Hi all. I've been cleaning out and organising my computer and I stumbled across a file with this in it:
A timeline of star trek. Anyone care to add to it. What year did the timeline divert... the year Kirk was born I suppose. I guess I wrote this 2003!
Begin File:
2003 --- you are here
2063 ---- Zephram Cochrane and first Human Warp flight (First Contact)
.
.
.
2151 ---- NX-01 Enterprise launched under the command of Captain Jonathon Archer “Enterprise Season 1 2152 “Enterprise” Season 2 2153 “Enterprise” Season 3 “Xindi Threat” 2154 “Enterprise” Season 4
((around this time was the Earth-Romulan war.))
2161 ----- Federation Founded with founding members that at least included Humans, Vulcans, Andorians and Tellarites.
.
.
.
2249 USS Enterprise 1701 – Constitution Class “Starship Class” Commisioned at the San Francisco ship yards, Earth, Sol Sector. 2264 Captain Pike at end of his 2nd 5 year mission on the Enterprise 2265---- Enterprise Captained by James T. Kirk's 5 year mission commences
2270---- Kirk's 1st 5 year mission ends (mentioned in Voyager)
2272----- The events of Star Trek: The Motion Picture (Kirk not logged a single Star Hour in 2 and a half years - Will Decker)
((possible 2nd 5 year mission before Enterprise used as a Cadet training ship.))
2283----- Events of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn (roughly 15 years after Space Seed 2283----- Events of Star Trek III: The Search for Spock 2283----- Events of Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home USS Enterprise 1701-A Commisioned, Spacedock, Earth, Sol Sector 2283----- Events of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
((Possibly another 2, five year missions with 1701-A))
2293---- Events of Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country 2293---- Events of Star Trek Generations and the commissioning of the USS Enterprise 1701-B (78 Years before 2371)
.
.
.
2344 USS Enterprise NCC 1701-C destroyed defending the Klingon outpost on Narendra III (Yesterday's Enterprise)
.
2364 USS Enterprise NCC 1701-D commissoned (Galaxy Class) TNG season 1 2365 TNG season 2 2366 TNG season 3 2367 TNG season 4 2368 TNG season 5 2369 TNG season 6/DS9 season 1 2370 TNG season 7/DS9 season 2 2371Star Trek: Generations/DS9 season 3/Voyager season 1 USS Enterprise NCC 1701-D destroyed above and on Veridian III 2372 DS9 season 4/Voyager season 2 USS Enterprise NCC 1701-E commisioned 2373 DS9 season 5/Voyager season 3/Star Trek: First Contact 2374 DS9 season 6/Voyager season 4 2375 DS9 season 7/Voyager season 5/Star Trek: Insurrection 2376 Voyager season 6 2377 Voyager season 7 2378 Star Trek: Nemesis
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
Cool beans. Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Nice, do you ever think about expanding on it? Going into details about the events within each series that could be considered as truly historical? Maybe dabble in a little pre-series history.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
No I haven't thought about expanding on it, at least not recently. Just found it in an old file, and thought that this would be the best place to share it. Anyone and everyone feel free to debate/discuss/add to? I do know there have been some discussions in the past about the true dates of the movies and how they fit in with the timeline, and other mentions of 'real' dates - like the throw away line in Voyager about the year that Kirk's first 5-year mission ended. I've also added a few possible 'other 5-year missions'. There HAS to be plenty of missions that they went on, especially between TMP and TWOK, and after they got the Enterprise A. I can't see them all sitting around. Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
It's quite lengthy, but I had something similar I found on an old hard drive recently. I'd apparenly dated individual episodes as well that fell outside of the normal continuity, but I don't seem to have referenced them.
I've added the Nu Trek dates, but it was complete upto the end of Enterprise, so that was summer 2005?
