The Federation attempted to achieve transwarp speeds in an experiment involving a new drive installed on the USS Excelsior in 2285. When Montgomery Scott sabotaged the drive, it was deemed a failure. where does it state that scott's sabotage caused the project to fail in Canon? for all we know, the excelsior project succedded and it's drive formed the basis for the TNG era ships. at the very least, i find it unlikely that scotty pulling out a few computer chips would cause starfleet to abandon the project. -Mithril 22:25, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

While I am not sure about the cause being stated in canon, we do know that the transwarp drive was a failure. No other starfleet ships are stated to have transwarp until the shuttlecraft Cochrane in "Threshold" (where they make obviou that transwarp is not used on other starfleet ships), therefore it can be assumed that other starfleet ships did not incorporate transwarp. Also, warp drives from other races were explicitly stated to be transwarp in contrast to federation designs, such as the Voth, and the Borg. --OuroborosCobra 22:31, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

then perhaps a better entry would be "The Federation attempted to achieve transwarp speeds in an experiment involving a new drive installed on the USS Excelsior in 2285. the drive was ultimately deemed a failure." dropping referance to Mr. Scott's sabotage, since that really has little bearing on the drive itself. as for no other ships mounting it, there is the possibility they discovered they could duplicate the effect using normal warp drives, leading to the development of the TNG era drives. not unlike how the Bell X-1 required a rocket to break the sound barrier, but later planes used variations of normal turbojets do do it. of course, that's speculation, so it doesn't require posting in the article.-Mithril 02:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

They did not duplicate the effect with different technology in TNG drives. Look how much faster Borg and Voth drives are. That is what transwarp is, faster. Starfleet ships are faster thanthey were in Star Trek III, but not that much faster. --OuroborosCobra 02:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Transwarp is a general term meaning any transportational speed that exceeds that of traditional warp drive limits. every time they improve conventional warp drive, they'd have to move transwarp up to a new baseline. look at the numbers. the TOS scale has warp 8 as 512c. in TNG, it's 1024c. 1024c equals TOS warp 10.07. TNG warp 9.9, the listed baseline for transwarp, is 3053c, or TOS 14.5. prior to excelsior, no starfleet ship easily exceeded 1000c. by TNG, the ships can Cruise at velocities 3x higher. well within the bounds of the concept of Transwarp for TOS. -Mithril 02:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Removed info Edit

It appears that by the 25th century the Federation may have constructed some form of successful transwarp technology as Q remarked to the Quinn that "Humans aren't supposed to be in this quadrant for another hundred years" concerning the USS Voyager being in the Delta Quadrant in 2372. Either this or the Federation found another stable wormhole which had its exit in the Delta Quadrant. (VOY: "Death Wish")

I removed the following due to its speculatory nature. I place it here for future discussion. --From Andoria with Love 04:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, I removed the following:

By the 24th century, this would mean speeds in excess of warp factor 9.9, a speed a Soverign-class vessel could sustain for only a few hours. Transwarp speeds can be measured in the same factors as normal warp to draw comparison, though the speeds increase exponentially up to warp 10 which is infinitely fast, drawing its own bizarre consequences. (VOY: "Threshold")
  • should mean speeds in excess of WF 10, not WF 9.9.
  • ...if at all, because we can't be sure what exactly transwarp really means, can we?
  •, do we really now about the top speed of a Sovereign class vessel (not that it would matter anymore, after the first two points)?
  • ...and then, what does the rest of the paragraph mean at all?

