The great transporter qualification thread.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:18 pm

I decided to put this here since it covers all series.

Simple in concept, lets work out the limits and uses of the common transporter. What's there range, what blocks them, how safe are they, etc.
Working from cannon, and anything we can figure out from it, we should easily be able to pool our knowledge to find out plenty about these things.

Good idea? Bad? Stupid?

Post by **Teaos** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:51 pm

I'm going to save us a lot of time and throw this off topic right now.

So how about that local sports team huh?

Shields are formed in sepments. Thats how you can collapse a part of a ships shield ie aft, port, stern.

When shields are collapsed you can transport through them so long as something else isnt jamming them (I cant remeber how you block transporters with out shields but it was one in Insurrection.

Going Pad to Pad is safer easier and uses less power than Pad to point or point to point.

Range is dependant on the hardware involved in it but can be rather long distance. A few hundred Kilometers is my guess for the Feds.

In everyday use they are very safe and even in adverse situations they are still realiable so long as you have a good crew operating them.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:06 pm

I'm going to save us a lot of time and throw this off topic right now.

So how about that local sports team huh?

The sad thing is that I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up like that!

It also seems to be more difficult to transport onto a ship than a planet. We see people beaming down from orbit plenty of times, yet they need to be a lot closer to another ship to beam on. Perhaps the hull interferes somehow?

Post by **Teaos** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:24 pm

And all the elecrical stuff in the walls. We see electronic interfernce stops transport on planets maybe the constant background electrical field of a starship makes it more difficult.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:33 pm

It's also possible that they have problems with moving objects (ships ) vs sationary ones (planets). In "Coming of Age" they were unable to beam an individual off a shuttle despite the shuttle being between them and a planet they had no problems beaming to.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:40 pm

That would make sense, it would be harder to lock onto something moving than stationary.

Another point, we see in Symbiosis (TNG) that low level X-ray radiation can interfere with transporters.

Post by **Teaos** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:44 pm

Any energy wave would proberly disrupt it since it depends on energy.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:49 pm

Good point.

Have we ever heard anything regarding range?

MetalHead · Post by **MetalHead** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:51 pm

Correct me if im wrong but weren't two people killed in TMP in the transporter? And on Enterprise, they seem to prefer to use shuttlepods even though the transporter is safe for people.

We've also seen that its possible to use the transporter to put oneself into suspended animation, like in TNG's 'Relics'. I think thats interesting, though its not without risk (obviously)

I think that transporters are an excellent tool and method of transport, and by TNG, they'd hammered out all the kinks for day-to-day use.

sunnyside · Post by **sunnyside** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:59 pm

Still there is always the risk of something going wrong that you didn't anticipate before you beamed down. We have yet to have someone cloned or whatever by a shuttle.

Also shuttlecraft have wider range, as later ones were warp capable, and give you some autonomy.

I forget where but I think I heard a max range of 100,000km for transporters. Since most M-class geostationary orbits are ~40,000km that is plenty.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:09 pm

MetalHead wrote:Correct me if im wrong but weren't two people killed in TMP in the transporter?

True, but I was thinking more about TNG era transporters.

And on Enterprise, they seem to prefer to use shuttlepods even though the transporter is safe for people.

Well, back then the transporter had only been tested on cargo. I think I'd be pretty reluctant to get into it as well!

I think that transporters are an excellent tool and method of transport, and by TNG, they'd hammered out all the kinks for day-to-day use

Well, not all of them. We've seen the transporter screw up pretty spectacularly on several ocasions. But overall it does seem rather safe.

Sunnyside wrote:We have yet to have someone cloned or whatever by a shuttle.

Could you explain what you're trying to say here? Thanks.

I forget where but I think I heard a max range of 100,000km for transporters. Since most M-class geostationary orbits are ~40,000km that is plenty.

That seems to make sense. Of course, that would probably be a max range under perfect conditions. We've seen ships needing to get closer than that on several ocasions.

MetalHead · Post by **MetalHead** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:23 pm

Rochey:

I've not seen many TNG episodes so I can't really say.

BUT. I remember several transporter accidents on Voyager, so perhaps im wrong. And the ones on TOS - Enemy Within I think it was where Kirk was split into good and evil.

I think what Sunnyside was saying is that you avoid taking almost all the transporter risks by using a shuttle - which actually, I reckon is more risky, given that shuttles can loose control, malfunction, crash, explode, be shot down, and have klingons perch on the starboard bow for all we know.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:28 pm

MetalHead;

No problem, this wasn't meant to be a thread discussing how accident prone or not transporters are.

think what Sunnyside was saying is that you avoid taking almost all the transporter risks by using a shuttle - which actually, I reckon is more risky, given that shuttles can loose control, malfunction, crash, explode, be shot down, and have klingons perch on the starboard bow for all we know.

Ah, okay.

Tiberius · Post by **Tiberius** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:56 am

As I recall, the max range for a transporter is 40,000 kilometers.

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:23 am

That would be in ideal conditions as well. Ship to ship, electrical interference, any number of things drop the range.