Skip to main content
Commonmark migration
Source Link

Transporters work by breaking down the subject into a matter stream, sending the matter stream from an emitter, and reassembling it on the other end. The TNG Technical Manual steps through an example ship-to-surface beam-down procedure. It also notes that beaming site-to-site (i.e. not starting or ending in the transporter room) consumes twice as much energy as a standard transport, because it's two transports without the reassembly in the middle. It is, however, silent on the matter of pad-to-pad beaming. However, since it's usually done when it's an option, it means that the systems probably interface to share the workload.

Depending on how canon you view the novels, this quote from Star Trek: Worlds in Collision by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens shows that it's for energy saving reasons.

"I know, I know," McCoy complained. "Pad-to-pad transfers use only ten percent of the energy a single-pad beam requires."

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers are working on the transporter systems.

Decker: I knew it. The transporter sensor was not activated.

 

[Other background chatter]

 

Decker: Faulty module.

 

Scotty: Cleary, put a new backup sensor into the unit.

There's been plenty of time for troubleshooting at this point, since Kirk and Scotty took a fairly leisurely shuttle ride on over, and Kirk's been wandering around the ship a bit before he goes to Engineering.

Because the Enterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the Enterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew; the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew just before the transport of the new crew began, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the Enterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted Enterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the Enterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

Transporters work by breaking down the subject into a matter stream, sending the matter stream from an emitter, and reassembling it on the other end. The TNG Technical Manual steps through an example ship-to-surface beam-down procedure. It also notes that beaming site-to-site (i.e. not starting or ending in the transporter room) consumes twice as much energy as a standard transport, because it's two transports without the reassembly in the middle. It is, however, silent on the matter of pad-to-pad beaming. However, since it's usually done when it's an option, it means that the systems probably interface to share the workload.

Depending on how canon you view the novels, this quote from Star Trek: Worlds in Collision by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens shows that it's for energy saving reasons.

"I know, I know," McCoy complained. "Pad-to-pad transfers use only ten percent of the energy a single-pad beam requires."

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers are working on the transporter systems.

Decker: I knew it. The transporter sensor was not activated.

 

[Other background chatter]

 

Decker: Faulty module.

 

Scotty: Cleary, put a new backup sensor into the unit.

There's been plenty of time for troubleshooting at this point, since Kirk and Scotty took a fairly leisurely shuttle ride on over, and Kirk's been wandering around the ship a bit before he goes to Engineering.

Because the Enterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the Enterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew; the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew just before the transport of the new crew began, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the Enterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted Enterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the Enterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

Transporters work by breaking down the subject into a matter stream, sending the matter stream from an emitter, and reassembling it on the other end. The TNG Technical Manual steps through an example ship-to-surface beam-down procedure. It also notes that beaming site-to-site (i.e. not starting or ending in the transporter room) consumes twice as much energy as a standard transport, because it's two transports without the reassembly in the middle. It is, however, silent on the matter of pad-to-pad beaming. However, since it's usually done when it's an option, it means that the systems probably interface to share the workload.

Depending on how canon you view the novels, this quote from Star Trek: Worlds in Collision by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens shows that it's for energy saving reasons.

"I know, I know," McCoy complained. "Pad-to-pad transfers use only ten percent of the energy a single-pad beam requires."

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers are working on the transporter systems.

Decker: I knew it. The transporter sensor was not activated.

[Other background chatter]

Decker: Faulty module.

Scotty: Cleary, put a new backup sensor into the unit.

There's been plenty of time for troubleshooting at this point, since Kirk and Scotty took a fairly leisurely shuttle ride on over, and Kirk's been wandering around the ship a bit before he goes to Engineering.

Because the Enterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the Enterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew; the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew just before the transport of the new crew began, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the Enterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted Enterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the Enterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

added 10 characters in body
Source Link
Jenayah
  • 58.3k
  • 13
  • 251
  • 336

Transporters work by breaking down the subject into a matter stream, sending the matter stream from an emitter, and reassembling it on the other end. The TNG Technical Manual steps through an example ship-to-surface beam-down procedure. It also notes that beaming site-to-site (i.e. not starting or ending in the transporter room) consumes twice as much energy as a standard transport, because it's two transports without the reassembly in the middle. It is, however, silent on the matter of pad-to-pad beaming. However, since it's usually done when it's an option, it means that the systems probably interface to share the workload.

