What's the point of the other ship's transporter?

[Pauln6]

But it is slightly relevant to the thread. If the two transporter pads can be linked then transporting from one pad to another even at warp shouldn't be a problem, assuming that the warp fields don't interrupt the signal when it is beamed from the first pad.

I much prefer a more limited approach to transporting (I think I've seen 80,000km distance cited in relation to Voyager, not sure how that compares to the tech manuals). I'm with McCoy - I think that transporting is and should be inherently dangerous and several layers of redundancy are built into the process to make it safer, one of those being the transporter pad at the destination.

 

[Gagarin]

So there's like a TCP/IP protocol for transporters? =)

 

[BillJ]

The book Memory Prime postulates that pad-to-pad transport only uses a tenth of the energy of pad-to-non pad transport. Interesting book.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

I think the color of the other ship's transporter sparklies is because transporters normally work like one ship sends out the signal, and the other ship picks up the signal and loads it up using their own system.

So how did they learn to work together?
A subspace treaty and agreement on a universal-mode or language for the transporters?

Similar things happen in real life... even countries that 'hate' eachother had to find ways to communicate with each other, requiring some cooperation.

Think USSR-USA 'hotline'.

The "hotline" is just a dedicated secure comm network, not any special technology.

Transporters, like radios or telephones, can interact because the basic physics of the signal are the same. The only differences between receivers and transmitters are specifications (signal strenght, broadcast power, etc).

 

[SpyOne]

So there's like a TCP/IP protocol for transporters? =)

Sort of.

In reality, there are a hundred different ways to do the same job with technology. Take radio, for example: a means of transmitting sound using the electromagnetic spectrum. There are two different ways of doing this in use in the US today: Frequency Modulation and Amplitude Modulation. In brief, the first encodes information in the signal by changing the frequency slightly, the other by changing the signal strength.

So, the odds that the Federation and the Romulans (say) chose to broadcast the video signal from their bridge in the same way is pretty low.
Generally, we have two ways to explain what we've seen on screen:
1) unlikely as it sounds, almost every major power has developed nearly identical tech. They all chose cameras with the same resolution, and to broadcast the data from those cameras in exactly the same way. The transporters all function basicly the same.
2) the tech has some kind of built-in "handshake": when contact is first made, it exchanges information about formatting and such. It says "Hi, I'm a video signal. I came from a camera with a resolution of x by y pixels, and I encode color like this."
And the powers that have already contacted each other have exchanged a bit of this basic information to facilitate contact. So Federation transporters probably have a button on them to set them to match Klingon Transporters, Cardassian Transporters, or Romulan Transporters. The computer automatically recognizes the incoming signal as "Klingon vid-screen feed" and adjusts it as needed to display properly on a Federation screen.

Sort of like how there used to be floppy drives that could read discs from several different computer formats: it would just compare the format on the disc to the ones it knew about, and pick the one that fit best.

 

[blssdwlf]

I remember TNG introduced Pattern Enhancer rods that can be taken to a site to help with transporter operations. Perhaps all starships with transporter rooms/pads have these enhancers built in and in general it makes it easier (and safer) for the sender to target the receiver's transporter room than say the bridge or some other part of the ship.

 

[SWHouston]

It seems to me that "Pattern Enhancer" is somewhat of a misnomer.
They're not really big enough to do much enhancing.

"Logic would dictate", that they may set a more specific parameter for the Transporter to focus on, a "Bullseye" so to speak.

Besides, those dahm Batteries run out SO quickly !

 

[Ghostface1701]

Out of interest, how often do we see the transporter signal actually changed "mid-flight"?

...

Apart from those two, are there really examples of the transporter beam changing color or showing suspicious color?

Timo Saloniemi

Has anyone ever adequately explained the goof in GEN, where Picard beams down from the Bird of Prey to Veridian III, but materialises in Federation blue?

