StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I know there's an example from Voyager where they are able to transport all humanoids in a given area without a direct target lock, but my question is sort of doing the inverse of this - intentionally transporting away an incomplete piece of something. For instance, let's say you needed to get through a solid wall - are there any instances where they were able to transport away a 2M circular area or something?

I suppose part of my question also entails asking how the transporters can sort of determine what defines a "whole something". For instance, a naturally occurring rock wall can be composted of several rocks packed together w/ some sort of medium/melted rock/sediment acting as a mortar. Can the transporter pick out individual rocks, from what we've seen, or is it a "whole" in the platonic sense?

We've seen the transporter transport Troi and her mother w/o clothing in an episode of TNG, so it can distinguish that, and there's one episode of, I think Voyager, where they transport some people that were abducted back in the early 20th century, and it disabled one of their weapons - so it can target specific things and/or alter them too.

Any insights into this matter?

Thanks!

I certainly don't know of any examples of anything like that happening on screen. Generally speaking, if you can't get all of a discrete object, you can't get any of it. Of course, what you're describing is never really attempted.

Closest thing would be the Vidiian technology that allows them to transport organs out of a living being, but we haven't seen anyone else with similar transport capabilities.

Also, Scotty was able to beam up two whales and a volume of water with them in ST:IV, so it's at least possible to beam up a volume of liquid without taking then entire volume. We haven't seen the same done with anything solid, though.

We see the same done every damned time they beam up anything solid resting on the ground (which essentially means every time we see them transport cargo or people).

And I'm not sure how the Bounty not beaming up the entirety of Earth's oceans figures into this-regardless of whether or not you can deliberately decide which bits and pieces within your transporter area of effect to transport, whatever is outside of it doesn't come into play to begin with as I see it.

Are there any limits on what kind of materials can be transported? As in say, ship hull armour? Does the density matter (beyond the required buffer size)? Shield not withstanding, what would take a ship apart faster- a transporter or phasers?

Transporters take, what, thirty or more seconds to transport something? And relative velocity seems to matter, too. Transporting something that's moving at thousands of kilometers per hour or more relative to you is gonna be harder than shooting it with a phaser at the same relative speed, I would think.

I'm not sure they take that long. I'm also wondering how much of the difficulty in transporting is due to the desire to transport rather than just dismantle. If you don't care if you only get 50% of the target- or care about reconstituting it- that's got to make it easier. Either way I'm not really suggesting as is they'd make superior weapons (due to shields if nothing more) but it does seem a path worth considering.

Let's say you knock out your opponent ship's shields. Why not just start transporting away components that are either vital or just chunks of the ship?

But my point was more about using transporters as a tool rather than just for transport. For instance, you have some valuable ore under however many feet of stuff you don't want.. could you just transport it out? What about if you had a medical patient who was impaled with a foreign object or something? Or, heck, could you take a person who had just been injected with Borg nanoprobes and teleport out *just* the probes?

In theory I suppose you could design or configure a transporter to do highly 'localized' transporting. I mean transporters by nature are used to transport things of varying volumes and masses, so that means that the area of effect/focus of the beam can be varied. Since we know they have to have a 'target' lock in many cases, I figure they determine this actively or passively by a variety of means, and that the degree/accuracy of information they have determines what is possible with transporters.

The importance of reliable/precise information may, in fact, be the biggest problem with 'safe' transportation, because whilst we have no real way of knowing, it follows that *precise* information is needed to safely do it (a very detailed scan of the object being transported so you can reconstitute it as closely as possible, rematerialize it in the right coordinates, relative to the destination, etc.) and that lots of the phenomena we've *known* to interfere with transporters are acutally just interfering with the detection process (and possibly the actual transporter beam in some cases, like shields and tractor beams, but something like EW or elecrtical interference may just be messing with the detection process.) Anyhow, assuming accurate information is important that likely will also dictate your ability to selectively transport away 'parts' of things as well.

My guess would be that they define 'whole' and 'part' largely by the sort of pattern the transporter constructs and the information they have. They probably break down and transport the whole target (in terms of mass/energy) and then rebuild it at the destination based off the information they collected prior to the transport.


Detection accuracy/information may be also what limits the ability of transporters to be used as weapons. That said, its quite possible phasers and transporters were related phenomena - I mean they both esem to involve some sort of matter/particle beam and the breaking down of matter (at least in part in the case of transporters... you could have a phaser probably just by using a transporter that eliminates the whole reconstruction part of the process I suspect.) In such a case a 'weaponized' transporter and a phaser are functionally identical anyhow (they can't damage the target until the shields rae down, you need information to 'shoot away' parts of the ship instead of doing general damage, etc.) so it really doesn't matter.

