"Jim, the Enterprise is 20 years old, we feel her day is done." My thoughts when seeing that scene.
- Thread starter Tribble puncher
- Start date
For me, this settles the fannon argument that the A is the Yorktown.
But there's no reason that the Yorktown couldn't have gotten back to spacedock and been repaired after all we don't know how much time passed between the Bird of pray crashing and the court martial.
Also it was in The Next Generations forth season writers bible that the E-A was Yorktown and it makes sense that the ship was taken out of service in the 2290s as it then would have been about the same age as the Refit was in 2285. At least that's how I see I see it because of the Yorktown's number of NCC-1717 being higher then the Enterprise it is probably newer.
Also Gene Roddenberry said it was so I'll go with it.
Also it was in The Next Generations forth season writers bible that the E-A was Yorktown and it makes sense that the ship was taken out of service in the 2290s as it then would have been about the same age as the Refit was in 2285. At least that's how I see I see it because of the Yorktown's number of NCC-1717 being higher then the Enterprise it is probably newer.
Also Gene Roddenberry said it was so I'll go with it.
Well what about the Captain of the Yorktown? Did Starfleet just Tell him: "Sorry Mr. Captain man, but Kirk just saved the planet so we want to give him your ship because it looks just like the Enterprise and we want to surprise him with it, here's an Oberth, a little I'm sorry card and a Stuffed Animal."
Maybe the next film's plot could have been him going after Kirk for getting his ship.....
I understand why the writers did it, because in order to make more movies, we (the audience) wouldn't have been happy unless it was Kirk and Co. on the ENTERPRISE so if they put them on Excelsior fans at the time would have been pissed.
Last edited:
Well yes if your superior reassigns you then you have to do what your told and that would be part of life in Starfleet and no one should take it personal and a Starfleet officer wouldn't it go's with the job. Just because you captain a ship doesn't mean you own it or will be on that ship forever.
If it wasn't on screen then it's not canon. In the first season of Star Trek several episodes "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "Space Seed" implied Kirk and crew's timeline was actually in the 22nd Century. No other episode go into any sort of bogus years or what nots... until the theatrical poster to TMP. It was that poster where the 23rd Century creeped in; it could've simply been resolved by establishing the TV series was actually in the end of the 22nd Century and the movies were in the beginning of the 23rd Century.
Nope. Here comes fans turned pro like Greg Jein, Michael Okuda, and the Reeves-Stevens, and the like, couldn't just leave things alone and allow the audience to imagine a logical continuity. They instead started conjuring things up while f^cking up everything that was great with Star Trek. Now there's these bogus timelines for the characters and the most famous ship in TV history; none of it makes sense.
For all the bullshit to work, the fans turn pro is saying when we first saw Kirk and crew in Where No Man has Gone Before, he and the crew were fresh starts. On the contrary, there's nothing in that episode to give the impression Kirk started his command in that episode; mostly everyone on the Enterprise appeared to be experienced and knew each other quite well. I also doubt The Cage was Pike's first go around on the Enterprise.
From what I've seen and understand about these characters who served and commanded the Enterprise; there's a history, and longevity which establishes they weren't green or just starting their careers--simply put-- it's a special place and privilege to serve aboard. There's nothing that states in these episodes the former Captains left after their five year mission or ten year mission.
13 years from The Cage to The Menagerie is a long time, but when I include the fact Kirk and crew were in living in the 22nd Century, how in blazes could the Enterprise be built in the year 2245???
Respectfully, Gene Roddenberry said a lot of stupid shit...doesn't make any of it true.
Also, Roddenberry never said that the A was the Yorktown. He speculated about it.
Because they didn't live in the 22nd Century It was never said on screen that they were in the 22nd Century. I'm guessing your talking about the fact that Kirk told Khan he'd been asleep for 200 years but he also said it was an estimate and it's a mistake they repeated in Star Trek 2 and by then they had the year looked down. If I had to guess I'd say they probably didn't know what year but they know it was the 23rd Century, maybe they though it was the early 23rd Century and if so the Khan estimate would be about right. My point about the Enterprise build date is that it's been well known since at least the 1980s and won't get changed just because we haven't heard it on screen.
Last edited:
He suggested it to the people making the movie which means it came out of his mouth and then it was added to the writers bible in TNG season 4 which is used by the people making the show, I don't know how the people and the guy who made the show could be wrong and I feel like his intention was clear. It was also in the Haynes manual which was said to be cannon by CBS.
These days we can't agree on what the old Enterprise looked like, let alone how old she was
You can believe and interpret as you wish if for for some reason your happiness is reliant upon believing this. But if it ain't onscreen, it ain't canon. Writers Guides and mumbling by Roddenberry don't fall into that category. "Intentions" have nothing to do with canon. Roddenberry was nothing when it came to the movies and didn't write a single line of dialogue into script after TMP.
Where did CBS say that the Haynes manual was "canon?" It was AUTHORIZED by CBS, but again, that's a bird of a different feather and has nothing to do with how the official universe is laid out.
I have to agree: A lot of "damage" was done to fans' imaginations in the name of obtaining book contracts, in particular Pocket Books' Star Trek Chronology and Encyclopedia 25 years ago.
