What If...

[Kane Starkiller]

Regarding the firepower of Federation ship it seems that whatever the class of a ship photon torpedoes are the most powerful weapons. Since all observed ship classes have about 2 forward and 2 aft torpedo launchers then all ship classes should actually have similar firepower.
The difference would come in the form of greater shield strength. This would explain why small ships like Jem'Hadar fighters and Birds of Prey blow each other up in a few seconds while larger ships like Scimitar and Enterprise slug it out over longer period of time.
The question is why doesn't Federation equip it's ships with something like vertical launch system rather than two launch tubes. Comparing it with Arleigh Burke class something the size of Voyager could carry 500 launch cells. This would allow it to hit say 10 targets with 50 torpedoes near simultaneously and based on what we've seen 50 torpedoes at once is more than enough to take care of any standard ship fielded by major Alpha or Gamma quadrant races.

As for whether Sovereign or Voyager is faster looking at the relative size of warp engines and the hull might be helpful. I'm not sure but I think Sovereign's engines are relatively larger.

[ILikeDeathNote]

Right. So the ooh, hundreds of times they did that are all writer errors.

Especially since they just didn't seem bothered anymore about their shields blocking their transports. Like say on the Enterprise-E where they too didn't worry about beaming through their own shields anymore.

But of course, that is just 'writer error' and hence we have to forget about it. And of course, when we have an entire episode detailing maintenance we can forget about that as well when it's inconvenient.

I'm sorry but it doesn't work that way.

Actually it does work that way - it's a consequence of this being a TV show and not real life.

The fact of the matter is that Voyager was a TV show that ran for six and a half seasons with nearly 200 episodes - there's lots of room in there for gaffs especially when, in the bigger picture, people just don't care. Berman and Braga's apathy towards consistency and canon is infamous, to the point where that alone should be enough evidence. Including B&B, Voyager was helmed by no less than five producers, of which only Berman held the title throughout the entire series' run - Piller resigned at the end of Season 2, Taylor left by '98, Braga was an executive producer for only a short time, 1998-2000, and Biller a shorter time than even that, from 2000 to the series' end. It's also worth noting that the two to bail first, Piller and Taylor, co-created Voyager with Berman.

Yes, such a large body of executive producers with that much turn-around time is bound to create some inconsistency and differing opinion towards how the internal mechanics of the show works.

That's not even considering the number of other producers, writers, teleplay writers, and directors, all of which could differ from episode to episode. Mike Wong and Chuck Sonnenberg have talked about extensively how gaffs and apathy are created when you have such a large pool of creative input, many of which have only a small pool of background knowledge in Star Trek lore.

By the way, the first season of Voyager, that half-season of the six and a half-seasons, had nearly 30 different writers and teleplay writers involved, including Berman, Branon, Piller and Talyor who all contributed to scripts or teleplays. A few of which collaborated on the same script or teleplay. Don't believe me? Free feel to count for yourself.

Voyager's canon established they can beam through shields. And no, they didn't do it once by accident, they did so on numerous occasions across seasons. Likewise, STTNG established that Galaxy-class cruisers needed a Baryon sweep for maintenance every now and then. Like it or not, these are parts of canon.

Like it or not, it's still a writing/production gaff; just because they do it multiple times doesn't mean its "correct" or even "canon." It only takes one contradictory incident to throw the whole canon status of "beaming through shields" into question.

And there are quite a few contradictory incidents. According to this FAQ of the newsgroup rec.arts.startrek.tech, we have contradictory evidence of whether or not a cloaked ship can beam people while cloaked. "Benjamin Chee" points out that it may be possible for someone to be beamed out of a ship with shields up, yet in Voyager we have multiple cases where someone has been beamed into a ship with shields ("Prototype," just to bring up one specific episode). We even have an admission from Mike Okuda stating that they didn't even keep track of cloaking incidents; it's no real stretch to extend it to whether or not shields were raised during transport. There's even a common sense statement regarding that shields which allow you to beam things past them would make lousy shields and defeat the purpose of having shields in the first place.

As for the Baryon Sweep, once again we only need one contradictory piece of evidence to call into question its canon status. We've never seen Voyager even mention a baryon sweep, thus our piece of contradictory evidence. But once again, to be fair, we can fairly assume that Voyager simply used an alien facility off-screen, assuming baryon sweeps are necessary for all warp-capable starships.

