Why do star wars fans think stormtrooper armor would be able to stop a phaser beam

[Tyralak 12,068]

What I always figured was that Redshirts aren't ground troops. Just like you wouldn't expect Naval crewmen to wear body armor. IIRC, didn't actual Federation ground troops have personal force fields? I seem to remember a DS9 episode where it was mentioned. Not sure of the episode offhand. I'll have to look into it.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

What I always figured was that Redshirts aren't ground troops. Just like you wouldn't expect Naval crewmen to wear body armor. IIRC, didn't actual Federation ground troops have personal force fields? I seem to remember a DS9 episode where it was mentioned. Not sure of the episode offhand. I'll have to look into it.

No one on AR-558 was wearing any

[Praeothmin 532]

No one on AR-558 was wearing any

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed, they only thing we saw which was different was that their uniform was a bit thicker then standard starfleet uniform.

 

It may have been some kind of armor, or a survival suit, no one knows...

[enigma 521]

What you assume has no bearing on what we are shown in the movies.

 

The armor of both seems almost identical in the material used, the difference being the Stormtrooper offers more protection all over the body, it has more plates.

 

But the plate thickness appears to be the same...

 

 

 

As for the redshirts, it is true I've always found the idea that they have no armor ridiculous, so I agree sending unarmored troups is a bit dumb.

 

Any shrapnel from glancing hits would injure the redshirts, while the Stormtrooper, and even a Scoutrooper, would have some protection...

 

 

 

 

 

From Starwars.com

 

Stormtrooper scout units were usually assigned to garrison posts. Their mission profiles often equipped them with speeder bikes; as such these men were usually called biker scouts. A scout's armor is more flexible and lighter than a standard trooper's.

 

 

 

The stormtroopers designated as scouts wear lightweight armor that is considerably more flexible than the standard uniform.

 

 

 

Therefore, scout troopers armor offers less protection than regular stormtroopers.

[Praeothmin 532]

From Starwars.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Therefore, scout troopers armor offers less protection than regular stormtroopers.

 

 

 

I agree it is lightweight, and offers less protection.

 

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough.

 

The Scouttrooper's armor, as seen here:

 

 

 

 

Has less plates then the Stromtrooper armor, and more flexible underarmor.

 

 

 

The StormTrooper armor, while using the same material, simply covers more body parts the the Scout's, as seen here:

 

 

 

 

Therefore, is does indeed offer "more" protection, as in "more of the wearer's body is covered", not as in "armor's material is better".

 

 

 

The same thing could be said of Full-Plate armours, seen here:

 

 

 

 

Some had less areas covered, but they still used the same material:

 

 

 

 

Thus they were lighter, and offered "less" protection...

[Mith 0]

The idea I got from reading SD.net is that blasters are far more powerful than phasers, and so to provide protection from blasters, they must be able to protect from phasers too. I'm going by memory here and I don't have time to re-read it now. Is there anyone from that site who can fill in?

 

 

 

I think this site has a pretty neat evaluation of the "protection" that the armour does, in fact, provide:

 

http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWtrooparmor.html

 

 

 

/cry.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':' />/cry.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':' />' />)' />

 

 

 

It's utter bunk. First off, blasters are shown to routinly deal serious or lethal damage to storm trooper and clone trooper armor. There are times when for some reason (often plot related) that they do offer resistance, but we've never seen their armor do anything more but make them look cool and scary.

 

 

 

Furthermore, they're attempting to say that because y blocks x, it must also block z. Phasers don't operate the same way as blasters, which is suspected to be plasma based. Fortunately, phasers are designed as technobabble weapons capable of 'vaporizing' stuff. On lower settings, we've seen that their phasers are about as lethal as blasters with similar burn marks left on victims. On higher settings, their victim is a burn mark.

 

 

 

On the ground.

[Ali-Sama 5]

phasers act like sonic guns do on glass. They match an optimal frequency of a material and cause it to shatter or explode due to it. when you raise the frequency of a particle weapon, you increase its; kinetic energy. So it would do more damage.

[Questor 501]

phasers act like sonic guns do on glass. They match an optimal frequency of a material and cause it to shatter or explode due to it. when you raise the frequency of a particle weapon, you increase its; kinetic energy. So it would do more damage.

 

 

 

In no way, shape, or form does that match the observable evidence.

[Questor 501]

It's utter bunk. First off, blasters are shown to routinly deal serious or lethal damage to storm trooper and clone trooper armor. There are times when for some reason (often plot related) that they do offer resistance, but we've never seen their armor do anything more but make them look cool and scary.

