Talk:Quantum torpedo

Tech Manual/non-canon content (obsolete)
Should we place non-canon in the body of the article, even if the source is mentioned? And second, there's a lot of info on when and why the torpedo was developed, and what kinds of protection it has, but was doet it do? -- Redge 23:25, 18 Jun 2004 (CEST)


 * Well considering that there are no specific mentions of how and what are in the torpedoes, we could just keep it to basics and mention what the article says. I think its the same from the DS9 Tech Manual. --Vice Admiral Colorge


 * Well, general consensus seems to be that this should not be done. Also, if it is a direct copy from that article, it might even be a copyright violation. I'll put a in, the possible copyvio definitely needs to be checked. -- Cid Highwind 00:21, 19 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Quantum filaments
I removed the following from the article:

Presumably, this weapon artificially generates quantum filaments, which are extremely dangerous to spacefaring vehicles.

Is there any evidence to support this? -- EtaPiscium 06:36, 3 Dec 2004 (CET)


 * Check the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual, i believe some torpedo theory derives from there.. the trick here is to find out how much canon information has been revealed, and restrict the DS9-TM data to a background section. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel


 * Quantum mearly means:


 * A The smallest amount of a physical quantity that can exist independently, especially a discrete quantity of electromagnetic radiation.
 * B This amount of energy regarded as a unit.
 * adj. Relating to or based upon quantum mechanics
 * http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=quantum


 * So I do not see any reason to connect Quantum Torpedo's and a Quantum Filament. --TOSrules 06:53, Dec 3, 2004 (CET)
 * (note this was typed before the post above it)


 * Well, we also remember that quantum torpedoes may have very little to do with quantums, since photon torpedoes have little to do with photons.


 * The TM describes their explosion as utilizing zero-point energy -- Captain Mike K. Bartel


 * Just to point out, photon torpedoes have everything to do with photons, as this is what is left behind after a matter/antimatter reaction.

Zero-point energy
Should mentions of zero-point energy even be in the main body of the article? I thought the Tech Manuals were non-canon. -- EtaPiscium 07:03, 7 Jan 2005 (CET)
 * I've indented it. Strictly speaking, I don't think we've ever really been told how a photon torpedo works outside of the TMs, either... -- Michael Warren | Talk 07:14, Jan 7, 2005 (CET)


 * I beleive that the TM's, unless specifically refuted by something said or seen onscreen in a feature or television series, should be considered canon. The books are written by the design staff, so who better to say what's real and what's not in Trek?  Lt. Commander Schinke

First seen?
I remember one DS9 episode where Captain Sisko physically picked up a quantum torpedo, at some sort of party or morale-boosting event. I think it was during the Dominion War, but I'm not sure. And I can't find the episode.

If someone can find it, we can add a picture of a rack of the devices to this article. --Short Circuit 21:41, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * That was actually the power cell from the phaser array -- the scene was from . I'm thinking a quantum torpedo resembles a photon torpedo, possibly larger. In fact, I recall in, they attached a cargo pod containing 200 kilos of trilithium to the torpedo, so I'm not sure something that large can be much bigger than the torpedo pushing it. Whatever the case, it is highly unlikely Sisko could pick a quantum torpedo up. --Gvsualan 21:49, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * The main body of the article mentions (near the bottom) that quantum torpedoes were first seen in "The Search". However, the first mention of their application is not until the later episode (who's name escapes me, but is mentioned in the article) where Tom Riker steals the Defiant... 74.34.57.171 11:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Needs attention (obsolete)
Article need to be checked on tense. Should be the past, not present -- Q 16:55, 17 Sep 2005 (UTC)


 * Should it be:
 * "The quantum torpedo is a weapon..."
 * or
 * "The quantum torpedo was a weapon..."
 * There's no evidence that anything else was created to supercede the Quantum torpedo, but what does everyone think? Apart from that, I think I've checked the article for niggling tense faults. Zsingaya  Talk 17:10, 17 Sep 2005 (UTC)