And this of course ignores the "realism problem" as already quoted from Mike Wong.

So, deal with it and don't try to rewrite the show to prove something.

I'm not. If anything it seems as if you have a problem accepting the fact that mistakes in the show exist, and that these mistakes are oft-repeated.

To sum up your post:

"I don't like that they can do that so I'm gonna say they can't just because I can. To hell with what we see on screen, it's my decision not the writers"

And my reaction: suit yourself, but you wanting something doesn't make it so. I gave you a rather extensive list, which included several examples where shields where explicitly raised mere moments before transport and at least one where having the shields down during transport would have been 'suicide'.

No, that seems to be your reaction. I as well listed examples. Even Wikipedia has this to say:

While several characters have asserted that transporters cannot transport through a ship's shields or planetary defense shields, there are instances of this "rule" being broken through a technobabble solution (TNG: "The Wounded") or disregarded by the show's writers (Voy: "Caretaker").

Yes, I know, this is Wikipedia. But it has been established for a long time that transporters cannot be used when shields are up. We have never heard anyone, either a piece of dialogue from the show itself, or one of the cast and crew commenting on it as "backstage info," mention that Voyager has technology that allows them to circumvent this. We do have an admission from Mike Okuda that they don't keep track of things all the time.

I don't see a list of episodes listing examples of transporting through shields as evidence of being able to actually achieve it, rather I see it as a list of gaffs. I'm not doing it just because I don't like it, I'm just using common sense to reach a conclusion since, once again, I do not recall anyone saying that they can transport through shields. For all we know, they may have just momentarily just dropped shields long enough to transport.

So to sum up:

1.) I need more evidence. Even just one word backstage would convince me otherwise.

2.) One instance of Voyager explicitly announcing via dialogue that they cannot transport through raised shields throws your assertion into doubt, since it's stronger canon evidence. You can have 40 examples of them transporting through shields, but it's not as strong as a single instance of actual verbal confirmation. And don't give me the SDN line of "visuals supersede dialogue," because otherwise we're forced to rationalize every single visual gaff in the history of all Star Trek series, such as why NCC-1701 has a tendency to change color or whether or not Enterprise-D's forward torpedo tube also doubles as a phaser bank.

3.) Claiming that my attitude is, as you put it, "I don't like that they can do that so I'm gonna say they can't just because I can. To hell with what we see on screen, it's my decision not the writers" only reflects poor debate skills on your part. I'm more than capable of demonstrating my own thoughts, though you don't seem to keen on reading through them all.

[Mike DiCenso]

Regarding the firepower of Federation ship it seems that whatever the class of a ship photon torpedoes are the most powerful weapons. Since all observed ship classes have about 2 forward and 2 aft torpedo launchers then all ship classes should actually have similar firepower.
The difference would come in the form of greater shield strength. This would explain why small ships like Jem'Hadar fighters and Birds of Prey blow each other up in a few seconds while larger ships like Scimitar and Enterprise slug it out over longer period of time.

The Scimitar was truely a monster ship, not merely for it's size, but for the unusual armament it mounted: 52 disruptor cannon, along with 27 torpedo launchers, making it one of the most heavily armed, if not the most heavily starship among the conventional ST powers' capital ships. If Shinzon had truly wished, he could have ended the battle with the the Enterprise with the first opening volley.

The question is why doesn't Federation equip it's ships with something like vertical launch system rather than two launch tubes. Comparing it with Arleigh Burke class something the size of Voyager could carry 500 launch cells. This would allow it to hit say 10 targets with 50 torpedoes near simultaneously and based on what we've seen 50 torpedoes at once is more than enough to take care of any standard ship fielded by major Alpha or Gamma quadrant races.

Much of what you are proposing predicates upon the idea that photon torpedo tubes are fairly short affairs. From what can be gathered based on the MSD displays and such, the loading bays and the tubes themselves take up a fairly decent length of the ship. As for the "two forward, two aft" principle, that does not always hold up as we have seen with the Galaxy class having only one forward tube and one aft, but each one capable of spitting out simultaneous spreads of 4-5 torpedoes. With the Intrepid class, there does appear to be at least one "vertical" tube and five or six tubes overall as shown in these images here. On the Sovereign class, there are documented at least three forward firing tubes; one quantum torpedo launcher on the ventral side of the saucer section, and two photon launchers on the forward ventral section of the stardrive. There are at least four aft-facing torpedo launchers. More on the added weapons of the Enterprise-E are documented here in this article at DITL.

