Scimitar vs. Sovereign

[Sionnach Glic]

Shinzon repeatedly stated "fire all disruptor banks" on several occasions, Mark.

M52: Fair enough.

[Mark]

Granted. But if the banks were all fixed, they would each only have a limited firing arc. You really WOULDN'T fire weapons that COULDN'T hit your target, right? If that were the case, (which I do believe is, as neither Klingons or Romulans have ever displayed anything like Starfleets phaser arrays), that order would only make sense if it were to mean fire all disruptors that could actually hit the Enterprise.

[Sionnach Glic]

So it has a grand total of two disruptors positioned to fire forwards?

[Mark]

I never said that it made sense. But depending on the angle of the banks, and how restricted their firing arcs are, they could have been set in pairs at various angles, like "forward dorsal, forward straight, forward ventral, forward port, forward starboard" and so forth. All those various banks could have been desinged so as not to leave any fields of fire open, and thus no blind spots. That explination would insure they could hit the enemy no matter WHERE the enemy was, and if they transferred full power to the appropriate disrupters, they could pack a hell of a punch.

[m52nickerson]

The problem with that is there were breaks in the blast hitting the Enterprise as the Scimitar turned.

[Mark]

The problem with that is there were breaks in the blast hitting the Enterprise as the Scimitar turned.

Maybe they couldn't aquire, target, and fire fast enough.

[Tsukiyumi]

Maybe the super-cloak drains so much power that they couldn't charge all of the weapons at once.

Like I said, a lot of conjecture.

[Teaos]

Man this is the third time this thread has been debated.

[Mikey]

And interestingly enough, nobody has yet said, "You know, you're right - I'll change my mind."

[Sionnach Glic]

I never said that it made sense. But depending on the angle of the banks, and how restricted their firing arcs are, they could have been set in pairs at various angles, like "forward dorsal, forward straight, forward ventral, forward port, forward starboard" and so forth. All those various banks could have been desinged so as not to leave any fields of fire open, and thus no blind spots. That explination would insure they could hit the enemy no matter WHERE the enemy was, and if they transferred full power to the appropriate disrupters, they could pack a hell of a punch.

So out of a total of 52 guns, he put a grand total of 2 facing forwards, another two facing back and just one guarding the dorsal surface? WHere were all the others, then? Facing downwards?
Given the tactics that would work best with the ship in question (approaching your unaware enemy under cloak and then opening fire) it would make far more sense for the majority of weapons to be facing forwards, to allow the first barrage to deal maximum damage.

Moreover, simply mounting ten guns on turrets would eliminate any blindspots. Putting them in fixed positions (and we know they aren't fixed positions, as we can see the bolts firing off from the ship at different angles) would be an incredibly stupid way of dealing with that problem.

Maybe they couldn't aquire, target, and fire fast enough.

And yet everytime the E-E came into the firing arcs of the five or so weapons we do know the existence of, they began firing immediately.

Maybe the super-cloak drains so much power that they couldn't charge all of the weapons at once.

Then what's the point of all the extra guns in the first place? The whole point of the ship is to fight while its cloak is active. If it's unable to use 47 of the guns built onto it while cloaked, then there's little point in having those guns in the first place. They just add extra mass that must be cloaked, and add extra complexity to the ship's design.

Also, once the ship was de-cloaked it didn't suddenly begin firing any more of its weapons.

[stitch626]

And interestingly enough, nobody has yet said, "You know, you're right - I'll change my mind."

Does this ever happen?

[Captain Seafort]

And interestingly enough, nobody has yet said, "You know, you're right - I'll change my mind."

Does this ever happen?

What do you think?

[m52nickerson]

I never said that it made sense. But depending on the angle of the banks, and how restricted their firing arcs are, they could have been set in pairs at various angles, like "forward dorsal, forward straight, forward ventral, forward port, forward starboard" and so forth. All those various banks could have been desinged so as not to leave any fields of fire open, and thus no blind spots. That explination would insure they could hit the enemy no matter WHERE the enemy was, and if they transferred full power to the appropriate disrupters, they could pack a hell of a punch.

So out of a total of 52 guns, he put a grand total of 2 facing forwards, another two facing back and just one guarding the dorsal surface? WHere were all the others, then? Facing downwards?
Given the tactics that would work best with the ship in question (approaching your unaware enemy under cloak and then opening fire) it would make far more sense for the majority of weapons to be facing forwards, to allow the first barrage to deal maximum damage.

Moreover, simply mounting ten guns on turrets would eliminate any blindspots. Putting them in fixed positions (and we know they aren't fixed positions, as we can see the bolts firing off from the ship at different angles) would be an incredibly stupid way of dealing with that problem.

Maybe they couldn't aquire, target, and fire fast enough.

And yet everytime the E-E came into the firing arcs of the five or so weapons we do know the existence of, they began firing immediately.

Maybe the super-cloak drains so much power that they couldn't charge all of the weapons at once.

Then what's the point of all the extra guns in the first place? The whole point of the ship is to fight while its cloak is active. If it's unable to use 47 of the guns built onto it while cloaked, then there's little point in having those guns in the first place. They just add extra mass that must be cloaked, and add extra complexity to the ship's design.

Also, once the ship was de-cloaked it didn't suddenly begin firing any more of its weapons.

So, the # disruptors is wrong, or the visual affects are wrong, or the disrutors are placed in very close set groups which makes it appear that the blasts are coming from only a few points.

[Teaos]

And interestingly enough, nobody has yet said, "You know, you're right - I'll change my mind."

Do you want to destory the universe...?

[Sionnach Glic]

So, the # disruptors is wrong, or the visual affects are wrong, or the disrutors are placed in very close set groups which makes it appear that the blasts are coming from only a few points.

There's simply no way that 52 disruptors could be crammed so tightly together like that without it being noticeable. That the number is simply wrong is the most logical explaination.

From an in-universe perspective, I find the simpest sollution is simply that Geordi was mistaken when he called out the ship's armaments. Either due to interference from the Scimitar itself, or through a simple mistake on his own behalf.