Transporters are Dangerous!!

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-08-01 01:53am

Doesn't look like it from Sisko's visit to New Orleans, and from what we see of SF. On the other hand, Picard does have a little Dune Buggy in the trailer for Nemesis.

Luke Hares · Post by **Luke Hares** » 2002-08-01 05:27am

TheDarkling wrote:You have to remember that almost every SF transport accident is due to some strange circumstance - people just beaming around Earth or to and from a transport will have no complaints.

Maybe - though I'm not sure of this - what caused the Rascals problem? - seems to just malfunction a lot as well.

But the main point is - why use it when these strange circumstances abound, especially if they're strange circumstances that can't be detected until after the transporter operation. Why no practical alternatives?

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2002-08-01 02:29pm

The Rascals problem was caused by an energy field masking the scans.
The Good/Bad split in Kirk was caused by an alien dust.
The Tuvix incident was cause by a rare (and previously unknown) plant.
The Second chances incident was caused by weird atmospheric distrubances.

I cant think of anymore off hand but theres enough to prove my point.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-08-01 02:32pm

TheDarkling wrote:The Rascals problem was caused by an energy field masking the scans.
The Good/Bad split in Kirk was caused by an alien dust.
The Tuvix incident was cause by a rare (and previously unknown) plant.
The Second chances incident was caused by weird atmospheric distrubances.

I cant think of anymore off hand but theres enough to prove my point.

And when they are faced with such situations they still use the transporter! Talk about blind faith in technology. If it was a strange situation I would insit on taking a shuttle. Acually I think I'd always take the shuttle.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2002-08-01 02:36pm

I agree there but I was just saying that people on Colonies dont have anything to complain about with the transorter.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-08-01 06:40pm

TheDarkling wrote:I agree there but I was just saying that people on Colonies dont have anything to complain about with the transorter.

how do we know that since it has never been seen. That is making a big assumtion there.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2002-08-01 06:45pm

No it isnt.

The strange an odd circumstances cause the majority of transporter problems we see thus these odd things arent present on colonies (not ones that have existed for any amount of time anyway).

Its reasoning based on evidence - the problems with transporters are over rated in general - think of all the transports that go ok.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-08-01 06:49pm

TheDarkling wrote:No it isnt.

The strange an odd circumstances cause the majority of transporter problems we see thus these odd things arent present on colonies (not ones that have existed for any amount of time anyway).

Its reasoning based on evidence - the problems with transporters are over rated in general - think of all the transports that go ok.

yes, the planets would be "normal" but the transporter has a failure rate that is horendous on the Show. The point was that these failures continue without ever there being even the smallest inquiry into the design. This is unexcusable

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2002-08-01 06:57pm

Yes but a transporter doesnt fail of its own accord its usually some weird technobabble field or dust etc.

The starlfeet people would be the only people who would complain and maybe they just prefer to risk their lives than spend 15 minutes in a shuttle.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-08-01 11:19pm

TheDarkling wrote:Yes but a transporter doesnt fail of its own accord its usually some weird technobabble field or dust etc.

The starlfeet people would be the only people who would complain and maybe they just prefer to risk their lives than spend 15 minutes in a shuttle.

Say hello to the King of technobabble Data. where would Trek do without it

LMSx · Post by **LMSx** » 2002-08-01 11:29pm

Shouldn't a transporter be designed to work through most problems, like alien dust or a sunny sky?

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2002-08-01 11:44pm

Star fleets design policy seems to involve correcting errors after the fact - they let problem occur then unpgrade the unit - just like mnodern computer software except cmoputer software rarely turns people inot doubles etc.

Isolder74: Im not sure I follow your meaning.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-08-01 11:51pm

LMSx wrote:Shouldn't a transporter be designed to work through most problems, like alien dust or a sunny sky?

Maybe there are some technical problems with doing so, or maybe it is impossible. We really don't know.

