“a couple of days” < “a week or so”
Given what they can accomplish in “a couple of days,” by the time “a week or so” has passed, she may well have the equivalent of several doctoral degrees, not to mention everything she got at Starfleet Academy.
Do they use the same teaching machine in “Spock’s Brain”? 
Okay…you may now revoke my Trek diploma…
He also was in “Requiem for Metusaleth,” as the M4 robot. Trek was (in)famous for reusing props-yes the M5 computer (they sure did love that letter-Sesame Street in Space!) was also reused as Gary Seven’s too, and showed up a few more times as well.
They also reused pieces of sets and backdrops, as well.
The remastered editions reimage that stuff out, so all those different places now look unique.
“Day of the Dove” is the episode you’re thinking of. It wasn’t so much that site-to-site was something nobody had ever thought of, just that it was technically difficult for whatever reason, as even small mistakes were likely to be lethal. That never bothered.
“That never bothered”… Kirk? No, that guy thinks with his testosterone.
But I am finding it difficult to fanwank why they can lock on and dematerialise someone standing on the surface of a planet, say, 10,000 miles away, probably moving at impressively divergent vectors, or materialising someone onto the same surface, but they can’t do site-to-site?
The same small margins of error can kill there, too. (Getting materialised inside an errant seagull, for example, when beaming down.)
But then again, I am not a transporter technician (IANATT).
As I understand it, Roddenberry was asked once why the transporter room wasn’t right off the bridge. He said it was so that the writers could get some exposition in while characters were on their way to the transporter room.
There is a lot more stuff to materialized inside in a room full of furniture and stuff. The odds are safer in an open area.
The difference is that in site-to-site the person never materializes right next to the pattern buffer. Here’s how it goes:
Dematerialization at location A –> pattern buffer –> materialization at location B
That is always what happens, no matter what A and B are. It so happens that doing this is a lot easier when either A or B or both are a transporter room, because then the journey from pattern buffer to B or from A to pattern buffer is very very short.
If the transport is site-to-site, then you’re conducting two remote assemblages instead of just one. Hence more technical difficulty.
I also think that site-to-site transports were needlessly energy-intensive. It’s much easier on the system to have a transporter station on both ends of the process than just one; and to have the transporter station only in the middle of the process is probably that much worse. Note that when beaming from one ship to another, the transporters of both ships are always involved. It wouldn’t surprise me if it takes more than twice as much energy (or processing power) to beam from a transporter platform to an neutral spot as it does from trasnsporter to transporter, and if three or four times as much effort is needed if there is a platform neither at the beginning nor the end.
Of course, they’re so prodigal with energy otherwise, it’s hard to imagine they care. But that is not my fault. 
Site to site existed. In Piece of the Action Kirk has one of the hoods call the other top hoods, and then has Scotty trace the call and beam them right into the office. One of them shows up with the phone still in his hand, so we can be pretty sure he didn’t materialize in the transporter room first.
As for the difficulty of doing it inside the ship, there seem to be all sorts of things that interfere with transporting, so maybe the energy fields inside the Enterprise have an impact. The transporter room can be specially shielded.
Oh, no. It’s got a couple of radio antennae that protrude from the slanted upper portion of it’s shell; the wire I’m referring to is without a doubt what the crew was using to puppet it across the stage.
So, whadda care if some goon materializes in a pool table?
Ya know what I mean?
IIRC, in that episode, Scotty warns Kirk that Chief Hood so-and-so looked awefully mad, so an unknown number of them must have materialised, if briefly, aboard the Enterprise.
(But it did seem as if at least one of the hoods was site-to-sited while on the phone. He was still in mid threat. 
)
I think he was so intent on making threats that he didn’t notice the stop on Enterprise. He obviously didn’t realize his phone ws disconnected.
Right - because they were asked “did you see thier ship” - yeah, I was there - even described the beaming process.
The beam has to come from somewhere. There’s no way to shoot the beam directly from one location to another. Think of it like cellphone tower. You can’t bypass the tower and connect directly to another cellphone. (well, you can with a Nextel, but the analogous technology doesn’t exist until the last Next Generation movie.)
So site-to-site means picking up the person, putting them in the buffer, and then, without pulling them out, sending them directly to the other location. This means the time spent “energized” is longer, and this is commonly revealed as a dangerous thing. It’s only by the time of Next Generation that this is safe enough to do routinely.
Yeah, it’s a fanwank. But it’s pretty obvious, at least to me. And it’s not like most of the other explanations for their technology wasn’t fanwank, at least at one time.
Well, it could ruin your shot 
BluE.