The Star Trek Books FAQ

The thread says: pin me please!

Thanks to Geoff "Wersgor" Hamell for suggesting this; Michael Schuster, John "Pf2144", Will Devine, Andrew Timson, Ian "Therin of Andor" McLean, Bob "Bobatiel" Manojlovich, Christopher L. Bennett, Kevin Killiany, and Michael Schuster for their suggestions and assistance; Slave of Seven and Aatrek for updating and pinning this; and Keith DeCandido, Marco Palmieri, Ann Crispin, and Margaret Clark for patiently answering some questions. Hopefully this will be the last time they're asked.


UPCOMING/MISSING PROJECTS

Q. When will [Rumored/Announced Book X] come out?
A. Rihannsu #5: The Empty Chair. When Diane Duane finishes it. Recently, according to her blog (http://outofambit.blogspot.com/), she has not been working on it, because of deadlines on other books such as Wizards at War. Before that, she was for some time. Maybe if we're really lucky we'll see it in 2005, but I doubt it. Remember, there were thirteen years between Books 2 and 3, and it's only been four years since Book 4 right now.
[*] The Yesterday Saga #3-5. This project has been cancelled for reasons unknown.
[*] Split Infinities. This project has been renamed Other Times to avoid conflict with Star Wars's Infinities mini-series. According to Marco's Q&A: "Split Infinities (which was only a working title) got backburnered, but will see the light of day at some point."
[*] Dark Passions #3-4. Also according to Marco, "Dark Passion's 3-4 was only hypothetical, and is not actually in development."
[*] The Lost Era. There are going to be two more Lost Era novels, one dealing with Picard's time between the Stargazer and the Enterprise-D; the other with Ben Sisko during the Tzenkethi War. Authors, titles, and publications dates are all still unannounced. Note that there will most likely be other books set in the time of the "Lost Era" without that specific banner-- the Stargazer series, for example.

Q. What happened to Challenger?
A. Star Trek: Challenger is on hold while Diane Carey pursues development of original fiction. Its return is indefinite. Marco Palmieri explains: "Not to confuse the issue with the obvious, but there never was a Challenger series. Only the hope that it would continue in much the same manner as, say, New Frontier. The mistake on our end, clearly, was touting it as a new series prematurely."

Q. If I've heard about a book and it isn't on the schedule, does that mean it was cancelled?
A. No. There are always plenty of books in development that haven't been scheduled yet. And remember, the schedule is always tentative and subject to change. The schedule is more a hope than a promise. (Thanks to Christopher L. Bennett)

Q. Is there a good place to find out about books that actually were cancelled?
A. Yes there is! Check out Steve Roby's page, Star Trek: The Lost Books. The page also has information on the oft-mentioned Probe/Music of the Spheres and A Flag Full of Stars debacles.


ASPECTS OF TREKLIT

Q. What is the order of the DS9 relaunch titles?
A. The "core" titles of the relaunch belong in this order, chronologically speaking:

The Left Hand of Destiny, Books One & Two
The Lives of Dax
Avatar, Books One & Two
Section 31: Abyss
Gateways #4: Demons of Air and Darkness
Gateways #7: What Lay Beyond: "Horn and Ivory"
Mission: Gamma
[*] #1: Twilight
[*] #2: This Gray Spirit
[*] #3: Cathedral
[*] #4: Lesser Evil
Rising Son*
Unity
The Worlds of Deep Space Nine
[*]#1: Cardassia/Andor
[*]#2: Bajor/Trill (available in February 2005)
[*]#3: Dominion/Ferenginar (available in February 2005)

* actually runs concurrent with books from Abyss through Lesser Evil

A timeline of these plus related relaunch materials can be found here: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~atimson/startrek/timeline.htm

Marco Palmieri's recommended reading order is almost the same. It runs thusly: Avatar, Abyss, the Gateways installments, Mission: Gamma, Rising Son, The Lives of Dax, The Left Hand of Destiny, Unity, Worlds of DS9.

Q. Will there be more post-finale titles after Worlds?
A. YES! As of yet, however, no details have been announced. There is a book called Walking Wounded, which has been mentioned for some time, but is still unscheduled.