--Cid Highwind 17:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Threshold (shudder) Edit

Now God knows I hate "Threshold," but this page needs to at reference it in some form. --TimPendragon 17:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

What, Threshold the series by Brannon Braga. Even though it's related, this is still a Star Trek wiki, and that clearly isn't canon.--Tim Thomason 18:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
I think he means the VOY episode "Threshold", which is canon. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
/me smacks OuroborosCobra around a bit with a large trout for not picking up Tim's sarcasm on subspace --From Andoria with Love 07:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

one little ship Edit

  • "An anomaly found in 2374 that was able to, among other things, shrink a runabout to a few centimeters gave Starfleet hope and inspired them to make further attempts at creating a transwarp corridor; however, these too ultimately failed."

correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't the implication in the episode that investigating the compression anomaly might give the federation the data needed to develop transwarp? so where did the bit about them attempting to build a corridor and if failing come from? it obviously refers to an event after the episode, but with no referance given. Mithril 23:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

borg transwarp Edit

"The Borg's transwarp technology, allow them to travel 20 times that of conventional warp drive. So if a ship is traveling warp 9.0 which is 1,516 times the speed of light, in a transwarp conduit it would be greater than warp 9.99 and 30320 times the speed of light. " Referance? i don't remember an episode that specified the speeds of borg ships in transwarp corridors. in addition, there is no canon formula for figuring warp velocity, so where did the poster get 30320c for 9.99? (not to mention that this seems in conradiction to observed transits through corridors, which appear to be on impulse drive, not warp.) Mithril 23:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

enterprise going transwarpEdit

In "The Nth Degree", when barclay takes control of the ship, he creates a very fast method of transport. I'm not the person to write this kind of stuff...but I belive it should be noted in this artificial. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

I'm not sure about the Nth Degree, but surely the Enterprise D went transwarp in "Descent". The Borg's method of travel was definitely called a 'transwarp conduit'. That would mean that Tom Paris was not the first person in Starfleet to cross the threshold, he was beaten by the 1,000 plus people aboard the E-D. Of course, they were using somebody else's conduit, and did not have an on-board drive system.– Indefatigable 00:54, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
As Indefatigable alluded to, a transwarp conduit is not the same thing as transwarp drive, so it is correct to state that Paris did it first.--31dot 01:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Borg transwarp historyEdit

According to canon, the Borg possessed this technology by the 2350's but is there any evidence it was used during the battle of Wolf 359 or any other Borg encounters pre-"Descent"? Does any historical information about the development of their transwarp conduits, hubs, etc. even exist? I figured it's just inconsistent Voyager writing but I figured you guys would know better than I. Thanks!! The preceding unsigned comment was added by DFJ (talk • contribs).

Please sign your comments, so we know who you are. :)
The strongest evidence of that is the fact that Starfleet officers who fought at Wolf 359 somehow ended up in the Delta Quadrant. ("Unity", "Unimatrix Zero") It has never been stated how they got there, so any explanation is speculation, but it would stand to reason they were somehow brought there on a transwarp vessel.--31dot 12:36, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
No need to speculate anything, because it is canon. In "Dark Frontier" the Hansens encounter a cube that utilizes transwarp conduit drive in the mid-2350s. --Pseudohuman 17:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Other faster than warp technologiesEdit

I think we can add these technologies to either this page or a brand new page. If anything, I think we need to create a new category. Faster than warp maybe? 04:22, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I think not. Because, actually there are no faster than warp technologies. Transwarp is simply a more energy efficient ftl-technology than the Federation warp-drive. Standard warp drive is also capable of any given velocity, even infinite. It simply requires an infinite ammount of energy to achieve infinite velocity, at least according to the TNG Technical Manual. I don't remember if it is quoted somewhere in canon as well. --Pseudohuman 19:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


Would anybody mind terribly if I took out the paragraph describing transwarp beaming? There is no evidence presented that it is related to transwarp drive, only that it can beam people "across warp" (hence the title "transwarp," which I interpreted as only a coincidence). -Angry Future Romulan 19:39, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

