From: 0juan_e@spcvxb.spc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Phaser emitters (Re: TNG Tech Manual)
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:39:15 GMT
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


Had to just butt into this conversation, (couldn't resist the urge):
_______________________________________________________________________________
In article <1992Mar30.113004.1847@hellgate.utah.edu>, jwindley%asylum.utah.edu@
cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley) writes:
> jkramer@sunwise.UWaterloo.ca (Viscous Pig Dog) writes:
>>Can somebody who has the new technical manual find out if there is
>>a phaser emmitter (sp?) near the forward torpedo tube. If not, which
>>do we consider canon in this issue, Darmok or the manual?
> 
> The closest emitters appear to be either the saucer ventral array or
> the battle section ventral array.  Neither one is located near the
> battle section's forward torpedo launcher (BTW, the saucer section has
> a forward-facing launcher as well).
___________________________________________________________________________
According to Okada and Sternbach -STNG Tech manual, the saucer has an 
aft-facing torpedo launcher, it is covered when the saucer section is coupled 
to the star-drive section.
____________________________________________________________________________
> 
> I imagine that this is just a miscommunication between the Paramount
> staff and their optical shop.  My way of thinking is that this is
> anomalous, and the manual still holds.  However, if we see phaser fire
> coming from that section again, I think we'll have to pencil in a new
> phaser emitter array in our diagrams.
> 
_____________________________________________________________________________
There is another explaination:  according to Okada and Sternbach's manual,
there is a tractor beam emitter near the forward torpedo bay.  Probably,
LaForge may have replaced the emitter with a phaser emitter -designed
not to harm or hurt the Darmok ship; but unfortunately it also took the
controls of the main phaser arrays off-line to do it.
_____________________________________________________________________________

>>For our first issue I suggest we come up with a reason why the subwarp
>>shuttles have what appear to be warp nacelles,
> 
> Because they just appear to be warp nacelles.  In my drawings they
> don't even look much like warp nacelles.
____________________________________________________________________
Probably, they're landing skids.
_____________________________________________________________________________
>>then we can figure out
>>what class the Enterprise was in ST V, finally we can discuss why Worf's
>>teeth have evolved in the past four years.
> 
> "Klingons do NOT brush their teeth." :-)
__________________________________________________________________________
According to the engineers at Paramount Studios and Starlog -The Enterprise
in ST V, is an Enterprise Class Heavy Cruiser.  I guess that prop schematic
was done in a tight schedule that couldn't allow in a change at the time.

As about Worf's teeth -I intend to agree with Jay on that one.


                                 Thanks,
                                 Ned
                                 St. Peter's College