Phaser type equals what?

[Lighthawk]

Question: What is the relation between a phaser's type and it's over all power, aside from the obvious, a bigger number means more power? Is a type 12 twice as powerful as a type 6? A type 10 ten times more powerful than a type 9, and a hundred times more than a type 8? Or is it a range, a phaser that falls between a maximum energy output of X and Y is a type 4, while a phaser with an output between V and W is a 3? Or is all just meanless technobabble on the part of the writers?

[Mikey]

Near as I can tell, there's no real standard based on the type.

[Graham Kennedy]

Phasers

[Teaos]

Hmmm I think I've seen that site somewhere before GK.

[Tyyr]

Yeah, moving away from the pistols was a great idea.

[Nickswitz]

Type X+ Classified

This means "I have no clue" right? lol

[Teaos]

Need to know.

[Mikey]

Actually, as GK even mentions in his article, the figures he uses are made up for the sake of illustration. Now, his hypothesis is the most logical and credible I've seen so far; but if you're looking for a basis in canon, there isn't much to go on.

[Nickswitz]

I know, but the fact that he said "classified" make me chuckle a little.

[Graham Kennedy]

That's straight from the TNG TM, incidentally.

Although I did make up a bunch of numbers in the article to illustrate an idea, the main thrust of it and reason I posted it is that there's no really sensible system for what phaser Type mean. It's sensible to presume that a TNG Type 1 is more powerful than a TOS Type 1, yet they are both Type 1. By that logic the Type specifies the ROLE of the weapon, not the power of it. But if that's so then the heavy phaser banks on every ship should be called the Type X, because Type X should basically mean "big phaser carried on ships". Under this system the Galaxy class phasers should be Type X as the Constitution class ones should be, despite being (presumably) vastly more powerful. And yet, generally, the Type numbers aren't used this way at the top end of the scale.

That's why I suggested Type numbers meaning a broad band of energies. Best of both systems combined into one.

[Lighthawk]

Thanks for the info. I didn't have much hope that there was any detailed specs on the relation between type and power, but you never know what some people might have come across.

[Tyyr]

Just wing it. Big ships get big phasers, little ships get smaller ones. I doubt anyone will give you grief since much like the speed of these ships the firepower of phasers is plot.

[Lighthawk]

Well that's what I've been doing so far, so finding my assumptions were true works for me, because it means I don't have to change anything.

[Mikey]

That's why I said that GK's idea was as logical as any, if non-canon. The only other way it makes sense is that if "type" specified different things at different ends of the spectrum - role for personal weapons and ouput for shipboard weapons - and I don't really care for that idea.

[Bryan Moore]

I know they looked awful on TV, but I'm amazed we didn't see more Type 1 on DS9/Voyager, some sort of redesign. And why aren't more officers equiped with a side arm at any given time.