 

 

 

Furthermore, they're attempting to say that because y blocks x, it must also block z. Phasers don't operate the same way as blasters, which is suspected to be plasma based. Fortunately, phasers are designed as technobabble weapons capable of 'vaporizing' stuff. On lower settings, we've seen that their phasers are about as lethal as blasters with similar burn marks left on victims. On higher settings, their victim is a burn mark.

 

 

 

On the ground.

 

 

 

Phasers rarely leave burn marks on humans. This one I WILL argue.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Meh, phasers work by magic

[Ali-Sama 5]

In no way, shape, or form does that match the observable evidence.

 

Kinetic energy in terms of em radiation or light, is different then kinetic energy in terms of ballistic damage.

 

when you increase the frequency of a carrier beam, you get it to to modulate on different levels. when you compare light to infrared and xrays, the only difference is the frequency. When you modulate the frequency of a laser style weapon, you can shift its; energy to a higher state. Same thing can be done with a lens and normal sunlight. If you ever used a magnifying glass to light a fire, this is the same thing that happens to phaser beams when they modulate the frequencies to a higher one. The same light can be used to burn. Hence it has higher kinetic energy.

[Questor 501]

Kinetic energy in terms of em radiation or light, is different then kinetic energy in terms of ballistic damage.

 

when you increase the frequency of a carrier beam, you get it to to modulate on different levels. when you compare light to infrared and xrays, the only difference is the frequency. When you modulate the frequency of a laser style weapon, you can shift its; energy to a higher state. Same thing can be done with a lens and normal sunlight. If you ever used a magnifying glass to light a fire, this is the same thing that happens to phaser beams when they modulate the frequencies to a higher one. The same light can be used to burn. Hence it has higher kinetic energy.

 

 

 

I know that.

 

 

 

The problem with that is (A) that phasers DO introduce kenetic energy in terms of motion in their targets, and ( that phasers tend to NOT burn things except at unusually high settings.

[Praeothmin 532]

Pretty much all Phaser shots on "kill" (settings 7 or higher from TNG and up) do leave burn marks where they hit.

 

There may have been some instances where we didn't see them (real life explanation being that "they" forgot to add them), but in most cases, kill settings leave burn marks.

 

Stun, on the other hand, never ever leaves any mark, except for heavy stun at point blank (ST VI).

[Questor 501]

Pretty much all Phaser shots on "kill" (settings 7 or higher from TNG and up) do leave burn marks where they hit.

 

 

 

When they hit people, or hit objects?

 

 

 

Objects possibly, but people is another question.

 

 

 

And simply assuming that everything is set to stun is dirty pool and you know it.

 

 

 

EDIT: Voyager... Enterprise... TNG...

[Praeothmin 532]

When they hit people, or hit objects?

 

 

 

Objects possibly, but people is another question.

 

 

 

And simply assuming that everything is set to stun is dirty pool and you know it.

 

 

 

EDIT: Voyager... Enterprise... TNG...

 

 

 

I've been watching Ent recently, and pretty much all Phaser hits set on kill seem to leave burn marks on people, and on most surfaces as well.

 

We know that basic setting on Ent is Stun because whenever Archer or Reed tell them to set to kill, people look surprised.

 

 

 

But I do agree that burn marks on people were rare in TNG, even on "kill" (though we do get to see quite a few, like that scientist that had a hole blown straight through), and I don't remember, in the series, seeing many burn marks on objects, even at "kill".

 

 

 

DS9 and Voyager, though, is a different story (for marks on people, at least, objects still don't get many burn marks I agree).

 

We see a lot more damage on people from Phasers or Disruptors on "kill", if I remember correctly.

 

 

 

As for the "Stun" comment, we usually see them set Phasers to stun for most first contact missions.

 

When Stun isn't the preferred setting, then special mention is made about it, like "Set Phasers to Kill" or something (although in TOS the setting was always mentioned prior to the mission).

[Questor 501]

I've been watching Ent recently, and pretty much all Phaser hits set on kill seem to leave burn marks on people, and on most surfaces as well.

 

We know that basic setting on Ent is Stun because whenever Archer or Reed tell them to set to kill, people look surprised.

 

 

 

Generally when Archer does something competent, people look surprised, too. Especially in the early seasons. Remember, this is the guy who's proud of committing genocide.