I would. this is not an article about transwarp drive or things related to transwarp drive. This is an article about all tech with the transwarp prefix in them. I understand that some people like you interpret transwarp to mean "across warp" and some interpret it to only mean "faster than warp" and some treknologists interpret it to mean "subspace tech where transwarp frequencies are used", etc. there is however no canonical statement related to what transwarp means when it is used instead of the subspace prefix. so it is safer to not speculate one way or the other and let the reader find links and info on all items in the Star Trek Multiverse with the term transwarp in them here on this page. This is my opinion. --Pseudohuman 22:43, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
Agreed about the removal of "beaming", as in it shouldn't happen. I think this raises another issue of what type of article this is. It seems to me that this is more a category and the information contained on this page should belong on each individual page. Even the background information is specific enough to go on individual pages. I think I'm going to vote this page be merged with the appropriate pages and then deleted. — Morder (talk) 23:49, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, it is problematic as this page is about all things transwarp tech when there is no evidence of a single type of tech. When the term "transwarp" is used in dialogue by itself it is always a reference to transwarp velocity. For example: "They just dropped out of transwarp." or "They'll be capable of transwarp in less than two hours." or "Once we know it's safe to travel at transwarp". MA should propably reflect this. If we merge, we could make transwarp a redirect to transwarp factor (and expand that article to be about all things transwarp velocity) under the precedent that warp is a redirect to warp factor as we have no page for "warp technology" either. --Pseudohuman 09:36, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned, this should be listed as "trans-warp beaming", as opposed to transwarp beaming. The difference, although minor, is significant; as the purpose - and effect - of the two technologies is markedly different. Given that the only reference to this is verbal, even Spock's intonation when referencing it would imply that it is trans-warp, as opposed to transwarp. 11:00, August 14, 2012 (UTC)The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
The script uses both ways of writing it: "trans-warp beaming" and "transwarp beaming". Transwarp is just the more common way of writing the term throughout Star Trek. I suppose its just one of those things where it doesnt matter which way you write it. --Pseudohuman (talk) 14:10, August 14, 2012 (UTC)

Removal reverted Edit

The following paragraph was just removed from the article - I reverted that edit:

The Federation developed transwarp beaming by 2387. This transporter technology allowed beaming living beings between the planets of a star system, and onto starships traveling at high warp. The theory was postulated and perfected by Montgomery Scott. The complete technology was introduced to the alternate reality by Ambassador Spock. (Star Trek)

It seems as if the theory had to be developed by 2387 for Spock to know about it. Also, doesn't he explicitly state that this theory was developed by Scott? Not sure why we would need to remove any of that. Please discuss here before attempting removal again. -- Cid Highwind 18:13, December 18, 2011 (UTC)

hmm. I'm getting the feeling that the anon who removed the segment had interpreted the movie in such a way that it was the future alt-Scotty who developed transwarp beaming and prime-Spock somehow knew about it. But prime-Spock was at this time lying to them that the future where he came from was the future of the alt reality as well. Which in the end is revealed not to be the case, as Spock only wanted to unite the crew to have the same friendships as he had had. So presumably it was prime-Scotty who had perfected transwarp beaming and prime-Spock had no knowledge of the future of the alt reality. --Pseudohuman 21:54, December 18, 2011 (UTC)

Removed Edit

Removed this section:

It should be noted that crew members of both the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) and NCC-1701-D have broken the transwarp threshold prior to Tom Paris, but by no means of their own direct doing. The Enterprise under Captain James T. Kirk was commandeered by the Kelvan race, which then implemented their own power source on the ship giving the Enterprise the capability of Warp 11 (TOS: "By Any Other Name"), while a being known as The Traveler indirectly propelled the USS Enterprise-D 2,700,000 in a matter of minutes into the M-33 Galaxy from the Milky Way Galaxy (TNG: "Where No One Has Gone Before")

Warp 10 is the transwarp threshold only in the tng-warp scale, pre tng-references do not apply. Traveler "warp boost" was incredibly fast speed due to the ship phasing, or something. I know the episode says they are passing warp 10 and go off the scale, but i have always thought this was false readings from the instruments or something, because "Threshold" makes it so clear that Paris is the first Human ever to cross the transwarp threshold. --Pseudohuman 19:26, January 9, 2012 (UTC)