The Tricorder

[Mark]

You could say the same for phasers, uniforms, and pretty much every other prop in the game.. you have to make a choice some time.

[Atlantisbase]

Allright... I'm a little lazy today and didn't feel like scrolling through 7 pages to see if there were at least one post about what I am going to say now...

Why don't you add, if not all, but some of the tricorders, and the player can choose for him/herself in-game? And change during gameplay? Would that be possible?

Just a suggestion... *shrug*

While it's a good way to satisfy everyone, it's kind of contrary to the idea of having standardized equipment. Starfleet is essentially a military institution. It's also more work of the developers.

[MajorD]

In that case, keep working on Matt's concept, I know the panel geometry is complicated with it both being convex and concave, although the sensor geometry looks simple so I don't see why it's different from the concept. I don't see any reason to make it look bulky. For the flip panel I suggest just making it act like a memory material, as in pop to the other curve position when flipped out.  Otherwise take #1's size and use a thinner variant of #2's ends with Matt's concept sensor deploying from either end, since the cut is already there, the idea being that which ever end isn't held deploys the sensor. Alternatively, when more sensing power is needed both ends deploy.

[Nahich]

While it's a good way to satisfy everyone, it's kind of contrary to the idea of having standardized equipment. Starfleet is essentially a military institution. It's also more work of the developers.

"It's also more work of the developers." Thus wouldn't it be worth it? And yes, I can understand that about standard equipment. How about adding it in as a mod later? Not neccesarily by the STE devs.

[Mark]

"It's also more work of the developers." Thus wouldn't it be worth it?

Id rather spend my time adding more weapons to the game, but thats just me.

[MajorD]

Depends on the kind of variety the weapons will have in stats, although, it would be nice for every group to have unique weapons even ones not featured in the story.

[MajorD]

More concept work for the virtual overlay and interaction with reality.
http://www.behance.net/gallery/Future-of-Internet-Search-Mobile-version/59175
http://petitinvention.wordpress.com/2008/02/10/future-of-internet-search-mobile-version/

The last bit may be confusing, they're real time text bubbles for the hearing impaired.

[Black Patriot]

I've had a thought, but would it be possible to have the Tricorder out at the same time as your phaser? The reason I'm asking is because the Tricorder often provides invaluable information, and yet they're so rarely used at the same time as weapons, wouldn't it be reasonable for someone to hold their phaser in one hand and the Tricorder in another. Then there are the 2 handed weapons, couldn't the Tricorder be attached to the side of say a phaser rifle, that way it could still be used without the operator having to take a hand off the gun, perhaps with some basic controls built into the handle of the phaser.

[Atlantisbase]

When using two handed weapons you can also brace the barrel on the forearm of hand holding the tricorder, granted this does put it on the other side but it allows you to preserve your grip more or less and use both devices.

[MajorD]

You wouldn't want to do that in real life. If you had a two handed weapon, then you would want the secondary device attached to the weapons. EI, phaser Type III should have built in tricorders, they already have screens.

With a Type I and II it is possible to have a tricorder out at the same time, although, it would be less comfortable than a flashlight. A flashlight can be held palm down which makes your off wrist a comfortable brace and locks the two hands into coordination. With the tricorder your off hand faces you, it's not comfortable to brace the other arm like that. Fortunately, unlike a flash light, and unlike modern weapons, pointing right at the target isn't so important as it is today. You can hold both arms out separately and it should be fine.

Or, better yet, put a holographic flip-up site on the Type II and link it to a tricorder wirelessly on your belt.  It might look weird to have a big sight on the pistol but it is practical.
http://www.crymod.com/uploads/mediapool/reflex_7_11/reflex_01.jpg
It wouldn't need to be anywhere near that bulky considering in-universe examples. It would only need to be a thin square of glass like material.

[Atlantisbase]

Of course for all we know, Type IIIs already link to the tricorder and it's just never shown on screen as a feature. Of course if you were a smart soldier you would have someone else use the tricorder while you take point with the gun. You probably wouldn't want to have the tricorder and a weapon going at the same time anyway since it would distract you from your surroundings. In defense of this method though, haven't we seen John Shepherd from SG Atlantis do this, scanner in one hand, gun in the other; granted they use P90s which are easier to use one-handed, but still.