 

 

 

 

But I do agree that burn marks on people were rare in TNG, even on "kill" (though we do get to see quite a few, like that scientist that had a hole blown straight through), and I don't remember, in the series, seeing many burn marks on objects, even at "kill".

 

 

 

DS9 and Voyager, though, is a different story (for marks on people, at least, objects still don't get many burn marks I agree).

 

We see a lot more damage on people from Phasers or Disruptors on "kill", if I remember correctly.

 

 

 

 

I'll give you DS9 - Nog's leg being an excellent example - but Voyager is notoriously bad for not only having people not show burns, but having them get hit several times.

 

 

 

 

As for the "Stun" comment, we usually see them set Phasers to stun for most first contact missions.

 

When Stun isn't the preferred setting, then special mention is made about it, like "Set Phasers to Kill" or something (although in TOS the setting was always mentioned prior to the mission).

 

 

 

 

Statistically, the stated setting is stun about 50% of the time (that's consistent across TNG and DS9, by the way). I would like you to prove the assertion that most first contact missions involve phasers being set to stun.

 

 

 

Since you have made the assertion, you need to back it up. Given that you said "most" I would like a breakdown of every first contact mission in TNG, DS9, and VOY. Have fun with Voyager, as almost ever episode with aliens is a first contact.

 

 

 

Please provide detailed notes. I find excel or another spreadsheet program is helpful in this regard.

[Praeothmin 532]

Generally when Archer does something competent, people look surprised, too. Especially in the early seasons. Remember, this is the guy who's proud of committing genocide.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'll give you DS9 - Nog's leg being an excellent example - but Voyager is notoriously bad for not only having people not show burns, but having them get hit several times.

 

 

 

I've just bought the first season of Voyager and will be watching it soon, so I'll be able to do a better analysis latter on...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Statistically, the stated setting is stun about 50% of the time (that's consistent across TNG and DS9, by the way). I would like you to prove the assertion that most first contact missions involve phasers being set to stun.

 

 

 

Since you have made the assertion, you need to back it up. Given that you said "most" I would like a breakdown of every first contact mission in TNG, DS9, and VOY. Have fun with Voyager, as almost ever episode with aliens is a first contact.

 

 

 

Please provide detailed notes. I find excel or another spreadsheet program is helpful in this regard.

 

 

 

I was going from ENT (which I'm watching right now) and from memory for the other shows, but since I really don't have the time to analyze all the series one episode after another, I'll concede that Stun is 50% of the time.

 

 

 

But, you stated that:

 

The problem with that is (A) that phasers DO introduce kenetic energy in terms of motion in their targets, and (that phasers tend to NOT burn things except at unusually high settings.

 

 

 

So, I would like you to prove the assertion that phasers tend to NOT burn things except at unusually high settings (and perhaps detail what you mean by "high setting").

 

 

 

Since you have made the assertion, you need to back it up.

 

 

 

Please provide detailed notes. I find excel or another spreadsheet program is helpful in this regard.

 

 

 

[Questor 501]

So, I would like you to prove the assertion that phasers tend to NOT burn things except at unusually high settings (and perhaps detail what you mean by "high setting").

 

 

 

Since you have made the assertion, you need to back it up.

 

 

 

Please provide detailed notes. I find excel or another spreadsheet program is helpful in this regard.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Technically, that was a response to the assertion that phasers work by setting up some kind of harmonic in the body with photons, but I still have no problem doing so.

 

 

 

Would TNG alone be statistically significant enough, or would you like details on DS9 as well. VOY is not really an option, as I don't own it on DVD and don't intend to spend that much time netflixing it.

 

 

 

I can probably get TNG done this weekend, DS9 will take longer.

 

 

 

How can I do all of TNG that quickly, you ask?

 

 

 

I have a listing of every time a humanoid was hit by phaser fire in TNG. Phaser Reaction Statistics TNG.

 

 

 

I anticipate adding a column for "wound"

 

 

 

I'll come up with categories for that column later.

 

 

 

Would that be sufficient evidence?

[Praeothmin 532]

Wow!

 

 

 

I mean... err... Yes, yes it would...

 

Could you color code it?

[Praeothmin 532]

Technically, that was a response to the assertion that phasers work by setting up some kind of harmonic in the body with photons, but I still have no problem doing so.

 

 

 

Would TNG alone be statistically significant enough, or would you like details on DS9 as well. VOY is not really an option, as I don't own it on DVD and don't intend to spend that much time netflixing it.

 

 

 

I can probably get TNG done this weekend, DS9 will take longer.

 

 

 

How can I do all of TNG that quickly, you ask?