As for the "20 years old" line (excuse me for repeating what I wrote a few years ago): If you assume no continuity (therefore no defined passage of time) between TMP and (the "II"-less when released) TWoK, and further assume that the ship seen in TWoK is not a refit but simply the TV series ship with improved detail and a never-before-seen second turbolift door to the bridge, then the idea of Starfleet deciding to scrap the ship in TSFS makes somewhat more sense (although 20 is still the wrong number of years, given the ship wasn't brand-new during the Pike-and-Spock era). For use as a training vessel, a mostly used-up although well-maintained ship makes a lot more sense than TMP's "almost totally new Enterprise".
When the line was used, the screenwriters probably had no idea that in a few years a new show and a spinoff were going to get every last dime out of that Reliant model. The over use of the Reliant and Excelsior models saved money for the series but it did put into question why Enterprise (and Enterprise A for that matter) had to get scrapped so quickly.
Once again and as usual "Connies are different" becomes the answer, except of course, they've reused those models as well, but only in extreme background shots, where it might as well be an easter-egg like the Falcon in first contact.
They only made a small number of Constitution class ships. A good deal of them were lost before there time, fell into another universe, etc. The admiralty might have decided the rest were just on borrowed time and not easily upgradeable to the changing needs of Starfleet. Rip it up and start again.
Once again and as usual "Connies are different" becomes the answer, except of course, they've reused those models as well, but only in extreme background shots, where it might as well be an easter-egg like the Falcon in first contact.
They only made a small number of Constitution class ships. A good deal of them were lost before there time, fell into another universe, etc. The admiralty might have decided the rest were just on borrowed time and not easily upgradeable to the changing needs of Starfleet. Rip it up and start again.
It is not a canonical fact. The date of 2245 for the launch of the Enterprise is never mentioned in a canonical source like a movie or tv episode.
STEPhon IT said:
I agree with most of what you say.
In "Where No Man Has Gone Before":
So Mitchell has served with Spock on the Enterprise for at least one or two years.
Mitchell could have begun serving on the Enterprise when Kirk became captain of the Enterprise or might he have had two separate tours of duty on the Enterprise, the first when Pike was in command and the second when Kirk was in command.
In "Menagerie", set 13.0 to 14.0 years after Pike and Spock voyage to Talos IV on the Enterprise, the following is said about the time that Pike and Spock were on the Enterprise:
Arbitrarily assuming that there are exactly 365.25 days in a year, and that a month is one twelfth of a year, eleven years, four months, and five days total about 11.3469 years. If Spock first served with Pike during the voyages to Rigel VIII and Talos IV Kirk would have taken over as Enterprise captain between 1.6531 and 2.531 years before "Menagerie". If Spock began serving under Pike earlier Kirk than the voyages to Rigel VIII and Talos IV in "The Cage" Kirk would have become captain of the Enterprise more than 1.6531 to 2.531 years before "Menagerie".
It is not known if the five year mission began when Kirk took command of the Enterprise or sometime later.
In "Menagerie" the events of "The Cage" are said to have been thirteen years earlier, including more than once by Spock, and thus should have been 13.0 to 14.0 years earlier.
In "The Cage" a radio message is received from the Columbia sent after it crashed on Talos IV 18 light years away, and thus sent 18 years ago. Other dialog confirms it:
Since Spock said approximately eighteen years, the crash should have been between 17.0 and 20.0 years earlier, and thus about 30.0 to 34.0 years before "Menagerie".
Tyler tells the "survivors":
Assuming that the Enterprise is one of the new ships it should be 13.0 to 34.0 years old during "Menagerie".
At the end of "Space Seed" Kirk decided to leave Khan and his people on Ceti Alpha V.
In Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan the date seems to be 15 years after Khan and his people were left on Ceti Alpha V and thus presumably 15 years after a time soon after the end of "Space Seed":
Assuming that Khan and Kirk might say fifteen years to mean anytime between 14.0 and 17.0 years, we can assume that "Menagerie" and "Space Seed" both happen during the five year mission. If the five year mission lasted less than 6.0 years, neither episode could be more than 6.0 years before the other.
If "Space Seed" is exactly 6.0 years BEFORE "Menagerie", the total age of the Enterprise in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should be 21.0 to 45.0 years. If "Space Seed" is exactly 6.0 years AFTER "Menagerie", the total age of the Enterprise in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should be 33.0 to 57.0 years. The halfway point in this age range is 39 years.
So it is slightly possible that Morrow could be just a little bit wrong when he says that the Enterprise is 20 year old. But it is also possible, and perhaps much more likely, that the Enterprise could be much older than Morrow says, up to 2.85 times as old!
So I guess that either Morrow was very bad at math, or he was using a year, perhaps that of his home planet, that was much longer than the years used by the other characters in this calculation.
Last edited:
I always assumed Morrow meant the Enterprise is 20 years out of date, especially compared to the new tech coming online (e.g. Excelsior).
I had a Haynes manual for my Ford Capri and it wasn't even canon for that...
I think Morrow misspoke.
No, they didn't. They only had the century locked down, with the "In the 23rd century..." opening text. Star Trek didn't use a specific calendar year for the events of an episode or movie until TNG produced "The Neutral Zone." (And the stated date of 2364 likely only made it into the finished episode because of the 1988 Writer's Strike.)
TWOK used 2283 as a date for the Romulan Ale that McCoy gave to Kirk, but it didn't provide any context for it outside of "Well, it takes this stuff a while to ferment." We aren't even told if the year is from a human or Romulan dating system.