Luke Hares · Post by **Luke Hares** » 2002-08-02 04:53am

Master of Ossus wrote:
LMSx wrote:Shouldn't a transporter be designed to work through most problems, like alien dust or a sunny sky?
Maybe there are some technical problems with doing so, or maybe it is impossible. We really don't know.

Well maybe the damn thing should check before dispatching the person - beam a ballbearing or a hamster or something through first?

Wasn't there that daft malfunction that caused the entire DS9 command staff to be turned into characters in a holodeck - what caused that?

And there was the transporter malfunction in ST:TMP - never got to the bottom of that.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-08-06 10:59am

Luke Hares wrote:
Master of Ossus wrote:
LMSx wrote:Shouldn't a transporter be designed to work through most problems, like alien dust or a sunny sky?
Maybe there are some technical problems with doing so, or maybe it is impossible. We really don't know.
Well maybe the damn thing should check before dispatching the person - beam a ballbearing or a hamster or something through first?

Wasn't there that daft malfunction that caused the entire DS9 command staff to be turned into characters in a holodeck - what caused that?

And there was the transporter malfunction in ST:TMP - never got to the bottom of that.

Exactally! Three people died and not even once did anyone question the design. Do we not remember the Apollo 1 acident? NASA grounded the entire program until they found exactally what had happened. They didn't continue using the Apollo Spacecraft anyway in its current configuration. This is exactally what Starfleet has done with the transporter! This is unexcuable.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2002-08-06 03:16pm

If a Boeing jet crashes, the feds will be all over Boeing until they find out what happened and fix it. Plus, commercial jet designs are supposed to be tested for all sorts of crap before mass production, and if anything goes wrong, they change the design so it doesn't happen again. That is what should happen with transporters. But instead, people die, get cloned, get fused, and the bloody thing still hasn't gotten any significant changes in 80 years.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-08-06 04:05pm

Scotty was easily able to work on the ship after all that time he spent missing, and transporters were one of the first systems that he checked out.

I would have thought a system that causes so many problems would have been overhauled for safety purposes long ago.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-08-06 05:46pm

Darth Yoshi wrote:If a Boeing jet crashes, the feds will be all over Boeing until they find out what happened and fix it. Plus, commercial jet designs are supposed to be tested for all sorts of crap before mass production, and if anything goes wrong, they change the design so it doesn't happen again. That is what should happen with transporters. But instead, people die, get cloned, get fused, and the bloody thing still hasn't gotten any significant changes in 80 years.

this is point I have been trying to make all of the time. In Star Trek they have some accident with the transporter and it is written off as a necissary risk and ignored.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-08-06 05:59pm

BTW, the total number of times we have seen people transport on the show is about equal to the number of times an average American will jump in his car to drive ten miles or more in his lifetime. In America, a person is generally considered a bad driver if they have more than two or three accidents over the course of their lives. There is no way an American driver with the number of accidents that the Transporter has had should be on the road. The transporters are obviously HIGHLY dangerous to people, even in percentage terms. Maybe the Federation should have stuck with cars on Earth, after all.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-08-06 10:40pm

Master of Ossus wrote:BTW, the total number of times we have seen people transport on the show is about equal to the number of times an average American will jump in his car to drive ten miles or more in his lifetime. In America, a person is generally considered a bad driver if they have more than two or three accidents over the course of their lives. There is no way an American driver with the number of accidents that the Transporter has had should be on the road. The transporters are obviously HIGHLY dangerous to people, even in percentage terms. Maybe the Federation should have stuck with cars on Earth, after all.

BTW I am writing my own Sci-Fi universe and the car is well intrenched in my version of the 22nd century. the only difference is that cars fly and the Highway is computer controlled "skyway". you get on activate the flight computer and you can take a nap as you travel across a continent.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2002-08-06 11:13pm

are we also forgeting the Space Balls Parody of the whole Transporter Thing? --Great Beasties, what happened to his head--