By your own admission Knightstorm, that tech on photorps in that ST mag was not canon, so we can consider it not true, especially when you consider how many examples in TNG/DSP/Voy of the torps being warp speed, from "Encounter at Farpoint" on. While I can't think of an actual moment when a character flatly states "torpedoes are ftl/sublight," the obvious conclusion, based on everything we've seen, is that the photon torpedoes are physical objects (TWOK onward) that require energy to fire. (TNG, S1ep5 "The Last Outpost," Lt. Yar says "We have energy to arm the photons but none to fire them.") The TNG Tech Manual, written by those who provided the science/technical advising for the show, says that photon torpedoes can be both sublight and FTL, depending on how they are launched, which is the same as what the "Daystrom Institute" site you provided Capt Adam (see footnotes there). So I'd say it's as "accurate" as you can get.
You sure are right about the "SFX" people, Capt Adam, but not their fault
- it's always plot driven, which is why this is such a muddled topic. The "swooping seeking" photorp looked cool in ST6, and they could use it to comedic effect in "Message in a Bottle," so they did.
Look, to try to "agree to disagree," let's reiterate - it's a TV show/movie series of 738 episodes. Yes we all love it but it can be maddening contradictory. Yes, overall Michio Kaku is right, it's not the best name for a weapon. In TOS they loked like blobs of light and they never said what thet were. "They" gave more detail as the movies and new shows came out, which is what we're stuck with. In any event, as with most of the technology, it's usually plot-driven how and when things work they way they do.
You're right, Captain Adam, in SFB the missiles (called "drones") required zero energy to arm and launch (exception: antimatter warhead drones that the Feds had access to). These came totally from the makers of SFB, not canon. SFB also used the concept common in the 70s that phasers were "warp-accelerated" and were FTL weapons. Also, in SFB, combat is FTL (low, below WF3), where in SFC they used the TNG et. al. concept that combat was almost entirely subllight and that phasers don't work in warp. While I can think of an exception or two (Voyager firing phasers as point defense "Basics, pt 1"), most of the TV and movies followed this case. Unless the plot-of-the-week required otherwise.
Personally, I prefer the "sublight combat" idea of SFC/TNG as opposed to the SFB model. The SFB rules had to jump through hoops about warp combat to cover the "examples" in TOS "Balance of Terror" AND "Elaan of Troyus." I can't resist posting this - here's the description of warp combat from SFB, Basic Set:
"Movement at a speed of one hex per turn equals movement at the speed of light.
Thus, each turn represents 1/30 of a second of subjective time. However, using relativistic
variable time distortion, the time elapsed during a turn appears to the crew
inside the ship to be about a minute"
Now, really, does
that make any real sense??
Topic: So anyone still play? (Read 81410 times)