Phaser Ranges - are they too short?

[Eric R.]

I was thumbing through the core rule books the oher night and realised that the Pahser ranges in the TNG and DS9 books seem incredibly short. I might be reading them wrong but I don't think so.

Example: A Type III phaser rife in the TNG book is given the range of 5 meters for point blank; 20 for short; 80 for medium and 150 for long range in DS9 the Type III-A is 5/45/85/160 now this is all well and good until you look at the TOS core book where the phaser rifle is listed as 10/50/150/300. Now I would assume that range would not suffer for better performance between TOS and TNG eras. Further generally the ranges seem to be awfully small when compared with modern day weaponry don;t you think? Could it be the TNG/DS9 era stuff left off a 0 at the end of the numbers?

What says the Assembly?

[Ergi]

So you mean that the new maximum range for a phaser rifle shoule be 1600 meters? What benefit would you have of such a weapon? Hitting an elephant 1 km away. It would surely be possible to build a phaser rifle with such a range but think of the difference. An other problem is that the phaser beam consists of nadions which doesnt travel at the speed of light. And the nadion speed of a sidearm can´t be compared to those of a starship phaser bank. I think the sidearm nadion speed can be seen when someone uses pulse mode. So an enemy 1000 meters away would probably have several seconds to dive for cover. And in addition he would know your position. A third point is that phasers are usually used in rather narrow environments like a starship. Therefore there´s no need for higher weapon ranges.

------------------
God, I liked him better before he died.

[Old Soldier]

Originally posted by Ergi:
So you mean that the new maximum range for a phaser rifle shoule be 1600 meters? What benefit would you have of such a weapon?
<<snip>>

As a former member of the military, let me address these points. First of all, the hand phasers ranges are fine (type I & II), given the short sighting cue and relative use of the weapon.

HOWEVER, modern real world weapons which fire bullets not nadions are commonly able to hit and killing real world targets at 800+ meters. The US Military's M-16A2 rifle, while hardly being the best in its class can (according to its own tech manual) effectively engage point targets at a maximum of 825 meters and area effect (burst) targets at 900 meters. Tracer burnout on most tracer using weapons occurs at 900 meters.

Granted that in practice, it is very difficult to hit a man sized target at ranges exceeding 300 meters. Snipers with somewhat better weapons have no problem at all killing officers at 1000+ meters in adverse weather conditions. If have the range advantage on your opponent, you are more likely to live in a standoff engagement. There are plenty of uses for weapons with long range.

<<snip>>
So an enemy 1000 meters away would probably have several seconds to dive for cover.
<<snip>>[/B]

I find this hard to believe. Given that a bullet (much, much slower than a nadion should be) from the weapons listed above will cross the distance to the target in slightly more than a second to somewhat less than a second depending on the ballistics. Unless the bad guys are drinking that funny stuff the high speed aliens dropped into Kirk's coffee, dodging the beam when you see it is a moot point.

<<snip>>
Therefore there´s no need for higher weapon ranges.<<snip>>[/B]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you on this point. Keep in mind that the phaser III is a HEAVY personal weapon. If starfleet crewmembers drag this monster out of the armory, they're expecting BIGTIME TROUBLE. This weapon is the 23rd century equivalent of an assault rifle / squad infantry weapon. As such, I would submit that the ranges as listed in the book are woefully inadequate. In that vein, the adjusted ranges (as used in my games) for the Phaser III series weapons as being: 25/100/300/1000 (scale in meters).

------------------
"Any society which is willing to surrender essential liberties in order to gain security, shall in the end have neither."

[SIR SIG]

Between the 3+ versions of type 3 phaser rifles do there stats relatively compare? ie range

------------------
SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

[Mad Cow]

I have to agree with Old Soldier here, though I think that hitting and killing someone at 825 metres with an M-16 (A2 or otherwise is just a TAD optimistic!). At 900 meters the old darling will have a beaten zone the size of a football field. But then again I've always been a fan of 7.62mm ...

Seriously though, when I was young and stupid I started writing a novel where Star Fleet marines were fighting a guerilla war in a desrt environment. Due to the range limitations of the phaser and the fact that one visual distance stretched to the horizon, each trooper carried a guass slugthrower. I gave these rifles a max effective range of 800m, though, of course, with a little practice marksman could nail targets nearly 1200m away. The action sequences involving some of the long range firefights, with a little help from my own military experience (Australian Army) worked quite well. And when you threw in heavy machine guns, mortars and orbital artillery, it got down right exiting.

Each trooper also carried a phaser but due to the nature of the fighting (hit and run) these saw very little use.

------------------
"You couldn't even SPELL Prime Directive!"
"Not true. It's spelt P-H-A-S-E-R."