TWOK and TSFS happened earlier

[Admiral Rex]

When the Okudas came out with the chronology in the 90s, they placed TWOK and TSFS in 2285. They said it was conjecture with no explanation on how they determined 2285 for these films.

How did they come up with this year? The Okudas say Space Seed is in 2267 which is 18 years prior to TWOK in their chronology. Khan mentions in TWOK that its been 15 years, so shouldn't these films be in 2282-2283?

Anything I've read since the Okuda chronology uses the 2285 year for these two movies. As far as I see it, there is nothing on film that points to 2285. Any idea how to quantify 2285 for these two movies?

[RyanKCR]

You have to remember that the Romulan Ale McCoy gives Kirk is of 2283 vintage. And it takes it a while to ferment.

[Christopher]

My best guess is that they were trying to reconcile Nimbus III in ST V -- formed by a treaty between the UFP, Klingons, and Romulans -- having been around for 20 years when there'd been no contact with the Romulans prior to "Balance of Terror" in late 2266. So they figured they had to push ST V back to 2287, and that meant pushing up II-IV as much as they could.

But if that's true, I don't see why they bothered. The 20-year figure could've been just a rough estimate, as much as Khan's 15-year figure.

[Admiral Rex]

That makes sense that ST V leads to estimating the years of the prior films. We could also assume Khan's 15 years are referring to Ceti Alpha V years which could be longer than Earth years.

[Christopher]

Admiral Rex wrote:

---

We could also assume Khan's 15 years are referring to Ceti Alpha V years which could be longer than Earth years.

That's what Greg Cox did in the novel To Reign in Hell.

[Bry_Sinclair]

Maybe years on Ceti Alpha V are a little longer than Earth, meaning that for Khan it was 15 years but for Kirk it was 18.

[Christopher]

^You didn't read the previous two posts, did you?

[C.E. Evans]

I believe some people still speak figuratively in Trek. In the real world, I also once rounded off an event that had happened 18 years ago as 20 years ago during a conversation. The person I was speaking to wasn't injured.

[EliyahuQeoni]

Christopher wrote:

---

That's what Greg Cox did in the novel To Reign in Hell.

The only problem I have with that theory is that Kirk and Khan both independently use the 15 years ago figure, if I remember correctly.

[Admiral Rex]

C.E. Evans wrote:

---

I believe some people still speak figuratively in Trek. In the real world, I also once rounded off an event that had happened 18 years ago as 20 years ago during a conversation. The person I was speaking to wasn't injured.

My wife was born in Virgina but moved to Ohio when she was 2 years old. So she tells people she's from Ohio. It reminds me of Kirk in the 2009 film being born in space but says he's from Iowa in ST IV. So maybe...just maybe...Kirk was born in space in the Prime Universe but figuratively tells people he's from Iowa because that's where he grew up.

I'm just saying, it's possible that he was indeed born in space in the Prime Universe as he was in the Abramsverse.

[Christopher]

^The filmmakers' idea, reportedly, is that the Kelvin was on its way back to Earth when Nero's ship came through, and that Kirk was born a bit prematurely because of the attack.

But it could've happened the way you say. "From" doesn't automatically mean "born in."

[Admiral Rex]

^ I guess Nero's ship scared the cap out of her.

Cap=captain

Ok, bad joke.

[Timo]

The only problem I have with that theory is that Kirk and Khan both independently use the 15 years ago figure, if I remember correctly.

Both would be within their rights to round down from 17 - but rounding down from 18 or more would call for some motivation in the character to belittle the passage of time.

However, the year of "Space Seed" might easily be moved from 2267 to 2268. After all, the episode carries a "midrange" stardate of 3141, quite possibly suggesting the third year of the five-year mission (since the earliest adventures have 1XXX range dates and the latest have 5XXX range ones). We know the fifth year of the mission was in (or extended into) 2270, so both 2267 and 2268 are possible for "Space Seed". The latter would mean the mathematic-grammatically all-important step from 18 to 17 intervening years...

FWIW, the movie stardate of 8130 would justifiably be 15 years after "Space Seed", sharp, in the TNG model where a thousand dates mark a year (and where a fifth digit, denoting decades, would be used but is here omitted).

Timo Saloniemi

[Admiral Rex]

^ When Kirk mentions 15 years, he is referring to the last time he saw David. This would place seeing David shortly after the 5-year mission in 2270.

I don't recall Kirk referring to a timeframe when he last saw Khan. Only Khan mentions that their last meeting was 15 years ago which we're saying could be Ceti Alpha V years.

[Christopher]

Admiral Rex wrote:

---

^ When Kirk mentions 15 years, he is referring to the last time he saw David. This would place seeing David shortly after the 5-year mission in 2270.

Sorry, but you're conflating two separate sentences. Kirk's line was:

There's a man out there I haven't seen in fifteen years who's trying to kill me. You show me a son that'd be happy to help him.

http://www.chakoteya.net/movies/movie2.html

So he was indeed saying that he hadn't seen Khan in 15 years.

Not that it's really such a big deal. People routinely round off or misremember time intervals. And for people who spend their careers traveling from planet to planet, dealing with years of different lengths, it'd be even easier to misremember the exact interval in Earth years. So I tend not to worry too much about such things. Heck, as a rule, I've found it's best not to take any numbers in Star Trek too literally.