RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,059
Posts: 5,431,727
Members: 24,925
Currently online: 695
Newest member: dracopticon

TrekToday headlines

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Cracked’s New Sci-Fi Satire
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Beltran Introduces Shakespeare To Theater Group
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Burton To Be Honored at Facets Boo! Bash
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16


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 August 28 2013, 10:19 PM   #16
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Transporters too Good

CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
Could the HUP be used as an excuse for why Starfleet doesn't use the transwarp beaming regularly? I admit I know very little about that stuff, but I'm sure they could have Scotty throw in some unobtrusive exposition (a simple line or two) in the next film about how the Heisenberg Compensators lack the sophistication to transwarp beam within acceptable safety levels or something like that.
Not so sure it would make the best excuse. The Uncertainty Principle applies on a quantum level, and the Heisenberg compensators were supposed to be a <magic tech> means of working around a "position and momentum of particle A may not both be measurable without interfering with position/movement of particle A and thus rendering the measurement invalid" sort of problem. How that might be affected by transport distance I couldn't guess, but I'm thinking not very much.

Something closer to an "annular confinement beam" type of <magic tech> might be a better bet.
__________________
The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but
that the lightning ain't distributed right.
— Mark Twain
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 02:28 AM   #17
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Police State
Re: Transporters too Good

Timo wrote: View Post
Or then Scotty only made the devices a tad less lethal, but that was enough for Spock Prime's purposes of stopping Nero; Spock wouldn't have worried all that much about the personal safety of Kirk at that point.
Aren't those concerns pretty much one and the same, though? If Kirk turns into a pile of goo or gets transported into a bulkhead, he isn't going to be doing any Nero-stopping. And Spock Prime did seem concerned with nuverse-Kirk's destiny.
__________________
Thank you very much for your concern, sir, but he does not need your religion, he has science and socialism and birthdays.
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 04:22 AM   #18
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
View SeerSGB's Twitter Profile
Re: Transporters too Good

Set Harth wrote: View Post
Timo wrote: View Post
Or then Scotty only made the devices a tad less lethal, but that was enough for Spock Prime's purposes of stopping Nero; Spock wouldn't have worried all that much about the personal safety of Kirk at that point.
Aren't those concerns pretty much one and the same, though? If Kirk turns into a pile of goo or gets transported into a bulkhead, he isn't going to be doing any Nero-stopping. And Spock Prime did seem concerned with nuverse-Kirk's destiny.
Risk versus gain: One transport might not be lethal or even that risky; but repeated use might stack the damage or increase your risks of something going wrong.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Blog | Homepage |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 06:08 PM   #19
Nine of Four
Commander
 
Nine of Four's Avatar
 
Location: On a Borg Cube in the Delta Quadrant
Re: Transporters too Good

If Starfleet had access to transwarp beaming, it might be stolen, (or assimilated ) by the Borg/Klingons/Romulans/Dominion/Cardassians.

Risk to great.
__________________
- Nine of Four
Nine of Four is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 06:31 PM   #20
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Transporters too Good

The Dominion already had similar long range transporters - weirdly they only used it for dramatic Vorta escapes and not to, say, beam an armed torpedo into the Federation President's office.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 06:57 PM   #21
geneo
Lieutenant
 
Location: WV
Re: Transporters too Good

Nine of Four wrote: View Post
The events in these movies occurred before those of The Original Series TV show, yet the transporter technology far outmatched that of any series.
Alternate reality. Not everything is going to be as the regular timeline.
geneo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 08:07 PM   #22
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Police State
Re: Transporters too Good

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
and not to, say, beam an armed torpedo into the Federation President's office.
Nobody ever does this, when they have the technology. It doesn't make sense. AbramsTrek is in this boat now.
__________________
Thank you very much for your concern, sir, but he does not need your religion, he has science and socialism and birthdays.
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29 2013, 08:53 PM   #23
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Transporters too Good

The Dominion already had similar long range transporters - weirdly they only used it for dramatic Vorta escapes and not to, say, beam an armed torpedo into the Federation President's office.
Well, there was no episode that would actually have presented evidence of a Dominion long range transporter existing - but somehow Worf had become convinced that such a device did exist, and could explain Kira's kidnapping, in "Covenant". I wonder what the Dominion did with such a transporter to make Worf so convinced?