The only way a reflex scope (or any scope) would work on a modern pistol is if it either A. isn't attached to the slide or B. is attached in such a way that the sight itself stays in one place. Otherwise the whole sight will move when you fire the gun and you've pretty much defeated the purpose of having the scope.

[Black Patriot]

The sight moving isn't really an issue with phasers, since they don't have any moving parts. A wireless connection from the weapon to the Tricorder is interesting, but in areas with large amounts of interference, or in situations where stealth is a priority (since wireless signals can be detected at very long range) then it'd be better to have the Tricorder physically mounted to a rifle, or held in one hand with the hand phaser in the other. Personally I'd want the Tricorder readout separate from the phaser targeting, since it'd likely overwhelm the shooter if they had all the information from a Tricorder interrupting their sights, even with effective compartmentalization of the Tricorders readings you're still trying to fit a lot of data into a much smaller space (since the sights have been shown to be more compact than the screens on Tricorders.

I've also had another though, what about if the Tricorder was used to generate the cross hairs for the phaser, or whatever weapon is being used. This ties in well with the augmented reality that was discussed earlier, and provides a realistic excuse for the existence of cross hairs. If the Tricorder was mounted to the side of a phaser rifle then it would still be useful for snap aiming, such as in close quarters or when under heavy fire, with the sight being more accurate for precision targeting. The Tricorder uses a camera to observe the users head in relation to the phaser and generates the cross hair. It wouldn't be as useful as having a proper HUD, but that'd need either a helmet or some sort of projection system that would need to be mounted on glasses or contact lenses. Since there's no on screen evidence of contact lenses or glasses really (except for sunglasses, and they're used sparingly at that), and since helmets are so rarely worn the Tricorder seems like a perfect fit for generating cross hairs.

[MajorD]

The TNG Type III would be easy enough to fire one handed. It's small and light as a sub machine gun, but it has the flip up site so I don't see it as needed. One guy in the team dedicated to using the tricorder makes sense, and linking all the data was mentioned earlier, to compile all sensors in the field into one superior view from every device.

The site moving isn't an issue with modern hand guns, as the bullet fires you can't aim anyway, because the entire gun moves, not just the slide. You can't aim until the weapon settles down, and that goes for iron sights, too.

Do you mean using a tricorder for firing around corners, with the shot image on the tricorder as you point the weapon around the corner?

[Black Patriot]

Do you mean using a tricorder for firing around corners, with the shot image on the tricorder as you point the weapon around the corner?

That's another option, though it didn't occur to me till after I made my post. My main point was that there could be a real physical reason to have a crosshair, since the Tricorder can simulate what the phaser is aimed at and show it on the screen with an augmented reality overlay. The head positioning is just to make sure that the crosshair is correct relative to both the weapon and the eye, otherwise it'd be fairly useless, tilt your head a few degrees to the left and the crosshair would be completely inaccurate. A diagram would probably help explain things clearly, but it's nearly midnight here so I don't really have the time, and I'm not that good with paint programs.

I never liked the TNG phaser rifle that much, it basically looked like someone in the prop department had panicked when they were told they needed a rifle and just stuck a few extra boxes to the handle of a type-II. I also get the sneaking suspicion that Gene Roddenberry was involved in it's design in some way, the same way he was with the early type-II in TNG, when they looked like vacuum cleaners.

The site moving isn't an issue with modern hand guns, as the bullet fires you can't aim anyway, because the entire gun moves, not just the slide. You can't aim until the weapon settles down, and that goes for iron sights, too.

True, but it also puts considerable strain on the sight if it's mounted to the slide of a pistol, since it'd get hammered every time the weapon fired, not to mention that it would make a significant safety hazard, which when you consider how dangerous guns are already any extra danger should be minimized.

[Atlantisbase]

True, but it also puts considerable strain on the sight if it's mounted to the slide of a pistol, since it'd get hammered every time the weapon fired, not to mention that it would make a significant safety hazard, which when you consider how dangerous guns are already any extra danger should be minimized.