Depending on how canon you view the novels, this quote from Star Trek: Worlds in Collision by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens shows that it's for energy saving reasons.

"I know, I know," McCoy complained. "Pad-to-pad transfers use only ten percent of the energy a single-pad beam requires."

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers are working on the transporter systems.

Decker: I knew it. The transporter sensor was not activated.

[Other background chatter]

Decker: Faulty module.

Scotty: Cleary, put a new backup sensor into the unit.

There's been plenty of time for troubleshooting at this point, since Kirk and Scotty took a fairly leisurely shuttle ride on over, and Kirk's been wandering around the ship a bit before he goes to Engineering.

Because the Enterprise'sEnterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the EnterpriseEnterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew; the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew just before the transport of the new crew began, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the EnterpriseEnterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted EnterpriseEnterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the EnterpriseEnterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

Transporters work by breaking down the subject into a matter stream, sending the matter stream from an emitter, and reassembling it on the other end. The TNG Technical Manual steps through an example ship-to-surface beam-down procedure. It also notes that beaming site-to-site (i.e. not starting or ending in the transporter room) consumes twice as much energy as a standard transport, because it's two transports without the reassembly in the middle. It is, however, silent on the matter of pad-to-pad beaming. However, since it's usually done when it's an option, it means that the systems probably interface to share the workload.

Depending on how canon you view the novels, this quote from Star Trek: Worlds in Collision by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens shows that it's for energy saving reasons.

"I know, I know," McCoy complained. "Pad-to-pad transfers use only ten percent of the energy a single-pad beam requires."

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers are working on the transporter systems.

Decker: I knew it. The transporter sensor was not activated.

[Other background chatter]

Decker: Faulty module.

Scotty: Cleary, put a new backup sensor into the unit.

There's been plenty of time for troubleshooting at this point, since Kirk and Scotty took a fairly leisurely shuttle ride on over, and Kirk's been wandering around the ship a bit before he goes to Engineering.

Because the Enterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the Enterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew; the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew just before the transport of the new crew began, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the Enterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted Enterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the Enterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

Transporters work by breaking down the subject into a matter stream, sending the matter stream from an emitter, and reassembling it on the other end. The TNG Technical Manual steps through an example ship-to-surface beam-down procedure. It also notes that beaming site-to-site (i.e. not starting or ending in the transporter room) consumes twice as much energy as a standard transport, because it's two transports without the reassembly in the middle. It is, however, silent on the matter of pad-to-pad beaming. However, since it's usually done when it's an option, it means that the systems probably interface to share the workload.

Depending on how canon you view the novels, this quote from Star Trek: Worlds in Collision by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens shows that it's for energy saving reasons.

"I know, I know," McCoy complained. "Pad-to-pad transfers use only ten percent of the energy a single-pad beam requires."

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers are working on the transporter systems.

Decker: I knew it. The transporter sensor was not activated.

[Other background chatter]

Decker: Faulty module.

Scotty: Cleary, put a new backup sensor into the unit.

There's been plenty of time for troubleshooting at this point, since Kirk and Scotty took a fairly leisurely shuttle ride on over, and Kirk's been wandering around the ship a bit before he goes to Engineering.

Because the Enterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the Enterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew; the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew just before the transport of the new crew began, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the Enterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted Enterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the Enterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

Referenced TNG Technical Manual, rewatched relevant bits of TMP, went searching for more info
Source Link
Dranon
  • 4.2k
  • 1
  • 23
  • 47

As I recall (and I will checkTransporters work by breaking down the TNG technical manual and edit this when I get home)subject into a matter stream, pad-to-pad transports usesending the transporter machinery on both sides in order to provide a transport that is safermatter stream from an emitter, and uses less energyreassembling it on the other end. A padThe TNG Technical Manual steps through an example ship-to-site orsurface beam-down procedure. It also notes that beaming site-to-site transport will use only(i.e. not starting or ending in the one available transporter room) consumes twice as much energy as a standard transport, because it's two transports without the reassembly in the middle. It is, however, silent on the matter of pad-to-pad beaming. However, since it's usually done when it's an option, it means that the systems probably interface to share the workload.

