StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Matt Huang wrote:Heat is only a part of entropy. Increased entropy is not always an increase in heat.

Actually, entropy levels in surrounding air are directly correlated to temperature for an isobaric system. I can even give you a steam pressure/temp/entropy chart showing precisely that.

Now to the inefficency question here, could it be that not all of the generated nadions generated have enough energy to interact, and instead would self-disrupt (leaving behind the phaser "glow" that is associated with the NDE effect). That would also explain why the phaser beam emits light despite not interacting with anything in space.

If a phaser emits 15% of its energy as light, then we could estimate its total energy by simply multiplying its luminosity by 6.7. You don't want to go there (not to mention the fact that the heat problem would remain; Geordi and Data would be radiatively heated with 15% of the beam power).

A stick of dynamite doesn't make a large portion of that rock dissapear into thin air. The only way it could possibly do that is to vaporize that part of the rock, which clearly isn't happening since people can walk through (or even stand in the general viscinity of) the air in that area immediately afterward without getting major burns.

Phasers, on the otherhand, can make large portions of said rock to dissapear without doing any significant thermal effects (no superheating of the rock).

Since when do phasers make large portions of rock disappear? Whenever I've seen them used against large rock formations, the effect is primarily explosive at the point of contact.

Now, people could argue that the rock in ST: Insurrection was hollow or was porous, but phasers are very non-reactive with air so a disrupt beam setting wouldn't work, and the heat setting were not used because of the negligible temperature change in the rock and surrounding air.

Or one could argue that they simply blew up a hole in a rock wall which fragmented into chunks. The effect certainly looked like a conventional explosive blasting effect.

I would think that the minimum required energy required to kill and what gets used are two different settings.

Darth Wong wrote:

Matt Huang wrote:Heat is only a part of entropy. Increased entropy is not always an increase in heat.

Actually, entropy levels in surrounding air are directly correlated to temperature for an isobaric system. I can even give you a steam pressure/temp/entropy chart showing precisely that.

no thanks, I was only being nitpicky there.

Now to the inefficency question here, could it be that not all of the generated nadions generated have enough energy to interact, and instead would self-disrupt (leaving behind the phaser "glow" that is associated with the NDE effect). That would also explain why the phaser beam emits light despite not interacting with anything in space.

If a phaser emits 15% of its energy as light, then we could estimate its total energy by simply multiplying its luminosity by 6.7. You don't want to go there (not to mention the fact that the heat problem would remain; Geordi and Data would be radiatively heated with 15% of the beam power).

The NDE can vaporize/disrupt items without burning the surroundings (such as the ground). This suggests that only a part of the energy lost is turned to light. The majority of the energy contained in the nonreactive nadions aren't released in realspace, however, since if the NDR is a chain reaction then the energy released by disrupting a person should cause major burns on anybody in the immediate area as phasers do not.

A stick of dynamite doesn't make a large portion of that rock dissapear into thin air. The only way it could possibly do that is to vaporize that part of the rock, which clearly isn't happening since people can walk through (or even stand in the general viscinity of) the air in that area immediately afterward without getting major burns.

Phasers, on the otherhand, can make large portions of said rock to dissapear without doing any significant thermal effects (no superheating of the rock).

Since when do phasers make large portions of rock disappear? Whenever I've seen them used against large rock formations, the effect is primarily explosive at the point of contact.

Now, people could argue that the rock in ST: Insurrection was hollow or was porous, but phasers are very non-reactive with air so a disrupt beam setting wouldn't work, and the heat setting were not used because of the negligible temperature change in the rock and surrounding air.

Or one could argue that they simply blew up a hole in a rock wall which fragmented into chunks. The effect certainly looked like a conventional explosive blasting effect.

minus a significant amount of debris that is typically associated with blasting a hole that large in rock walls.

paraphrasing Ted C:
Type III phaser's total energy capacity of 52.5 MJ ... If the battery is full, a type III rifle can make a pretty big kaboom.
A hand phaser is probably only about a tenth of that, if the charge in a Federation hand phaser is similar to the charge in a Cardassian hand phaser (4.7 MJ according to Kira in DS9 "Return to Grace").
\end parapharase.

