Why, oh why, the bat'leth?

[Timo]

the more sensitive tolerances of the electronics of a phaser beam.

That's just it, though: there's no obvious reason why the tolerances of a piece of technology should be more sensitive than the tolerances of the heart, or the brain.

A piece of technology can be made as tolerant as desired (in theory, treknology would allow for the piece to be encased in impenetrable armor and still be made portable through inertia and gravity control). A heart or a brain can't be "made" anything, because of some sort of a phobia on part of our heroes against cybernetically enhanced warriors. So we're stuck with things that quit at the first taste of induced current.

A knife can't "run out of ammo" either.

Apparently, neither can a phaser. Or at least it's good enough for killing an army of thousands first. Try that with a knife, and you'll probably have to find a new one less than halfway through the effort...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Lord Manitou]

I think it is important to say this.
Local disputing and fights among the a Klingon clans would quickly clear the ranks of defenders if the knife and the Battleth were not honored weapons in the field of combat. The Klingons feelings of honor is far stronger than feelings of self preservation.

 

[JarodRussell]

I would have wished for a big TNG movie where a company like WETA gets to take a look at Klingon weapons and put the same effort in it like they put effort into the weapons of Lord of the Rings.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

the more sensitive tolerances of the electronics of a phaser beam.

That's just it, though: there's no obvious reason why the tolerances of a piece of technology should be more sensitive than the tolerances of the heart, or the brain.

They don't HAVE to be, but they are. You can slam a human being into a brick wall without causing catastrophic damage to his heart and lungs. OTOH, my laptop suffered major hard drive failure after my son pushed it off the kitchen table last year.

Living organisms have very loose tolerances to heat and radiation and environment, just as a function of our evolution and adaptability. Electronic components are designed to do exactly one thing and do it really well, and so they are only as fault tolerant as their designers are thoughtful.

 

[Newspaper Taxi]

Let's do an experiment. Half of the posters in this thread go get your phasers and the other half can go get their bat'leths. We'll meet behind The ol' Brisby's field Sunday night and see for ourselves just what is more effective overall.

 

[baxart]

I'll chime in with obvious, but overlooked points: You have a very low chance of piercing the hull with a bat'leth.
If captured, it would be difficult for an enemy to turn your own bat'leth against you. (since they are unfamiliar with the heavy weapon)
And there is the psychological effect upon an enemy of seeing their comrades hacked apart, hearing them screaming in pain, and seeing blood, limbs and entrails flying around. When they would be most accustomed to either seeing people die with only burn marks, or vanish completely.

 

[Manticore]

Let's do an experiment. Half of the posters in this thread go get your phasers and the other half can go get their bat'leths. We'll meet behind The ol' Brisby's field Sunday night and see for ourselves just what is more effective overall.

Sadly, I left my Type 2 phaser in my parents' basement when I moved out. I think the batteries were dead though. And I never could get the danged thing to fire, just make odd noises.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

The better question is: would phasers or a bat'leth be more effective than a sonic screwdriver?

 

[Timo]

They don't HAVE to be, but they are. You can slam a human being into a brick wall without causing catastrophic damage to his heart and lungs. OTOH, my laptop suffered major hard drive failure after my son pushed it off the kitchen table last year.

Yet take a military-ruggerized laptop and run over it with a tank, and it will still work. Been there, done that.

We have basically zero evidence of Starfleet hardware being susceptible to structural failure. Picard nearly dies of shock of disbelief when his rifle breaks in ST:NEM... There is no pressing reason for Starfleet weapons not to be a thousand times more tolerant to radiation, heat or EM gradients than our soft and tender bodies, which have evolved to only cope with an extremely narrow range of environmental parameters - the one found here on Earth.

You have a very low chance of piercing the hull with a bat'leth.

Or with a phaser, for that matter. We have seen firefights in corridors that don't even leave scorch marks on the corridor walls even when the same hits connecting with a humanoid body cause it to cease to exist. So phasers are probably safer than halberd-like edged weapons when one doesn't want to hurt the walls. And you definitely want to have the option of hurting the walls, too - something the Klingon sword can't do (they have been seen to break against stone walls and floors at least).

If captured, it would be difficult for an enemy to turn your own bat'leth against you. (since they are unfamiliar with the heavy weapon)

But far more difficult for them to turn your phaser against you, because they couldn't figure out what button does what. Nona from "A Private Little War" had seen Kirk operate a Type 1 phaser, but couldn't repeat the feat to literally save her life. And it shouldn't be difficult to program your phaser with a PIN code that needs to be re-punched every time the grip on the weapon is lost...