Depending on how canon you view the novels, this quote from Star Trek: Worlds in Collision by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens shows that it's for energy saving reasons.

"I know, I know," McCoy complained. "Pad-to-pad transfers use only ten percent of the energy a single-pad beam requires."

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers have just detected a badare working on the transporter circuitsystems.

Decker: I knew it. The transporter sensor was not activated.

[Other background chatter]

Decker: Faulty module.

Scotty: Cleary, put a new backup sensor into the unit.

There's been plenty of time for troubleshooting at this point, butsince Kirk and Scotty took a fairly leisurely shuttle ride on over, and Kirk's been wandering around the transporters are still operationalship a bit before he goes to Engineering. 

Because the Enterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the Enterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew. The tests had either already occurred and passed, orcrew; the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew whenjust before the transport of the new crew was in the process of being transportedbegan, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the Enterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted Enterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a particularly gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the Enterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

As I recall (and I will check the TNG technical manual and edit this when I get home), pad-to-pad transports use the transporter machinery on both sides in order to provide a transport that is safer and uses less energy. A pad-to-site or site-to-site transport will use only the one available transporter.

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers have just detected a bad transporter circuit, but the transporters are still operational. Because the Enterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the Enterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew. The tests had either already occurred and passed, or the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew when the new crew was in the process of being transported, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the Enterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted Enterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a particularly gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the Enterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

Transporters work by breaking down the subject into a matter stream, sending the matter stream from an emitter, and reassembling it on the other end. The TNG Technical Manual steps through an example ship-to-surface beam-down procedure. It also notes that beaming site-to-site (i.e. not starting or ending in the transporter room) consumes twice as much energy as a standard transport, because it's two transports without the reassembly in the middle. It is, however, silent on the matter of pad-to-pad beaming. However, since it's usually done when it's an option, it means that the systems probably interface to share the workload.

Depending on how canon you view the novels, this quote from Star Trek: Worlds in Collision by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens shows that it's for energy saving reasons.

"I know, I know," McCoy complained. "Pad-to-pad transfers use only ten percent of the energy a single-pad beam requires."

In the scene where Kirk goes to see Decker in Engineering, Decker and the engineers are working on the transporter systems.

Decker: I knew it. The transporter sensor was not activated.

[Other background chatter]

Decker: Faulty module.

Scotty: Cleary, put a new backup sensor into the unit.

There's been plenty of time for troubleshooting at this point, since Kirk and Scotty took a fairly leisurely shuttle ride on over, and Kirk's been wandering around the ship a bit before he goes to Engineering. 

Because the Enterprise's transporters are on, even though they're malfunctioning, a pad-to-pad transport from Starfleet to the Enterprise is initiated. So the answer to the first part of your question is that they weren't testing the transporters on the new crew; the transporter was not properly disabled at the time. The circuits blew just before the transport of the new crew began, with disastrous results.

I've never been especially happy with the transporter malfunction part of TMP because it raises exactly these questions and more. Starfleet knew that the Enterprise was having transporter trouble. If the Enterprise crew thought the transporter was fixed and put it back into service before discovering that it wasn't, then the safeguards in place are extremely shoddy for something that's supposed to be incredibly safe. If it wasn't fixed but still in service for some reason anyway, then both the automatic safeguards and the engineering procedures are horrendously flawed.

The answer to the second part of your question is probably cynically that they could initiate a pad-to-site transport for Kirk, but Starfleet didn't think about it because the writers wanted to spend fifteen minutes showing the audience how awesome the refitted Enterprise looked.

Storywise, the purpose of the accident was to underscore how unprepared the ship was to tackle V'ger, and also to dispose of Sonak in preparation for Spock's arrival — Leonard Nimoy wasn't originally going to be in the movie, hence Sonak. Still, it's a gruesome and cruel way of handling a pair of characters, particularly since V'ger is scary enough by itself, and everything else going on on the Enterprise already shows how unprepared they are. That Dr. McCoy's fear of the transporter is played for laughs just a few minutes later makes the ship's crew, and the movie, seem needlessly callous.

Source Link
Dranon
  • 4.2k
  • 1
  • 23
  • 47
Loading