A transporter has to be able to "lock on" to a target. That part of the process is easy to disrupt, as the "transport inhibitors" and mineral deposits in Insurrection show.

Once you achieve a transporter lock, the system somehow creates a "pattern". The pattern is not the result of a scanning process, because on multiple occasions we've seen them transport things that they couldn't scan. Somehow the structure of the target is converted into data at the site. This is where the "partial transport" mechanic would have to apply. The pattern is normally a whole, contiguous mass: an entire person, for example. The pattern creation process has to detect boundary conditions based on unspecified criteria and stop at those boundaries. Presumably you would have to adjust the boundary conditions very carefully to beam away pieces of something.

From there, everything captured in the "pattern" is disintegrated, the "pattern" is transmitted to the transporter system (and possibly from there to a third location), and the target is reconstructed from the pattern.

The trick would be getting the system to recognize the desired boundaries. The Vidiian transporter weapon shows that it can be done, so it's a question of whether the transporter systems of other civilizations are up to the task.

biostem wrote:Let's say you knock out your opponent ship's shields. Why not just start transporting away components that are either vital or just chunks of the ship?

Why not just transport the crew out under those circumstances?

No one ever tries, so it must not be practical. My guess is that even without shields, starships still have "transport inhibitor" technology operating to protect the ship and crew from hostile beam-out. That's why they have to beam boarders onto the target instead of beaming enemies out.

I think there's even some evidence to suggest that being something in is easier then beaming something out.

More to the point, once a starship's shields are down it's basically at the attackers mercy. That question earlier about which is faster at carving up a ship, transporters or phasers? That's what torpedoes are for.

Realistically though, how often do we actually see boarding actions being used? Most times I can recall the Enterprose or Defiant having to stop a ship they fire a warning shot or disable it and the ship surrenders.

Eternal_Freedom wrote:More to the point, once a starship's shields are down it's basically at the attackers mercy. That question earlier about which is faster at carving up a ship, transporters or phasers? That's what torpedoes are for.

Not necessarily. An attacking ship can temporarily disable shields or a section of shields and them beam in something like a torpedo. This would be an effective tactic against an enemy ship if it has superior defenses that can't be taken down with conventional attack.

Voyager did exactly that against a Borg probe vessel in STVOY "Dark Frontier'.

biostem wrote:Let's say you knock out your opponent ship's shields. Why not just start transporting away components that are either vital or just chunks of the ship?

Because in order to do that you would have to lower your own shields. Which doesn't seem like a good idea if the enemy is shooting back.

Yes, there are some times when people can transport through their own shields. But those are exceptions, not the general rule.

I wander if part of the reason we don't see more generalized use of the transporter is related to energy expenditure. The few times we've seen mining occurring it is rather similar to traditional mining. This doesn't seem to make sense if you could either beam out the ore directly or alternatively beam away large sections of nonvaluable material. Basically, think mountain top removal mining, but flashy and futuristic and perhaps with less environmental impact. It may be that the energy required to transport something is related to the mass of what you're transporting. This would account for the transport of personnel and some cargo, yet not tons of rock/ore in mining. You're better off transporting personnel and cargo down to the location and mining traditionally then smelting down the ore and transporting that, than you are moving tons of unprocessed material, at least from an economical standpoint. This would also account for instances when they use another method to remove an obstacle, even if beaming it away would be quicker. In "The Cage" it was apparently more prudent to beam down a large piece of mining equipment or field artillery and feed it power from orbit, than to simply beam away the rock concealing the entrance, even though time was critical in rescuing Captain Pike.

Regarding the lock-on, from what we've seen of the transporters they seem to take a given volume and transport everything there, with perhaps some selective ability at reconstituting/creating the matter to account for their ability to disable weapons and other such feats. How many times have we seen someone get transported by jumping onto another person before they dematerialize? That shouldn't work if it's scanning something and then beaming up only a select item in a given space, especially since the process has already begun. A major part of the transporter lock may be simply accounting for movement of the object relative to the transporter and sizing the transporter field correctly, too small a field or one that is positioned incorrectly with regards to movement and you may end up lopping off part of the object(s) your transporting, too large a field and you may not even be able to transport due to energy required. What this proably means is that the pattern buffer and the computer's abilty to sort out different objects is the most important part in determining what you get at the end of transporting. This would also account for easier beaming in vs beaming out, as the transporter pad is probably a relatively stable and well known environment compared to an unknown source. The hardest part is making sure your subject doesn't end up embedded inside another object at the destination on outgoing transports, wheras with incoming not only do you have to make sure to get the whole object, but you have to determing where pieces go and what they are part of. We've seen what happens in TMP if part of that process goes wrong with a living creature.

