How is the rifle incorporated into cannon barrels


  • Since the plasma charges fired by blasters also have a mass, they would have to be influenced by gravity like real projectiles and forced into a curved trajectory. However, such is not shown or described in the films or any other source. Ballistics comparable to that of real weapons does not exist.
  • Due to the acceleration of the non-massless blaster bolt, a certain amount of recoil should also occur. This is indeed represented and described in most sources, but not always in a uniform manner. In view of the rather low mass of the ionized blaster gas charge and the lower acceleration in the barrel compared to real firearms, it sometimes even looks exaggerated. However, it was taken into account primarily because of the optics, especially in the films, to illustrate the firepower through the vibrations of the weapon and the shooter. Ultimately, however, the exact mass of the projectiles is not known, so this is only a guess as to how big the mass really is.
Further processing of the blaster blanks in the props department.
  • The exterior of most blaster weapons is unmistakably based on that of real weapons. This can go so far that entire parts of the housing have been adopted or imitated so that the original models can be clearly identified. For example, the British Sterling submachine gun was the inspiration for the E-11 and the German MG42 or MG3 for the DC-15 blaster rifle. Here, however, there is also a clear difference between the classic trilogy and the prequels. While existing components and housings were primarily used and reproduced for the production of Episodes IV to VI, the more recent films show a higher proportion of completely redesigned weapons. This allowed a further adjustment of the armament to its users, so that typical elements of the design of a culture could be more easily transferred to their distinctively designed blasters. Where original parts and wood were used in the past, more recently synthetic resin and sophisticated paintwork have been used, so that blasters can be cast in any shape and number. This was also relevant for the safety of the shooting. In this way, flexible rubber specimens could be made for stunts if required.[1][2]
  • Like the appearance, the handling of the blasters, including stopping and reloading, is based on reality. In addition, the blaster weapons show overall parallels to the actually existing firearms, from their central role as military armament, the historical suppression of other types of weapons to the division into classes with comparable properties and purposes, in the case of pistols, rifles and sniper rifles even identical names . The repeater blaster correspond to the machine guns or, in the case of their heavier forms, the machine guns.
  • Despite the close proximity to reality, visual effects had to be used to represent the blaster bullets. In many cases, the blasters of the Classic Trilogy had the option of igniting a kind of blank cartridge to generate the muzzle flash during the live action-Recordings. The actual bolts were added to the footage later, with occasional inconsistencies between the aiming and firing of the dummies and the flight of the projectiles. With the advancement of trick technology, the increasing performance of computer graphics (CGI) was used for the prequels in order to display muzzle flash, blaster bolt and impact more complex and more accurately, only larger explosions and flying sparks were still the task of pyrotechnics.[1][2][3]
A contradicting component: the divergent lenses
  • There are also some inconsistencies in the various sources on the subject of blasters. That's how he speaks New Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology of crystals that are used to focus the blaster rays in the barrel. The other sources, for example The compendium, neither mention such crystals, nor can they be seen in corresponding elevations. In Cracken's Rebel Field Guide it also states that the blaster bolt can be scattered by attaching several lenses to the muzzle. Both errors are obviously due to the fact that the resulting plasma was wrongly equated with the light it emitted. The term Blaster beam (orig. beam) is actually misleading in this regard. The distinction between blaster and laser technology is also imprecise in many places, especially in the translated versions, in the case of the first quotation of this article[4] even downright wrong. The term Blaster was here for the German dubbing as Laser cannon translated.

References Edit]