'was a weapon', maby tense was an unlucky term, I meant more a dictionary POV, but it is solved and I removed the -- Q 18:26, 17 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Ferengi mention
Quark mentioned selling quantum torpedoes to earth in the DS9 episode Little Green Men indicating the ferengi have knowledge of quantum torpedo technology of some kind


 * Well, "Quark" is from the 24th Century, and Quark has been on the Defiant, and Quark has good ears, therefore he would know about them. Most everyone probably has knowledge about them, just like today most everyone has knowledge of cruise missiles. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:48, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Well my point is that it can be mentioned that the Ferengi may also have Quantum Torpedo technology


 * No, it can't. This is not evidence of that. This is evidence of Quark being a bad salesman, and dishonest. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:30, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Possibly, he may be mislabeling a product, as stated in rule of acquisition 239, but neither of our suppositions is clarified in the episode, i am suggesting we state that Quark offered to sell quantum torpedo technology to 1947 humans, and since he is a ferengi, he may or may not have actually possessed the schematics.

Federation attack fighter / BG notes
When and how are these said to have quantum torpedoes? --OuroborosCobra talk 22:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * "Sacrifice of Angels", script only, iirc vfx does not support this. Should be a background note and that's about it. --Alan 22:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the only VFX I saw for those fighters in that episode were pulse phasers similar to that used by the Defiant in later seasons. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * "On a strange note in , it takes six quantum torpedoes to destroy the Jem'Hadar attack ship in question, after it had taken at least two or three passes of phaser cannon fire. This leads one to speculate about just what was wrong with the Valiant's weapon systems, however it did start exploding after the first hits, so the extra torpedoes may have just been "insurance" or possibly overkill or even just the inexperience of the crew (comprised entirely of cadets). Similar sequences involving the Defiant have never taken more than one or two quantum torpedoes to do the same job (barring the sequence in  which was stock footage from Valiant)."