A comparison for the interested warmonger/fic writer:
the german DM51 offensive/defensive grenade (60 gram PETN) has an explosive force of 0.25 MJ, while the purely defensive SM HG85 from Switzerland (125 gram RDX/TNT) has 0.52 MJ:

So ... a Type III phaser is 100 times as powerful as a modern defensive grenade , and a hand phaser likely some 9-10 times as powerful; IF fully charged that is .
A user limitation is of course that without a trigger guard the things are impossible to throw (as they might land on the reset botton or something ), so they are best used as demolitions charges; in which capacity they will be second only to thermal detonators .

InnocentBystander wrote:I would think that the minimum required energy required to kill and what gets used are two different settings.

?

hvb wrote:paraphrasing Ted C:
Type III phaser's total energy capacity of 52.5 MJ ... If the battery is full, a type III rifle can make a pretty big kaboom.
A hand phaser is probably only about a tenth of that, if the charge in a Federation hand phaser is similar to the charge in a Cardassian hand phaser (4.7 MJ according to Kira in DS9 "Return to Grace").
\end parapharase.

A comparison for the interested warmonger/fic writer:
the german DM51 offensive/defensive grenade (60 gram PETN) has an explosive force of 0.25 MJ, while the purely defensive SM HG85 from Switzerland (125 gram RDX/TNT) has 0.52 MJ:

So ... a Type III phaser is 100 times as powerful as a modern defensive grenade , and a hand phaser likely some 9-10 times as powerful; IF fully charged that is .
A user limitation is of course that without a trigger guard the things are impossible to throw (as they might land on the reset botton or something ), so they are best used as demolitions charges; in which capacity they will be second only to thermal detonators .

If you look closely at the props, you'll notice that the phaser setting buttons are actually slightly recessed into the housing.

Matt Huang wrote:
If you look closely at the props, you'll notice that the phaser setting buttons are actually slightly recessed into the housing.

Uups, caught me on that one.
Well that just goes to show I don't major in Trek props ...

All right, Trek phasers make real good hand grenades ... if the charge is lower then your throwing arm is strong. (or better cover then a standard flimsy Trek ship internal partitioning wall is handy)

So if you ever see a trekkie with 10-12 phasers on his belt: RUN!

hvb wrote:All right, Trek phasers make real good hand grenades ... if the charge is lower then your throwing arm is strong. (or better cover then a standard flimsy Trek ship internal partitioning wall is handy)

Well, they'll produce a lot of blast, but they'll have only marginal fragmentation, which is the really dangerous feature of a purpose-built hand-grenade. We also don't know if they efficiently release all of their stored energy in an overload, so you might not get as much bang for the battery charge as you expect.

And telling your troops to set their sidearms to overload and throw them is a really stupid way to equip them with grenades or even demolition charges.

hvb wrote:

Matt Huang wrote:
If you look closely at the props, you'll notice that the phaser setting buttons are actually slightly recessed into the housing.

Uups, caught me on that one.
Well that just goes to show I don't major in Trek props ...

Just being nitpicky

Ted C wrote: Well, they'll produce a lot of blast, but they'll have only marginal fragmentation, which is the really dangerous feature of a purpose-built hand-grenade. We also don't know if they efficiently release all of their stored energy in an overload, so you might not get as much bang for the battery charge as you expect.

And telling your troops to set their sidearms to overload and throw them is a really stupid way to equip them with grenades or even demolition charges.

FUCK (aka Ups, the 2nd ) I wanted to say comparable to 100 respectively 9 Offensive, NOT Defensive , grenades in my first post; as the numbers above that summarization shows.

Offensive grenades are purpose-build to NOT produce much fragmentation, to limit the lethal zone. A hand phaser I would assume (as Ted C does above) to have similarly limited fragmentation, albeit for other reasons.