Q. What is the Shatnerverse?
A. In order to prevent confusion, those novels written in collaboration between the Reeves-Stevens and William Shatner have been set aside in their own continuity. This way, casual references to Kirk being alive will not slip into other books and confuse the poor readers. However, this has not stopped the Shatnerverse books from referencing other works, including Ship of the Line and The Dominion War Tetralogy. The novels in the Shatnerverse are:

Odyssey
[*] The Ashes of Eden
[*] The Return
[*] Avenger
The Mirror Universe Trilogy
[*] Spectre
[*] Dark Victory
[*] Preserver
Totality
[*] Captain's Peril
[*] Captain's Blood
[*] Captain's Glory (available in March 2005)

Q. What is Star Trek: S.C.E.?
A. S.C.E. is a series of eBooks chronicling the adventures of the U.S.S. da Vinci and its Starfleet Corps of Engineers response team. Available in eBook format up to book #45 and in six paperback collections up to book #24. More information available here: http://www.psiphi.org/cgi/upc-db/sce/

Q. What is in the future for Star Trek: The Next Generation?
A. TNG received a major focus in 2004 with the nine-book A Time to... maxiseries. The events of this series led up to Star Trek: Nemesis, and will be followed up on in two ways. First, there shall be The Next Generation: The Second Decade (editor Margaret Clark's unofficial and inaccurate title), following the Enterprise-E crew. There have been two announced titles so far: Death in Winter by Michael Jan Friedman and Resistance by J.M. Dillard, both hardcovers. There will also a series entitled Star Trek: Titan, suprisingly enough focusing on Captain Riker's U.S.S. Titan. The first novel, Taking Wing by Michael A. Martin and Andy Mangels, should be available in April 2005.

Q. What is Star Trek: Vanguard?
A. Vanguard is a new fiction series from editor Marco Palmieri and writer David Mack. As Marco has said, "Vanguard centers around a Federation starbase and the ships assigned to it during the time of The Original Series. It's about a chasing an ancient mystery having to do with the remote region of space in which the station has been established. The first novel is by Dave Mack and will be published in August, 2005." Incidentally, anyone who suggests this series is "DS9 in the 23rd century" will be promptly reprimanded... fatally.

Q. Will New Frontier: After the Fall have a coolio CD like Stone and Anvil? I heard that the comic book Double Time would be on it.
A. No. The idea was discussed, but not pursued.


FEW AND FAR BETWEEN?

Q. Why aren't there any more Star Trek comics?
A. Oh, but there are! Recently, the publisher Tokyopop announced plans to create a Star Trek: The Next Generation manga anthology, for publication in Winter 2003/2004. Further information can be found here: http://www.tokyopop.com/news/press2004/2004_star_trek.php and http://newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19217

In addition, Checker Book Publishing recently announced a plan to reprint the old Gold Key TOS comics from the 1960's and 70's into trade paperbacks. (http://www.checkerbpg.com/strek1_gn.html) Also, J.G. Hertzler is trying to create a Klingon graphic novel, but no word has been forthcoming on whether he's had any sort of success with this.

Q. Why are the S.C.E. paperback reprints so rare?
A. S.C.E. was primarily conceived of and executed as an eBook series. Any paperback concerns are secondary. Anyway, only so many books fit on the schedule every year, and the editors do their best to maintain a balanced approach, meaning there is not always room for S.C.E. Besides, you can always just buy the eBooks. That's what I did. 2004 has seen the release of two paperbacks (after an unplanned schedule alteration), and 2005 will see the release of two more, Breakdowns and Aftermath, taking the series up to #32.

Q. Why are there so few TOS books this year? Why are there so few TNG books this year? Why are there so few DS9, VGR, ENT, NF, CHA, SGZ, GKN, etc. books this year? Does Pocket hate me and want to destroy my favorite series?
A. No. As said before, Pocket tries its best to create a balanced approach, however this balance is achieved over several years, not within each year, to give them more freedom. Hence, 2004 is TNG-heavy; whereas 2001-03 have had a lot of DS9; and 2000, 2002, and 2005/06 were/will be TOS-heavy. Also note that VGR relaunch, NF, CHA, SGZ, and GKN are single-author series, and will thus probably have one to two books at max each year. (Though some may be dissapointed that some series are multi-author and others are single-author, each of these decisions was made individually, with the best editorial interests of that series in mind.)

ENT books are likely to be somewhat rare for a while, as according to Margaret Clark, "Second, the Enterprise books are light on our schedule. This is just how we decided to do the books, with the show in production, it is really hard to make sure that you don't step on the episodes and still do interesting books." Christoper Bennett adds, "The choice to publish fewer ENT novels per year during the series run seems to me like a reasonable way to minimize those problems this time around -- as well as making sense in the context of modern Trek publishing when there are so many other series."

