Review of scifights.net Phasers Case Study

For reviews and close examination of sources - episode reviews, book reviews, raves and rants about short stories, et cetera.
User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Re: Review of scifights.net Phasers Case Study

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Tue May 05, 2015 8:51 pm

2046 wrote:
Mike DiCenso wrote: perhaps more rugged at the cost of versatility.
I actually would favor the SW philosophy if that were so.

1. Modern police pistol training emphasizes training for maximum adrenaline and fight-or-flight reactions, including the potential for tunnel vision, the loss of fine motor control, and general lack of reasoning faculties (e.g. the North Hollywood shootout officers picking up spent brass because that is what they did in training).

So for pistols, they train to rack the slide with the whole palm rather than pinch the back grip area, under the thinking that the loss of fine motor control will result in 'monkey-hands'.

Tapping little buttons seems less useful in that frame of reference than messing with the big fat switch on the carbine.
Image

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 483
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Review of scifights.net Phasers Case Study

Post by 359 » Wed May 06, 2015 1:16 am

Mike DiCenso wrote:Yes, that was hilarious to read along with Brian's old worn out bit about how mean we are to him and his claim that we don't watch his crappy overlong videos is a hoot, especially the one about 359 not watching them when in this very thread's OP 359 provides an exhaustive list of quotes with precise time indexes from the case study and rebuts each one!
Wait... What???

*Does reading*
*followed by look of shock*


Apparently I don't watch Star Trek either......





Excuse me, I have a few paragraphs to go write.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5798
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: Review of scifights.net Phasers Case Study

Post by Mike DiCenso » Wed May 06, 2015 8:15 pm

I look forward to reading those two paragraphs.
-Mike

Firmus Piett
Padawan
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Review of scifights.net Phasers Case Study

Post by Firmus Piett » Wed May 06, 2015 11:38 pm

To be fair 359, he had a case of "mistaken identity" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzLv_WqOxnE

I do have a sneaky suspicion about who he was actually thinking of. But I'm also pretty certain in my brief read of the YT comments that the old argument regarding shuttle take off and phaser batteries was brought up. Perhaps his remembrances of people has gotten muddled, as it has been a long time since we were all participating on ASVS..

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Review of scifights.net Phasers Case Study

Post by Lucky » Fri May 08, 2015 6:25 am

Man, your stating flaws that don't exist based on assumptions that aren't grounded in the canon. Don't you normally get annoyed when other people do this?
2046 wrote: 1. Modern police pistol training emphasizes training for maximum adrenaline and fight-or-flight reactions, including the potential for tunnel vision, the loss of fine motor control, and general lack of reasoning faculties (e.g. the North Hollywood shootout officers picking up spent brass because that is what they did in training).

So for pistols, they train to rack the slide with the whole palm rather than pinch the back grip area, under the thinking that the loss of fine motor control will result in 'monkey-hands'.

Tapping little buttons seems less useful in that frame of reference than messing with the big fat switch on the carbine.
From what we commonly see, the Federation/Starfleet trains its personnel to pick a setting before entering combat, and then stick with it unless things change drastically. They don't normally fiddle with the settings during a fight.

You are familiar with the episode Too Short a Season aren't you?
2046 wrote: 2. Modern American military design doctrine emphasizes technology over simplicity and numbers, just as the Nazis did. This misses the fact that our best weapons have been simple and robust, like the Garand, the Sherman, and the A-10, even if they were a little more complicated in some cases.

So, we end up with mistakes like the F-35 being favored over the A-10.

The phaser is a great multi-purpose Swiss Army Knife, a good weapon for explorers who might have to heat up their coffee, do surgery, and vaporize a wall with the same tool. But if a blaster could out-do it in the context of modern military acceptance tests (sand, water, extreme temps) plus additional torture tests we can dream up (drop, crush, radiation, technobabble fields), I would go blaster every time on the battlefield.
1) Except that a Type-1 and Type-2 phaser are multi-tools first and foremost.

2) We never see the problems you assume with a Starfleet standard issue Type-3 phaser. The closest you get is a vague line by Major Kirs in Return to Grace, but the quote in question is just too vague, and sounds like M-16 VS AK-47 stuff.

3) I have no doubt in my mind that Starfleet could build a perfectly working Star Trek version of a K-11 that worked flawlessly, and had none of the drawbacks.

4) Sadly the A-10 need to be replaced do to the airframe getting worn out.

5) The Garand had some rather glaring flaws.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Review of scifights.net Phasers Case Study

Post by 2046 » Mon May 11, 2015 4:34 am

Easy, tiger. Read carefully and you'll see that post was a big if-then propositional. If the "ifs" aren't satisfied, then the "then" ain't satisfactory, either.

Considering that Obi-Wan could plausibly pass off a jam as an excuse when he didn't want to fire in "Deception"[TCW4], I suspect that the "if" isn't valid, but I haven't exactly counted up weapon failures.

Lucky
Jedi Master
Posts: 2239
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Review of scifights.net Phasers Case Study

Post by Lucky » Thu May 28, 2015 8:18 am

2046 wrote:Easy, tiger. Read carefully and you'll see that post was a big if-then propositional. If the "ifs" aren't satisfied, then the "then" ain't satisfactory, either.
Sorry, I sort of over reacted. I just get tried of people being overly critical of things.

Settings on a phaser are more of a matter of programing then adding new systems it would seem. The phaser really doesn't become any more complex weather it has 2 or 100 settings really.

As far as I can tell, the F-35 is coming along like any thing where there are new and never before tried things being tried, and if isn't as good at an A-10's job as an A-10 that isn't a flaw in the F-35.
2046 wrote:Considering that Obi-Wan could plausibly pass off a jam as an excuse when he didn't want to fire in "Deception"[TCW4], I suspect that the "if" isn't valid, but I haven't exactly counted up weapon failures.
What besides the trigger is there to jam on a blaster? It would seem like one of the major perks of an energy weapon is no moving parts beyond a few switches like the trigger?

Post Reply