As for whether Sovereign or Voyager is faster looking at the relative size of warp engines and the hull might be helpful. I'm not sure but I think Sovereign's engines are relatively larger.

They are much larger proportionately. If Mirror-Trip's comments in "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part I" are correct, the larger the warp coils, the faster it can go. But given that we have seen periods of alternating smaller and then larger warp nacelles, it stands to reason that advances in warp technology strive for more efficient and compact warp engines, but when push comes to shove, just making the things really huge gives results. Perhaps it is a power issue as well, since you can build 'em big, but can you power them adequately?
-Mike

[GStone]

Not to make an argument, but could that vertical launcher be the rear launcher shooting a torp upwards? The torp just made a sharp turn right after coming out instead of the usual large curve or possibly something in the tube that 'rebounds' them in a particular direction, kind of like changing the angle of phaser blasts, but with a different mechanism. Maybe a temporary force field to deflect its path and the strength of the deflection is either based on the strength of the field or its position.

[Kane Starkiller]

The Scimitar was truely a monster ship, not merely for it's size, but for the unusual armament it mounted: 52 disruptor cannon, along with 27 torpedo launchers, making it one of the most heavily armed, if not the most heavily starship among the conventional ST powers' capital ships. If Shinzon had truly wished, he could have ended the battle with the the Enterprise with the first opening volley.

Well they never actually say launchers but 27 torpedo bays so there could be certain torpedo bays that lead to other torpedo bays but don't have a launcher of their own. But certainly if Scimitar had the ability to shoot 27 photon torpedoes simultaneously the fight would be over quickly.

Much of what you are proposing predicates upon the idea that photon torpedo tubes are fairly short affairs. From what can be gathered based on the MSD displays and such, the loading bays and the tubes themselves take up a fairly decent length of the ship. As for the "two forward, two aft" principle, that does not always hold up as we have seen with the Galaxy class having only one forward tube and one aft, but each one capable of spitting out simultaneous spreads of 4-5 torpedoes. With the Intrepid class, there does appear to be at least one "vertical" tube and five or six tubes overall as shown in these images here. On the Sovereign class, there are documented at least three forward firing tubes; one quantum torpedo launcher on the ventral side of the saucer section, and two photon launchers on the forward ventral section of the stardrive. There are at least four aft-facing torpedo launchers. More on the added weapons of the Enterprise-E are documented here in this article at DITL.

But why would the launchers need to be that long? Photon torpedoes are self propelled so what's stopping the Starfleet from simply putting them in a cell of similar dimensions as the photon torpedo? Replacing some of the Sovereign's lifeboats with photon launchers would give it quite a boost in firepower on the cheap without any fancy reactor upgrades. Come to think about it the Captains yacht would be the first on the list.
About the Galaxy burst launch. If I remember correctly we actually see a single glow exit the launch tube which then disperses into several glows. This could indicate the torpedo had multiple warheads rather than simultaneous launch. It would also explain why Galaxy class doesn't do it all the time: individual warheads would have much lower yield thus negating the advantage.

[Praeothmin]

Regarding the firepower of Federation ship it seems that whatever the class of a ship photon torpedoes are the most powerful weapons. Since all observed ship classes have about 2 forward and 2 aft torpedo launchers then all ship classes should actually have similar firepower.

While I agree that on pretty much all of the ships the torperdoes do seem the more powerful weapon, Phasers are used a lot more often then torpedoes in battle, and the difference in effect and power does not seem that high, so the actual Phaser power of any ship will count heavily in any firepower analysis.

But why would the launchers need to be that long? Photon torpedoes are self propelled so what's stopping the Starfleet from simply putting them in a cell of similar dimensions as the photon torpedo?

All the ship diagrams I've seen, as well as ST II: TWoK and ST VI: TUC canonically establish that torpedo launchers are indeed long, and require space to operate.
The way it's been in ST VI is that the launcher imparts the initial thrust to the torpedo, and the engine takes over after the launch.
This would most likely be a way to use more space on the torpedo for the reactants, giving it more power then a torpedo needing more fuel.