1933 ---------- TOS "The City on the Edge of Forever" 1947 ---------- DS9 "Little Green Men" 1968 ---------- TOS "Assignment: Earth" 1969 ---------- TOS "Tomorrow is Yesterday" 1986 ---------- TVH 1996 ---------- VOY "Future's End" 2004 ---------- ENT "Carpenter Street" 2024 ---------- DS9 "Past Tense" 2053 ---------- WW3 takes place 2063 ---------- Zephram Cochrane has first sucesful warp flight. First contact made with Vulcans (ST:FC) ca. 2065------ SS Valaint? [earliest rough date from dialouge, probably later than Friendship 1] 2067---------- Friendship 1 launched 2151---------- NX-01 launched
ENT S1: Apr 2151 - Feb 2152 S2: Apr 2152 - Apr 2153 S3: May 2153 - Feb 2154 S4: Feb 2154 - Jan 2155
ca. 2156------ Romulan War begins, ending 2160 2161---------- Federation formed by Earth, Andor, Tellar & Vulcan (+ perhaps Alpha Centuri and unknown others) ca. 2167------ USS Archon, USS Essex destroyed [rough dates from dialogue] ca. 2168------ USS Horizon? [rough date from dialogue]
2233---------- Nu Trek diverges from timeline
2249---------- USS Enterprise NCC-1701 launched, San Fransisco Yards
April's mission: 2249-2254
2254---------- First contact with Talos IV (The Cage)
2265 Kirk takes command of Enterprise, begins 5yr mission
TOS: 2266 - 2269
2268---------- DS9 "Trials and Tribble-ations"
TAS: late 2269 - early 2270
2270---------- Kirks 5yr mission ends [VOY dialogue] 2272---------- V'Ger incident (TMP) [2.5 years after 2270]
'Phase II', i.e. another 5yr mission, would go here.
Kirks 2nd 5yr mission: 2272-2276
Enterprise retired from frontline service ca. 2277
2278---------- TWOK Uniforms first seen
2282---------- TWOK, TSFS 2283---------- TVH [6mths after TSFS], Enterprise A launched 2284---------- TFF (possibly closer to end of TFF, but there is a period of refit + shore leave)
[I]Likely missions occur between these two films. Assuming TFF is the start of a 5 yr mission and TUC is the end of their mission exploring gaseous things:
Mission 1: 2284-2289 Mission 2: 2290-2293
2293---------- TUC, GEN. Enterprise B launched 2311---------- Tomed Incident 2344---------- Enterprise C destroyed (TNG 'Yesterday's Enterprise) 2355---------- Battle of Maxia [9 years prior to TNG S1] 2364---------- Enterprise D launched
TNG S1: 2364 S7: 2370
2369---------- Starfleet assumes control of DS9
DS9 S1: 2369 S7: 2375
2371---------- GEN, Voyager Launched
VOY S1: 2371 S7: 2377
2375---------- INS 2379---------- NEM 2387---------- Nu Trek
Anyway, I think that matches largely with yours. The only thing I never did was try to place the dated things from TOS (such as Nomad, the Eugenics War), the dates of which were on screen but have since passed.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
TWOK-TFF is a headache. I don't know why the Okudas placed it in 2285, especially since the underlying principle they mostly worked from is that figures as spoken by the characters are exact and not rounded off. Maybe it was the 2283 date on the Romulan Ale bottle, which shouldn't be a concern at all because (a) McCoy's "it takes the stuff a while to ferment" seems to be sarcastic, (b) there's no reason it has to be an Earth year or a year at all and not, say, a stardate. But whatever.
The problem is, 2285 was the "official" reference point for TWOK that was used by Ronald D. Moore when writing Generations. Kirk states that the scene at his cabin in the Nexus just before he was "going back to Starfleet" is "9 years ago," from the viewpoint of it being 2293. So TWOK can't take place any earlier than 2284, because obviously he was already back in Starfleet at that time and didn't leave again.
