If Spock and Scotty are Captains.....

[Nebusj]

Is it such a stretch to assume that, while they had saved the Earth, our intrepid heroes wouldn't suffer some small career fallout from the litany of offenses they committed in TSFS? Surely its at least plausible that going so far off the reservation would at least have some temporary effects on these people's career advancement, regardless of the outcome? What CO of a starship would want Chekov or Sulu as an XO, given that they had just demonstrated a real ability to engage in a conspiracy, assault their fellow officers, ignore a direct order from a superior, steal an entire starship and then blow it up?

I'd certainly expect their careers to be stopped dead in their tracks, really. Saving the Earth is fantastic, certainly, but the Enterprise gang got really really really lucky that there was a planetary-crisis-level threat that arose exactly at the moment they were the people best-positioned to respond to it. The heroism deserves a reward, but, it's not like answering the Whalesong Probe was something that followed logically from their mutiny, assault, and theft and destruction of a starship.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I mean, if you want to treat the ST: Encyclopedia dates as such, ok. But even at that, we know that TMP takes place roughly in 2272-73, given Kirk's two and a half years as an Admiral and the 2270 date for the end of the five year mission from Voyager. And TWOK can take place no earlier than 2283, from the date on the Romulan Ale bottle. As to the gap between TFF and TUC, that has to be at least 3 years because that's how long Sulu had command of Excelsior So the point still stands that there are at least 12 to 13 years, minimum, of these people's lives and careers that we never see.

Well, the VOY 2270 date was just something that the Okudas threw in to the show to justify/validate their own work on the Encyclopedia/Chronology dates. And since VOY pretty much missed the whole point of TOS ("All of them would be thrown out of Starfleet today"), I have no problem disregarding that date. I prefer deriving TOS dates from the shows and the movies that are actually about the TOS crew.

And the Okudas saying that there was an 18-year gap between "Space Seed" and TWOK despite both Kirk and Khan saying that it had been 15 years in the movie itself drives me nuts every time I read it.

The TNG/DS9/VOY dates work great, since the Okudas worked on all of those shows and made sure they made internal sense, but I tend to take the TOS dates from the Chronology with several truckloads of salt and consider them to be just fan speculation. YMMV.

 

[Ithekro]

Well in responce to Kirk's comment on of "2283" McCoy responds that the stuff takes a while to ferment. Having this be a year or two might work for that, but not the same year. 15 years from 2283 puts it at 2268, which is still about a year or two after Space Seed. If we assume that it has been a few years since 2283 when Kirk gets the Romulan Ale, than "15 years" gets even later and later, into the 2270s.

We have one fixed date in the late part of the first season of TNG at 2364. We know that by 2371 (and Data getting his emotion chip installed) that it has been 78 years since the launching of the Enterprise-B. That would be 2293.

Taken together there are 25 years between "15 years before 2283" and 2293. While that could work, it doesn't quite. Kirk and Kahn might be rounding a bit. Or it feels like fifteen years, when it has actually been more than that. I know people who talk about something that happened years ago and think it was only ten or fifteen years ago, when it was actually more like twenty or twenty-five years ago. It happens when we get older. Time seems to have flashed by. That would also fit with Kirk feeling old in that movie. Kahn on the other hand is isolated and on an alien planet. Days, weeks, and years, might be a bit off compared to Kirk on Earth or a starship.

Recall then that FASA and some others had that set in 2222, with Space Seed around 2207, and TNG set in 2304. They did not have the 2364 fixed point to work with yet. Nor was 2283 considered I think at that time, to be a year. Maybe a stardate. Stardate 2283 would have been before the events of What Are Little Girls Made Of? Almost a year before the events of Space Seed.

 

[BK613]

^^I never considered the 2283 as a Terran date because it doesn't line up with what is being said in the movie about 1996, the 20th century and 200 years. Assumed it was a Romulan date, since the bottle was smuggled. Like the idea of it being a stardate; casts McCoy's "time to ferment" line in a new light.

 

[Trimm]

Let's set aside for a moment what TNG et al gives us evidence wise for the dates of the TOS movies, just for the sake of argument. What do the movies, and only the movies, tell us about the passage of time? TMP is at least 2.5 years after TOS, given Kirk's line about his time as Chief of Operations, and the Enterprise has been under refit for 18 months. TWOK gives us a date of 2283 for the bottle of Romulan Ale, and Kirk and Khan both place the events at least 15 years from the events of Space Seed. TVH tells us that the crew has spent 3 months on Vulcan. TFF takes place at least 3 weeks after TVH, from Kirk's comment about how much time he gave Scotty to put the Ent-A back together again. Finally, TUC has to be at least 3 years from TFF, because Sulu states that his first assignment as Excelsior captain has been that long. McCoy also states that he has been the CMO of Enterprise for 27 years. So where does that leave us in terms of the passage of time?

Just following those dialogue references (and ignoring anything from TNG on), we can place TMP at TOS +2.5 years at minimum, and TWOK at TOS +10.5 assuming the end of TOS is at least 2 years after Space Seed. Dating TSFS, TVH, and TFF is harder, but TUC is at least 3 years from TFF, and assuming McCoy joined our heroes at the very beginning of TOS that places TUC at TOS +24 years. This timeline varies considerably from the dates in the Encyclopedia, but it is reasonably consistent with what happens on screen. So what does that leave us in terms of this thread, and the careers of our heroes?