 

 

 

I have a listing of every time a humanoid was hit by phaser fire in TNG. Phaser Reaction Statistics TNG.

 

 

 

I anticipate adding a column for "wound"

 

 

 

I'll come up with categories for that column later.

 

 

 

Would that be sufficient evidence?

 

 

 

Seriously though, impressive work...

 

Tell you what, I'll try to help.

 

I'll do the same for Voyager, since I am starting to watch it atm, and when I watch the fourth season of ENT, I'll do it also.

 

I've got a few more seasons of DS9 to watch as well, and I'll do the same (seasons 3, 4 and 7).

 

Would that help?

[Questor 501]

Seriously though, impressive work...

 

Tell you what, I'll try to help.

 

I'll do the same for Voyager, since I am starting to watch it atm, and when I watch the fourth season of ENT, I'll do it also.

 

I've got a few more seasons of DS9 to watch as well, and I'll do the same (seasons 3, 4 and 7).

 

Would that help?

 

 

 

That would be great.

 

 

 

Then we can compile the definitive guide to phasers!

[Praeothmin 532]

Kewl!!!

 

Although I cannot guarantee the results really quick, since in the upcoming weeks I'm moving into my new house, so preparation, and training, and trips for the job mean I'll be working in slow motion.

 

 

 

But I'll take care of it, anyways it's not as if we were in any hurry...

[Questor 501]

Kewl!!!

 

Although I cannot guarantee the results really quick, since in the upcoming weeks I'm moving into my new house, so preparation, and training, and trips for the job mean I'll be working in slow motion.

 

 

 

But I'll take care of it, anyways it's not as if we were in any hurry...

 

 

 

We should agree on a notes format to use to calculate from.

 

 

 

How about this:

 

 

 

Season

 

 

 

Episode Number

 

 

 

Episode Name

 

 

 

Chapter (On DVD)

 

 

 

Timecode

 

 

 

Character

 

 

 

Hit/Miss (Hit/Miss/Unknown)

 

 

 

Target

 

 

 

Weapon A listing of the weapon used.

 

 

 

Setting (Phasorize/Kill/Stun/Unknown)

 

 

 

Type (Beam/Pulse)

 

 

 

Kinetic Effect on Humanoid (NA/No Effect/Drop/Phasorize/Stagger/Stagger-Fall/Push/Throw) (This column is for the kinetic effect on the target)

 

NA

Target is not humanoid

 

No Effect

Target is not effected kineticly

 

Drop

Target falls to the ground without changing kinetic energy

 

Phasorize

A better word for disintegrate, adopted because disintegrate does not accurately describe effect. Listed here because aside from TMP era, there does not seem to be any kinetic effect associated

 

Stagger

Target staggers, but does not fall

 

Stagger-Fall

Target staggers, and then falls

 

Push

Target is knocked off his/her feet with enough force to lift them off the ground slightly

 

Throw

As above, but target is lifted more than a few inches in the air

 

 

 

Explosive Effect (None/Sparks/Small/Large) (This column is for explosive effects observed on target.)

 

None

No explosive effect

 

Sparks

Sparks appear on contact, but no true explosion

 

Small

Small explosion, up to about head sized

 

Medium

Explosion, from small to about torso sized

 

Large

Bigger than the above

 

 

 

Aftereffects (None/Charring/Hole/Phasorize) (This column is for the aftereffects of the blast)

 

 

 

None

No aftereffects

 

Charring

There is a scorch mark or small wound

 

Hole

There is a hole or large wound

 

Phasorize

Target no longer exists

 

 

 

Notes

 

 

 

Here are my DS9 notes, which use most of these columns

[Praeothmin 532]

We should agree on a notes format to use to calculate from.

 

 

 

Here are my DS9 notes, which use most of these columns

 

 

 

 

 

Excellent, I'll use that form.

 

I will identify which seasons the Form relates to, as (like I said) I've already watched ENT 1-3, so there's only season 4 left to watch.

 

Voyager, I can do completely, since I've just started season 1, episode 1.

 

TNG, you've done (although I should eventually be able to check seasons 3 and 6)

 

And DS9, I can do seasons 4, 6 and 7 (the good ones ).

[Questor 501]

Excellent, I'll use that form.

 

 

 

There are a couple of additional columns.

 

 

 

I will identify which seasons the Form relates to, as (like I said) I've already watched ENT 1-3, so there's only season 4 left to watch.

 

 

 

 

We can argue about the applicability of ENT later