There's also a problem with TFF: Caithlin Dar says the Romulans, Klingons, and Terrans established Nimbus III "20 years ago." This needn't be a precise figure, but in TOS season 1 (commonly dated as 2266-67) the Romulans hadn't been heard from for a century before "Balance Of Terror" and as late as season three (and TAS) the Federation was still in open conflict with them, so even 2284-85 (i.e., same year as TWOK) is too early, let alone 2283.
I would argue also that there's no reason it needs to take place in the same year as TWOK-TVH anyway, as the Enterprise-A has clearly been undergoing an extensive amount of work at the beginning of TFF, the bridge is different, etc. Kirk says he gave Scotty three weeks to get the ship operational but we don't know exactly how long it took for the ship's issues to present themselves or whatever else happened after the final scene of TVH, where everythng seemed to be working fine.
All this plus Gillian Taylor's statement that she had "300 years of catch-up learning to do" at the end of TVH is probably what led the Okudas to place TWOK and TSFS in 2285, TVH in 2286, and TFF in 2287, but things have to be fudged a little any way you slice it. The way I look at it, "9 years" from GEN is the least fudge-able because it's the most specific figure (no one rounds to 9) and we have the most concrete dates for that film's 23rd century events courtesy of it being "78 years" (another non-rounded figure) prior to 2371. TWOK's "15 years" is slightly more fudgeable, as someone might realistically say 15 when it's actually 16, etc. Same with TFF's "20 years." (But again, the later we can fudge that one the better because of the Romulan thing.) TVH's "300 years" is no problem at all given its roughness and the casual context in which the remark was made.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
I don't see a problem with Kirk's 9 year line in Generations.
We know firmly that he was on the Ent B in 2293. TUC was probably the same or previous year but not very long in the past.
In fact, if we take the same '200 years in the future' as for TOS, then TWOK, TUC and GEN fit, more or less. TSS follows nearly straight on from TWOK and TVH is several months after TSFS (is it 3 or 6 months, I can't remember).
Anyway, I digress. So in about 2284 Kirk is a captain, meaning that TVH can not tke place later than this point (unless Kirk's fantasy was not accurate).
It is possible that around this time (perhaps, stretching it a bit, this happens before TFF) he had some time off, had a crisis after demotion, met this nice girl and romanced her, but ultimately decided to "go back to Starfleet".
He's still in uniform, so he may not have resigned - but he might have been considering it after fallling head over heals for Antonia. That sounds more like Kirk to me.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I'm not quite sure what you're saying. He's wearing exactly what he was wearing when he was swept into the Nexus, just as Picard is. Neither's attire changes when they shift locations and times. It shouldn't be taken as an indication of his rank in 2284.
The point is that 2293 minus 9 years is 2284 and this has to be before TWOK, because he doesn't leave Starfleet after that. TWOK is when he rediscovers his "first best destiny" as a starship captain. It would make absolutely no sense after getting exactly what he always really wanted (command of the Enterprise) at the end of TVH for him to then leave Starfleet. He was happy to be demoted because he was never happy as an Admiral anyway. So TWOK can be no earlier than 2284, and it's probably 2285 since it takes place in March (Kirk's birthday) and that's pretty early in the year and it seems like he's been living in San Francisco and evaluating cadets and such, not like he just got back.
My personal rationalization for why TWOK is actually 18 years after "Space Seed" is that Kirk (who fortunately is IIRC the only one who says "15 years" in the actual film) looks on his five-year mission as a single block of time, so it's 15 years after the end of the mission.
TSFS does follow nearly straight on from TWOK, but we don't know exactly how long that is (it could be weeks or even months taking into account limping home while repairing the battle damage, transferring David and Saavik to the Grissom and dropping Carol wherever, the Federation cordoning off Genesis, etc.) and we also don't know how long they're on Earth before stealing the ship. TVH is three months after the end of TSFS.