[Mike DiCenso]

The Scimitar was truely a monster ship, not merely for it's size, but for the unusual armament it mounted: 52 disruptor cannon, along with 27 torpedo launchers, making it one of the most heavily armed, if not the most heavily starship among the conventional ST powers' capital ships. If Shinzon had truly wished, he could have ended the battle with the the Enterprise with the first opening volley.

Well they never actually say launchers but 27 torpedo bays so there could be certain torpedo bays that lead to other torpedo bays but don't have a launcher of their own. But certainly if Scimitar had the ability to shoot 27 photon torpedoes simultaneously the fight would be over quickly.

It would have been, except that Shinzon wanted to take Picard alive, and so his only aim was to disable the E-E, rather than destroy it it, or damage it in such a way that would seriously risk destroying his body. When going head-to-head against the two Valdore warbirds, Shizon showed no reservations and the Scimitar did serious damage to one ship and utterly destroyed the other without any effort.

But why would the launchers need to be that long? Photon torpedoes are self propelled so what's stopping the Starfleet from simply putting them in a cell of similar dimensions as the photon torpedo? Replacing some of the Sovereign's lifeboats with photon launchers would give it quite a boost in firepower on the cheap without any fancy reactor upgrades. Come to think about it the Captains yacht would be the first on the list.
About the Galaxy burst launch. If I remember correctly we actually see a single glow exit the launch tube which then disperses into several glows. This could indicate the torpedo had multiple warheads rather than simultaneous launch. It would also explain why Galaxy class doesn't do it all the time: individual warheads would have much lower yield thus negating the advantage.

The launcher as Praeothmin points out acts to accelerate the torpedo so that it does not have to do so itself from a relative dead-stop, and then possibly have to accelerate to a high fraction of c or to a higher warp speed, which would waste the warhead reactants. With the launcher pickign up a good chunk of the acceleration, either handing off a warp field or whiel at sublight, accelerating the torpedo to a high fraction of c before the torpedo's own propulsion kicks in, it saves more power and means a bigger BOOM when it hits the target.

The "burst fire" torpedo spread starts out a big cluster, that then rapidly spreads out equidistantly then maneuvers to converge on the target at different angles. It's been seen at least three times in TNG; "The Arsenal of Freedom", "Booby trap", and "Yesterday's Enterprise". In "Booby trap" we saw that the torpedoes are all individually powerful enough to vaporize 75-100 meter wide asteroids as well as a 600 meter warship, and produce explosions which expanded further on to consume additional asteroids of similar size. So weak MIRVs from a single torpedo is not what I would call it, especially considering that the tube openings are big enough to allow four or five tightly packed torpedo casings to exit from it.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

Not to make an argument, but could that vertical launcher be the rear launcher shooting a torp upwards? The torp just made a sharp turn right after coming out instead of the usual large curve or possibly something in the tube that 'rebounds' them in a particular direction, kind of like changing the angle of phaser blasts, but with a different mechanism. Maybe a temporary force field to deflect its path and the strength of the deflection is either based on the strength of the field or its position.

Looks like the torpedo is droping straight down out of the stardrive section's belly. It's a gaff, and we probably can ignore it, but still it is rather interesting if we were to accept it as-is.
-Mike

[Jedi Master Spock]

Regarding the firepower of Federation ship it seems that whatever the class of a ship photon torpedoes are the most powerful weapons. Since all observed ship classes have about 2 forward and 2 aft torpedo launchers then all ship classes should actually have similar firepower.

I'm going to take serious issue with all three of your claims here.

First, that all observed ship classes have 2 forward and 2 aft torpedo launchers. This is not what we see at any level of analysis of the canon. You may object to the 15 torpedo bays designed for the Akira, but the fact of the matter is that counts of torpedo bays (especially on the Sovereign) vary a great deal from for. On the other end of the scale, the Miranda has an optional roll-bar torpedo launcher present in some models, absent in others.

Second, not all torpedo launchers are created equal. Either the Galaxy class main launchers are much superior, or there are a great many more of them, because the ship can spread-fire groups of five in quite short order (ten according to the TNGTM, which would fit nicely with each of two forward launchers firing five in alternating groups). Then there's the question of launchers dedicated to quantum or photon torpedoes, and launchers that may shoot either.