During the last five years (Jan 2000 - Dec 2004), there have been 134 Star Trek books published and the series distributions broke down thusly (thanks to Keith DeCandido):

16% are cross-series
18% are original Star Trek
20% are Star Trek: The Next Generation
13% are Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
8% are Star Trek: Voyager
6% are Enterprise
7% are Star Trek: New Frontier
1% are Star Trek: Challenger
4% are Star Trek: S.C.E.
4% are Star Trek: Stargazer
1% are Star Trek: I.K.S. Gorkon

Q. Where are my nonfiction books?
A. Nonfiction sales have been abysmally down for Pocket's Star Trek books recently; their last big effort, Star Charts, apparently sold very poorly despite being the coolest book ever (except if you're James Dixon). For the forseeable future, there will not be many nonfiction ST titles from Pocket, though John Ordover said he tentatively had an idea in the works. Also: The Unseen Frontier: Declassified Images From the History of the Federation has been cancelled. Get over it.


PEOPLE OF TREKLIT

Q. Where did John Ordover go? Who are the Pocket editors for Star Trek books now?
A. In his own words, "I left Pocket at the end of August [2003], finished up work on some ongoing projects and was planning to start a packager - an entity that comes up with nifty ideas, gets a writer to work up and outline, and then goes out and sells the project to a publisher. On the way to doing this, however, I wound up taking the job of Editor-in-Chief at Phobos Books, a small-press SF publisher that I'm hoping to grow into something bigger." According to Keith R.A. DeCandido, the current editors for ST material at Pocket are: Marco Palmieri, Margaret Clark, Ed Schlesinger, Jennifer Heddle, and Elisa Kassin. Keith himself does freelance editorial work for Pocket (various anthologies, S.C.E.), but is not on staff.

Q. Who is Richard Arnold?
A. Richard Arnold ran the Star Trek Office of Paramount Licensing at the behest of Gene Roddenberry from around the premiere of TNG to the time of Roddenberry's death. It was his job to approve proposed novels, and he is held responsible for the "dark period" of ST literature from the mid-80's to the mid-90's. Richard Arnold did not believe in inter-novel continuity, claiming that every novel should be based upon the TV shows and movies, not other novels. Fortunately, he has since left, and his decrees are no longer in effect, as is evidenced by today's publishing program.

Q. Who is "Anonymous," the author of two stories in Prophecy and Change?
A. Well, if you were supposed to know who s/he was, s/he wouldn't go by the name "Anonymous," would s/he?

Q. Who are the people on the covers of the books "playing" Calhoun, Vaughn, et al.?
A. Those are models hired by artists to portray those characters for brief snapshots. The model for Calhoun has been said to be a neighbor of artist Keith Birdsong.



MISCELLANY

Q. Why aren't the books numbered anymore?
A. Because the editors don't want to number them. By and large, they don't actually occur in any sort of sequential order, so the only purpose of the numbers is to create a sort of "assembly line" impression about the books. Also, whether or not a book was numbered was becoming increasingly arbitrary -- what made The Q Continuum Trilogy numbered when The Best and the Brightest was not? Besides, they look ugly on the covers. Sequential series, such as I.K.S. Gorkon or New Frontier will likely continue numbering for the time being, at least in the booklist if not actually on the covers.

Q. Why can't people from outside the U.S./Canada (except Quebec) participate in the Strange New Worlds anthologies/short fiction contests?
A. The reason is tax laws. For the contest to work in the UK, the EU, Australia and just about everywhere else it would have to comply with their tax laws. As a company based outside of the UK, for example, Pocket US can not sponsor a contest. (Pocket UK can, but there hasn't been sufficient evidence, either in sales or demand from the public, to make them think it's profitable. There was a letter campaign a few years ago, but I don't think much came of it.)

Though NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and North American tax treaties avoid this issue, not all of Canada is open to the contest, either. Language laws prohibit the contest in Quebec unless entries are accepted and final product is available in French. (Thanks to Kevin Killiany)

Q. What happened in Stargazer: Oblivion on pages 72, 74, 195, and 197?
A. The first printing has an error that means some text is omitted on these pages. The full text can be found on the SimonSays site. Alternatively, you could buy the eBook or do as I did, and keep your eyes peeled for the second printing, and give up after a year of not finding it. Margaret Clark, editor of Stargazer, says: "Look at the copyright page, you know that page you blow by it's got the Paramount mountian and Gertude (the Pocket logo has a name, like who wouldn't?) the 1 should be missing and the first number should be a 2. This is the second printing the printing errors were corrected on this edition."