TUC would indeed be earlier the same year as GEN (2293, at least the middle part which takes place two months after the Praxis incident) because at the trial McCoy says he's been ship's surgeon on the Enterprise for 27 years. (He replaced Dr. Mark Piper in 2266.)
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Well, I never gave it that much thought it seems.
Having seen it I like your take much better – and I must bow down to your far greater geek powers. Or, you know, just proper research. Also, I never put the fact that Picard and Guinan were wearing the same clothes as when they entered the Nexus together with Kirk. Dumb…
Anyway, your way of seeing things fits much better with the ‘official’ timeline, which is apparently a lot less flexible that it might appear at first glance. The only issue of contention is the two rounded dates – Kirk’s 15 not having seen Kahn in 15 years and Caithlen Dar’s “20 years ago” speech.
Therefore, loosely speaking, we get this:
In 2265 Kirk becomes captain of the Enterprise
Mid-late 2266, Season 1 of TOS begins and McCoy becomes ships surgeon (27yrs prior to TUC)
In 2267 the events of the episodes “Balance of Terror” and “Space Seed” occur. This is 18 years prior to TWOK (rounded to 15 by Kirk). It is also about 20 years before TFF, fitting with the opening of relations between the Federation and Romulus, especially if Dar’s rounding is anything like Kirks.
TOS then finishes in mid 2269 or so. TAS (if you want to include it) will continue to 2270, the year the Enterprises mission ends (This is also, incidentally, 15yrs prior to TWOK). As an aside, Mr Scot’s Guide to the Enterprise places this in 2212, with the refit finishing 2216. I think we can discount this as non-cannon.
Here we make two assumptions: Assumption 1 is that Kirk is immediately promoted to a desk job. Assumption 2 is that Decker’s statement is pretty accurate. Taking these to be true we skip forward two-and-a-half years to the events of TMP. This places it sometime in mid-late 2273.
From here to 2284 is a large gap that can be filled with a mission following on from TMP. Is the prevailing assumption that the Enterprise is a training vessel for some time prior to TWOK? If not, a further mission can be slotted in, perhaps shorter than 5yrs, or maybe just not as a frontline ship
By TWOK Kirk is also no longer captain, although it is not clear when he left. These details aside, Spock is captain at the beginning of the film.
In 2284 or very early 2285, 9 years prior to GEN, Kirk has his crisis and considers quitting Starfleet. He leaves his lady friend to resume his job.
In March 2285 TWOK reinvigorates him and reaffirms his decision not to quit.
Some months later, but probably less than a year, are the events of TSFS, the end of which sees the Klingon ship land on Vulcan.
Three months later TVH begins, likely in 2286 (the ‘official’ date), or even 2287 at a stretch. The Enterprise-A appears at the end of the film, is not ready and is still being finished by the beginning of TFF, possibly before the close of 2286. Again, the ‘official’ date is 2287, which is not problematic as we don’t know how far the Enterprise got before everything broke (except the warp drive, which worked perfectly).
Then 6-7 years pass, during which time, probably towards the end of this period, the Enterprise is part of a larger mission to explore gaseous anomalies. There could be another mission prior to this of up to 5yrs.
In the first half of 2293 the events of TUC happen, followed around 6 months later by GEN.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
I wish James Dixon would update his gargantuan Star Trek Timeline, incorporating Star Trek (2009). The last update to the Dixon Timeline document is from 2004, as far as I know.
Ginger, you should include Sulu's promotion and Scotty's work on the Excelsior project.
After all, it's not a Kirk Timeline, right?
Besides that I loathe the 2009 movie, I'd omit it from any timeline as it's either it's own alternate timeline or events there will continue to change/alter/undo the events we've seen.
You could also include known starship commision dates like from the Reliant, Excelsior, etc. Maybe David's year of birth...really, all themajor events in the ST:Chronology book, with your corrections and updates.
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Ginger Beacon: By TWOK Kirk is also no longer captain, although it is not clear when he left.
Captain by rank or occupation? He was already admiral in TMP...
