If someone can be beamed from any point on the ship to any point outside the ship, within range, why would there be a need to go to the transporter room at all? What is the purpose of formally meeting at the transporter room to travel when beaming can happen anywhere?
The Transporter Room
- Thread starter Garren
- Start date
Intership beaming is usually reserved for emergencies (it may be a trickier process than direct beaming from an actual complex).
In the episode Cloud Minders, Scotty beamed someone from one location to the transporter room and then separately to a third location. So that's two transports, even if you only reside for a moment in the pattern buffer.
Using the transport room means just one transport and would save power. I would assume that the transporter takes a shit load of power.
Also, the transporter "antennas" might point outwards and using them for intership beaming is using the system in a way it wasn't really intended.
Using the transport room means just one transport and would save power. I would assume that the transporter takes a shit load of power.
Also, the transporter "antennas" might point outwards and using them for intership beaming is using the system in a way it wasn't really intended.
Yes, in the original series, it was clearly impossible to beam anywhere or from anywhere without having a transporter pad at one end of the process at least.
In the spinoffs since TNG, this has not been impossible. And saving power has never really been a concern for our heroes, because they always have plenty to spare - the transporter is a very low-power application compared with other Trek staples such as warp drives or shields, apparently. See for example ST4:The Voyage Home, where the Klingon ship is basically powerless but can effortlessly run a cloaking device and has very little trouble performing these "site-to-site" transports, even for completely frivolous purposes (Jim is beamed aboard, allowing Gillian to jump in, even though all the other heroes just walked in through the door!).
However, even if the pads themselves are completely unnecessary in the 24th century, the room still serves a purpose. It's a staging area (because away teams need equipment, and this should be stored in a centralized manner instead of keeping one of everything in every room), and it's a boarding room and quarantine gateway as well. If the room did not exist, most items and people should be beamed site-to-site to dedicated quarantine facilities or holding cells anyway.
What is unrealistic about the setup is the failure to use site-to-site more often, in situations where quarantine or gearing up is not a requirement. That's done for the drama - there are certain types of dialogue that require waiting before transport, a concept that shouldn't exist if site-to-site transport were available. But we can always argue Starfleet is conservative (or even paranoid) about certain safety measures and therefore only allows site-to-site in emergencies.
Makes a lot of sense. Although we have seen the transporter move items from outside the ship to inside the ship with absolute precision, this could be because the antennas point outward but the signal then travels along wires to the transporter pad; aiming it anywhere else would require beams rather than wires, and those might have real trouble focusing inward or close up.
Timo Saloniemi
In the spinoffs since TNG, this has not been impossible. And saving power has never really been a concern for our heroes, because they always have plenty to spare - the transporter is a very low-power application compared with other Trek staples such as warp drives or shields, apparently. See for example ST4:The Voyage Home, where the Klingon ship is basically powerless but can effortlessly run a cloaking device and has very little trouble performing these "site-to-site" transports, even for completely frivolous purposes (Jim is beamed aboard, allowing Gillian to jump in, even though all the other heroes just walked in through the door!).
However, even if the pads themselves are completely unnecessary in the 24th century, the room still serves a purpose. It's a staging area (because away teams need equipment, and this should be stored in a centralized manner instead of keeping one of everything in every room), and it's a boarding room and quarantine gateway as well. If the room did not exist, most items and people should be beamed site-to-site to dedicated quarantine facilities or holding cells anyway.
What is unrealistic about the setup is the failure to use site-to-site more often, in situations where quarantine or gearing up is not a requirement. That's done for the drama - there are certain types of dialogue that require waiting before transport, a concept that shouldn't exist if site-to-site transport were available. But we can always argue Starfleet is conservative (or even paranoid) about certain safety measures and therefore only allows site-to-site in emergencies.
Makes a lot of sense. Although we have seen the transporter move items from outside the ship to inside the ship with absolute precision, this could be because the antennas point outward but the signal then travels along wires to the transporter pad; aiming it anywhere else would require beams rather than wires, and those might have real trouble focusing inward or close up.
Timo Saloniemi
I like SG-1's way of dealing with transporters better.
That said, the TOS transporter room is iconic. The ubiquitous hum when it's not in use, the energizer sound, the ramping up and beaming down sound, the re-materialization sound as it starts off ethereally.... But I digress. Obviously, I love the TOS transporter room, and especially the TOS transporter sound effects.
