How many years between TMP and TWOK?

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Lek, May 24, 2007.

  1. Lek

    Lek Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Location:
    So why call an eliminator?!
    I can't seem to find the thread but it was stated that 15 years had gone by between TMP stardate 74xx and TWOK 8130.4...

    However, after watching TWOK, the Genesis tape was "made a year before TWOK events at star date 7130 which is pre-vger.
     
  2. Candlelight

    Candlelight Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2000
    Location:
    New Zealand
    It's generally considered to be about 12 years - TMP takes place in 2270 or 2271, and TWOK in 2282.
     
  3. A beaker full of death

    A beaker full of death Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002

    Ok. Here we go:

    THERE WAS NO SYSTEM TO THE STARDATES.

    "Why," you might ask.

    So that people didn't get caught up in irrelevant bullshit like this.
     
  4. cardinal biggles

    cardinal biggles ZARDU HASSELFRAU Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2001
    Location:
    potrzebie
    And lo, on the eighth day, the Lord (Garth) created the TrekBBS Star Trek Movies FAQ, and it was good.

    And beaker is right about the stardates. There wasn't any conscious attempt to make them ordered, sequential "dates" until TNG, a system which was maintained during DS9, VOY, and the TNG movies.
     
  5. Red Ranger

    Red Ranger Admiral In Memoriam

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Location:
    New York City, the greatest city in the world!
    People,

    Frankly, I'm glad that the modern-era stardates make some sense. The old way was just silly. I know some posters here consider anything TOS inviolable, and anything from TNG onward worthy of scorn. In all honesty, that's even sillier than quibbling about stardates. (End of mini-rant).

    I always assumed there had to have been a longer "in-universe" span of years for the characters, esp. Chekov, to have advanced in rank. It also made sense since about 14 years had passed since the end of TOS and the beginning of TWOK.

    But is there any actual, so-called "canon" evidence that about 12 years had passed? (Yeah, I said, "canon," sue me!)

    Red Ranger
     
  6. InklingStar

    InklingStar Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2003
    All that is really "canon" is that 15 years span Space Seed and TWoK.
     
  7. Nebusj

    Nebusj Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    15 years from ``Space Seed'' to The Wrath of Khan; and we know that The Motion Picture is no less than two and a half years away from the end of the Five-Year Mission. If we assume that it's this minimum time, and further that ``Space Seed'' was in the middle of the Five-Year Mission (not explicitly stated, but it gives us a range), then that gives five years from ``Space Seed'' to The Motion Picture and thus ten years between that and The Wrath of Khan.

    Which incidentally neatly suggests that if stardates in that era rolled over after reaching 9,999.99 and that one calendar year earth-style is about 1000 stardates then ... The Wrath of Khan had to be at least ten years after The Motion Picture. Given the wiggle room in just when ``Space Seed'' happened, this is all stunningly consistent for a system designed to be obscure on this point.
     
  8. TGTheodore

    TGTheodore Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2003
    Location:
    TGTheodore
    Although Nicholas Meyer tried to make 1000 units=1 solar year in TWOK. But subsequent films and TV shows paid no attention.

    Too bad. It made the most sense.

    A metric solar year.

    So don't try making any sense of them. You'll only get a headache and make thousands of posters' eyes roll to heaven.

    --Ted
     
  9. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    The thing is, most stardates do jibe with the Meyer/TNG system nicely enough. The glaring exception (besides TAS) is the progression of TOS movies, the biggest problem indeed being the TMP/TWoK comparison.

    However, we know that the TNG system includes a "decade digit", and we further know that the Trek saga certainly spans decades even in the TOS era. If we assume that our heroes simply drop the decade digit from TOS era stardates (like we might say "back in seventy-five" rather than "back in nineteen-seventy-five"), we can assign different, consecutive decade digits to TMP and TWoK. Voilá, a dozen-year difference, just as required!

    It's not perfect for ST6 any more. But it's damn near perfect for every other stardate ever uttered in the entirety of Star Trek (again, TAS notwithstanding). Nyah nyah, Roddenberry and your failed attempt at obfuscation! :p

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  10. Lek

    Lek Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Location:
    So why call an eliminator?!
    Ok. Here we go:

    THERE WAS NO SYSTEM TO THE STARDATES.

    "Why," you might ask.

    So that people didn't get caught up in irrelevant bullshit like this.

    [/QUOTE]

    You sound like Brannon Braga! But sadly, I'll have to accept this answer.
     
  11. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    sounds about what I've heard as well.
     
  12. Oso Blanco

    Oso Blanco Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2001
    Location:
    Berlin, Germany
    I think that the first two digits of the TOS movie stardates give us a hint onto how much time had passed by:

    TMP: 7412.6
    TWOK: 8130.4
    TSFS: 8210.3
    TVH: 8390.0
    TFF: 8454.1
    TUC: 9521.6

    That would set TMP into 2274 and TWOK into 2281, which would pretty much fit the "15 years" statement from TWOK. TUC in 2295 would work as well.

    The problems with my theory is that TSFS, TVH and TFF are direct follow ups to TWOK, and the events from TWOK through TFF can't possibly stretch out over four years.

    But as a rule, I'd take the first two digits as the year the movie took place.
     
  13. cardinal biggles

    cardinal biggles ZARDU HASSELFRAU Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2001
    Location:
    potrzebie
    ^There's also the fact that "Q2" nailed down the end of the Five Year Mission as being 2270, which means TMP could have happened anywhere from the middle of 2272 to the middle of 2273.

    Then there's also Kirk's bottle of Romulan Ale, which has a vintage of 2283. Unless the Romulans keep a calendar with its own separate count of years (like the Hebrew calendar), that means TWOK is closer to 2284 or 85.
     
  14. Tomalak

    Tomalak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    Manchester
    Meh, Voyager. Never happened.

    On the Romulan ale reference, I always thought it implied a later dating than Okuda generally gave. Bones says it takes a while to ferment". Two years is nothing compared with your average bottle of whisky or a decent wine. I suppose Bones could be using his famous wit though.
     
  15. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    This beverage is called ale, though... To let it ferment for any length of time, let alone years, must result in stuff of somewhat alien potency!

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  16. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    No, he sounds like Gene Roddenberry. GR and his boss Herb Solow intentionally avoided putting any clear date references into TOS because they didn't want to get locked down. The whole point of the stardate system was its complete lack of meaningful information.
     
  17. Jon1701

    Jon1701 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2005
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    In Stephen E. Whitfield's "making of Star Trek" book (of which I have an exceedingly old copy - 74 I think!), Gene Roddenberry mentions the aforementioned desire to keep the stardates vague. He also felt the date would be different in different parts of the universe at the same time. It might be Stardate 1701.1 on Earth and 1234.5 on Vulcan or something like that. Kind of like the time difference between the different parts of the world we have now. Thats why the Star Dates jumped around in TOS.

    I always liked that explanation.
     
  18. A beaker full of death

    A beaker full of death Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    ^ It fits in with the whole "time warp" thing. It actually plays out that way in subtle references in TOS. It was one of the few harder sci fi elements in Trek.
     
  19. Zeppster

    Zeppster Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I think jon1701's explanation is the best. That and the whole Gene didn't want anyone to know the year TOS took place although there were episodes that said 200, 400, and 700(or was it 800 for Squire of Gothis) years. It was always confusing. While TOS was going on Gene didn't know what year the show took place. It wasn't till after the show was canceled that 23rd century was finalized and it wasn't till TWOK when it said "somewhere in the 23rd century" or something like that.
     
  20. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    I believe the card used in TWOK was "In the 23rd Century"