The escape of the Vorta in "Jem'Hadar" could be explained without long range transporters: simple standard transporter, coupled with a cloaked ship, would be plenty enough. And Kira's kidnapping was never thoroughly analyzed, only speculated upon; a standard transporter could have snatched her off the station to a waiting ship, say.

Risk versus gain: One transport might not be lethal or even that risky; but repeated use might stack the damage or increase your risks of something going wrong.
Exactly. That was explicitly the thing that had stopped the UFP from using the "High Ground" space-folding trick (it worked fine, until you died). The "Bloodlines" subspace transporter was said to be unstable and an energy hog. And the sub-quantum teleportation in "Daedalus" was apparently too dangerous to be even tried out. Scotty's invention could be similar to one of the three, or then something else altogether.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 10:03 AM   #24
ROBE
Commander
 
ROBE's Avatar
 
Re: Transporters too Good

I suppose they could claim long term use could lead to damage to humanoids and there is a 10% risk of accident (Scotty being stuck in tube).
ROBE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 03:00 PM   #25
AUbricklogic
Ensign
 
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Re: Transporters too Good

They honestly need to make the technology of the future seem risky and finicky again or they're going to shoot themselves in the foot over and over. Problematic technology is used as the device in the story for why they don't just "beam up" out of danger or other "easy-fixes" to the various troubles they face.
AUbricklogic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 03:50 PM   #26
austen_pierce
Captain
 
austen_pierce's Avatar
 
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Re: Transporters too Good

Forgetting transwarp for a moment, transporters just don't malfunction like they did in TOS. On the other hand. Enterprise (Archer and company) beat this to death,; Abrams has better things to focus on.
austen_pierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 03:59 PM   #27
Jeyl
Commodore
 
Jeyl's Avatar
 
Location: Asheville, NC
Re: Transporters too Good

How does one confiscate an equation? I mean, Scotty was able to make it work on the JJPrise's transporters in the last movie by beaming Kirk and Spock onboard the Narada from Titan, so why couldn't he just use it again?
Jeyl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 04:02 PM   #28
Bry_Sinclair
Commodore
 
Bry_Sinclair's Avatar
 
Location: Tactical withdrawl along the Klingon border
Re: Transporters too Good

Why do they need starships when they have transporters that can beam them across sectors?
__________________
Avatar: Captain Naya, U.S.S. Renown NCC-1415 [Star Trek: Four Years War]
Manip by: JM1776 (STPMA.net)
Bry_Sinclair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 04:42 PM   #29
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Transporters too Good

General logistics, I guess. In terms of personal armaments, Khan was rather well equipped even in his Qo'noS exile, but he didn't have a means of transportation or a sensor array with him.

What you would do with a super-transporter would thus be beaming starships across sectors. That is, vessels with warp engines replaced by super-transporters, but the other elements such as big guns, laboratories, holodecks and cargo holds still remaining.

This also relates to the Scotty-still-has-the-skills issue. What would our heroes do with a super-transporter? We've seen they have big trouble locking on to a target even with their regular ones (cf. the conclusion of the movie), so they couldn't use the transwarp transporter to imprison John Harrison. They could use it to go after him in force, but how much force could they pack on their belts and packpacks alone? Sending a starship would seem to be their only option of either delivering decisive firepower (as Marcus wanted) or snatching back Harrison.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 30 2013, 04:43 PM   #30
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
View SeerSGB's Twitter Profile
Re: Transporters too Good

Bry_Sinclair wrote: View Post
Why do they need starships when they have transporters that can beam them across sectors?
Risk. Who knows how damn finicky or dangerous the thing is normally. We never saw it used in a normal situation: Kirk and Scotty was a last ditch desperation move; Khan was a nutjob super genius.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Blog | Homepage |
SeerSGB 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 10:24 PM.

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