RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,629
Posts: 5,427,037
Members: 24,810
Currently online: 588
Newest member: Rom

TrekToday headlines

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17

September Loot Crate Features Trek Surprise
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

USS Enterprise Miniature Out For Refit
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Comic Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Trek 3 Shooting Next Spring?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 13 2013, 11:43 PM   #46
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

Timo wrote: View Post
What I have a much bigger problem with is the OP's suggestion that there is something in the film about not being able to beam up when beaming down happens without a hitch! The transporter has never been asymmetric like that. Of course, it could be, and by all rights should be, but it isn't. The transporter room guy needs a clear image of what is at the other end, and if he can't see it well enough to beam it up, he can't send anybody down "blind", either.
I haven't seen the new film and I haven't read all the spoilers, so I don't know what this issue is in the new film.

However, there was beam down/up asymmetry in The Cage. Landing parties beamed down together, but they came up one at a time, as evidently they had to.

So, the idea of asymmetry was present in the first pilot.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 12:00 AM   #47
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Harrison beamed 72 missiles with a single transport on a starship.
SPOILERS:

Have we seen the same movie?
Harrison/Khan had nothing to do with the transfer of the missiles.
Marcus had them transferred to the Enterprise, thus getting rid of - if the Kirk had functioned as intended - Khan, his crew and the Enterprise.
SPOILERS:

Maybe we didn't see the same movie! I thought Spock pulled a fast one at the end? I didn't see anything to indicate that Harrison left any of his people behind? Wasn't that 72 in a single transport?

The TMP Enterprise had a couple of emergency transporters that could take 20(?) people at a time but that presumably had fewer safety features. In TNG I believe they temporarily upgraded cargo transporters so transporting large numbers of people in one go is not unheard of but unusual for a single person, especially considering how proud Scotty was of beaming 3 people from two locations in the last movie - although I can see how that would be tricky for one person. Maybe they should have more than one transporter on standby?

It is a bit incongruous though isn't it? Why do you need emergency transporters at all if you can just beam 72 people to your cargo bay.

I really love the TMP Enterprise. So much thought went into making it credible and yet limited in scope (including emergency batteries, recreational facilities, and botanical labs). It evoked the pioneer spirit of our current astronauts by clearly being a cramped tin can in space but had just enough advanced features to make it inspiring.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 12:07 AM   #48
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

If subspace radio can be believed to deliver real time messages and conversations across vast distances (even at warp), then it's not much of a stretch to think some kind of Trek technology could possibly be used to transport animate objects across just as vast a distance.

The thing is, over the years in TOS, they've always wanted us to believe the transporter was rather iffy, cutting edge technology (with bad timing when it decided to break down) Transporters were more dependable and transporting more routine around TNG time.

Apparently, in this Trek universe transporters are already less problematic. Except,
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 12:12 AM   #49
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Harrison beamed 72 missiles with a single transport on a starship.
SPOILERS:

Have we seen the same movie?
Harrison/Khan had nothing to do with the transfer of the missiles.
Marcus had them transferred to the Enterprise, thus getting rid of - if the Kirk had functioned as intended - Khan, his crew and the Enterprise.
SPOILERS:

Maybe we didn't see the same movie! I thought Spock pulled a fast one at the end? I didn't see anything to indicate that Harrison left any of his people behind? Wasn't that 72 in a single transport?
Oh, by that time he was known as Khan. You should have been more specific. Yes, he beamed those 72 torpedoes in one go. So?
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 12:22 AM   #50
Phily B
Fleet Captain
 
Phily B's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
View Phily B's Twitter Profile
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

The scene where they didn't painfully sit around watching the torpedoes beaming aboard ruined the movie for me.
Phily B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 12:38 AM   #51
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

Franklin wrote: View Post
If subspace radio can be believed to deliver real time messages and conversations across vast distances (even at warp), then it's not much of a stretch to think some kind of Trek technology could possibly be used to transport animate objects across just as vast a distance.
The issue for me is the amount of data. Admittedly, TNGadded layers of technobabble to the process but you need a beam of energy to prevent too much data leaking and you need heisenberg compensators to recombine the person successfully. It's hard to see how all that can still work at such long distances without a receiving pad if you can't even beam people out of the katric arc underground or when people are moving (FYI - the universe is moving, the planets are moving, the spaceships are moving, and tiny movements are magnified over long distances - it really should be a lot harder doing this over such long distances.

God-like alien tech aside, I can only see this working if they have a network of transporter relays on subspace communication relays to buffer the signal but transportees could end up being stranded if one of the relays is destroyed...

Or the Stargate style, where you open a wormhole and scan beyond it before sending the transporter signal through.

Now Stargate had a very good grasp on the limits of its tech and used it in some very effective stories. Trek tech is more versatile but I do wish the writers had a bible of do's and don'ts to work with.