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Ginger Beacon:
1933 ---------- TOS "The City on the Edge of Forever" 1947 ---------- DS9 "Little Green Men" 1968 ---------- TOS "Assignment: Earth" 1969 ---------- TOS "Tomorrow is Yesterday" 1986 ---------- TVH 1996 ---------- VOY "Future's End" 2004 ---------- ENT "Carpenter Street" 2024 ---------- DS9 "Past Tense" 2053 ---------- WW3 takes place 2063 ---------- Zephram Cochrane has first sucesful warp flight. First contact made with Vulcans (ST:FC)
This is the start of an excellent list which I may steal if I ever continue my diatribe as to why JJ-Trek is actually much more different than our own.
After all, if you screw with the past of someone who screws with the timeline a lot, then you also screw with his screwings, and the screwings of those who followed him.
In some cases, yes, a lack of screwing would make no big difference (i.e. where the episode revolves around inadvertent changes which must be undone), but in other instances the screwing is critical to the timeline.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Jason - I never actually had copy of the chronology. This thread is comming dangerously close to rekindling nerdy activities that were until now just a distant memory.
Fabrux - Captain as in the job, not the rank. That said, at the end of TMP he was still under "Temporary Grade Reduction". *Holds head in hands*
Guardian - I really do think you're right. Even if the ones seen in Trek are the only times time travel ever happened, then Nu-Trek still can't have over-written the "Prime" (or as I like to think of it "Actual") course of events. But, if it did then it would explain why we have Microsoft and not Chronowerx.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...the screwing is critical to the timeline."
I'm sure that's what Kirk told her, anyway.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Mim's analysis makes a lot of sense. The Antonia Incident was obviously quite a significant period in Kirk's life; and it obviously led to significant things. It kinda fits that he'd consider leaving after his (hypothetical) second 5-year-mission, before ultimately deciding to return to Starfleet. He'd have the initial let-down of seeing the Enterprise become a training ship, staffed with lots of people much younger than him; followedd by all that then happened in TWOK/TSFS/TVH/TFF/TUC putting him back on his true path, as a starship captain, for what nust have been a third 5-year-mission.
The alternative is to say most of that happened BEFORE the Antonia Incident, and why would he leave when the whole bloody Federation council had effectively agreed that commanding a starship was what he was made for?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Ginger Beacon: Jason - I never actually had copy of the chronology. This thread is comming dangerously close to rekindling nerdy activities that were until now just a distant memory.
EXCELLENNNNT!!
I don't think I consulted the chronology for mine either. If I remember correctly I think I started after the Voyager throw away line of 2270 for the end of Kirk's mission on the Enterprise and built it up around there from my (better) knowledge at the time of all things Trek.
Awesome work Ginger Beacon. Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
In retrospect, is there really any reason to assume five-year missions anymore? We know that was the TOS line regarding Kirk's voyage, but we've almost never heard of such a thing elsewhere. Sulu and the Excelsior, IIRC, had a three-year mission, but I'm not aware of any other ship that had a particular timeline in that way.
Older Kim in "Endgame" mentioned something about being out in space for four years or something, but that's as close as we've come.
Maybe there's more from that same Voyager episode with whatzisname's report on Kirk, but I don't know off the top of my head.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I just happened to see a bit of Generations on TV just now, and it had a line where Kirk says he met Antonia "11 years ago" (unless I misheard) - Memory Alpha doesn't mention this timeframe, just says they met in 2282.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Ah, but 11 years prior to when exactly? We still dont know when that "now" moment in Kirk's happy dreamspace was.
That scene is more odd because it references property ownership- how exactly would that work in a society without money? And on DS9 (which I was watching again from the start) Jake (in Explorers) mentions "a month's supply of transporter credits"- so it seems that, despite unlimited energy and no monetary system, there is some give and take.
Regarding the whole "Five Year Mission" thing, that was never established as some standard operating procedure- taht's just sorta assumed because it makes the convoluted timeline mesh with the series.
