THIS!!!!
And in much the same way as The New 52 eliminated the old DC Comics continuity for a new one, or the Marvel NOW! set up does the same for Marvel Comics.
Do You Believe the Official Chronology?
- Thread starter ZapBrannigan
- Start date
THIS!!!!
And in much the same way as The New 52 eliminated the old DC Comics continuity for a new one, or the Marvel NOW! set up does the same for Marvel Comics.
Yes...that's the updated one with the color pictures that I referred to in my post. If memory serves it doesn't cover the entirety of either DS9 or VOY, and certainly doesn't cover ENT.
Here is just another anecdote on the stardate issue I feel worthwhile mentioning.
When German television bought 40 episodes of TOS and dubbed these into German, the introduction narrator said "In the year 2200" and the log entries where "Computer Log # 1 of the Starship Enterprise". Whether this was artistic license or the consideration of something previously unheard of, I don't know.
However, if we were to believe that stardate entries had been made on different logs this would yield a rather remarkable result:
stardate (0)3141.9 "Space Seed"
stardate (1)8130.3 "The Wrath of Khan"
If we were to assume that by TMP one solar year equals 1,000 stardate digits, the elapsed time between "Space Seed" and TWOK would amount to 14,988.4 stardate digits.
I'd say 14.99 years is definitely close to the 15 years mentioned by Kirk and Khan in TWOK.
Bob
When German television bought 40 episodes of TOS and dubbed these into German, the introduction narrator said "In the year 2200" and the log entries where "Computer Log # 1 of the Starship Enterprise". Whether this was artistic license or the consideration of something previously unheard of, I don't know.
However, if we were to believe that stardate entries had been made on different logs this would yield a rather remarkable result:
stardate (0)3141.9 "Space Seed"
stardate (1)8130.3 "The Wrath of Khan"
If we were to assume that by TMP one solar year equals 1,000 stardate digits, the elapsed time between "Space Seed" and TWOK would amount to 14,988.4 stardate digits.
I'd say 14.99 years is definitely close to the 15 years mentioned by Kirk and Khan in TWOK.
Bob
Lenny Nurdbol
Lieutenant Commander
?
Timo Saloniemi
Call Captain Janeway! There's a bug that needs squishing - looks like one of Voyager's landing pads should do the trick.
I actually would like to see that updated.
I'd make it multi-volume. I don't hate J.J.'s vision, but having an encyclopedia of different timelines reminds me of the bit where Spock talks about the timeline trying to re-assert itself.
One timeline might be Dixons, Aridas' Okuda's Timos, etc.
And all line up in TOS.
Here, you might take cues from Doctor Who where Oswin keeps cropping up. Now we have multiple universes, where things synch up at crtain times.
This way, if someone has another attempt--you add another volume.
I'd love to see the morphing "Superwarp" ships of Sternbach fleshed out.
If they could please include Masao Okazaki's timeline as well (The Starfleet Museum), it is excellent. I especially like his take on the Romulan War, vastly superior to the novel-verse version.
If they could please include Masao Okazaki's timeline as well (The Starfleet Museum), it is excellent. I especially like his take on the Romulan War, vastly superior to the novel-verse version.
Thanks for the kind words, T'Girl.
After getting the first black and white edition of the Star Trek Chronology back in 1993 I started designing ships for time periods not established on screen. As long as I played in the wide lacunae between on-screen events and references, I was free to make up a timeline that I felt made sense from a technological point of view. I figured that warp flight could be achieved in various ways and was not tied to the development of the matter/antimatter reactor. A big part of the fun of historical fiction is playing with the differences between the present and the past, not just name-checking similarities. In contrast, those poor bastards having to write in a post-Enterprise/post-Voyager environment are locked into a pre-TOS "past" that is technologically very similar to the "present." That's like giving guns and cars to hobbits. What fun is that?
Last edited:
While I generally find the book well researched and a good read, sadly the TOS era timeline seems a but wrong to me.
Obviously the Okudas could not forsee the five year mission being said to end in 2270, but aside from that some dates seem just odd.