Wing Commander MAD wrote:How many times have we seen someone get transported by jumping onto another person before they dematerialize? That shouldn't work if it's scanning something and then beaming up only a select item in a given space, especially since the process has already begun.

That's a good point, and it makes the "boundary conditions" idea more of a problem. After all, the transporter doesn't just beam up a person, it beams up their clothes and equipment. Of course, it's run by a very advanced computer, so if the computer has a good idea of what it's trying to pick up, fitting a field to them for transporter will be easier. It knows the volume, mass, and composition of what you want to transport.

When you have no idea what you're trying to transport, that's much harder. It beamed Roga Danar out of a small ship with no data at all, since he didn't show up on sensors. Best guess was that they new there was a humanoid on board that ship, so they aimed for the cockpit and energized, and that was sufficient to get him without bringing over the pilot's seat, console, and assorted other furnishings.

That doesn't explain why it will let someone jump into a transporter beam as the process is starting and be picked up with the intended target.

Wing Commander MAD wrote:A major part of the transporter lock may be simply accounting for movement of the object relative to the transporter and sizing the transporter field correctly, too small a field or one that is positioned incorrectly with regards to movement and you may end up lopping off part of the object(s) your transporting, too large a field and you may not even be able to transport due to energy required.

Seems like relative motion is the same problem either way. Energy fields are the most common interference with a transporter lock. Lots of intervening material also interferes, and there are the minerals that just happen to be in the vicinity that somehow interfere with transporter locks. Nonetheless, if you can put an isolinear tag on your target, you can get them immediately.

My best (for a decidedly wanting definition of best) guess for 'jump onto the transportee at the last second' method of second-hand beaming is that either they beam up a select volume of space with the intended transport subject (and everything else) in it to begin with, the main purpose of the scan/lock-on being they beam up the right segment, or that once the transport cycle has begun, the system can no longer distinguish between what it was and wasn't supposed to transport if additional mass is introduced to the process so as a safety measure it brings up everything within the ACB's volume of effect to avoid making the kind of mess we saw in TMP.

And while we do know energy shortages affect transporter availability, I'm iffy about that being the reason they're not used in mining operations. The Sisko used to beam home for dinner, and while he was Starfleet at the time, he was also a cadet. I don't think cadets get those kinds of privileges so while beaming is energy intensive, I don't think it is to the point that makes conventional mining more efficient, at least not in situations where modern UFP level power generation is available.

There are other factors here that are interesting. For instance, let's say you were at the top of a high mountain, and got transported - would you have to deal with potential complications from the pressure difference? I also know there's that episode from Enterprise where they transported a crewman up from a dust storm, and he ended up with bits of leaves and sticks imbedded in his skin - so the computers that determine what is part of the target have improved since then.

Another oddity is that the Vidiian device that could transport individual body parts must beam-in air or something to take the place of the volume that was removed - otherwise wouldn't it create a small vacuum in the cavity that it just created.

I do wonder if it's also an issue of most Alpha Quadrant powers simply working off the same core design - which basically prevents it from being "misused" - I wonder if they all share firmwares

Ted C wrote:

biostem wrote:Let's say you knock out your opponent ship's shields. Why not just start transporting away components that are either vital or just chunks of the ship?

Why not just transport the crew out under those circumstances?

No one ever tries, so it must not be practical. My guess is that even without shields, starships still have "transport inhibitor" technology operating to protect the ship and crew from hostile beam-out. That's why they have to beam boarders onto the target instead of beaming enemies out.

Well, it was done once, in "Return To Grace." Dukat and Kira boarded a BoP. After fiddling a bit with one of the ship's transporters, she beamed the Klingon crew, 36 total, over to Dukat's freighter, the Groumall. At [roughly] the same time, she beamed the freighter crew over to the BoP.

But I'm not certain if that example is entirely kosher. Kira did use the Klingon transporter system to beam the Groumall's crew off their own ship, but given her familiarity with the freighter ... that might skew things.

On a related note, the Hansens beamed Borg aboard the Raven at least once ("Dark Frontier"). But Magnus Hansen might've beamed over to their cube first, tagged them, and only then brought them aboard his ship. I actually strongly suspect he did just that. Even the Borg had to board the Enterprise to snatch Picard.

Oop! I forgot one thing. Janeway was beamed off the Voyager bridge and straight into a cube in "Scorpion." 'Course, that's one person, and she had an active comm link with that cube (among other things). So as it stands, "RTG" is the only real standout.