Sort of.
I think it likely that the "Five year Mission" was due more to the Enterprise's maximum mission time between refits and major repairs- and that ship took a pounding! Less of a pounding than the Constelation or Intrepid, but still...and then there's stuff like crew promotions. Otherwise yo have a ship full of Harry Kim's- poor losers that do everything right and never get promoted, only to return home and find all the bozos from his class that played it safe on some starbase now outrank him several times over.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
It's possible to overthink things - from Kirk's perspective he'd only just arrived, so he was still thinking in his 'now' of 2293.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Or he was thinking of his "now" as the time he made the eggs and broke her heart...
Though you are of course quite right- we're likely giving this more thought than the writers did.
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: And on DS9 (which I was watching again from the start) Jake (in Explorers) mentions "a month's supply of transporter credits"- so it seems that, despite unlimited energy and no monetary system, there is some give and take.
Perhaps life on a far-flung frontier outpost is a little different than a planet-bound assignment; energy resources would be rationed, I'd think.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Oh, dear - the Federation Economy. That's a whole other can of worms you're opening there! There seems to have been a determined policy never to explore it on the shows, probably because anythign that smacks of 'communism' or 'socialism' is the kiss of death in the US.
Simple fact is, with unlimited energy and energy-matter conversion, any sort of scarcity-based economy becomes unsustainable - pointless, in fact. It's a moot point whether the means of production of, well, everything is controlled by the State or by the voluntary collectives or individuals - the result is the same.
So, if you choose to you can live a comfortable but aimless existence on Earth and other human-settled worlds (we never really get to hear about any, do we? I wonder what become of Terra Nova?) as well as the other UFP member worlds. Or you can choose to go out and settle on an outer world where you really have to work for what you get. Or you pursue scientific/artistic/other academic endeavours for the betterment of mankind. Or. . . You join Starfleet and push out beyond the boundaries of what is known and mapped and understood.
And yes, in the hinterlands some things you mjight take for grabted on earth, like being able to transport wherever and whenever you like, would be restricted by the lack of development inherent in a frontier environment. Just the same as how replicator use was rationed on Voyager (but not Holodecks, I don't think - something about a different kind of energy, which never made sense to me. Why not just say that they chose to keep the Holodecks more available for crew morale reasons, and have everyone meet communaly to eat to stop people becoming withdrawn and reclusive as the reality of their plight sank in).
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yes, Voyager was pointless and stupid- such amazing potential for drama pissed away in favor of the TNG syndication format.
I think there must be dozens, if not hundreds of colonized and setteled worlds in the UFP- certainly a mix of races and species though- no "humans only" worlds, though a given race's homeworld is always dominated by that species- Andor, Vulcan, etc. Each world might develop it's own unique culture and dialect (translators would fix that, but it's a pride thing- like Europe).
If anything were to bring down the UFP, I think it would be civil war- some grouping of outer territory worlds catches intolerant religion or decides to monopolize a vital resource their worlds have exclusively and break away. Somehow I dont think that would lead to warfare though- at least not untill the seperatists start building fleets of ships or strike alliances with UFP hostile stellar empires (Breen, Romulans, whatever).
quote:Originally posted by Fabrux:
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: And on DS9 (which I was watching again from the start) Jake (in Explorers) mentions "a month's supply of transporter credits"- so it seems that, despite unlimited energy and no monetary system, there is some give and take.
Perhaps life on a far-flung frontier outpost is a little different than a planet-bound assignment; energy resources would be rationed, I'd think.
Totally right but it was Sisko relating how homesick he got when he started Starfleet Academy and how he transported home every night for a week dinner and sleep- Jake replies with "You must have used a month worth of transporter credits!" My bad for not explaining more clearly.
So, taking taht into consideration, a month of credits would be what? Fifteen credits maybe?