Of note to me are the placing of "Where no man has gone before" which seemed a little late in the day ( indeed until the remastered version there was no real evidence it was part of the five year mission, with the opening narration being conspicuously absent).
The movie dating always seemed odd as well, personally I would say that TWOK occured in 2283 on Kirks 50th birthday ( which seems thematically consistent, and that his comment about the date of the Romulan ale was sarcastic). Regardless even given the 2285 date, the dating of TVH and TFF seem odd being 2286 and 2287 respectively.
According to the timeline, Kirks birthday is in March, therefore TWOK is in march, with TSFS being shortly after. dialogue in TVH places it three months after the previous movie - so still 2285 and following from that TFF is set shortly after the end of TVH so again, 2285 ( you could make a case for 2286 ) but there is no way it could be 2287 as far as I can see.
would love an updated version though, and agree having the Abramverse in a chapter at the end would seem to fit ( though I am dubious of claims there were no changes in time prior to 2233, and personally believe Enterprise reset the timeline somewhat).
Obviously the Okudas could not forsee the five year mission being said to end in 2270, but aside from that some dates seem just odd.
Of note to me are the placing of "Where no man has gone before" which seemed a little late in the day ( indeed until the remastered version there was no real evidence it was part of the five year mission, with the opening narration being conspicuously absent).
The movie dating always seemed odd as well, personally I would say that TWOK occured in 2283 on Kirks 50th birthday ( which seems thematically consistent, and that his comment about the date of the Romulan ale was sarcastic). Regardless even given the 2285 date, the dating of TVH and TFF seem odd being 2286 and 2287 respectively.
According to the timeline, Kirks birthday is in March, therefore TWOK is in march, with TSFS being shortly after. dialogue in TVH places it three months after the previous movie - so still 2285 and following from that TFF is set shortly after the end of TVH so again, 2285 ( you could make a case for 2286 ) but there is no way it could be 2287 as far as I can see.
would love an updated version though, and agree having the Abramverse in a chapter at the end would seem to fit ( though I am dubious of claims there were no changes in time prior to 2233, and personally believe Enterprise reset the timeline somewhat).
Hello everyone,
I'd like to add to the requests for an updated edition of the Okudas' "Star Trek Chronology". In particular, I'd be really interested to see how they tackle the later parts of "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" and "Star Trek: Voyager". There are a lot of internal continuity references in those shows, and it would be interesting to know if there's any "inside dope" from the production offices as to how that was worked out, and whether it was done "ad hoc" based on the production schedule, or worked out "in universe"? I'd also be interested to see how the movies are dealt with, since 2271 is now very obviously too early for Star Trek I, and I agree with sariel2005, Star Trek II to V all happen within one year based on the internal references, although I think that 2285 seems to be the least unlikely option for the year in question, although the whole thing is very much a matter of opinion, not facts.
On the topic of contentious views, I'd like to see the animated series included this time, possibly with some "screencaps" faked up to make the stories blend in with the "live action" material.
Including absolutely everything might be more than a bit overwhelming: the "Doctor Who" unofficial chronology "Ahistory" is incredibly comprehensive, and the most recent edition is 700+ big pages with fairly small print. I seriously doubt that I'll have the stamina to read the next edition from cover to cover, and the cost might put me off altogether, something that a publisher would worry about. The current arrangement of a separate but compatible novels chronology (the most recent one was part of "Star Trek: Voyages of Imagination") works alright for me, but that doesn't really address the "yes it's officially part of the timeline" games and tie-in publications for the new films. Would they be included in the "alternate timeline"?
Unfortunately, I doubt it'll happen, although a revised edition of the closest thing to an "official" chronology seems to me a good way of getting something of interest to "Star Trek" fans in general, not just one particular sub-group (unless it's the "chronologically-minded" sub-group, of course).
Although it's incomplete, the last edition is still worth picking up if you don't have it. It's a nice reference book just as it is, and since it's officially licensed and produced by authors who worked in the "Star Trek" production offices, the dates it gives are as official as any are ever likely to be. I'm fairly sure the "Star Trek Chronology" was used to date events in the later "Star Trek" shows, and it certainly is the framework for the chronology of the Pocket Books novels produced after it was published. Having had a go at a timeline myself, it's very difficult to move very far from this work without contradicting dates established in the shows themselves.