And there is the psychological effect upon an enemy of seeing their comrades hacked apart, hearing them screaming in pain, and seeing blood, limbs and entrails flying around.

There's a setting in the phaser for that, too.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Crazy Eddie]

They don't HAVE to be, but they are. You can slam a human being into a brick wall without causing catastrophic damage to his heart and lungs. OTOH, my laptop suffered major hard drive failure after my son pushed it off the kitchen table last year.

Yet take a military-ruggerized laptop and run over it with a tank, and it will still work. Been there, done that...

Ironically, the first thing I thought of when I read this line was the broken phaser rifle from Nemesis.

The second thing I thought of was Khan bending Kirk's hand phaser in half with his bare hands.

I'm not sure Starfleet really qualifies as a "military" as such; their battle uniforms look like pajamas and their assault weapons are as durable as nerf guns (not necessarily because some of them ARE redressed nerf guns...)

There is no pressing reason for Starfleet weapons not to be a thousand times more tolerant to radiation, heat or EM gradients than our soft and tender bodies, which have evolved to only cope with an extremely narrow range of environmental parameters - the one found here on Earth.

I would assume for the exact same reason they never bother to equip their security officers with portable forcefields or anything resembling body armor. Hell, their ground troops don't even have HATS.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Yet take a military-ruggerized laptop and run over it with a tank, and it will still work. Been there, done that.

And if you shoot it?

We have basically zero evidence of Starfleet hardware being susceptible to structural failure. Picard nearly dies of shock of disbelief when his rifle breaks in ST:NEM... There is no pressing reason for Starfleet weapons not to be a thousand times more tolerant to radiation, heat or EM gradients than our soft and tender bodies, which have evolved to only cope with an extremely narrow range of environmental parameters - the one found here on Earth.

We have plenty of evidence: Picard's rifle in Nemesis, and the statements about the TR-116 being developed in order to avoid the problems phasers have (or had) in relation to certain types of radiation. (Which also "killed" the phaser in Trek IV, you will recall.)

Canon fact trumps your specualtion and unsupported pronouncements.

You have a very low chance of piercing the hull with a bat'leth.

Or with a phaser, for that matter. We have seen firefights in corridors that don't even leave scorch marks on the corridor walls even when the same hits connecting with a humanoid body cause it to cease to exist.

The human body is structurally weaker than dense metal walls, so that is understandable.

But far more difficult for them to turn your phaser against you, because they couldn't figure out what button does what. Nona from "A Private Little War" had seen Kirk operate a Type 1 phaser, but couldn't repeat the feat to literally save her life.

Wrong. She was grabbed before she could do so because she was grandstanding.

And it shouldn't be difficult to program your phaser with a PIN code that needs to be re-punched every time the grip on the weapon is lost...

Oh yes, let's stop in the middle of a firefight and fiddle with pushing in a pincode every time you accidently drop your weapon.

 

[Timo]

And if you shoot it?

I guess it has better odds of remaining at least partially functional than my poor body would have.

In fact, almost anything has better odds than a human body, because we are naturally incredibly fragile, with several key weaknesses that aren't compensated for by backups. The only thing going for us is our capability for some limited self-repair if given sufficient time. And technology could have that, too - with much greater capabilities at much greater speed. Like the Borg have it in Trek, logically enough.

The human body is structurally weaker than dense metal walls, so that is understandable.

Not really - not when the phaser beam fails to damage a painting on the wall!

TrekCore doesn't quite deliver this time, but what we see being hit in the screencap below is a piece of art that remains a piece of art after said hit. Namely, the piece we see in the other screencap, from earlier on in the episode.

http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x25/conspiracy232.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s1/1x25/conspiracy137.jpg

Wrong. She was grabbed before she could do so because she was grandstanding.

Naah. Just watch the scene - she's pushing and twisting everything on the weapon for fear of her life, without result.

Oh yes, let's stop in the middle of a firefight and fiddle with pushing in a pincode every time you accidently drop your weapon.

That'll teach you not to drop it, I guess.

In any case, the argument that a sword would be more difficult for the enemy to use than a gun is already well defeated. A sword, any sword, is intuitively trivially easy to operate, because what you see is what you get. A gun is a mechanism with a user interface, and those always take some time to learn - especially when the enemy doing the learning is a bulging-eyed monster from outer space!

http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/en/images/9/9d/Gowron%2C_2375.jpg

Timo Saloniemi

 

[baxart]

A sword, any sword, is intuitively trivially easy to operate, because what you see is what you get.

Timo Saloniemi

Yes that's basically true Timo, but pick up a two handed (8-12lb) sword for the first time and face someone who's trained. You can operate it sure, "the pointy bit goes into the other guy" but you'll humiliate yourself very quickly. I think we've seen plenty of examples in film and TV to back me up.

