Star Trek Haynes Manual Discussion?

[F. King Daniel]

The Starfleet in Enterprise isn't the same Starfleet as the rest of Trek?

Only if the Federation that Archer founded was actually the United Federation of Beagle Enthusiasts

 

[Christopher]

The Starfleet in Enterprise isn't the same Starfleet as the rest of Trek?

It was Earth Starfleet. It was an antecedent of the Federation Starfleet, but not the same organization, any more than, say, the colonial militia of New York was the same organization as the United States Army.

 

[Captain Robert April]

The Starfleet in Enterprise isn't the same Starfleet as the rest of Trek?

I would think this was patently obvious from the first episode.

 

[Admiral_Young]

It was made very clear that the Starfleet in "Enterprise" was as mentioned an Earth Starfleet, precursor to the Federation Starfleet. Implying that when the Federation was founded it absorbed Starfleet and adopted it as it's defense and exploratory branch.

 

[Therin of Andor]

The Starfleet in Enterprise isn't the same Starfleet as the rest of Trek?

When GE Fabbri's "The Star Trek Fact Files" began incorporating episodes and tech from ENT, they added a new cardboard divider for "Earth Starfleet", since the material and dating for the founding of the UFP and Starfleet was already established as a much later date.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The Starfleet in Enterprise isn't the same Starfleet as the rest of Trek?

When GE Fabbri's "The Star Trek Fact Files" began incorporating episodes and tech from ENT, they added a new cardboard divider for "Earth Starfleet", since the material and dating for the founding of the UFP and Starfleet was already established as a much later date.

Was it established on TV/film or just in the manuals? I can see why the later Fact Files would have to fudge in order to fit the new issues in with the old, but unless it's canon surely the new info (i.e. Starfleet in 2151) takes precedence. TOS made many "Earth Command"-type references, too.

That said, ENT retconned and ignored all sorts, so I don't think it matters any more than Picard's comments about "disasterous" first contact with the Klingons, Worf's "there were no phasers in the 22nd century" and Spock's lecture on Romulan War-era technology and everyone's amazement at a cloaking device.

 

[Christopher]

^Well, it's obviously not the same Starfleet, because it's not serving the same government. United Earth is a different entity than the United Federation of Planets. Therefore, its space service is not the same organization. It may be a direct antecedent, but it is not the same entity.

There's also the fact that the UE Starfleet wasn't a military force, but only an exploratory body. When Enterprise was assigned to a military mission against the Xindi, it was a joint operation with the MACOs, who were military. But the Federation Starfleet is a combined military/scientific service.

 

[Hathaway Brown]

Actually even if you omit the NX-01 it still doesn't explain how the book lists the C as 4th and the D as 6th.

 

[Christopher]

Typos happen.

 

[craig keith]

Actually it does make sense, everyone seems to be forgetting the original enterprise lol

uss enterprise NCC 1701
uss enterprise NCC 1701-A
uss enterprise NCC 1701-B
uss enterprise NCC 1701-C
uss enterprise NCC 1701-D
uss enterprise NCC 1701-E

Which makes the EE-C the fourth ship to bear the name

 

[Christopher]

^But the point is, if the C is fourth, then the D would be fifth, not sixth. And if the D is sixth (with NX-01 being the first), then the C would have to be the fifth. So referring to the C as the fourth and the D as the sixth is contradictory, because they were consecutive.

 

[craig keith]

I havnt actually read this properly so does it actually make this error ..... I was warey of it anywaz as it wasnt made by anyone from Pocket.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Was it established on TV/film or just in the manuals?

IIRC, the date of the formation of Starfleet (and Starfleet Academy) was on the wall logo in TNG's "The First Duty". Manuals then used this date as canonical.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I was warey of it anywaz as it wasnt made by anyone from Pocket.

Pocket Books sub-licensed out the Haynes Manual because they no longer find manuals and calendars financially viable, but they still have editorial input, as does CBS Consumer Products.

Similarly, Pocket gets Andrew & McMeel to do the annual calendars.