P.S. -- I also forgot the Vidiian example. Great catch there, Biostem!

P.P.S. -- When I read the topic header, I immediately thought of long-banned poster Enabran Tain. He concocted some of the most ridiculous scenarios I'd ever heard in SW/ST comparisons; e.g., the Federation would send a ship to Coruscant and neutralize Palpatine by "beaming the wrinkly old emperor's arms off." It was so silly it was funny

Let me get this straight-in a scenario where the Feds actually manage to get a ship all the way to Coruscant and past the planetary shield, his idea of neutralizing the emperor is...to beam his arms off. Instead of, I dunno, dropping a photon torpedo or three in his vicinity.
I knew Enabran Tain was nuts but this is way out there.

Batman wrote:Let me get this straight-in a scenario where the Feds actually manage to get a ship all the way to Coruscant and past the planetary shield, his idea of neutralizing the emperor is...to beam his arms off. Instead of, I dunno, dropping a photon torpedo or three in his vicinity.
I knew Enabran Tain was nuts but this is way out there.

Yeah. I won't veer too off-topic, but that was among his funniest claims. He also attributed near God-like powers to Adm. Pressman, that prick from "The Pegasus."

On a more relevant note, we do know transporters can lock onto armed hostiles and beam them aboard either with their weapons somehow deactivated or stripped of them altogether ("To the Death"). Key phrase, "lock onto." Differentiating between a gun and a living being pales in comparison to the Vidiian tech Ted and Biostem noted.

And we know as of Nemesis that they have tiny little one-off transporter devices too. I wonder if you could, for instance, beam a small quantity of a virus or poison into someone else. Similarly, I wonder why they never try to beam out all of a virus or other foreign infection from someone.

It could also be an interesting sabotage tactic - you come within transporter range of a ship that doesn't think you're hostile yet, and transport out one of their antimatter containment components... and boom internal explosion that can't be traced.

biostem wrote:And we know as of Nemesis that they have tiny little one-off transporter devices too. I wonder if you could, for instance, beam a small quantity of a virus or poison into someone else. Similarly, I wonder why they never try to beam out all of a virus or other foreign infection from someone.

It could also be an interesting sabotage tactic - you come within transporter range of a ship that doesn't think you're hostile yet, and transport out one of their antimatter containment components... and boom internal explosion that can't be traced.

Or performing such a tactic in a cloaked vessel. We know they can easily beam in that mode.

Let's face it, the transporter technology is a ridiculously advanced piece of technology that, if used in clever ways, is a massive tactical advantage.

This is why so many and such ridiculously inconsistent drawbacks have to be brought up to nullify it for plot purposes.

biostem wrote:And we know as of Nemesis that they have tiny little one-off transporter devices too. I wonder if you could, for instance, beam a small quantity of a virus or poison into someone else. Similarly, I wonder why they never try to beam out all of a virus or other foreign infection from someone.

It could also be an interesting sabotage tactic - you come within transporter range of a ship that doesn't think you're hostile yet, and transport out one of their antimatter containment components... and boom internal explosion that can't be traced.

Interesting thoughts.

If the Vidiians can beam a pair of lungs from a Talaxian, I doubt they, at least, would have a hard time beaming a lethal amount of something into a person.

But then, as we've pretty much all said throughout this discussion, Vidiian transporters are ridiculously advanced. I wonder if they were used when Torres was split into Klingon and human halves in "Faces"? I don't remember how the two were reintegrated, either ... it wasn't until probably "Scorpion" that I actually rewatched many ST:VGR episodes

The Voth had a tremendously powerful transporter, able to quickly beam the 700,000 ton Voyager into their cargo hold. That doesn't really speak to this thread, but it's still remarkable. Even the Borg don't have transporters capable of that; when they try to capture the Voyager or even mere Federation shuttlecraft, they drag them inside with a tractor beam.

seanrobertson wrote:The Voth had a tremendously powerful transporter, able to quickly beam the 700,000 ton Voyager into their cargo hold. That doesn't really speak to this thread, but it's still remarkable. Even the Borg don't have transporters capable of that; when they try to capture the Voyager or even mere Federation shuttlecraft, they drag them inside with a tractor beam.

That doesn't automatically mean the Borg couldn't do it, however. It just could be far more energy intensive then they care to be. The Borg are quite the efficiency obsessed type after all.

It's been speculated the Borg might use large scale transporting when 'scooping' colonies and such off the surface of planets. That could be justified in terms of the energy expenditure of moving such large masses out of gravity wells into orbit with conventional tactics. In space, however, no such gravity force is relevant, so such a tactic would be pointless and inefficient.