That's to say nothing of throwing it out of alignment; also if you didn't mount it right you could block the ejection port which is even more dangerous.

[MajorD]

That's another option, though it didn't occur to me till after I made my post. My main point was that there could be a real physical reason to have a crosshair, since the Tricorder can simulate what the phaser is aimed at and show it on the screen with an augmented reality overlay. The head positioning is just to make sure that the crosshair is correct relative to both the weapon and the eye, otherwise it'd be fairly useless, tilt your head a few degrees to the left and the crosshair would be completely inaccurate. A diagram would probably help explain things clearly, but it's nearly midnight here so I don't really have the time, and I'm not that good with paint programs.

This is pretty much how I imagine phaser Type I and II eye tracking works. The weapon knows where it is relative to your eyes, it knows its orientation, and the orientation of your eyes. Based on this it can determine how much it needs to angle the beam in order to place it where you are looking. It doesn't make a target lock, it is only performing a simple triangulation. However, once the beam is being created, it no longer steers the beam, for safety reasons. What if you are focused one moment then distracted by a child. You would vaporize the kid! It's very good you can't sweep by eye. So, you have to manually adjust by either moving the whole phaser, or by releasing and re-squeezing the trigger to realign the beam.

What you describe will probably be useful for scientists or dedicated sensor personnel as long as they stick to a virtual window mode. The system could be made smart enough to automatically switch from window mode to remote, so it can seamlessly switch from virtual FPS to around-corner aiming. 

I never liked the TNG phaser rifle that much, it basically looked like someone in the prop department had panicked when they were told they needed a rifle and just stuck a few extra boxes to the handle of a type-II. I also get the sneaking suspicion that Gene Roddenberry was involved in it's design in some way, the same way he was with the early type-II in TNG, when they looked like vacuum cleaners.

It could have been worse, they almost extended the Type I in Type II concept from TOS into a Type II into Type III concept. The concept art for it is not particularly good. However, I think you make a good point. I'm actually a fan of the TNG Type III simplicity, and would love to see a reworked sub-machine gun style Type III as a true TNG Type III successor, ie no stock, short, and small. The worst Type III has to be the compression rifle from Voyager.

True, but it also puts considerable strain on the sight if it's mounted to the slide of a pistol, since it'd get hammered every time the weapon fired, not to mention that it would make a significant safety hazard, which when you consider how dangerous guns are already any extra danger should be minimized.

Well, that's why pistol mounts do circumnavigate the slide. Here is some tacticool. The rear mounted mount can probably fit in a somewhat normal holster unlike the first one which is front mounted.
http://www.usacarry.com/forums/handgun-discussion/3983-more-gun-porn-reflex-sight-come.html
http://www.jackweigand.com/sm3.html

[Black Patriot]

It could have been worse, they almost extended the Type I in Type II concept from TOS into a Type II into Type III concept. The concept art for it is not particularly good. However, I think you make a good point. I'm actually a fan of the TNG Type III simplicity, and would love to see a reworked sub-machine gun style Type III as a true TNG Type III successor, ie no stock, short, and small. The worst Type III has to be the compression rifle from Voyager.

Yeah, the Voyager rifle was pretty bad, it's a good thing they switched to the First Contact rifle after a couple of seasons. Having said that though I do find the First Contact type-III to be too big for starship use, it' be difficult to get round corners easily, which is what you want in close quarters. Just look at Macrocosm and see the awkward way that Janeway had to hold it. A cut down TNG type-III would probably be alright, it was thin and light enough that it'd work as a sub-machine gun, though it'd need a better sight than what it had, that thing just looked like it would get snapped off.

[Atlantisbase]

This is pretty much how I imagine phaser Type I and II eye tracking works. The weapon knows where it is relative to your eyes, it knows its orientation, and the orientation of your eyes. Based on this it can determine how much it needs to angle the beam in order to place it where you are looking. It doesn't make a target lock, it is only performing a simple triangulation. However, once the beam is being created, it no longer steers the beam, for safety reasons. What if you are focused one moment then distracted by a child. You would vaporize the kid! It's very good you can't sweep by eye. So, you have to manually adjust by either moving the whole phaser, or by releasing and re-squeezing the trigger to realign the beam.