Not too shabby if the world population is maybe three or four billion (for sustainibility reasons and the allure of life offworld). That's a hell of a lot of power and an unimaginable amount of computer power if there's (potentially) sixty billion transports going on monthly! That's 720 billion transports every year, and if only one in a million ends in death, that's a hell of a lot of funerals each year.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I'd always assumed that those transporter credits were an Academy thing, a limit on what cadets were allowed to do. I mean, it is basically a military school. I'd expect them to put their students under quite a few restrictions that don't apply to the general public.
Of course, explaining how "transporter credits" make sense as one of those restrictions is something I'll leave to someone who feels more inclined to putting the creative energy into it.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
Hang on a minute - and this is nitpicking here, but McCoy says he was ships surgeon for 27 years. Does that include the time between the end of the 5 yr mission (when he retired presumably) and Kirk invoking the super secret re-activation clause in TMP?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
That, there, is a good point.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Or not very well-thought-out writing. 2266 to 2293 is 27 years. Perhaps given the sheer length of time, he had come to view his pre-TMP retirement (which lasted... how long are we saying? I've lost track. More than the 'official' 2 years between TOS & TMP?) as no more than a sabbatical.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
"ship's surgeon" might not apply to just the CMO either- it could be like saying "I was a surgeon for 27 years" in the real world- it does not have to be just the time he was the top doc. On a ship like the Connie, there should have been at least four for five people with the basics at least- someone for McCoy's downtime, third shift and occasioanl shore leave.
Nautical comparisons and TOS screen evidence notwithstanding, it's foolishness to assume that any starship has only one or two medical personess.
as to the cadet credits thing, tha's makes a certain sense but losing all restritions only makes the insane number of transport jumps I mentioned all the larger...
Which makes me think they have some sort of hardline transporter systen instead of beaming someone up to bounce from several satelites to compensate for the planet's curviture- something like magnetic conduits that allow a transporter beam to zip down them to a recieving pad- routed by the magnetic field.
It's how I'd explain the Oberth pylons being too thin for a turbolift- and it eliminates the dangers of inter-ship beaming, as it's really no more dangerous than a plasma conduit.
Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
I'd always just assumed the Oberth pylons had a sort of firemans pole in them. When the ship got back to Space-Dock after a mission, they got a big can opener, cut a hole in the bottom bit and let them all out, staring wild-eyed like new born deer.
Now, for McCoy and his quote, which was that he was: “for 27 years [he had] been Ship’s Surgeon and later Chief Medical Officer aboard the USS Enterprise”.
First of all, what does this mean? Ship's surgeon is a valid if archaic term for the person doling out medicine and so forth on a ship, dating back to the days when they were effectively warrant officers - skilled in butchering but not a gentlemen like the officers.
Chief Medical Officer in Star Trek is the head of the medical division on a ship. In the real world it refers to the government position and as far as I know is not a term used by a contemporary ships doctor or officer in charge of the department (correct me please if I am wrong), but that’s an aside.
This could therefore imply that he was on or on assignment to the Enterprise as the surgeon – i.e. the doctor specialising in surgery, before he became CMO. He could even have been a surgeon under Piper, although I can’t remember if it was ever explicitly said that he’d just come aboard. I’ve lent someone my TOS so I can’t actually check this without googling, and that could turn up rubbish.
Right, fine that's just pedantry, out of the way.
So, in TMP when Bones comes aboard, 1) it is never explicitly said that he left. Kirk does say "Well, for a man who swore he'd never return to Starfleet...", so it is implied.
2) Bones says "What happened, Captain, sir, was that your revered Admiral Nogura invoked a little known -- and seldom used -- reserve activation clause..." - so reactivation, not re-commissioning or giving him a new commission as might be expected if he hung up his blue jumper for good. However;
3) Immediately after this he says "... in simpler language, Captain, sir, they drafted me!", implying that he was obliged to stop being a civilian and go back into Starfleet. However, it’s not as if McCoy is incapable of dramatic licence or sarcasm, which is how I interpret this statement, as a whinge, not actual fact.