Third, phasers, not photon torpedoes, are the primary armament of large Trek ships. Photon torpedoes necessarily have a larger effective range against moving targets, and can be fine-tuned for particular effects, but do not represent as large an investment in energy and antimatter.

Well they never actually say launchers but 27 torpedo bays so there could be certain torpedo bays that lead to other torpedo bays but don't have a launcher of their own. But certainly if Scimitar had the ability to shoot 27 photon torpedoes simultaneously the fight would be over quickly.

The TNG-era Galaxy had the ability to shoot at least five photon torpedoes forward at once, and is a much less heavily armed ship than the NEM-era Sovereign, which in turn is dwarfed by the Scimitar. 27 is perfectly reasonable, especially considering fore and aft launchers. The updated Sovereign hypothetically has around that half many launchers by Memory Alpha's count.

It seems strange, but there evidently are reasons for rationing torpedoes carefully in battle and not dumping all of them at once, given how variable torpedo output is even on the same model of ship.

It's the same thing with phasers. The GCS has a dozen or so phaser strips, yet only usually uses one at a time.

[Mike DiCenso]

Third, phasers, not photon torpedoes, are the primary armament of large Trek ships. Photon torpedoes necessarily have a larger effective range against moving targets, and can be fine-tuned for particular effects, but do not represent as large an investment in energy and antimatter.

I think Kane may be referring to the raw power of the photon torpedo versus the phaser, at least with regards to how it is portrayed in early half of the TNG episodes, most notably "Q Who?" and "The Nth Degree" where it is established that a full spread of of full yield torpedoes at near point-blank range can cripple a ship or destroy it, even through maximum shields. In terms of over all versatility, phasers win hands down, which when trying to do pin-point crippling attacks on an opposing vessel, or firing down into a position where a large explosion would be dangerous, phasers are indeed the weapon of choice.
-Mike

[GStone]

Not to make an argument, but could that vertical launcher be the rear launcher shooting a torp upwards? The torp just made a sharp turn right after coming out instead of the usual large curve or possibly something in the tube that 'rebounds' them in a particular direction, kind of like changing the angle of phaser blasts, but with a different mechanism. Maybe a temporary force field to deflect its path and the strength of the deflection is either based on the strength of the field or its position.

Looks like the torpedo is droping straight down out of the stardrive section's belly. It's a gaff, and we probably can ignore it, but still it is rather interesting if we were to accept it as-is.
-Mike

It would be interesting. It would provide some evidence that ship-to-ship fights aren't always gonna have everyone stay on practically the same plane. SoA did show that a lot, but you'd think that if it was more common, they'd put in vertical tubes. The horizontal ones have to be passing somewhere near crew quarters, so that wouldn't be that big of an issue for areas people go through when they're awake.

Edit: Actually, I was thinking you meant the rear shots of Voyager that fired the torp that made a more diagonal path. I hadn't even scrolled down further than that till now.

[Kane Starkiller]

The launcher as Praeothmin points out acts to accelerate the torpedo so that it does not have to do so itself from a relative dead-stop, and then possibly have to accelerate to a high fraction of c or to a higher warp speed, which would waste the warhead reactants. With the launcher pickign up a good chunk of the acceleration, either handing off a warp field or whiel at sublight, accelerating the torpedo to a high fraction of c before the torpedo's own propulsion kicks in, it saves more power and means a bigger BOOM when it hits the target.

I have never seen a photon torpedo exiting the launch tubes at speeds and accelerations that can't be matched by even todays missiles. Is there any evidence launch tubes can accelerate the torpedo to such relative speeds? Photon torpedoes launched at warp still move at low relative velocity to the firing ship, even those fired in quantum slipstream.

The "burst fire" torpedo spread starts out a big cluster, that then rapidly spreads out equidistantly then maneuvers to converge on the target at different angles. It's been seen at least three times in TNG; "The Arsenal of Freedom", "Booby trap", and "Yesterday's Enterprise". In "Booby trap" we saw that the torpedoes are all individually powerful enough to vaporize 75-100 meter wide asteroids as well as a 600 meter warship, and produce explosions which expanded further on to consume additional asteroids of similar size. So weak MIRVs from a single torpedo is not what I would call it, especially considering that the tube openings are big enough to allow four or five tightly packed torpedo casings to exit from it.