 * I'm not sold on the last note of the background section...especially when it contains such phrases as "strange note", "leads one to speculate" ...--Alan 22:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree....each battle is a unique circumstance with numerous factors. Who knows why it took more torpedoes on one occasion.--31dot 14:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Possible origin of the Quantum in Quantum torpedo
I'm noting this here, instead of any article, as it is extremely speculative, in case some future incarnation of Trek ever confirms any of it. But if we forget the DS9TM-explanation and focus on canonical notes we can find an indirect possible explanation for the use of the word "Quantum". Okay, so we begin with "For the Uniform" where Plasma warheads on Quantum torpedoes 3 and 4 are mentioned. Okay, so it's a Plasma torpedo? Then we go to "Image in the Sand" where Romulan Plasma torpedoes are said to give off concentrations of trilithium isotopes. So it's a Trilithium torpedo? Then we go right back to "Star Trek Generations" where Trilithium torpedoes are used by Soran to detonate stars by causing quantum implosions. So there you have it, "Quantum (implosion) torpedoes". In the alternative ending where Kirk is shot in the back, Sorans Trilithium missile launches and impacts on the planet surface and the explosion is just a regular big blast, so its not as if the torpedo itself is such a WMD, just when its fired into a star it becomes that. --Pseudohuman 22:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Quantum torpedo, a plasma torpedo?
The reference to Quantums being plasma based is not really accurate. Worf says that Torpedoes 3 and 4 have an energy variance on the plasma warheads, but he does not specify that it is the quantum torpedoes. We know that the Defiant Class ships are capable for launching either Quantum or Photon torpedoes, it is possible that they might have been carrying something unconventional at the time. But regardless, Quantum Torpedoes are never specified hence we can not conclude that they are plasma based. (90.227.26.235 15:25, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * You are correct, in that scene of the episode they are not specified. But at the end of the episode torpedoes 1, 2, 3 and 4 are mentioned again, and it is made clear they are quantum torpedoes. --Pseudohuman 16:38, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Actually before that Sisko asks Worf to specificly prepare Quantum Torpededoes and to have engineering attach pods with trilithium resin it it. A considerable amount of time passed between both conversations and it is very possible that they changed the loaded torpedoes in between, which seems to be emphasised further by the fact that as afore mentioned, sisko asks Worf to "prepare" Quantum Torpedoes, I.E load them and as an addition orders the cargo pods to be attached. This is logical to assume given the fact that nothing about the Quantum Torpedoes is consistent with what we know of Plasma weapon behavior. 90.227.26.235 21:12, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually plasma torpedoes used by the Romulans and the Cardassians in the TNG-era seem to be fairly similar to quantum torpedoes. But I would like to have an additional third opinion from someone else here. Is "For the Uniform" evidence that Starfleet uses plasma torpedoes in addition to photon and quantum torpedoes on the Defiant, as you suggest. or is it evidence that quantum torpedoes are armed with plasma warheads, as i suggest. --Pseudohuman 22:14, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Quantum torpedoes are supposed to be the next major step up after photons, and are supposed to be a lot more powerful as well. Now Photon torpedoes are antimatter warheads, but plasma torpedoes are just plain highly energized matter. It is extremely unlikely IMO that a plasma torpedo in such small format would be able to carry enough destructive energy to rival an antimatter or more powerful warhead. Remember, the plasma torpedo fired against the enterprise in TOS was immensly powerful but also very large, and plasma torpedoes fired by orbital weapons platforms at the first battle of Chin'Toka were small and inflicted relatively localized damage to the areas of the ships, whereas a few quantum torpedoes have been shown to be able to cripple and blow apart entire ships. Personally i would write this up as either Federation ships carrying plasma torpedoes or just a writers mistake. Because sometiems a mistake is just a mistake, and we don't consider every single error or inconsistency to be canon. – Alexraptor 22:07, September 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * But then again if you remember Image in the Sand, the 24th century Romulan plasma torpedoes use trilithium, which is a pretty substantial WMD, if you remember Generations for example. --Pseudohuman 22:33, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