Ah, but how does this system account for blind firing or when you aren't looking directly at your target. Under this system the phaser wouldn't be able to resolve a target unless you look in the target's general direction. Is the assumption that the phaser would simply fire straight forward? What about when the target is ambiguous? This system also implies that there is some kind of actuator either on the focusing crystal or the whole pre-fire matrix which would align the beam and no schematic of a phaser has ever show such a device. Are you saying phasers have this feature or this is how it might work?

In my mind a target adjustment system like this could be detrimental or unwanted in certain situations unless it was very advanced and capable of dealing with the ambiguities of battle. Just a system which used the tricorder or on-board hardware to either link to a HUD or displayed targeting data directly on the tricorder screen would be more useful; obviously rifles could display targeting data on their sights. If you're using a HUD you could use eye detection to set a target manualy and then have the phaser perform target adjustment to ensure a direct hit.

[MajorD]

Can you believe it, I made this six years ago. It needs some changes, though.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/2175/phasercarbinefinal3b.jpg

Ah, but how does this system account for blind firing or when you aren't looking directly at your target. Under this system the phaser wouldn't be able to resolve a target unless you look in the target's general direction. Is the assumption that the phaser would simply fire straight forward? What about when the target is ambiguous? This system also implies that there is some kind of actuator either on the focusing crystal or the whole pre-fire matrix which would align the beam and no schematic of a phaser has ever show such a device. Are you saying phasers have this feature or this is how it might work?

If the weapon were unable to sufficiently angle the shot, or could not determine where you are looking then I assume it would fire straight.

Under this system the phasers doesn't need to recognize targets, it is more like a deadly range finder. It has no idea what it is looking at, but can still derive a distance.

I am saying phasers do have this feature and that it may be a way it works. Phasers have frequently fired off-bore, dramatically so, especially in the early days, but also into the movies.
http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/4733/p2co03.jpg
http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/1980/p2pp10.jpg
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/6667/phafcriker2.jpg
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/8271/tng3vengeance14phahit.jpg
http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/3301/tng3vengnoran01sm.jpg

In my mind a target adjustment system like this could be detrimental or unwanted in certain situations unless it was very advanced and capable of dealing with the ambiguities of battle. Just a system which used the tricorder or on-board hardware to either link to a HUD or displayed targeting data directly on the tricorder screen would be more useful; obviously rifles could display targeting data on their sights. If you're using a HUD you could use eye detection to set a target manualy and then have the phaser perform target adjustment to ensure a direct hit.

        The worst that can happen with the system I describe is you have the weapon pointed in the general direction of something you don't want shot, and get distracted at the very moment you squeeze the trigger. The off-bore firing has lots of angle but not 90 degrees, the most we've seen is almost 45 degrees which fits with the widest widebeam setting we've seen in Voyager. So, simply keeping the phaser pointed away from things you don't want shot should be enough. Wide beam settings are another point in regard to off-bore firing since both require the ability to scatter the beam without aiming the whole device. But I digress, the point is, the worst that would normally happen is your target moves in between the time it takes to squeeze the trigger and the beam reaching the target, or the phaser's line of sight is blocked while yours is not, or the phaser line of sight suddenly becomes blocked when it previously was not blocked.
       Since the beam has never moved after firing, but instead has stayed fixed in relation to the weapon, moving your eyes while the beam is firing is not a danger. Instead, hand movement becomes the risk. Since, in my proposal, the phaser does not make target locks, it cannot target out of control nor unexpectedly.
       I would assume the Type II is too small to contain the more advanced and bulky systems capable of being fitted on the Type III variants. Tricorders are about as big as the Type II, bigger considering how small the weapon has become. Instead of multi-target tracking and holographic sights, it uses a relatively simple method that gains better results than any modern system. The mean hit probability of police is only 15%, phasers I think are 25%, not counting training situations which have an improbably high hit ratio given the targets.
http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf

[MajorD]

Not so much better as closer to what I was thinking.