Finally, there is a kind of "supplement" to the "Star Trek Chronology". The "Starship Creator" computer game (also by Mike Okuda) includes an extensive set of "service records" for a lot of major and minor characters, giving dates of birth and suchlike. I think the last edition of the James Dixon "Fandom" chronology incorporated a lot of that information.
Best wishes,
Timon
I'd like to add to the requests for an updated edition of the Okudas' "Star Trek Chronology". In particular, I'd be really interested to see how they tackle the later parts of "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" and "Star Trek: Voyager". There are a lot of internal continuity references in those shows, and it would be interesting to know if there's any "inside dope" from the production offices as to how that was worked out, and whether it was done "ad hoc" based on the production schedule, or worked out "in universe"? I'd also be interested to see how the movies are dealt with, since 2271 is now very obviously too early for Star Trek I, and I agree with sariel2005, Star Trek II to V all happen within one year based on the internal references, although I think that 2285 seems to be the least unlikely option for the year in question, although the whole thing is very much a matter of opinion, not facts.
On the topic of contentious views, I'd like to see the animated series included this time, possibly with some "screencaps" faked up to make the stories blend in with the "live action" material.
Including absolutely everything might be more than a bit overwhelming: the "Doctor Who" unofficial chronology "Ahistory" is incredibly comprehensive, and the most recent edition is 700+ big pages with fairly small print. I seriously doubt that I'll have the stamina to read the next edition from cover to cover, and the cost might put me off altogether, something that a publisher would worry about. The current arrangement of a separate but compatible novels chronology (the most recent one was part of "Star Trek: Voyages of Imagination") works alright for me, but that doesn't really address the "yes it's officially part of the timeline" games and tie-in publications for the new films. Would they be included in the "alternate timeline"?
Unfortunately, I doubt it'll happen, although a revised edition of the closest thing to an "official" chronology seems to me a good way of getting something of interest to "Star Trek" fans in general, not just one particular sub-group (unless it's the "chronologically-minded" sub-group, of course).
Although it's incomplete, the last edition is still worth picking up if you don't have it. It's a nice reference book just as it is, and since it's officially licensed and produced by authors who worked in the "Star Trek" production offices, the dates it gives are as official as any are ever likely to be. I'm fairly sure the "Star Trek Chronology" was used to date events in the later "Star Trek" shows, and it certainly is the framework for the chronology of the Pocket Books novels produced after it was published. Having had a go at a timeline myself, it's very difficult to move very far from this work without contradicting dates established in the shows themselves.
Finally, there is a kind of "supplement" to the "Star Trek Chronology". The "Starship Creator" computer game (also by Mike Okuda) includes an extensive set of "service records" for a lot of major and minor characters, giving dates of birth and suchlike. I think the last edition of the James Dixon "Fandom" chronology incorporated a lot of that information.
Best wishes,
Timon
I agree that it would make more sense for TWOK to be placed in March 2283, assuming Kirk was born in March 2233. TSFS follows in April/May (not more than a few weeks later), TVH in July/August (3 Months later) and TFF a few months after that, at most. However, I think the Okudas shuffled the dates to allow for the claim that the UFP/Klingons/Romulans founded the Nimbus III colony jointly 20 years before. Since there had been no contact between UFP and Romulus between the Earth-Romulan War and Balance of Terror, this must have happened after Balance of Terror. Personally, I think there are better ways to reconcile things, but that is what they did.
totally agree looking at the dating for TFF the logical reason is that it has to occur after not only "Balance of Terror" but " Errand of Mercy" also ( which they set in 2267) That said I think there is an over emphasis on dialogue being exact as opposed to vague. If Spock says something, I will take it as accurate, others... not so much. either way the TFF dating simply jars.
As an aside, I would further defend the 2283 dating of TWOK as saying that Kirk met Antonia while based on Earth and his return to Starfleet, would be him choosing NOT to retire just after TVH ( admittedly this assumes some sort of break between the saving of Earth and the hearing, though its hard to imagine under the circumstances the hearing was top priority).