Weak as in weaker than a single warhead. Alternatively the time needed to load up 5 torpedoes is 5 times greater so they can fire 1 torpedo, say, every second and 5 torpedoes every 5 seconds.

First, that all observed ship classes have 2 forward and 2 aft torpedo launchers. This is not what we see at any level of analysis of the canon. You may object to the 15 torpedo bays designed for the Akira, but the fact of the matter is that counts of torpedo bays (especially on the Sovereign) vary a great deal from for. On the other end of the scale, the Miranda has an optional roll-bar torpedo launcher present in some models, absent in others.

There was no trace of the 15 launchers on Akira when it was firing on the Borg cube. There were in fact only two launchers and even they weren't used simultaneously. I didn't claim 2x2 launchers is true for all ship classes but that seems to be the rough number. Sovereign has 3 forward identified launchers so that isn't a big variation from Voyager's or Constitution's 2 forward launchers.

Second, not all torpedo launchers are created equal. Either the Galaxy class main launchers are much superior, or there are a great many more of them, because the ship can spread-fire groups of five in quite short order (ten according to the TNGTM, which would fit nicely with each of two forward launchers firing five in alternating groups). Then there's the question of launchers dedicated to quantum or photon torpedoes, and launchers that may shoot either.

As I said either it was a photon torpedo with submunitions or it takes more time to load up more torpedoes into the launch tube thus negating much of the advantage. Otherwise it would be ridiculous for Galaxy not to use such firepower in big fleet engagements.

Third, phasers, not photon torpedoes, are the primary armament of large Trek ships. Photon torpedoes necessarily have a larger effective range against moving targets, and can be fine-tuned for particular effects, but do not represent as large an investment in energy and antimatter.

So are you claiming phasers are more powerful than photon torpedo? As in 1 second fire from a phaser is significantly more powerful than a photon torpedo? Because that doesn't follow at all from canon. Federation captains tend to use phasers if they can get away with it but when push comes to shove it's the photon torpedoes that get used.

The TNG-era Galaxy had the ability to shoot at least five photon torpedoes forward at once, and is a much less heavily armed ship than the NEM-era Sovereign, which in turn is dwarfed by the Scimitar. 27 is perfectly reasonable, especially considering fore and aft launchers. The updated Sovereign hypothetically has around that half many launchers by Memory Alpha's count.

How do we know Galaxy is much less heavily armed than Sovereign? The trouble is we see no trace of these 27 launchers not even against the Valdores which Shinzon has every reason to move out of the way as soon as possible. And as I said they don't even say 27 torpedo launchers but 27 torpedo bays which may or may not all have a launcher of their own.



However upon further thought there is a big problem in my multiple launcher proposal I didn't consider. And that is the fact that photon torpedoes have antimatter warheads which need some kind of active containment system. It is likely the system in a small photon torpedo is not very reliable and the antimatter is held in a single large container and only filled before the torpedo is loaded into the launch tube. Statistically speaking a ship carrying hundreds of preloaded photon torpedoes and depending on each and every torpedo not to have a defective containment system would be a disaster waiting to happen.
Which brings me to the question of why they don't simply replace the antimatter warhead with a W88 but that argument would bring out our differences in photon torpedo yield and I don't really have the interest of rehashing that one again.

[Jedi Master Spock]

I think Kane may be referring to the raw power of the photon torpedo versus the phaser, at least with regards to how it is portrayed in early half of the TNG episodes, most notably "Q Who?" and "The Nth Degree" where it is established that a full spread of of full yield torpedoes at near point-blank range can cripple a ship or destroy it, even through maximum shields. In terms of over all versatility, phasers win hands down, which when trying to do pin-point crippling attacks on an opposing vessel, or firing down into a position where a large explosion would be dangerous, phasers are indeed the weapon of choice.
-Mike

So are you claiming phasers are more powerful than photon torpedo? As in 1 second fire from a phaser is significantly more powerful than a photon torpedo? Because that doesn't follow at all from canon. Federation captains tend to use phasers if they can get away with it but when push comes to shove it's the photon torpedoes that get used.