4) Although McCoy bitches about Chapel having her MD, he never calls her Ship’s Surgeon or CMO. She could be either acting head of department or the actual head of department, it’s never made clear.
I chose to think that point 3) is just McCoy using dramatic license. It is therefore possible that he effectively on sabbatical. He’d be on the books as CMO but in fact was doing whatever it was that led to him growing my favourite beard in all of Star Trek (including Mirror Spock).
So, theory one: Despite appearances, McCoy ‘left’ Starfleet but did not actually resign his commission and role of Enterprise CMO. He was, strictly speaking, assigned to the Enterprise in one or other of these roles for a continuous 27 years, despite doing some other stuff in the meantime. The time he spent buying jumpsuits, growing facial hair and wearing medallions was all on sabbatical or something similar.
Theory two: He was on the Enterprise as the Ship’s Surgeon about two years prior to when we first see him. Piper leaves the ship (or is eaten by an alien monster, whatever) an McCoy gets his job. He then takes a break of 2ish years after TOS and before TMP, then continues his surprisingly long assignment, totalling 27 years’ service (but 29 chronological years) by the time he is on trial.
Theory three: He’s a sixty something year old man, on trial in a strange Klingon court and under extreme stress. He’s got arthritis, he’s a bit hung over perhaps, possibly mistreated and scared to death (or even of death). Under these circumstances he forgot that he took a bit of time off to let his hair grow.
While convenient, theory three is also probably the easiest to fit in there. It’s even possible that Starfleet backdated his pay/employment record/whatever to include his time off. But in a world without economics (and therefore no pensions) why would they do that.
As an additional point to this, McCoy wears 4 pips and 3 squeaks in TUC (the round and long gold markers on the ring round the left sleeve of his uniform). Apparently the squeaks (the long ones) mark commendations. The circular ones mark either 5 years’ service (if plain) or 10 years (if they have the Starfleet arrowhead on them). Unfortunately even with Trek Core’s HD shots of TUC, it’s not quite clear. You can see them in the scene where he’s trying to save Gorkon, but not all. The front two are 10 year markers in this one:
But you can’t categorically say what the back two are. They wouldn't both be 5 year markers, unless they round up the years. They are both unlikely to be 10 year markers because that would mean he was in Starfleet from about 15 years old.
So they are likely 35 years of service markers. Which doesn't help at all.
Infact, even if we take them to be 1 year for the round ones and five or ten years for the big ones (which is wrong but often stated) then he's been in Starfleet for either 19 years (wrong) or 34 years (perhaps).
So that was no help. Bugger. Anyway, I vote three.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The pips and squeaks represent months and weeks gone without exclaiming "Damnit, Jim!". Medallions represent year markers. He was doing so well too....sad really, STVI sent him back to the start of his recovery yet again.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
The useful but not quite authoritative "Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise" states that the bars are 10 year service markers and the pips are 1 year markers.
Now someone has to check all five movies with that uniform to make sure they kept count properly. Posted by The Ginger Beacon (Member # 1585) on :
So if they can't be bothered to get it right for him I think we can dismiss them completely as evidence of years served.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Maybe Kirk's bars and squeaks and such got altered when he got demoted...lack of seniority costing him that sweet San Fran apartment or something.
Really stretching here...but hey, it's what we do: covering paramount's ass with implausible in-universe explanations.
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Anyone and everyone feel free to debate/discuss/add to? I do know there have been some discussions in the past about the true dates of the movies and how they fit in with the timeline, and other mentions of 'real' dates - like the throw away line in Voyager about the year that Kirk's first 5-year mission ended. I've also added a few possible 'other 5-year missions'. There HAS to be plenty of missions that they went on, especially between TMP and TWOK, and after they got the Enterprise A. I can't see them all sitting around. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)