The lethal zone will of course go up with the cubic root of the increase in released energy (or square root if ceilings & floors contain the blast to one deck), thus making them more lethal then contemporary Offensive grenades.


And YES! If you give your troops hand phasers for the express purpose of using them as grenades, then you ain't too bright. (I was making a joke in that last line).

But the point is: if the federation don't produce any hand grenades, and the troops know of this field modification, and several of the TNG crew appear to do, then you should expect to see it used by those who carry both a rifle and a sidearm into battle, although perhaps only in desperate situations.

edited once for my rotten spelling

hvb wrote:FUCK (aka Ups, the 2nd ) I wanted to say comparable to 100 respectively 9 Offensive, NOT Defensive , grenades in my first post; as the numbers above that summarization shows.

Offensive grenades are purpose-build to NOT produce much fragmentation, to limit the lethal zone. A hand phaser I would assume (as Ted C does above) to have similarly limited fragmentation, albeit for other reasons.

Perhaps you need to more clearly define an "offensive" grenade. Sounds to me like a grenade designed to kill people, and that implies a fragmentation grenade to my mind. Grenades the rely primarily on blast effects have a relatively limited area of effect.

That's the point. Fragmentation grenades can cause occasional casualites even a hundred meters away. These grenades are specifically designed not to have such unpredictable kills. The area of effect is small, but it is well defined and therefore less of a threat to your own troops.

Howedar wrote:That's the point. Fragmentation grenades can cause occasional casualites even a hundred meters away. These grenades are specifically designed not to have such unpredictable kills. The area of effect is small, but it is well defined and therefore less of a threat to your own troops.

Can you describe an example of such a grenade? Surely there's a "Jane's Guide to Hand Grenades" article somewhere.

Heh... Maybe this is why they never use phasers on full power... They would literally overcook themselves. The whole "At level 16, you'll melt a skyscraper" is true to an extent, but is just Federation propaganada.

Ted C wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:If a single clip holds tens of thousands of shots, it seems odd that they would not be hosing down the Jem'Hadar with automatic fire as they came pouring around the corner.

Assuming that each shot carries 3000 J, the weapon has to dump nearly 500 J of waste heat every time it fires due to inefficiency. I think that would put a damper on automatic fire.

If it can fire at 1.05 MJ's for 50 seconds then this explanation strikes me as being HIGHLY unlikely.

Ted C wrote:

Howedar wrote:That's the point. Fragmentation grenades can cause occasional casualites even a hundred meters away. These grenades are specifically designed not to have such unpredictable kills. The area of effect is small, but it is well defined and therefore less of a threat to your own troops.

Can you describe an example of such a grenade? Surely there's a "Jane's Guide to Hand Grenades" article somewhere.

An example would be the aformentioned SM HG85 Offensive grenade from some Switz producer (I have in the meantime forgotten the name of the producer): it uses a filler of ~125 gram "RDX/TNT", the container is designed to be consumed by the explosion, rather then form fragmentation ... as Howedar said: The intend is to allow an exposed infantrymen to throw it far enough to be at a safe distance from the device when it goes off, even if he has no other cover then distance.

The German device (the DM51 offensive/defensive grenade with a 60 gram filler of PETN, probably produced by H&K) is a combination weapon: it has a removable fragmentation jacket. with the jacket on it is a normal frag grenade; without the jacket it is a fairly low area of effect offensive grenade (although by far more dangerous then a flash-bang, especially if used in an inclosed compartment, like a pillbox. , and if it misses the fire slit, it will not kill you like a frag grenade would)

Master of Ossus wrote:

Ted C wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:If a single clip holds tens of thousands of shots, it seems odd that they would not be hosing down the Jem'Hadar with automatic fire as they came pouring around the corner.

Assuming that each shot carries 3000 J, the weapon has to dump nearly 500 J of waste heat every time it fires due to inefficiency. I think that would put a damper on automatic fire.

If it can fire at 1.05 MJ's for 50 seconds then this explanation strikes me as being HIGHLY unlikely.