Transporting over 20 light years would be on my don't list.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 12:40 AM   #52
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
beamMe wrote: View Post

SPOILERS:

Have we seen the same movie?
Harrison/Khan had nothing to do with the transfer of the missiles.
Marcus had them transferred to the Enterprise, thus getting rid of - if the Kirk had functioned as intended - Khan, his crew and the Enterprise.
SPOILERS:

Maybe we didn't see the same movie! I thought Spock pulled a fast one at the end? I didn't see anything to indicate that Harrison left any of his people behind? Wasn't that 72 in a single transport?
Oh, by that time he was known as Khan. You should have been more specific. Yes, he beamed those 72 torpedoes in one go. So?
He more than one name and I was trying to you know not spoil that little tidbit for those that hadn't watched it yet! It's too easy to be free with major spoilers.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 12:50 AM   #53
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

Phily B wrote: View Post
The scene where they didn't painfully sit around watching the torpedoes beaming aboard ruined the movie for me.
SPOILERS

Lol - technological hindrances force characters to make difficult choices. Does the villain hang around to complete the task or does he flee to avoid being captured (lucky for him he was in the only starship in the quadrant and starfleet security was napping again).

But don't be so down on talky or moralising bits. Without them you get a hollow movie full of explosions and women in their underwear. The homage to TWoK felt a bit forced and hollow here whereas I tear up every time in TWoK because of the way that scene is written - the music, the event coming after they think they've cheated death yet again, the talking etc. Some of the greatest sci fi movies of all time have lots of talking. ;P

Still, sometimes less talking can be good. I think Tasha's death and Wash's death in Serenity have a certain cool factor because they aren't noble or drawn out - they're redshirt deaths happening to main characters. That's what I want to see!
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 01:02 AM   #54
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

OK. All of this is my opinion ofc. I am trying to say how I think Transwarp beaming undermines actually using a starship and/or shuttlecraft to get from point A to point B which is a pretty core component of Star Trek from 1966-2005. Transwarp beaming puts multiple spanners into the works for me. I was willing to let it go as a one-off to help them write their script for ST09 but now its an integral plot device again and it annoys me!!.. I wish it didn't! Honestly! Its too easy and convenient...

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-splitting Kirk into good and evil halves
A one off occurrence caused by accident! What are the odds? This is acceptable (to me.) I probably need to see this ep again, surely this is not something they can easily replicate. I would hope its a one in a million chance or something... its a plot device revisited by TNG once only in 40 years? I think?

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-beaming into a parallel universe
Required plot device for an alt-universe episode, I like mirror eps This is cool They setup a mirror episode and then go away.

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-making a copy of Riker
Ok I need to see the episode to hear the required technobabble but again I assume this is a freak accident that is not easily replicated? It requires certain conditions that may not occur often and even then might not work?

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-De-ageing Picard, Ro, Guinan and Keiko to children
Again, an accident? Remote chance of re-occurance? Cannot do it again? Unlike transwarp beaming where any transporter in the federation can be fed an equation to make it transwarp capable?

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-Making Hoshi into a ghost
I think I skipped this episode tbh, but I assume that once again it was a freak accident, not something that can be repeated on command.

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-Merging Tuvok and Neelix into Tuvix
-Unmerging Tuvix... months later!
Ughh its Tuvix!!! I will trot out the same excuse that allows my brain to 'live with it'.... it was an accident and its highly improbable that you can put two people on the pad and replicate it without something going wrong? Again, I need to listen to the technobabble I suppose. Not ready to re-watch that episode right now

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-Beaming across time in Deep Space Nine
I have forgot this one? Which ep? The difference (again) to transwarp beaming is that you cannot go to any transporter and punch in an equation to beam through time again. A certain set of highly improbable circumstances must have occurred in this episode to cause such an event, unlike transwarp beaming that can be retrofitted into any transporter with some equations with no problem !

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-De-ageing Pulaski and curing her disease
Ok this one beats me but fortunately its a so-so TNG episode from 1988 that I can easily discard

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-De-ageing Kirk and Spock in the cartoons
-Re-ageing the bridge crew after an alternate reality de-aged them in the cartoons.
Come on man, Cartoons don't count!!!

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-Beaming across space and time several times in TOS
Not certain on this one, I need to watch the episodes. Point taken here.

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-The Dominion had a transwarp beaming equivalent in DS9 and used it several times
I have seen DS9 many times and I suppose I have seen these beamings as well and I never noticed. I need to watch the episodes again, I tried to find information about this on memory alpha but I didn't see anything. This is an interesting development! Need to look into it

King Daniel wrote: View Post
-People getting lost in the beam, only to be seen by Barclay as floating monsters during teleport.
-Scotty spending 70 years dematerialized inside a transporter.
-The transporter inventor's son becoming a ghost that mutilated people when they touched him. He spent 18 years like this.


