons when the war started. Even the coolest gun is pretty much worthless once the ammo runs out.

When did Sisko use one?

In Blaze of Glory, Sisko used a Jem'Hadar rifle on full auto. That's the only one I have in my notes.

[Zed Snardbody]

It's easy to forget, in a board where weapons terminology is commonly used, that not everyone knows what "automatic weapon" normally means.

In any case, the Feds do have some automatic weapons. Sisko used one once. They also have some guns that can do a continuous beam, but that's going to use up energy at a hideous rate compared to a repeating burst-fire weapon. It's no wonder they went to pulse-firing weapons when the war started. Even the coolest gun is pretty much worthless once the ammo runs out.

When did Sisko use one?

In Blaze of Glory, Sisko used a Jem'Hadar rifle on full auto. That's the only one I have in my notes.

Ahh thank you.

[Samuel]

Wesley's jury-rigged Type II did nothing like that.

Still, isn't that a very neat tool to have? Why not install them in places to defend them- or is this like the personal force field from the wild west episode?

[Lord Revan]

wasn't it a phaser I though, the small one, not seen in later trek due how hard it was to film

[Ted C]

Without getting too deep into the already-dead debate (it doesn't really matter in terms of shifting the odds in an ST vs SW battle, after all); what has been said about the automatic phaser in "Final Mission" (S04, Ep09 of TNG)? In this episode as part of a strategm Wesley is told to set his phaser to 'automatic fire' and when they carry out the ploy we get to see his phaser acting as a lone turret.

"Final Mission" and "The Game" both indicate that you can program a phaser to fire repeatedly if you know what you're doing. On a larger weapon, it might have some practical applications, but we still don't really know what the "ammunition capacity" is for a phaser. A real support weapon will need to be able to sustain fire on an area for minutes at a time, if not more, and we've really never seen any indication that a man-portable phaser is capable of that kind of prolonged energy output. Even if they have the storage capacity, we know from "The Mind's Eye" that they're pretty inefficient, so they'd probably heat up and melt if you tried to use them in a GPMG role.

[Ted C]

wasn't it a phaser I though, the small one, not seen in later trek due how hard it was to film

I think you're right on that one. Also, it must have been set on really low power, since we know phaser's have some recoil, but the small phaser's Wesley used in "Final Mission" and "The Game" never budged from where he left them firing.

[Batman]

I DO think it was a Type II and either way since it was essentially used as a distraction Wesley could probably have set it almost arbitrarily low.
After all, all the phaser was supposed to achieve was be noticed.
And since when do phasers have recoil?

[Zed Snardbody]

It was a type 1:

[Batman]

Except that's not from 'Final Mission'. Offhand, I'd say those shots are from 'The Game' but that's just a guess.
'Final Mission' had Westley set up the phaser in a cave shooting at that fountain thingy.

[Zed Snardbody]

Argh sorry I lost track of which episode was being discussed.

[Ted C]

And since when do phasers have recoil?

My bad. They transfer momentum, but we have come up with technobabble reasons why that might happen without them actually having recoil.

[Ted C]

Except that's not from 'Final Mission'. Offhand, I'd say those shots are from 'The Game' but that's just a guess.
'Final Mission' had Westley set up the phaser in a cave shooting at that fountain thingy.

It's hard to find a clear picture, but it looks like a TOS-era phaser II.

+http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/ ... ion259.jpg

[Ted C]

Your picture didn't work - you need to link to the page the picture is on, not the picture directly.

But, I know the Final Mission phasers were the pistol prop from Star Trek III reused.

Shite. I knew they'd rigged their server so you couldn't directly link, but I thought you could paste the URL and get there.

This might work...

+http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/thumbna ... 82&page=13

[Lost Soal]

I DO think it was a Type II and either way since it was essentially used as a distraction Wesley could probably have set it almost arbitrarily low.
After all, all the phaser was supposed to achieve was be noticed.
And since when do phasers have recoil?

Actually the plan called on the phaser to fire continuously at maximum power while the other guy fired at a lower setting while it was hopefully distracted by the bigger threat.

[ArmorPierce]

And since when do phasers have recoil?

My bad. They transfer momentum, but we have come up with technobabble reasons why that might happen without them actually having recoil.

If they transfer momentum they have to have recoil equal to the transfer of momentum. Only technobabble reason I can think of is that it has it's on personal 'Inertial dampener.'

[Ted C]

If they transfer momentum they have to have recoil equal to the transfer of momentum. Only technobabble reason I can think of is that it has it's on personal 'Inertial dampener.'

The technobabble reason is based on the phaser page of SDN, which hypothesizes that phasers cause matter to decay into neutrinos, which tend to be released directionally. The neutrinos have little or no interaction with other matter (which explains why "vaporizations" have no effect on the environment), but they do carry momentum, and enough of them moving fast enough would -- via conservation of momentum -- effectively thrust the target of the beam in the opposite direction.

[Swindle1984]

If they transfer momentum they have to have recoil equal to the transfer of momentum. Only technobabble reason I can think of is that it has it's on personal 'Inertial dampener.'

The technobabble reason is based on the phaser page of SDN, which hypothesizes that phasers cause matter to decay into neutrinos, which tend to be released directionally. The neutrinos have little or no interaction with other matter (which explains why "vaporizations" have no effect on the environment), but they do carry momentum, and enough of them moving fast enough would -- via conservation of momentum -- effectively thrust the target of the beam in the opposite direction.

That works great for shooting someone with a phaser set on "obliterate", but how does that explain instances like Geordi getting hurled several feet by a phaser set on stun in the episode with the space retards? I'd think Geordi would have noticed if enough of his body had been converted to neutrinos to bodily launch him through the air.

[Ted C]

If they transfer momentum they have to have recoil equal to the transfer of momentum. Only technobabble reason I can think of is that it has it's on personal 'Inertial dampener.'

The technobabble reason is based on the phaser page of SDN, which hypothesizes that phasers cause matter to decay into neutrinos, which tend to be released directionally. The neutrinos have little or no interaction with other matter (which explains why "vaporizations" have no effect on the environment), but they do carry momentum, and enough of them moving fast enough would -- via conservation of momentum -- effectively thrust the target of the beam in the opposite direction.

That works great for shooting someone with a phaser set on "obliterate", but how does that explain instances like Geordi getting hurled several feet by a phaser set on stun in the episode with the space retards? I'd think Geordi would have noticed if enough of his body had been converted to neutrinos to bodily launch him through the air.

It doesn't take a lot of mass if the neutrinos generated are moving fast enough. They'd have to be going at relativistic speeds, but they should be able to manage it.

[Darth Wong]

That works great for shooting someone with a phaser set on "obliterate", but how does that explain instances like Geordi getting hurled several feet by a phaser set on stun in the episode with the space retards? I'd think Geordi would have noticed if enough of his body had been converted to neutrinos to bodily launch him through the air.

Have you bothered doing any math on this declaration?

[Singular Intellect]

Have you bothered doing any math on this declaration?

So how much of his body mass would need to be turned into directional neutrinos in order to fling him with that kind of force?