As Mike notes in the Database, they've set the phaser in a holding device with unknown properties. It's possible that this device contains a cooling system to allow the weapon to fire at full power without superheating the air around it.

Ted C wrote:As Mike notes in the Database, they've set the phaser in a holding device with unknown properties. It's possible that this device contains a cooling system to allow the weapon to fire at full power without superheating the air around it.

Possible, but not probable. I should have noted that I was trying to be generous at the time I wrote that. It would imply that the heat is all vented through the part of the gun which is held in the fixture ... which also happens to be the part of the gun that you hold in your hands. Either that, or some magical heat-draining field around the gun.

In any case, the mere existence of such a setting would be a safety hazard outside of the fixture if this were true. And since hand phasers were used at maximum setting for extended periods in "Arsenal of Freedom" with no apparent heat buildup despite the target hovering nearby, it would not be difficult to argue that this generosity is unwarranted.

Darth Wong wrote:Possible, but not probable. I should have noted that I was trying to be generous at the time I wrote that. It would imply that the heat is all vented through the part of the gun which is held in the fixture ... which also happens to be the part of the gun that you hold in your hands. Either that, or some magical heat-draining field around the gun.

In any case, the mere existence of such a setting would be a safety hazard outside of the fixture if this were true. And since hand phasers were used at maximum setting for extended periods in "Arsenal of Freedom" with no apparent heat buildup despite the target hovering nearby, it would not be difficult to argue that this generosity is unwarranted.

We would therefore conclude that energy reserve figures based on "The Mind's Eye" are very generous at best and completely unfounded at worst. Perhaps there's another error of word choice at work, and the battery drain was more like 1.05 KW than 1.05 MW.

Data seems to have all kinds of problems with SI units.

Ted C wrote:We would therefore conclude that energy reserve figures based on "The Mind's Eye" are very generous at best and completely unfounded at worst. Perhaps there's another error of word choice at work, and the battery drain was more like 1.05 KW than 1.05 MW.

Data seems to have all kinds of problems with SI units.

We are talking about a guy who fucked up a simple surface-area calculation by several orders of magnitude, who got his ass kicked by Strategema by Fold-Face, and who got beaten at chess by Troi.

hvb wrote: An example would be the aformentioned SM HG85 Offensive grenade from some Switz producer (I have in the meantime forgotten the name of the producer): it uses a filler of ~125 gram "RDX/TNT"

Sorry guys: I really should not leave my source material 6 km, and a workday, away when trying to quote examples from them like this...
Brought it this time round, so here it is:

The SM HG 85 is the defensive grenade, with the filler of 125g (the UK issue them as the L109A1); the offensive version is called OHG 92 and has a filler of 200g RDX/TNT.

The full name of the german weapon is the Diehl HGR DM51 Offensive/Defensive Grenade.

Darth Wong wrote:

Ted C wrote:We would therefore conclude that energy reserve figures based on "The Mind's Eye" are very generous at best and completely unfounded at worst. Perhaps there's another error of word choice at work, and the battery drain was more like 1.05 KW than 1.05 MW.

Data seems to have all kinds of problems with SI units.

We are talking about a guy who fucked up a simple surface-area calculation by several orders of magnitude, who got his ass kicked by Strategema by Fold-Face, and who got beaten at chess by Troi.

This conclusion doesn't do Geordi any favors, either, since he didn't even blink when Data made that power claim. Is he so used to Data screwing up that he just ignores it and carries on? Or is he even more inept ("Deja Q" springs to mind here)?

We have to assume some level of competence on the part of the characters. If they are inept as you are claiming, they would already be dead because they would have confused 10% shields with 100% shields and died in their first combat.

Alyeska wrote:We have to assume some level of competence on the part of the characters. If they are inept as you are claiming, they would already be dead because they would have confused 10% shields with 100% shields and died in their first combat.

People in real life give wrong verbal units all the time, yet it doesn't mean they are incompetant. But even you must admit, Data doesn't exactly have the greatest track record.