True, but the trilithiums WMD properties is not as much its explosive properties as it is its ability to suspend all nuclear reactions within a star, resulting in a supernova. Remember, Soran told the Duras sisters that without his research the trilithium was "worthless" to them. – Alexraptor 01:31, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * There have been other various explosive uses for it in trek, read more at: trilithium, trilithium resin. Whatever form of trilithium the romulans use, all we know is it gives off trilithium isotopes. But that is just to illustrate that plasma torpedoes arent just a ball of simple plasma. And for the other thing, as far as i know it is not canonically stated that the quantum torpedo was introduced to be a better torpedo than the photon torpedo, this notion only comes from bg-material. We see basic photons blowing up ships with single hits also in trek, and used by ships together with quantums. --Pseudohuman 03:05, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * In, it is pretty clearly indicated that quantum torpedoes are more capable. When the Lakota was given the order to switch to quantum torpedoes, their mission became one of "disable" to "destroy." --OuroborosCobra talk 03:56, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, plasma is a "state" of matter, which means Trilithium could easily constitute as part of that plasma. And i'm not saying it has not been used as an explosive, just not one that is that extremely powerful, mostly its use comes from the unique properties it has like causing supernovas and use as a biogenic weapon. And your right, Photons have been shown to destroy ships in one hit, however as far as i know only Quantums have been shown to have the extreme high yield needed to disable or blow apart large formidable ships like Keldon's, Sphere's and Breen ships in just a couple of hits. All evidence points clearly to the vast superiority of Quantums over photons. That a ship would be refitted to carry them, the defiants almost-only using them, not to mention that sovereign was armed with both Photon and Quantum torpedoes and having the quantum launcher installed as a turret. And ultimately, it was the quantum torpedoes that managed to completely disable the Scimitar's cloak in Nemesis, while photon torpedoes had relatively minor effect on the Scimitar. – Alexraptor 12:42, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, ok, we all agree. Quantums are more effective than photons at destroying starships. So what. I dont see any reason why lets say a trilithium plasma warhead cant be part of a torpedo with more destructive power than a photon warhead. "For the uniform" wouldnt btw actually contradict the DS9TM statements as the DS9TM was released a year after the episode aired. So it's the other way around, TM-writers werent paying atention to canon. Also, photon torpedoes have a lot of things that arent mentioned in the TMs. such as shields and completely different ranges. --Pseudohuman 14:59, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest i don't even use the TM as a source for anything since its not canon. If a Quantum torpedo was truly a plasma weapon with a plasma warhead then it would be called a Plasma torpedo, not Quantum. The very name itself clearly suggests a connection with Quantum Mechanics which would make the Quantum torpedo something far more than mere plasma based weapon. As i said before, sometimes writers mistakes are made, just as FX mistakes are made. As i recall in Nemesis Riker orders security down to deck 29, despite the fact that according to Picard in First Contact the Enterprise E only has 24 decks along with the MSD in both movies that indicates 23-24 decks. – Alexraptor 17:55, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, the name suggests a connection to quantum mechanics, and that it is different from a basic plasma torpedo. but to me that doesnt mean that there cant be a plasma warhead inside the torpedo. it isn't always the case that a torpedo and warhead have the same name, photonic torpedo with the antimatter warhead is an example of this. I've never considered that a writers mistake. --Pseudohuman 19:19, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Well Photonic and Photon is obviously intentional, as photonic torpedoes are precursors to proper photon torpedoes, the main difference being that Photon Torpedoes have a self contained warhead and do not require antimatter from ships antimatter reserves. And of course Matter + Antimatter = Annihilation = Release of Photons. But your right, a Quantum torpedo could contain plasma, in fact it most likely does contain plasma as Photon Torpedoes use plasma for propulsion. One could even theorise that Quantum torpedoes even use some of that drive plasma as part of the explosive yield. However, i would not classify a Quantum Torpedo as a Plasma weapon as i can't really see any plasma in the torpedo accounting for the main effect of the torpedo. – Alexraptor 23:02, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, when the word warhead is used with plasma, that implies that a plasma detonation plays some part in the explosion. But allright. So if i understand correctly we agree that there is a plasma warhead in the quantum torpedo according to the writers, and we agree that the quantum torpedo isn't just a basic plasma torpedo. The main issue seems to be here about the wording in the article? "quantum torpedo was a tactical plasma torpedo weapon". if we change it to "quantum torpedo was a tactical quantum weapon that utilized a plasma warhead" would that be enough to settle this debate? --Pseudohuman 23:31, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Better late than never i suppose. But i still do not agree that its primary destructive capability comes from plasma. I think too much attention is being given this "stray" and obscure plasma reference when its obvious the destructive power comes from something else, especially since its detonation effects in "Defiant" are very reminiscent of subspace anomalies and nothing at all like plasma(would not be the first time Starfleet has dabbled in psuedo-subspace weapons). And if one looks carefully in First Contact when the sphere is hit a similar effect can be seen at the moment of impact. Ultimately i would make the plasma connection something a footnote or a writers error just as an Intrepid firing photon torpedoes from its tractor beam emitter is an FX error. I mean really, at what point does one just stop up and say, "ok so the writer/artist made a mistake", because this one obscure line and what we see throught the series and movies just does not add up. – Alexraptor 00:24, November 20, 2010 (UTC)

reference in "way of the warrior"
Though at the onset of the battle to rescue Dukat, Sisko precisely orders: "Arm quantum torpedoes. Drop the cloak. And raise shields," I don't recall actually seeing any torpedoes fired during the battle (or no special effect). I'm not sure if the reference should remain, though perhaps it occurred off screen. 74.69.11.229 13:54, October 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * It would still be a reference, even if they were never fired. -- sulfur (talk) 14:06, October 31, 2012 (UTC)