Our heroes have 2.5 years between TOS and TMP, a whopping 8 years between TMP and TWOK, and at least 3 years between TFF and TUC, and 24 years or so between the end of TOS and TUC. So, over 24 years of their careers post TOS, we see nothing of 13.5 years of that. If you look at the dates in the Chronology/Encyclopedia, the gap between TOS and TMP remains at 24 years, the gap between TMP and TWOk expands to a massive 12 years, and the gap between TFF and TUC grows to 6 years, leaving 20.5 to 21 years of these characters lives and careers unseen to us.

What are we shown of this time, this gap of 13.5 to 21 years? We see all of our heroes advance in rank, some of them several steps. We see in TWOK that Chekov has ascended to XO on another ship, and in TUC Sulu has ascended to a command of his own. I don't think any of these things point to our heroes having stagnant careers, and I don't think we can assume the presence of everyone on Enterprise in TWOK and TFF by itself as evidence that these people have spent the better part of two decades going nowhere and doing nothing.

 

[sonak]

Is it such a stretch to assume that, while they had saved the Earth, our intrepid heroes wouldn't suffer some small career fallout from the litany of offenses they committed in TSFS? Surely its at least plausible that going so far off the reservation would at least have some temporary effects on these people's career advancement, regardless of the outcome? What CO of a starship would want Chekov or Sulu as an XO, given that they had just demonstrated a real ability to engage in a conspiracy, assault their fellow officers, ignore a direct order from a superior, steal an entire starship and then blow it up?

I'd certainly expect their careers to be stopped dead in their tracks, really. Saving the Earth is fantastic, certainly, but the Enterprise gang got really really really lucky that there was a planetary-crisis-level threat that arose exactly at the moment they were the people best-positioned to respond to it. The heroism deserves a reward, but, it's not like answering the Whalesong Probe was something that followed logically from their mutiny, assault, and theft and destruction of a starship.

I would assume that the end result of bringing Spock back from the dead would pretty much vindicate their actions, at least if the true story about why they did what they did was available. I always thought that they make Starfleet out to be pretty unreasonable in TSFS just to set up a pretty contrived confrontation. Don't get me wrong-the whole "stealing the Enterprise" sequence is great, but considering Kirk is an admiral and a war hero, and considering Sarek's level of pull, isn't it a bit absurd that they can't just give him a ship to go in secret?

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

^Except that the Federation Council had already declared that only the USS Grissom was allowed to visit the planet until an official policy regarding the use of the Genesis planet was drafted. Allowing Kirk to go in spite of that ruling (even secretly) would have raised too many questions--and perhaps have gotten Marrow and others in hot water.

--Sran

 

[Trimm]

I would assume that the end result of bringing Spock back from the dead would pretty much vindicate their actions, at least if the true story about why they did what they did was available. I always thought that they make Starfleet out to be pretty unreasonable in TSFS just to set up a pretty contrived confrontation. Don't get me wrong-the whole "stealing the Enterprise" sequence is great, but considering Kirk is an admiral and a war hero, and considering Sarek's level of pull, isn't it a bit absurd that they can't just give him a ship to go in secret?

Starfleet is a organization with rules and a chain of command. Setting aside the fact that the Federation Council itself said no one was to go to Genesis, Kirk and company committed a litany of offenses including assault, theft, and what was tantamount to mutiny. There was no way that those actions were not going to have some consequences, whatever the intentions or outcomes of them were.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Who would have wanted Chekov as their first officer after seeing him in that outfit that he wore in STIII?

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

To be fair, he DID change his shirt after they escaped from spacedock from the Munster collar thing to a plain black turtleneck. The Russians invented the latter, after all.

Does anyone think that the E-A by TUC may not even have been under the command of Kirk? Checking the screencaps on Trek Core, he was clearly unpacking a suitcase when placing his picture of David, and the room was pretty sparsely decorated with mostly generic stuff and a smattering of nautical drawings to fit the theme. Meanwhile, Spock's quarters were seriously decked out in all sorts of brassware and candles and a big fancy painting and such.

Perhaps Kirk was just lugging a big case full of mementos for that last trip, or maybe he'd already packed up his stuff on the E-A and moved to that mountain cabin to chop wood, leaving the ship in Spock's capable hands..?

Mark

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

^The Enterprise was still his ship. As she was in spacedock before the mission began, it's not surprising that he would have brought a duffel bag with him. As for his quarters, there appear to be a number of photographs of ancient mariner vessels, something a history buff like Kirk would appreciate.

--Sran

 

[martok2112]

Didn't read all posts, so my apologies if I echo anyone's thoughts here...

That said...

Regarding Sulu, and one poster's conment about Kirk "having Sulu at the helm for three weeks"... In the original script of TWOK, Sulu was supposed to prepare for his own captaincy of the USS Excelsior.