Further into the future, the need for a transporter room per se should simply disappear. Transporter transceivers would still be located throughout the ship, of course, but the actual beaming would likely be all site-to-site through those transceivers. You'd need staging areas of course, though, but those could be anywhere and everywhere, including right on the bridge.
That said, the TOS transporter room is iconic. The ubiquitous hum when it's not in use, the energizer sound, the ramping up and beaming down sound, the re-materialization sound as it starts off ethereally.... But I digress. Obviously, I love the TOS transporter room, and especially the TOS transporter sound effects.
Further into the future, the need for a transporter room per se should simply disappear. Transporter transceivers would still be located throughout the ship, of course, but the actual beaming would likely be all site-to-site through those transceivers. You'd need staging areas of course, though, but those could be anywhere and everywhere, including right on the bridge.
Two points here.
1. Site to site may eat up a lot of computer power.
2. Having a Tech in a room may be easier on the computer for basic transport activity.
Besides, you have to have the equipment in the ship somewhere anyway. That said, I believe that if Trek had continued to evolve beyond Voyager instead of rebooting, the transporter 'room' would have gone the way of the dinosaurs and people would have simply tapped their com badges to initiate transport.
CCC.
1. Site to site may eat up a lot of computer power.
2. Having a Tech in a room may be easier on the computer for basic transport activity.
Besides, you have to have the equipment in the ship somewhere anyway. That said, I believe that if Trek had continued to evolve beyond Voyager instead of rebooting, the transporter 'room' would have gone the way of the dinosaurs and people would have simply tapped their com badges to initiate transport.
CCC.
Why can't any console on the ship become a transporter console? Why can't any console on the ship become any other, so long as the user is properly authorized?
Also, although perhaps as a minor issue only, it's a part of the social protocol or etiquette of bringing visitors aboard. Although obviously not a grand or formal space, the transporter room provides an appropriate setting to welcome guests, particularly those of an august rank or distinction or who have had limited opportunity or occasion to interact with Starfleet or the Federation.
Making this the point of entry or gateway on a mission to conduct business, diplomacy, or just as a glorified meet and greet, is likely perceived as being much more dignified and seemly than simply having the individual(s) pop up in a conference room, quarters, or an anonymous hallway outside engineering, say.
I agree with the power issue, it probably takes less power to beam someone directly from a transporter pad to a destination.
Also, the transporter room is a good staging area for mission instructions and intel, typically a weapons and equipment locker is nearby for whatever an away team would need for a given mission.
Also, the transporter room is a good staging area for mission instructions and intel, typically a weapons and equipment locker is nearby for whatever an away team would need for a given mission.
As I understand, eliminating the transporter room was proposed for TNG, everyone would use a transporter pad on the bridge. Roddenberry didn't like the idea, though, and we were stuck with the transporter room.
At the very least, transporter rooms do provide the away team a common location to meet-up and prep for their mission. Pretty important purpose there.
At the very least, transporter rooms do provide the away team a common location to meet-up and prep for their mission. Pretty important purpose there.
That's what I have read as well, except that Roddenberry objected for dramatic reasons, not because of any in-universe justification for needing the room. He wanted people to be able to have conversations en route to the transporter room.
DS9 didn't suffer for a having a transporter in Ops...
Also, if you attach the bridge to the transporter, there's the risk of coming across as a Saturday-moring tv version of things.
And if you're building a new show that you want to be taken seriously, you don't want to lean too far into this territory:
The computer could do it in most cases. And no doubt civilian transporters in the 24th century are just wrist-worn remotes, as seen in "Non Sequitur", or tastefully hidden household items requiring very little user input. But starships are military machines operating in demanding circumstances and environments, and it probably thus pays off to have not just an operator but also a repairman at hand - and all the relevant machinery accessible to that repairman at a moment's notice.
There could be a centralized transporter room where nobody but the transporter operators/repairmen ever go, handling site-to-site requests from everywhere in and out of the ship. But there are advantages to seeing your operator/repairman face to face...
Timo Saloniemi
At one point on DS9, Sisco was on Earth and went home to New Orleans, I think to visit his father's restaurant, and had to schedule use of the public transport system.
CCC.
Particularly for any potentially dangerous missions where you'd want a thinking being on duty to yank you out of danger. Or at least to receive specialized instructions.
Yes. Also, if it's preferable to have a living operator for, say, a six-man landing party, then there's no reason for him to also run six different site-to-site transports. He'd have to get the go-ahead from each man before proceeding ("Rodriguez, are you STILL on the toilet??!!") and coordinate them so they all transported at close to the same time. No. Just make it SOP to stage together and beam down together.
