View Single Post
Old May 18 2013, 09:47 PM   #26
datalogan
Lieutenant Commander
 
datalogan's Avatar
 
Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Into Darkness and the novelverse [SPOILERS]

Christopher wrote: View Post
Which rather defeats the purpose of the filmmakers, doesn't it?
Roberto Orci, in discussion on trekmovie.com has stated that the entire character arch of “John Harrison” was developed way before the idea came up to make him Khan. It was just a little added bonus that their “John Harrison” character back-story could be easily changed to incorporate the idea of getting “Khan” into the movie. So, apparently, their whole purpose was to just get the shock-and-awe of name recognition added to the pre-existing Harrison character. I think that can be served without this character ultimately having to be Khan Noonien Singh.

Christopher wrote: View Post
We've seen it used exactly twice -- that's not nearly enough to establish a baseline for its reliability.
Actually, this particular version of transwarp beaming was used twice in Star Trek 2009 [once to get Scotty and Kirk aboard Enterprise and once to get Kirk and Spock aboard the Nerada] and once in STiD.
Plus, I was really referring to all types of long-range transporters, so you also have to add in TOS "Assignment: Earth”, TOS “The Gamesters of Triskelion”, TNG “Bloodlines”, DS9 “The Jem’Hadar”, DS9 “Covenant”. All these uses and never a failure.

Christopher wrote: View Post
Even if it failed only one time out of three or four, or even one time out of a hundred, that would hardly be considered a sufficient survival rate to justify putting it into everyday use.
I’ve never said it had to be put into everyday use. I just think it should be addressed/developed in the novelverse. Maybe it is still a little too unreliable for people. But that doesn’t mean some people wouldn’t be willing to use it anyway—like criminals, like Bok in “Bloodlines”. And it doesn’t mean that it couldn’t be used as a viable delivery method for weapons, goods, etc.


Christopher wrote: View Post
And I would submit that the coordinate error that endangered Scotty was an inseparable part of what makes it dangerous. The greater the distance you have to transport, the more any margin of error is magnified.
Coordinate error would be an inseparable part of what makes long-range transport dangerous—if that was caused by the tech itself. But all the evidence says otherwise. In every situation where long-range transporters were used with good coordinates inputted into the system (see the long list above) it works well. In STiD the system was good enough to keep inaccuracies low even during a transport from Earth to Qo’noS.
The only reason there was “coordinate error” in that one transport of Scotty in Star Trek ’09 was because Spock Prime was guessing about the coordinates. He didn’t actually know where the Enterprise was at the time. If he had had better coordinates to enter into the transport it would have worked fine. The transport system itself did work fine. According to the evidence, there is nothing wrong/dangerous/risky about the system, just the coordinates that Spock Prime had entered.

Christopher wrote: View Post
some additional insight that nobody in the Prime universe has had yet.
Except that we know that someone did have that insight in the Prime universe. Scotty had it. And Spock knew about it. At least by 2387. That was established in the 2009 film.

Christopher wrote: View Post
if someone wanted to introduce it into the Primeverse novels, it could be justified (as long as the risk were reasonably addressed), but I'm perfectly content to let that breakthrough remain unmade for the foreseeable future.
And I understand your reluctance. I’m just arguing that it is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid. Not if you want to be consistent with canon.
datalogan is offline   Reply With Quote