As far as phasers & disruptors not scorching walls, uniforms or paintings, IMO that's more the fault of the effects department, not the weapon.

 

[Ian Keldon]

And if you shoot it?

I guess it has better odds of remaining at least partially functional than my poor body would have.

In fact, almost anything has better odds than a human body, because we are naturally incredibly fragile, with several key weaknesses that aren't compensated for by backups. The only thing going for us is our capability for some limited self-repair if given sufficient time. And technology could have that, too - with much greater capabilities at much greater speed. Like the Borg have it in Trek, logically enough.

1) "better odds" does not "indestructable" make

2) again, so what?

The human body is structurally weaker than dense metal walls, so that is understandable.

Not really - not when the phaser beam fails to damage a painting on the wall!

TrekCore doesn't quite deliver this time, but what we see being hit in the screencap below is a piece of art that remains a piece of art after said hit. Namely, the piece we see in the other screencap, from earlier on in the episode.

Production peculiarity. We only get to see what actual phaser burns from a kill (non vaporizing) shot looks like in one ep in any event. (Night Terrors)

Wrong. She was grabbed before she could do so because she was grandstanding.

Naah. Just watch the scene - she's pushing and twisting everything on the weapon for fear of her life, without result.

Did rewatch it, and it was typical 60s "frail woman" fighting after she got caught monologuing.

Oh yes, let's stop in the middle of a firefight and fiddle with pushing in a pincode every time you accidently drop your weapon.

That'll teach you not to drop it, I guess.

Accidents happen. Murphy is the king of the battlefield (ANY battlefield).

In any case, the argument that a sword would be more difficult for the enemy to use than a gun is already well defeated. A sword, any sword, is intuitively trivially easy to operate, because what you see is what you get. A gun is a mechanism with a user interface, and those always take some time to learn - especially when the enemy doing the learning is a bulging-eyed monster from outer space!

Care to show me where I made that argument, or are you going to just keep making stuff up.


The ultimate point is that edged, hand to hand weapons are NOT rendered impotent or obsolete by energy weapons. They are still 100% capable of doing their job in the right time and circumstances.

 

[Starlock]

Oh yes, let's stop in the middle of a firefight and fiddle with pushing in a pincode every time you accidently drop your weapon.

That'll teach you not to drop it, I guess.[/QUOTE]

Why the need to use codes?

You would think Star Fleet would equip these weapons with fingerprint and/or biometric recognition sensors?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Oh yes, let's stop in the middle of a firefight and fiddle with pushing in a pincode every time you accidently drop your weapon.

That'll teach you not to drop it, I guess.

Why the need to use codes?

You would think Star Fleet would equip these weapons with fingerprint and/or biometric recognition sensors?[/QUOTE]

Or install a simple sensor that keeps track of its owner and is capable of recognizing who is picking it up and deciding whether or not to fire.

It's the 24th century, dude. They could probably install Siri in the fire control circuitry.

 

[Ayelbourne]

So I was curious: Can someone come up with PRACTICAL scenarios that would realistically justify using bat'leths in 23rd centruy intergalatic combat?

Personal Energy Shields

Also, a Bat'leth is just a piece of metall. it can break and that is pretty much all that could go wrong with it.
Any energy weapon, on the other hand, has a multitude of technical components, all of which could have malfunction at any given point, rendering the weapon unusable.

Therefor, the overall potential for malfunctions is significantly higher for energy weapons than it is for a simple blade.

 

[Timo]

...pick up a two handed (8-12lb) sword for the first time and face someone who's trained.

I think I might still manage in the scenario presented - because in that scenario, the trained person has dropped his two-handed sword and is now unarmed!

1) "better odds" does not "indestructable" make 2) again, so what?

Indeed, so what? Nobody is talking indestructable. The point is simply that machines are automatically and categorically better at surviving damage than people, if one bothers to design the machines with damage resistance in mind. Anything that will hurt a properly ruggerized machine will kill a person, but not vice versa.

Care to show me where I made that argument, or are you going to just keep making stuff up.

That WAS your argument, asshole: "dropped sword is safer for the dropper than a dropped phaser". Stop your juvenile posturing - you aren't impressing anybody. And stop accusing me of lying, or I'll come over and kill you.

Fucking idiot.

The ultimate point is that edged, hand to hand weapons are NOT rendered impotent or obsolete by energy weapons.

Completely agreed. The only points of disagreements for me are whether it's always worth the bother to have an edged weapon if you also have an energy weapon (because redundancy doesn't always pay) and whether there really are situations where Star Trek energy weapons would be outdone by edged weapons.