Q. I just read David R. George III's wonderful Serpents Among the Ruins and wanted to know whether the oft-referenced "Iron Mike" Paris has been in any ST novels, and what his relation to Tom Paris is.
A. It is wonderful, isn't it? Anyway, "Iron Mike" Paris was referenced in the novel Stargazer: Gauntlet. He is the father of Stargazer's Cole Paris and Voyager's Owen Paris, who is of course the father of Tom.

Q. What's a good source of information on Star Trek novels?
A. Well, TrekBBS's TrekLit forum of course, but if you didn't know that, you wouldn't be here, would you? Also, the Star Trek Books Board at psiphi.org has some authors/editors who post there. Other key TrekLit links:

Steve Roby's The Complete Starfleet Library: http://www.well.com/user/sjroby/lcars/index.html
David Henderson's Star Trek Booklist: http://www.psiphi.org/cgi/upc-db/booklist.html
Psi Phi Book Database - Upcoming Books List: http://www.psiphi.org/cgi/upc-db/upcoming.html
Psi Phi Book Database - 2004 Schedule: http://www.psiphi.org/cgi/upc-db/schedule-2004.html
The Star Trek Novel Rankings: http://novelranks.analma.com/
Marco Palmieri's (Editor, Pocket Books) Q&A: http://www.simonsays.com/subs/qaap.cfm?areaid=44&userid=7
The Star Trek Comics Checklist: http://homepage.mac.com/mmtz/stcomix/
Psi Phi Awards for Star Trek Books: http://www.users.muohio.edu/mollmasc/psiphiold.htm


QUESTIONS TO NEVER ASK

Q. Which Star Trek books are canon?
A. Short answer: none. Long answer: read Steve Roby's "Every Fan's Canon Primer," which will not only answer your question in detail, but humorously ridicule you for asking it. http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/showflat.php?Board=UBB17&Number=1702839#Post1702839

Q. Why is this month's book late?
A. The books come out during a rough four-week period and have no set street date, unlike the higher profile Harry Potter and Star Wars. Hence, your only assurance is that mass market paperback will be out by the middle of the publication month, and other books (trade paperback/hardcover) by the end of it, since they are on a different production schedule thingy.

Q. I have this extraordinary idea I want one of the writers to use in their next novel! Can I talk about the plot of my fan fiction/SNW story here? Would one of the writers here take a look at my story and tell me how good it is?
A. Theoretically, you could post your ideas or ask the writers to look at your story but you shouldn't. The world's an evil place, and people nowadays sue at the drop of a hat. To avoid legal difficulties, editors and writers refrain from reading fan-written stories. If you post story ideas, the chance is that Marco has already thought about it before. Speculation is fine, but please don't post ideas, plots or entire stories. (Thanks to Michael Schuster)

Q. If Terri Osborne cuts off Keith DeCandido's hair, will he lose his amazing power to write so many books?
A.

 

Re: Books FAQ update

I also don't like Star Trek Star Charts. It may look really cool because of the glossy, colouful paper but the maps are all wrong. Federation space and general explored space is way too small. It's as if Starfleet has been doing hardly any exploring for the past 200 years. Antares, Rigel and Mintaka are show to be on the edge of explored space, far beyond the boundaries of Federation space even though those areas were well explored and even had Federation outposts. If the Cardassian Union is really so close to Earth, then there should be Cardassians in TOS and in ENT. It's like all the maps have been compacted so they take up less pages.
Also, the planetary info is terribly uncreative and littered with mistakes. Are we supposed accept that the capital of Andoria is Andor and that the capital of Romulus is Romulus?

If new nonfiction books ever come out I hope they'll be better than this.

 

Re: Books FAQ update

You have to realize that the geographic information we've been given in Trek is wildly inconsistent. Stars have been chosen based on their familiarity rather than their positions -- and indeed, our knowledge of the actual distances to certain stars has changed considerably since the '60s as better parallax data has been accumulated. Mandel's "small Federation model," based in part on Christian Ruehl's similar model at his ST Cartography site, is in their view the best compromise between the conflicting threads of evidence.