 

[Mr. Mugato]

In TOS, it certainly seems that the transporter used some kind of stasis field to immobilize things just before it materializes or de-materializes them (which would make sense).

You could say minor variations in this technology are why we see different colors.

If so, perhaps when you beam from your transporter room to someone else's transporter room, the receiving room throws up it's stasis field (for good measure) even though your ship is doing the actual transporting.

Hence, beaming out in a "federation blue" stasis field, and materializing inside a "Klingon red" stasis field.

However if you are sneaking aboard like Kirk in "The Enterprise Incident" then you do so without the receiving stasis field (and keep your original "color")

I have no explanation for being able to move around during transport post TOS

 

[Timo]

Has anyone ever adequately explained the goof in GEN, where Picard beams down from the Bird of Prey to Veridian III, but materialises in Federation blue?

Who says he beamed down from the BoP?

All we know is that he left the E-D, then materialized in a secret location on the planet. Possibly the Klingons simply rerouted his Starfleet-standard signal (after filtering out concealed weapons and doing other such standard tricks). Certainly the Klingons wouldn't want Picard to gain any sort of access to or inside information on the BoP, so they wouldn't materialize him aboard the vessel if they could avoid it.

I have no explanation for being able to move around during transport post TOS

How about during TOS? After all, theoretically our heroes moved around during every TOS transport - the actors couldn't be expected to hold the exact same pose during the "demat" and "remat" scenes, which might be filmed days and miles apart. Sometimes this is more blatant than in other cases, but it certainly is a feature of the TOS transporters that the transportee can draw or stow his weapon or tricorder while in mid-transport.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Ghostface1701]

Has anyone ever adequately explained the goof in GEN, where Picard beams down from the Bird of Prey to Veridian III, but materialises in Federation blue?

Who says he beamed down from the BoP?

All we know is that he left the E-D, then materialized in a secret location on the planet. Possibly the Klingons simply rerouted his Starfleet-standard signal (after filtering out concealed weapons and doing other such standard tricks). Certainly the Klingons wouldn't want Picard to gain any sort of access to or inside information on the BoP, so they wouldn't materialize him aboard the vessel if they could avoid it.

Timo Saloniemi

Well, Picard did say "I will beam to your ship, and you can transport me to Soran", which the Klingons agreed to. Also, Picard lost his comm badge between leaving Enterprise and arriving at the surface. Sure, the Klingons could have removed it, but that's going beyond just rerouting the transporter beam.

I've checking the DVD now, and in the very next scene, I've noticed the transporter operator saying "Receiving the co-ordinates, Captain", which opens up a whole new can of worms because the Enterprise crew knew the exact location of Soran and his star-destroying rocket! It also means that they themselves removed Picard's comm badge in transport.

I think Picard must've had a few words with his crew when he got back.

 

[Timo]

Well, we know that our heroes can remove the lethal charge of a weapon, or indeed the entire weapon, of the transportee by manipulating the beam before rematerialization. We see the former in several instances, and the latter in DS9 "To the Death", where it's nonchalantly called "Transporter protocol 5"...

It thus wouldn't be all that difficult to think that the Klingons would give our heroes the coordinates to the Klingon ship, where their equipment would grab the beam, manipulate it to remove Picard's commbadge and the sixteen concealed weapons Worf provided him with, and then reroute the beam to the planet.

Alternately, it could simply be that the Klingons phoned Picard and told him "Oh, and BTW, if you bring along weapons, sensors or comm gear, we'll use your skull as a drinking vessel". Or then Picard figured that out without needing to be told. But the beam would have to be rerouted in any case, to conceal the location of the launch site.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mr. Mugato]

How about during TOS? After all, theoretically our heroes moved around during every TOS transport - the actors couldn't be expected to hold the exact same pose during the "demat" and "remat" scenes, which might be filmed days and miles apart. Sometimes this is more blatant than in other cases, but it certainly is a feature of the TOS transporters that the transportee can draw or stow his weapon or tricorder while in mid-transport.