THEY are why transwarp beaming is no big deal whatsoever, and perfectly consistent with the Trek universe. I can only imagine the reaction if they dared resuse one of the other ideas above
The majority of these transporter accidents I believe are caused by some form of anomaly or co-incidence that occurs during the episode that causes the accident and results in these extraordinary events. None of them (?) are as a result of someone actually changing the software to do exactly what occurs. They are mostly freak accidents that cannot be replicated.

Transwarp Beaming is a software update by Scotty using an equation. It results in a transporter that is able to beam people across tens or perhaps hundreds of light-years and it can be used again and again with pretty good success rate (so far!). This imho renders Starships and shuttlecraft obsolete or at the very least undermines their existence. Why bother with them when you can now beam everywhere. Transporters were never meant to be used for interstellar beaming from one solar system to another!

If Kurtzman/Orci had submitted a script like STID or even ST09 to the team in charge of the spinoffs I suspect the first bit to fall by the wayside would have been transwarp beaming because it does not/did not fit into the Trek universe. It is fortunate that the writing staff on the spinoffs had scientific consultants and trek alumni they could go (Okudas, Sternback, Andre Bormanis etc) to to make sure they are not making a mistake with the established Trek gadgets and making them too magical. I would imagine it is something they encountered a lot when they accepted submissions of scripts from the public, now in the nuVerse this consultant team has gone and as a result we have transwarp beaming. Enjoy it people!
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 01:12 AM   #55
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

TheSubCommander wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
TheSubCommander wrote: View Post
My take on Transwarp beaming is that it has existed (sort of) since Gamesters of Triskelion, albeit it was alien technology.
See I found it awful and cheesy every time they pulled out the alien race with the magically powerful tech.

Give me the battle of wits between equally matched foes any day - Balance of Terror and TWoK are streets ahead of Gamesters in terms of excitement and anticipation.
I can't disagree with you. It is a bit of a lazy out. Just saying that the new movies weren't the first in Trek to use such a thing.
Whereas I don't have a problem with the concept that aliens that are older and or smarter than the federation having better toys than them.
Hartzilla2007 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 01:14 AM   #56
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

When were transporters used to beam across time in TOS?

The DS9 beam across time accident was Past Tense.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 01:14 AM   #57
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

Timo wrote: View Post
What I have a much bigger problem with is the OP's suggestion that there is something in the film about not being able to beam up when beaming down happens without a hitch! The transporter has never been asymmetric like that. Of course, it could be, and by all rights should be, but it isn't. The transporter room guy needs a clear image of what is at the other end, and if he can't see it well enough to beam it up, he can't send anybody down "blind", either.

Or can he? The issue has never arisen in previous Trek, because no beam-down has been desperate enough. Desperation has only involved getting a hero out of a jam, and generally this can't be achieved by sending more people into said jam. But this scene might well involve something worth risking a "blind beam-down".

...Apparently, the hero beaming down isn't able to pack a beacon that would allow him and his target to subsequently be beamed up. But that sort of a limitation can probably easily be handwaved away.

Dunno. Gonna see the flick no matter what. Sounds a bit silly in places, but probably not too damningly so.

Timo Saloniemi
Yes, at a critical moment we find that you cannot beam an object up but you can beam an object down right next to it

My advice is to try your best not to focus on Trek Tech or plot because it makes little sense (IMHO!) just enjoy the spectacle and the performances of the cast because both are A+

The tech and plot issues are probably no 'worse' than what occurred in Star Trek (2009). The trouble is the novelty has worn off and it has to live or die by its plot which comes under more scrutiny and falls to bits as a result... again... IMO.
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 01:17 AM   #58
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
When were transporters used to beam across time in TOS?

The DS9 beam across time accident was Past Tense.
How can I forget that?

Once again its a one off I think? An accident? Need to check the treknobabble of the episode at some point Its certainly not something revisited or reproduced with some equations !
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 01:19 AM   #59
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
TheSubCommander wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post

See I found it awful and cheesy every time they pulled out the alien race with the magically powerful tech.

Give me the battle of wits between equally matched foes any day - Balance of Terror and TWoK are streets ahead of Gamesters in terms of excitement and anticipation.
I can't disagree with you. It is a bit of a lazy out. Just saying that the new movies weren't the first in Trek to use such a thing.
Whereas I don't have a problem with the concept that aliens that are older and or smarter than the federation having better toys than them.
Yes, maybe the disembodied brains of triskelion are 10 million years old or something and have moved beyond the need for a Starship which is now something starfleet can consider in the nuVerse !
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14 2013, 02:06 AM   #60
mos6507
Captain
 
mos6507's Avatar
 
Re: Transporters in the nuVerse [SPOILERS]

beamMe wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post
This is supposed to be a prequel in the (if it were prime)
Thankfully, it isn't.
The writers are free to create this Star Trek as they like.
And the audience is free not to like it, and by extension, free to express such criticism in threads such as these. The critics should have just as much a right as defenders.
__________________
Fem Trekz on Facebook

Last edited by mos6507; May 14 2013 at 02:19 AM.
mos6507 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.