 

Re: Books FAQ update

Just because space is really really big doesn't mean explored space has to be really really small. I know throughout the series it's been mentioned several times that only a tiny percentage of the galaxy has been explored. However this doesn't hold up when you consider how much space the original Enterprise explored, how much space the Enterprise-D explored and the fact that Starfleet has hundreds of starships. The flaw in Star Charts becomes apparent when you look at the "United Federation of Planets II" page. It has several Federation planets positioned almost 1000 lightyears from the rest of Federation space. I know that there are two Rigels but even the "real" Rigel was supposed to have a Federation outpost on Rigel XII. So was Mintaka, which is actually positioned beyond the edge of explored space. The Cardassian Union is only a few hundred lightyears from Earth, while the Sheliak homeworld is about a thousand lightyears away. Shouldn't it be the other way around as the Sheliak were encountered long before the Cardassians? The Malcor system is positioned only a few hundred lightyears from Earth, whereas it was explicitly stated in the episode to be 2000 lightyears away. I know there's a lot known about real stars now, but why did Mandel have to match up Star Trek's stars with real stars that are clearly the wrong distance away?
I don't remember any episode where the Federation was said to be this small. In fact there's plenty of evidence to the contrary: the Federation being spread out across 8000 lightears, Cestus III being many weeks away from Bajor at maximum warp.
As for the capitals, why didn't Mandel just write "Unknown" if he was worried about being contradicted.
This is just the tip of the iceberg; there's a lot more that's wrong with Star Charts.

 

Re: Books FAQ update

But the point is, it's rather strange to think of a volume several hundred light-years in diameter as "really really small." The number is relatively small, but that's because a light-year is such an astonishingly huge distance. Frankly it's rather spoiled to think of hundreds of light-years as a small distance, and shows a failure to appreciate the true immensity of the universe. Even our solar system alone is huger than we can even grasp. Just the other day I found out that the asteroids in our system's asteroid belt average six million kilometers between any two adjacent ones, even though there are a hundred thousand of them. A far cry from the cluttered asteroid fields we see in SFTV and movies. Even the most cluttered part of our solar system is emptier than the human mind can comprehend. And that's just peanuts to interstellar space. "Small" is not a word that meaningfully applies to any interstellar journey, even from Earth to Alpha Centauri.

To get more specific: The blue circle on the foldout map in Star Charts has a radius of 250 ly -- a sphere of that volume centered on Earth would contain over 225,000 stars! It would take centuries to explore them all.

See above. Even a tiny fraction of the galaxy is a huge amount of space, because the galaxy is stunningly, devastatingly, insanely enormous. And even hundreds of starships could barely make a dent in exploring a galaxy of three hundred billion stars. Let's say each of 500 starships surveys one new system per month -- that's 6000 systems per year. It'd take 40 years just to do preliminary surveys of all the stars in that blue circle, and that's assuming there aren't any starships spending their time doing more extensive surveys, colonization, relief missions, diplomacy, combat or saving the universe. Factor all that in and it takes lifetimes to really get to know just that "small" portion of our galaxy. Now, let's move the sphere's radius out to just 500 ly -- that'd contain nearly 2 million stars. Doing just a cursory survey (and nothing more) of every one of those stars would take over 300 years. Even a "paltry" 500 light-years is a staggeringly vast amount of space.

The real distance is the "wrong" distance???? Rigel, Sheliak and Malcor are the real names of those stars. Mandel didn't pick them at random; he was stuck with what the show's writers established. For something like Andoria or Betazed, which have never been officially identified with real stars, he was able to choose reasonable locations for them; but for a real star name like Mintaka or Sheliak or Canopus, he was stuck with the actual positions. The problem is that SFTV writers just pick familiar names, as I said. And that means the brightest stars in the sky, regardless of how far away they are.

So that's why Mandel et al. went with the "large Federation" theory in the old ST Maps. But the problem is that modern Trek has given us too much information that contradicts that. DS9 pretty much established that the station was less than 100 light-years from Earth, and both TNG and DS9 showed starships crossing the width of the Federation, or between Earth and the border, in mere days. And that's alongside a semi-official warp chart which states that even Warp 8 is only 20 light-years a week. Which is far too slow even for Mandel's small Federation, by the way.

So don't blame Mandel for the inconsistencies of the shows themselves. He made the best compromise he could. The distance discrepancies can be dealt with by assuming there are regions where warp travel is faster than usual due to the different concentrations of mass and energy affecting the shape of spacetime. This has been a standard assumption in technical fandom for decades and is more or less explicitly spelled out in the TNG Tech Manual (although this latter fact is overlooked with surprising frequency).