Timo Saloniemi

Well, now I think your crossing the line between fleshing out Trek Tech and trying to create "Treknical" explanations for minor production issues. (I know, I know, it's a very gray line that moves for each person )

I don't think it was ever the intention that you can move around in the transporter, any more than we are supposed to believe that the Enterprises nacelles randomly switch back and forth between "vent" ends and "Ball" ends or that Kirk's boots magically transform into lace-up wrestling shoes when he beams down to uneven terrain. Both of which happen as often as people "moving" in the transporter.

 

[Psi'a Meese]

Lest we forget that in TWK, we hear the warbled voice of Saavik. Within the transporter beam from the Genesis Cave to arrival on the Enterprise transporter pad. Saavik spoke and Kirk managed to hear her before the transport was complete. While I interpreted a leap in transporter tech at the time, I now think it was horrible idea.

 

[Unicron]

It is a rather odd scene. I've always been tempted to think that we just heard them during the final part of the re-initialization sequence. There's a similar oddity (a genuine goof) during the transport sequence in "Mirror Mirror." When the landing party beams up, Kirk puts his communicator away. Then they get "hung" in the transporter temporarily because of the storm, before winding up in the MU, and Kirk is visible holding his communicator. When they finally rematerialize on the ISS Enterprise, it's on his belt again.

 

[Timo]

Really, there are only two rational ways for the transporter to operate. Either there is complete stasis, or then all movement is allowed. Any limitations falling between those would be nonsensical...

From the dramatic-practical point of view, a transporter that does allow for movement is a good thing: goofs like the above one are bound to happen and could be predicted from Day One - but it could also be predicted that transportation scenes between the level-floored transporter room set and a rugged location or a soundstage dressed up as a planetary surface would involve our heroes altering their pose. At the very least, their legs would have to move to accommodate the uneven surface of the "alien planet". If the transporter can handle that sort of movement, there's no rational reason it couldn't also handle speech, or holstering a gun, or a quick round of tango.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mr. Mugato]

in "Mirror Mirror." When the landing party beams up, Kirk puts his communicator away. Then they get "hung" in the transporter temporarily because of the storm, before winding up in the MU, and Kirk is visible holding his communicator. When they finally rematerialize on the ISS Enterprise, it's on his belt again.

There is also the question of why they have new clothes when they materialize.

Maybe the "good" and "evil" crews don't physically switch universes, perhaps only their consciousness is transferred into their duplicate's bodies.

 

[blssdwlf]

in "Mirror Mirror." When the landing party beams up, Kirk puts his communicator away. Then they get "hung" in the transporter temporarily because of the storm, before winding up in the MU, and Kirk is visible holding his communicator. When they finally rematerialize on the ISS Enterprise, it's on his belt again.

There is also the question of why they have new clothes when they materialize.

Maybe the "good" and "evil" crews don't physically switch universes, perhaps only their consciousness is transferred into their duplicate's bodies.

Hmm... That does make alot of sense!

 

[Unicron]

Well, I can think of at least one instance (FC) where the implication was that the transporter could replicate appropriate clothing to a planet or a given period in history. I haven't watched it in a while, so I could be off a bit. I don't know that that accounts for the convenient clothes switch in MM or not, but the idea of merely the personalities being switched has been suggested before. I'd say it's as plausible as any transporter theory.

 

[Timo]

The DS9 revisits to the Mirror Universe (Mirror Universes?) seem to happen differently, then, because heroes whose Mirror counterparts are dead and buried (blown up, vaporized, hacked to pieces, whatever) can use the transporter trick to enter the Mirror realm; also, heroes can meet their Mirror counterparts...

We could argue all sorts of things, such as Mirror Kirk having his transporters rigged so that they refresh his clothing on every trip (and/or strip any female companions of excess clothing material). Ultimately, though, "Mirror, Mirror" is pretty much a standalone story that doesn't dovetail well into the DS9 follow-ons.

Timo Saloniemi