The only incoming link here is from antimatter. A merge or redirect to antimatter pod would make sense search-wise, and eliminate the citation issues. Redirect makes more sense, since there wouldn't really be a need for history merge, but I offer the suggestion anyway. -- Michael Warren | Talk 23:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. Go for it. Jaf 23:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)Jaf

Antimatter pod in "Resolutions"Edit

There's so much ranting going on on talk pages, so it's time for some praise as well: While browsing through the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual for the first time in years I noticed the graphic of an antimatter pod. This book was released in 1991 and an antimatter pod was seen for the first time in "Resolutions", several years later, but the graphic and the pod seen in the VOY episode look exactly alike. Kudos to Mike Okuda and Rick Sternbach!. --Jörg 20:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Removed speculation Edit

I've removed the following entirely speculative note, "We can assume that antimatter pods are self-contained and survive some sorts of disasters aboard starships, such as the destruction of the starship, uncontrolled entry into an atmosphere, etc. This is because vehicles in the Star Trek universe do not consistently explode on every single occasion a vessel is catastrophically damaged. It is probably safe to assume that each pod has its own battery, or other power source to maintain the containment field, or some kind of post-exhaustion flush method. This way, it is believable that a free floating antimatter pod from a destroyed starship, or a pod remaining in a derelict hulk, could remain intact until such a time as all of the antimatter within was expended." --Defiant (talk) 09:48, September 22, 2016 (UTC)