Can sometimes, under certain circumstances. In "The Nth degree" the concern expressed is "cripple" for a full spread of maximum yield torpedoes. Crippling doesn't mean destroying; what we're looking at here is the very common scenario of systems temporarily going down when the fractional-second surge bleeds through. The ship rocks, consoles explodes, shields are still up, but miscellaneous systems need Geordi to wave a magic wand over them. That's exactly what I expect "The Nth Degree" to be referring to.

Also, the trick Barclay does to fix this is routing warp power to the shields, which in the next season ("Hero Worship") is in the E-D's regular bag of tricks, and in this particular case represented a 300% increase in shield strength while shields were in the process of failing, i.e., probably less than the difference between maximum absolute yield and normal tactical yields.

After that, we don't see very much concern about torpedo backblast. Don't forget that shield technology advances, not just weapons technology - between that and the exploration of metaphasic shielding near the end of TNG, shield technology seems to have been going through a development phase right then.

In "Q Who?" when the concern is about destruction of the Enterprise, the shields are already down. There are a number of other episodes which establish the greater energy phasers can easily supply, such as "The Sound of Her Voice," in which phaser banks are drained to provide substantial warp power juice, "Masks" as compared to "Rise," and, as explored on SB.com by NOVAWARRIOR, the battle of Chin'Toka, in which he finds a second of phaser fire from an Excelsior is worth 4-5 photon torpedo hits from a Galaxy.

I've repeatedly gauged phasers at 1+ GT/second for a GCS; photon torpedoes only seem to hit the GT range in bombardment scenarios ("Skin of Evil", "The Die is Cast").

The indications are that for tactical photon torpedoes, they are quite a bit weaker than a second of phaser fire from a heavier ship. I'm not saying photon torpedoes are useless; far from it! However, they are for most ships the secondary weapons system, not the primary. Even for a D12 - an older cloaking vessel - we see the beam weapons (disruptor bolts or phasers; not specified) causing larger areas of destruction in Star Trek: Generations than the photon torpedoes.

Fact of the matter is that ST ships need enormous amounts of power coursing through plasma conduits out from the warp core. Using even a small fraction of that for phaser fire means phasers can provide more yield on target over time. Are photon torpedoes useful? Definitely!

For one thing, they release their energy in a tiny fractional-second burst, meaning that while they don't deliver as much yield, they do it in a time-concentrated punch. For another, while they need antimatter supplies, they don't need much power to launch. A third, as I mentioned, is that when you're engaging at long ranges against moving targets (e.g., from a light-second away in "The Wounded") beam weapons have limited accuracy against highly mobile targets.

However upon further thought there is a big problem in my multiple launcher proposal I didn't consider. And that is the fact that photon torpedoes have antimatter warheads which need some kind of active containment system. It is likely the system in a small photon torpedo is not very reliable and the antimatter is held in a single large container and only filled before the torpedo is loaded into the launch tube. Statistically speaking a ship carrying hundreds of preloaded photon torpedoes and depending on each and every torpedo not to have a defective containment system would be a disaster waiting to happen.
Which brings me to the question of why they don't simply replace the antimatter warhead with a W88 but that argument would bring out our differences in photon torpedo yield and I don't really have the interest of rehashing that one again.

We've seen antimatter stored with little concern for safety, especially with Wesley's science experiment. In TNG, this seems to be a solved engineering problem.

[Kane Starkiller]

In "Q Who?" when the concern is about destruction of the Enterprise, the shields are already down. There are a number of other episodes which establish the greater energy phasers can easily supply, such as "The Sound of Her Voice," in which phaser banks are drained to provide substantial warp power juice, "Masks" as compared to "Rise," and, as explored on SB.com by NOVAWARRIOR, the battle of Chin'Toka, in which he finds a second of phaser fire from an Excelsior is worth 4-5 photon torpedo hits from a Galaxy.

In Battle of Chin'Toka it's unclear whether certain installations were attacked off screen. Speaking of Rise it is yet another argument for photon torpedoes being more powerful since Voyager opts for using them instead of phasers to try and break the asteroid even though Voyager's supply of torpedoes was repeatedly stated to be limited.

I've repeatedly gauged phasers at 1+ GT/second for a GCS; photon torpedoes only seem to hit the GT range in bombardment scenarios ("Skin of Evil", "The Die is Cast").