 

[Hathaway Brown]

Actually it does make sense, everyone seems to be forgetting the original enterprise lol

uss enterprise NCC 1701
uss enterprise NCC 1701-A
uss enterprise NCC 1701-B
uss enterprise NCC 1701-C
uss enterprise NCC 1701-D
uss enterprise NCC 1701-E

Which makes the EE-C the fourth ship to bear the name

You're right. Re-reading the bio, the C is called the 4th UFP ship (so from the 1701) and the D is the 6th vessel (which the counts from the NX01).
It just looked like such a rudimentary error to go from one chapter to another and skipping the "fifth".

 

[Captain Robert April]

The Starfleet in Enterprise isn't the same Starfleet as the rest of Trek?

When GE Fabbri's "The Star Trek Fact Files" began incorporating episodes and tech from ENT, they added a new cardboard divider for "Earth Starfleet", since the material and dating for the founding of the UFP and Starfleet was already established as a much later date.

Was it established on TV/film or just in the manuals? I can see why the later Fact Files would have to fudge in order to fit the new issues in with the old, but unless it's canon surely the new info (i.e. Starfleet in 2151) takes precedence. TOS made many "Earth Command"-type references, too.

That said, ENT retconned and ignored all sorts, so I don't think it matters any more than Picard's comments about "disasterous" first contact with the Klingons, Worf's "there were no phasers in the 22nd century" and Spock's lecture on Romulan War-era technology and everyone's amazement at a cloaking device.

This rather shocking ignorance of some pretty basic facts goes a long ways towards explaining some of your previous statements...

 

[F. King Daniel]

^How so? Or do you just mean the "facts" as seen by you? Welcome to the revisionist world of Star Trek, where we made first contact with the Borg at least twice, and where the Q have never had a baby despite the events of "True Q".

We know the Federation and Starfleet Academy were founded in 2161 (there are no academy references in Enterprise - Archer went to "flight school"). Conjecture from Okuda's timeline is just that - conjecture. It even comes with a disclaimer.

 

[craig keith]

^How so? Or do you just mean the "facts" as seen by you? Welcome to the revisionist world of Star Trek, where we made first contact with the Borg at least twice, and where the Q have never had a baby despite the events of "True Q".

We know the Federation and Starfleet Academy were founded in 2161 (there are no academy references in Enterprise - Archer went to "flight school"). Conjecture from Okuda's timeline is just that - conjecture. It even comes with a disclaimer.

It has been establised numorous times on the tv show that Enterprise nx01 is a Earth ship part of Earths stafleet. The federation wasnt even mentioned. And dont you think its an easy mistake to make for a nation to lose records of a species they encountered once in 150 years. Do you think our records from 150 years ago for every nation is complete?

 

[F. King Daniel]

The Federation is mentioned in "Shockwave", we see a flashforward to it's founding in "Azati Prime" and then a holoprogram of it in "These Are The Voyages". We also see the founding of it's precursor, the Coalition of Planets, in "Demons"/"Terra Prime"

Losing records between ENT and TNG would be halfway plausible if they hadn't done "These Are The Voyages" which is supposed to be an accurate portrayal of the NX-01's last mission, seen on the holodeck 200 years later (despite the total rewrite in The Good That Men Do, a Section 31 cover-up obviously wasn't the intent of the ENT writers)

Something similar happened between "The Immunity Syndrome" and "Loud as a Whisper", where walking computer Data claimed that nothing resembling a "hole in space" had ever been encountered before. All sorts of contrived excuses can be made for these gaffs and retcons, but it doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[Christopher]

Something similar happened between "The Immunity Syndrome" and "Loud as a Whisper", where walking computer Data claimed that nothing resembling a "hole in space" had ever been encountered before.

That was "Where Silence Has Lease." "Loud as a Whisper" was the one with Riva, the deaf mediator.

I suspect what happened was that Roddenberry later in life grew to regret some of the sillier episodes of TOS and wanted to retcon them out of continuity. He may have considered the space amoeba idea too absurd and insisted on the inclusion of that line to implicitly render "The Immunity Syndrome" apocryphal. But that's pure speculation on my part.