However, according to Takei, Shatner kept so understating the travel pod scene in regards to congratulating Sulu in his post. Apparently, Takei asked Shatner to help give the scene a little more life, as this was supposed to be a proud moment for Sulu (in fact, he was supposed to be Captain Sulu in TWOK). Shatner would say: "Sure, George," and then continue to downplay the moment. In the end, time for the shoot ran out, and they had to cut out the unusable footage....so, the scene as it plays out suggests that Commander Sulu had some other assignment that didn't involve a captaincy.

At least the novelizations of TWOK and TSFS kept the Captain Sulu subplot intact.


But, yes, to agree with other posters, Captain of a ship is a position, and actually, one does not have to be captain ranked to hold that position. You can be a Lieutenant on a smaller ship, and still be addressed as "Captain" because that's what you are....the position you hold.

And when it comes to matters of authority, the ship's doctor can relieve the captain of duty if he has solid reason to declare the captain unfit. And I think at one point, in the novelization of TMP, Kirk ends up saying something to the effect of "Ship's doctor doesn't give you leave for oneupsmanship" (or something like that) to McCoy.

 

[Trimm]

To be fair, he DID change his shirt after they escaped from spacedock from the Munster collar thing to a plain black turtleneck. The Russians invented the latter, after all.

Does anyone think that the E-A by TUC may not even have been under the command of Kirk? Checking the screencaps on Trek Core, he was clearly unpacking a suitcase when placing his picture of David, and the room was pretty sparsely decorated with mostly generic stuff and a smattering of nautical drawings to fit the theme. Meanwhile, Spock's quarters were seriously decked out in all sorts of brassware and candles and a big fancy painting and such.

Perhaps Kirk was just lugging a big case full of mementos for that last trip, or maybe he'd already packed up his stuff on the E-A and moved to that mountain cabin to chop wood, leaving the ship in Spock's capable hands..?

Mark

That's an interesting supposition. I don't agree with it, but I do find it intriguing. I personally would guess that Kirk takes that picture of David with him wherever he goes, given the circumstances. My guess is that, given that the crew is said to be standing down in three months, the Enterprise hasn't hit the road in some time, and the mission in TUC is both sudden and rather unexpected. Valeris's comment about hearing that Kirk needed someone to man the helm is also illustrative there.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

However, according to Takei, Shatner kept so understating the travel pod scene in regards to congratulating Sulu in his post. Apparently, Takei asked Shatner to help give the scene a little more life, as this was supposed to be a proud moment for Sulu (in fact, he was supposed to be Captain Sulu in TWOK). Shatner would say: "Sure, George," and then continue to downplay the moment. In the end, time for the shoot ran out, and they had to cut out the unusable footage....so, the scene as it plays out suggests that Commander Sulu had some other assignment that didn't involve a captaincy.

You know what? Shatner played that travel pod scene exactly as he should have. Kirk was still depressed over his lot in life in that scene, and that's what Shatner played. However personally important that line might've been to Takei, Sulu's promotion to Captain was a throwaway line at best. It's utterly irrelevant to the plot of the movie, which is probably the real reason it was cut. The scene -- and the movie -- play just fine without it.

Sorry, George, but Star Trek was never about you.

 

[martok2112]

However, according to Takei, Shatner kept so understating the travel pod scene in regards to congratulating Sulu in his post. Apparently, Takei asked Shatner to help give the scene a little more life, as this was supposed to be a proud moment for Sulu (in fact, he was supposed to be Captain Sulu in TWOK). Shatner would say: "Sure, George," and then continue to downplay the moment. In the end, time for the shoot ran out, and they had to cut out the unusable footage....so, the scene as it plays out suggests that Commander Sulu had some other assignment that didn't involve a captaincy.

You know what? Shatner played that travel pod scene exactly as he should have. Kirk was still depressed over his lot in life in that scene, and that's what Shatner played. However personally important that line might've been to Takei, Sulu's promotion to Captain was a throwaway line at best. It's utterly irrelevant to the plot of the movie, which is probably the real reason it was cut. The scene -- and the movie -- play just fine without it.

Sorry, George, but Star Trek was never about you.

I wasn't defending Takei or blasting Shatner.

But, you may well be right in that it was a throwaway line, and that Takei may have been making more out of it than it was due. It may simply have been Takei thinking that there was a subplot about Sulu's captaincy....I'll have to review the commentary during the travel pod scene, because I was sure that Nick Meyer made some mention about Sulu's captaincy....it's been years since I watched it though.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

As a big Sulu fan, I like to think that Shatner *could* have played it up as part of the positive front Kirk was putting up against his aging self, yet decided not to as an actor's choice. That's fair.

Kirk totally respects his crew, and should be proud that one of his own is finally getting a command, regardless of how bummed he's feeling about turning fifty or whatever. Takei is very protective of his character, despite its secondary nature; all his fighting to get that growth ultimately netted him retribution as Meyer, who arguably came up with that throwaway line, followed through and got Sulu the Excelsior. Great for us fans at the end of the day, but a downer for Takei at the time. Didn't help that his OTHER big scene in TVH was cut due to an unresponsive child actor.

Mark

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Yeah, Takei undeniably had bad luck when it came to the extra bits they tried to give him in the movies.