I guess if we take 2267 as the baseline for the creation of Nimbus III then based on 2283 we are looking at 2284 for TFF ( at best) and it would have been 16-17 years it was set up, so Caitlin's comments are vague but IMPO not irreconcilable.
As a further commentary, looking at the Okuda timeline, I find the idea of "gallileo seven" as the first story of 2267 unlikely as well, given " Charlie X" is set around Thanksgiving and "Dagger of the mind " is set after christmas ( or after the christmas party anyway!) they seem to cram a bit too much into the post christmas period.
...Indeed, once again I'd defend the idea that a thousand stardates amount to one year even in TOS, running from the beginning of the Desilu season to the next beginning (rather than from New Year to New Year). That way, both "Charlie X" and "Dagger" have stardates appropriate for winter.
Regarding Nimbus III, the agreement to found Nimbus III might have been made well in advance of "Balance of Terror"; it's just the sort of shady affair reeking of deniability that the three governments would be interested in before going public with the information that they are on speaking terms. If the governments can't talk directly, why, let's found this secret meeting place, and camouflage it as a neutral colony where no Klingons, humans or Romulans are in evidence - save for the trio of diplomats that secretly meets in the back room of a bar...
Timo Saloniemi
Regarding Nimbus III, the agreement to found Nimbus III might have been made well in advance of "Balance of Terror"; it's just the sort of shady affair reeking of deniability that the three governments would be interested in before going public with the information that they are on speaking terms. If the governments can't talk directly, why, let's found this secret meeting place, and camouflage it as a neutral colony where no Klingons, humans or Romulans are in evidence - save for the trio of diplomats that secretly meets in the back room of a bar...
Timo Saloniemi
To keep TOS canon, we have to change 20th century history as I see it. (the voyage back to the past with the whaleprobe was a history caused by Voyager era
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Henry_Starling
This to me allowed microchips to come on line faster
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2284/1
To me, the microchip was something that should have been invented on the Moon--in that both the USA and the USSR built larger and larger LVs (UR-500, DY-500 etc)
This allowed spaceflight to advance.
The microchip came only after spaceflight was well advanced by heavy lift
In ENTERPRISE, some other boost came by to make up time lost due to microchips driving down the size of LVs and thus delaying a more 1950-ish conquest of space that should have been TOS 20th century.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Henry_Starling
This to me allowed microchips to come on line faster
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2284/1
To me, the microchip was something that should have been invented on the Moon--in that both the USA and the USSR built larger and larger LVs (UR-500, DY-500 etc)
This allowed spaceflight to advance.
The microchip came only after spaceflight was well advanced by heavy lift
In ENTERPRISE, some other boost came by to make up time lost due to microchips driving down the size of LVs and thus delaying a more 1950-ish conquest of space that should have been TOS 20th century.
Well, clearly the 20th Century we lived in and the one that is in Star Trek's past are not the same, and never really have been.
The first obvious difference being that in our timeline Star Trek is just a TV show, while it is the reality happening in the 23rd century in their timeline. This is why Kirk and Co. do not get mistaken for Shatner and Co. in STIV and mobbed by obsessive trekkies.
The Eugenics War of the 1990's did not hapen in our 20th century like it did in theirs, nor do we have any spacecraft as advanced as the one Khan escaped with in their 1990's.
The first obvious difference being that in our timeline Star Trek is just a TV show, while it is the reality happening in the 23rd century in their timeline. This is why Kirk and Co. do not get mistaken for Shatner and Co. in STIV and mobbed by obsessive trekkies.
The Eugenics War of the 1990's did not hapen in our 20th century like it did in theirs, nor do we have any spacecraft as advanced as the one Khan escaped with in their 1990's.
All true that TOS is not going to be our future and the Prime universe is not ours.
Star Trek was meant to be our future. Which is why, when its speculation about what the future will be is shown to be wrong, it should be ignored.
A foolish consistency ( or continuity
) is the hobgoblin of little minds.
Haven't you all read Greg's novels? The Eugenics Wars totally did happen.
I have and didn't like them. Too fan-wanky. To Reign In Hell rocked though.
Similar threads