On the former, there're probably plenty of exceptions, but by and large I concede the point that there's absolutely no harm for having a knife on your belt or ankle. And after seeing the latest movie, we know that the hero could carry a broadsword strapped to his ankle if he so wanted! (adding the necessary mass to the stiletto weapon might call for some "energy-based" technology, though, defeating the purpose.)

On the latter, it seems stealth attack is a good example of a special application but ability to survive jamming is at best a mediocre one. That is, our Starfleet heroes might find a knife useful if they encountered a type of jamming for the first time, but the second time into the fray their phaser would be working fine again, having been suitably ruggerized.

Personal Energy Shields

Interestingly, when we did see those in TAS, they were fine for blocking kinetic attack (such as the crushing weight of a hatch in "Beyond the Farthest Star"), but completely useless in stopping energy weapons (such as the stun phasers in "Slaver Weapon").

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Personal Energy Shields

Interestingly, when we did see those in TAS, they were fine for blocking kinetic attack (such as the crushing weight of a hatch in "Beyond the Farthest Star"), but completely useless in stopping energy weapons (such as the stun phasers in "Slaver Weapon").

Well, they worked pretty well against the bridge defense system in that same episode, at least to the point that it was able to buy Kirk a few crucial seconds to run the helm before the alien being killed him.

I would venture that the stun setting on phasers is as widely used as it is because it can still be effective despite personal forcefields while more dangerous settings--disruption and thermal--are not. Perhaps that also explains the "recoil" when somebody gets knocked over by a phaser blast, with an unseen personal forcefield converting the beam energy directly into kinetic energy and deflecting it away as such, but at a high enough phaser setting, that's like detonating a hand grenade in your front pocket (like Geordi in "The Samaritan Snare").

 

[Timo]

Well, they worked pretty well against the bridge defense system in that same episode, at least to the point that it was able to buy Kirk a few crucial seconds to run the helm before the alien being killed him.

Is that what's going on there?

The sequence of events is this:

1) The alien takes control of some of the ship's systems
2) Kirk tells Spock to lock the helm console with a "static shield" to prevent tampering of key systems
3) This shield is put in place, without using any visible hardware
4) The alien is thwarted by the shield, and starts blackmailing our heroes, first by reminding them that it has the power to shut down life support; at this point, some of the heroes are wearing their life support belts (although not in all the shots!), probably because of the fact that the alien controls life support
5) The alien starts shooting at the heroes with the intruder control system; Kirk and Spock take hits while their belts are on (although the belts disappear in many an intervening shot!) and are outlined in the familiar forcefield yellow
6) Kirk crawls to the console, punches some buttons and removes his belt
7) Alien ceases fire and issues Kirk further commands, which Kirk obeys

It seems to me, then, that the belts did nothing to protect Kirk. The beams were effective in hurting him (which was the aim - there was no lethal intent) and forced him to accede to the enemy demands.

8) The alien gets the heroes to rig special controls so that it can completely take over the ship
9) Kirk convinces the alien that the controls require manual intervention; he presses the button for that
10) The ship is now controlled by Kirk, who initiates a suicide plunge
11) The alien resumes blackmailing attempts by firing at Kirk, who is surrounded by the glow of his belt (even though the belt still rests on the helm console where he left it at surrendering) and takes multiple hits while already standing next to the console and having completed his rebellious act
12) Kirk withstands the pain, and the alien loses the game of chicken and departs

Again, I don't see evidence of a real protective effect here. Kirk just refuses to surrender to nonlethal force a second time, since he now finds tactical advantage in resisting. But the first time around, he wore the belt, and still had to surrender after just two shots. The second time around, he isn't wearing the belt, and shrugs off half a dozen shots by a more desperate enemy.

I would venture that the stun setting on phasers is as widely used as it is because it can still be effective despite personal forcefields while more dangerous settings--disruption and thermal--are not.

I could agree with this, yes - but we still have no evidence that the more dangerous settings would have less penetrating power. We see nonlethal beams inflict the sort of damage the enemy hopes for, both in "Beyond" and "Slaver Weapon", and we see kinetic attacks thwarted, both in "Beyond" and "A Fistful of Datas". This combination is in full agreement with the idea that personal shields are only good against kinetic attack but cannot resist phasers on any setting, which explains why the belts are not combat gear outside TAS or even within TAS.

As for the stun setting, it is widely used by Starfleet, which has doctrinal reasons for nonlethal weapons. We don't see it used by the villain species much if at all. Individual civilians of villainous persuasion often use stun for criminal gain, but that's a different issue...

Timo Saloniemi