I don't believe either phasers or photon torpedoes much exceed single megaton level so I guess on that one we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The indications are that for tactical photon torpedoes, they are quite a bit weaker than a second of phaser fire from a heavier ship. I'm not saying photon torpedoes are useless; far from it! However, they are for most ships the secondary weapons system, not the primary. Even for a D12 - an older cloaking vessel - we see the beam weapons (disruptor bolts or phasers; not specified) causing larger areas of destruction in Star Trek: Generations than the photon torpedoes.

I don't remember any particular evidence that disruptors caused more damage than photon torpedoes in ST7. In fact the actual visual damage didn't appear at all extensive.

Fact of the matter is that ST ships need enormous amounts of power coursing through plasma conduits out from the warp core. Using even a small fraction of that for phaser fire means phasers can provide more yield on target over time. Are photon torpedoes useful? Definitely!

For one thing, they release their energy in a tiny fractional-second burst, meaning that while they don't deliver as much yield, they do it in a time-concentrated punch. For another, while they need antimatter supplies, they don't need much power to launch. A third, as I mentioned, is that when you're engaging at long ranges against moving targets (e.g., from a light-second away in "The Wounded") beam weapons have limited accuracy against highly mobile targets.

Over time perhaps but how much time? Again we are back to the fact that every time time and energy are critical photon torpedoes are used whether it's the asteroid destruction in "Cost of Living" or "Rise".

We've seen antimatter stored with little concern for safety, especially with Wesley's science experiment. In TNG, this seems to be a solved engineering problem.

That they gave a 15 year old boy antimatter only demonstrates that the crew of Enterprise is, well, idiotic. However Geordi's own comments in Contaigon that they are "sitting on a bomb that could go any second -- or never" indicate antimatter containment is not perfectly reliable. Multiply that by hundreds of different containment systems and the risk of a catastrophe rises dramatically.

[Jedi Master Spock]

In Battle of Chin'Toka it's unclear whether certain installations were attacked off screen. Speaking of Rise it is yet another argument for photon torpedoes being more powerful since Voyager opts for using them instead of phasers to try and break the asteroid even though Voyager's supply of torpedoes was repeatedly stated to be limited.

Voyager is a much smaller ship with less powerful weaponry and shields, focused on engines and sensors rather than armament - and yet, to gauge by its photon torpedo supply, which is stated to be quite small (a tenth as much as a GCS, even though it's almost a sixth of the size), it could be carrying torpedoes as powerful or more powerful. Yet its phasers could easily be only a tenth the strength of a larger ship.

If you read the SB.com link, you'll note that for the Defiant, one second (4 pulses) of pulse phaser fire seemed to have the same effect as one of the Defiant's torpedoes. Small ships have less powerful phaser arrays.

I don't believe either phasers or photon torpedoes much exceed single megaton level so I guess on that one we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Even so, look at the difference. If you're assuming photon torpedoes are no more than the single digit megaton range, we're talking about fragmenting a hundred-meter range asteroid. A similar energy phaser burst, applying energy over seconds instead of microseconds, would melt, rather than scatter, the asteroid.

I don't remember any particular evidence that disruptors caused more damage than photon torpedoes in ST7. In fact the actual visual damage didn't appear at all extensive.

Check out the impact scenes on YouTube, then. There's also dialog - it's the disruptor bolts that are cited to cause damage across a whole string of decks, not the initial torpedo hits.

Over time perhaps but how much time? Again we are back to the fact that every time time and energy are critical photon torpedoes are used whether it's the asteroid destruction in "Cost of Living" or "Rise".

And for the hardest tasks and the largest obstacles that need destroying, such as "Masks" or "The Paradise Syndrome" or "Destiny," you pull out the phasers.

When you want to explode things, your first instinct is to pull out an explosive, and photon torpedoes are explosives.

That they gave a 15 year old boy antimatter only demonstrates that the crew of Enterprise is, well, idiotic. However Geordi's own comments in Contaigon that they are "sitting on a bomb that could go any second -- or never" indicate antimatter containment is not perfectly reliable. Multiply that by hundreds of different containment systems and the risk of a catastrophe rises dramatically.

In "Contagion" they're dealing with a virus that can fiddle with the containment controls - i.e., "deliberate release" of the containment... via accident.

Let me summarize a nice example. Voyager may well carry torpedoes as powerful as a Galaxy class's, but it fires them much more slowly and has a much smaller supply. Its phasers are certainly much less powerful than the GCS.