Here... I think you need to look over the discussions on the following pages:

http://www.stdimension.org/int/Cartography/federation.htm

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies2.htm#speed

 

One suggestion for the next update:
Since the whole "season 8 / 9" disussion for the series formerly known as Relaunch surfaces frequently, maybe you could put Marco Palmieri's stand on the issue into the next version of the FAQ.

 

One other web resource for Star Trek books I'd like to add to this list...

The Star Trek LCARS Book & Episode Database

It currently has detailed information and cover scans on over 1,150 Star Trek books...

Enjoy,

John

 

Copied from an earlier post by KRAD.

2375
"Eleven Hours Out" by Dave Galanter (Tales of the Dominion War)
TNG: Gemworld Books 1-2 by John Vornholt
TNG: Double Helix: Double or Nothing by Peter David

2376
TNG: Diplomatic Implausibility by Keith R.A. DeCandido
TNG: Maximum Warp Books 1-2 by Dave Galanter & Greg Brodeur
SCE: The Belly of the Beast by Dean Wesley Smith
DS9: Avatar Books 1-2 by S.D. Perry
TNG: Doors into Chaos by Robert Greenberger
TNG: "The Other Side" by Robert Greenberger (What Lay Beyond)
The Brave and the Bold Book 2: TNG: "The Final Artifact" by Keith R.A. DeCandido
NF: Stone and Anvil by Peter David

2377
TNG: Genesis Wave Books 1-3 by John Vornholt
TNG: Genesis Force by John Vornholt
TNG: A Hard Rain by Dean Wesley Smith

2378
VOY: Homecoming by Christie Golden
VOY: The Farther Shore by Christie Golden
TNG: A Time to be Born by John Vornholt
TNG: A Time to Die by John Vornholt
TNG: A Time to Sow by Dayton Ward & Kevin Dilmore

2379
TNG: A Time to Harvest by Dayton Ward & Kevin Dilmore
TNG: A Time to Love by Robert Greenberger
TNG: A Time to Hate by Robert Greenberger
TNG: A Time to Kill by David Mack
TNG: A Time to Heal by David Mack
TNG: A Time for War, a Time for Peace by Keith R.A. DeCandido
Star Trek Nemesis
TNG: Death in Winter by Michael Jan Friedman (forthcoming)
Titan: Taking Wing by Andy Mangels & Michael A. Martin (forthcoming)

 

Uhm, that's a wholly incomplete timeline, posted in response to a very specific question. Posting it out of context like this is a big confusing.....

 

Sorry if this caused any confusion.

It's too late for me to edit it.

Personally, I find it extremely helpful. While not wholly complete it still seems to convey when a lot of the "cuurrent" or "new" stories are set in relation to each other.

 

This was recently quoted on this board:

The phrase "though John Ordover said he tentatively had an idea in the works" should be eliminated, since John is now the editor-in-chief of Phobos Books and is unlikely to be proposing any editorial projects for Star Trek any time soon.

 

Yeah, Steve! How could you leave that there so that, um, whoever, would blithely repost it?! I mean, it's not like that person looked right at the words, thought about deleting them, and didn't. That would be crazy!

 

Whats the most suceessful book series?

I seem to remember it was tng

but is that still true? how about the others

just wondering thats all

 

Last time the data was provided by John Ordover, the relative ranking of the average sales per book went NF, TNG, TOS, VGR, DS9 I believe.

But that was a long time ago. Late 1990's, probably.

 

Ah, man. I guess this means no third edition of the Okuda's STAR TREK CHRONOLOGY (updated to include FIRST CONTACT, INSURRECTION, NEMESIS, all of ENTERPRISE, and the rest of DS9 and VOYAGER) and no THE ENTERPRISE COMPANION?

CHRONOLOGY is my all-time favorite non-fiction STAR TREK book, and the last edition was in 1996.

 

Actually there is a third edition that goes up to the end of DS9, up to the end of the fifth season of VOY, and has FC and INS. However, the information isn't integrated into the rest of the encyclopedia, like the second edition did, rather 128 pages are added to the end of the second edition's version. I believe there's also a few new appendices, but I'm not sure.

I do admit it does suck that there won't be an ENT companion (if that's true, Margaret can correct me if I'm arong), even though I wouldn't buy it.

 

It's true that there was a third edition of the Encyclopedia, but the Chronology hasn't been updated since its second edition in 1996. It only covers information through the fourth season of DS9 and the second season of Voyager.

Cheers,
Geoff

 

Oh, wow, I'm blind as a bat. I could've sworn his post said encyclopedia, not chronology.