This is something I've thought about occasionally for years and just wanted to put it out there and see if it's crossed anyone else's mind at any point.
I really don't like the transporter, I think it's my least favourite device/ concept in Trek.
I've heard in the past that the original intention was to have away teams use the shuttles more, but this would have been far too costly, so the transporter was created as a cheaper alternative. Since then it's become a Trek staple and it's hard to imagine any of the shows without it.
Personally if I was in charge of my own Trek reboot I'd either leave it out, or have it only work between 2 pads. Below is some of my reasoning for this, sorry it's a lot of text;
1/ Danger. I struggle to worry about any situation anyone is in when a starship can swoop in and beam them out. I know, I know there are dampening fields and other tech... But then our heroes are countering that tech with their own tech. Just becomes a mess of pointless technobabble. And I'm really tired of someone setting a collision course when you know they will be beamed out at the last second.
2/ Security. Ok, this is the exact opposite of my last point, but why aren't transporters used tactically more? It's shown that cloaked ships have full transporter capability, why would any cloaked ship ready weapons and assault an unsuspecting, unshielded vicitm, when they could beam the bridge crew into space, or beam a torpedo into engineering? I guess there's further dampening fields but there have been situations like in Nemesis where Picard is beamed right off the Enterprise by a cloaked ship. If this happens once in the show, then that's a threat they need to constantly be aware of, yet they're not... Sometimes not even raising shields until they have no other choice when threatened. It would be a terrifying existance working on a ship, aware you could be beamed off it by a cloaked Romulan Scout at any point.
3/ Society. Transporters, like all technology will continue to progress. Look at the device used in Nemesis as an example of where it could go. But more to the point look at site to site transporting. Yes, it's possible to move a person from point A to point B, without them visiting a transporter room. How long is it before turbolifts are a secondary option, wake up in the morning and get beamed to your station automatically. Have the transporter beam you from your house to a meeting then back again. And again, look at the tactical implications of this. You have been boarded by enemy troops who have beamed themselves aboard. Yes, the enemy beamed troops and not grenades. They beamed troops on board but didn't beam prisoners off. Why not beam them into space, or into the brig, or beam their weapons into space? If a Starfleet security office is being shot by an enemy who is hiding behind cover, why even try to engage him, why not beam some kind of charge behind him? Beam it directly from the pocket of the Starfleet officer he's firing at, saves him throwing it!
4/ It's always used as a cop out. I guess this one is more of a symptom of bad writing than an issue with the actual technology, but sticking someone in a transporter and pressing some buttons solves a lot of problems. Just look at Tuvix as an example. Also, it seems it can just do too much. I'm not expert but if you can correct genetic issues through the transporter then I guess it would be easy to fix say a broken arm. So if I have a badly injured crewmember, why beam him directly to sickbay, when I can beam him back to his workstation and put him back together in the process? I know that on screen evidence implies this cannot be down, I'm just not clear on why, when you can change Geordi's species by beaming him, you can turn kids back into adults, and you can merge 2 separate individuals.
I imagine a Trek where shuttles play a larger role. If you want to get somewhere you travel there, be it by train, shuttle, whatever. If a crewmember is held hostage by terrorists, you are either negotiating, leaving them behind, or planning some kind of rescue. And if you set a collision course from the bridge of your ship you are about to die a hero.
I know the shows have done a decent job of limiting and avoiding a lot of these cliches, and a lot of my complaints arise from my understanding or imagination of the technology, which I'll be the first to admit isn't as extensive as some. I'm not too interested in seeing how well everyone can pull apart my analysis and counter my complaints, I know any real Trekkie can, hell I could easily play devil's advocate and come up with an opposing viewpoint for everything I just typed. I'm more interested in whether anyone feels the transporter adds enough to warrant the effort keeping it necessarily limited, or whether people would prefer it wasn't there.
I really don't like the transporter, I think it's my least favourite device/ concept in Trek.
I've heard in the past that the original intention was to have away teams use the shuttles more, but this would have been far too costly, so the transporter was created as a cheaper alternative. Since then it's become a Trek staple and it's hard to imagine any of the shows without it.
Personally if I was in charge of my own Trek reboot I'd either leave it out, or have it only work between 2 pads. Below is some of my reasoning for this, sorry it's a lot of text;
1/ Danger. I struggle to worry about any situation anyone is in when a starship can swoop in and beam them out. I know, I know there are dampening fields and other tech... But then our heroes are countering that tech with their own tech. Just becomes a mess of pointless technobabble. And I'm really tired of someone setting a collision course when you know they will be beamed out at the last second.
2/ Security. Ok, this is the exact opposite of my last point, but why aren't transporters used tactically more? It's shown that cloaked ships have full transporter capability, why would any cloaked ship ready weapons and assault an unsuspecting, unshielded vicitm, when they could beam the bridge crew into space, or beam a torpedo into engineering? I guess there's further dampening fields but there have been situations like in Nemesis where Picard is beamed right off the Enterprise by a cloaked ship. If this happens once in the show, then that's a threat they need to constantly be aware of, yet they're not... Sometimes not even raising shields until they have no other choice when threatened. It would be a terrifying existance working on a ship, aware you could be beamed off it by a cloaked Romulan Scout at any point.
3/ Society. Transporters, like all technology will continue to progress. Look at the device used in Nemesis as an example of where it could go. But more to the point look at site to site transporting. Yes, it's possible to move a person from point A to point B, without them visiting a transporter room. How long is it before turbolifts are a secondary option, wake up in the morning and get beamed to your station automatically. Have the transporter beam you from your house to a meeting then back again. And again, look at the tactical implications of this. You have been boarded by enemy troops who have beamed themselves aboard. Yes, the enemy beamed troops and not grenades. They beamed troops on board but didn't beam prisoners off. Why not beam them into space, or into the brig, or beam their weapons into space? If a Starfleet security office is being shot by an enemy who is hiding behind cover, why even try to engage him, why not beam some kind of charge behind him? Beam it directly from the pocket of the Starfleet officer he's firing at, saves him throwing it!
4/ It's always used as a cop out. I guess this one is more of a symptom of bad writing than an issue with the actual technology, but sticking someone in a transporter and pressing some buttons solves a lot of problems. Just look at Tuvix as an example. Also, it seems it can just do too much. I'm not expert but if you can correct genetic issues through the transporter then I guess it would be easy to fix say a broken arm. So if I have a badly injured crewmember, why beam him directly to sickbay, when I can beam him back to his workstation and put him back together in the process? I know that on screen evidence implies this cannot be down, I'm just not clear on why, when you can change Geordi's species by beaming him, you can turn kids back into adults, and you can merge 2 separate individuals.
I imagine a Trek where shuttles play a larger role. If you want to get somewhere you travel there, be it by train, shuttle, whatever. If a crewmember is held hostage by terrorists, you are either negotiating, leaving them behind, or planning some kind of rescue. And if you set a collision course from the bridge of your ship you are about to die a hero.
I know the shows have done a decent job of limiting and avoiding a lot of these cliches, and a lot of my complaints arise from my understanding or imagination of the technology, which I'll be the first to admit isn't as extensive as some. I'm not too interested in seeing how well everyone can pull apart my analysis and counter my complaints, I know any real Trekkie can, hell I could easily play devil's advocate and come up with an opposing viewpoint for everything I just typed. I'm more interested in whether anyone feels the transporter adds enough to warrant the effort keeping it necessarily limited, or whether people would prefer it wasn't there.
