posted
That's exactly what I'm talking about: some specilized conduit that channels the matter-stream.
That would be "safe" by Starfleet standards.
Remember that these guys shoot imporntant ambasadors off in torpedo casings and design ships that fire torpedos scant meters above from the bridge...
A conduit transporter system would be no more risky than the ol' suicidally-fast turbolift or shuttlebay-with-only-a-forcefield in an emergency situation.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Turbolifts go exactly as fast as the story requires- see DS9's lift in season one for example. I'm certain starsleet lifts go just as fast (or the transporter room is right under the bridge on the Enterprise).
True, shuttlebays have physical doors, but the point is that in an emergency, those doors close waaay too slow to save anyone if the field drops.
It's all part of that "Risk is our business" line that some washed up captain once said before getting sucked into space.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
For what it's worth, trasporter to transporter, er, transporting was never seen in the original series. It first popped up in TOS. I'm guessing Okuda or Sternbach came up with the "it uses less energy and is safer if there's a receiving pad" theory.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: For what it's worth, trasporter to transporter, er, transporting was never seen in the original series. It first popped up in TOS.
^Just one of many examples of Liam going senile.
You did mean TMP, right?
Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
No. I meant Totally On SilverScreen. Which is what I call Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Yes.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: For what it's worth, trasporter to transporter, er, transporting was never seen in the original series. It first popped up in TOS. I'm guessing Okuda or Sternbach came up with the "it uses less energy and is safer if there's a receiving pad" theory.
I belive that Kirk and Spock beamed from the Transporter room on the Enterprise to transporter pads on K-7.
Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
Nitpicking time! We see that the transport ends on twin station pads, but we never see whether the operation begins on the pads of the Enterprise.
We see Kirk leaving the bridge and ordering the transporter room to "stand by" - but is this because Kirk is going to be using the room to go to the station in a few minutes, or because Kirk is going to be transported there by the station system and merely wants the ship to be prepared to grab him back if there is trouble...?
Of course, one wonders why Kirk even leaves the bridge if he is going to rely on the station machinery.
posted
Was there acctually a transporter operator on the other side? I can't remember.
If not, I'd certanly hope that the ship's transporter room had somethign to do with the beam over, otherwise I question the need for a transporter operator at all.
Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
I think on K7 AND on the Starbase 11?? in "Court Martial" there was a set of pads on the other side. I two-man pad actually. One could argue that using pad-to-pad between facilities requires less energy than pad to 'any point' - annular confinement beams etc etc.
Also at that time it may have been more safe to go pad-to-pad.
But even on DS9 they still used pad-to-pad transport from Ops etc.
Although if we want to be picky still - if there was a problem at one of the upper docking pylons etc etc - a presumably long turbolift ride away - why not just use the transporter pad in ops to emergency beam a team to a particular spot?
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
I think Kirk and co beamed from Enterprise onto Regula's transporter (not 100% on this though).
Not transporting to another transporter seems unusal- as evidenced whenevr there's an emergency and specific instructions to "beam them directly to sickbay/ops/the bridge" are given by whoever is in charge. Otherwise it's just assumed they'll get directed to the pads.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I think Kirk and co beamed from Enterprise onto Regula's transporter (not 100% on this though).
Not transporting to another transporter seems unusal- as evidenced whenevr there's an emergency and specific instructions to "beam them directly to sickbay/ops/the bridge" are given by whoever is in charge. Otherwise it's just assumed they'll get directed to the pads.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Nope - Kirk's posse materialized in a corridor junction, then walked (via the central command area / mortuary) to the transporter room and found that it had been set for the interior of the Regula asteroid.
I in turn think that in "Doomsday Machine", the party was shown explicitly going from Enterprise pads to Constellation pads. Have to check later on.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
