Other 5 year missions?
- Thread starter herofan
- Start date
We don't even know if a "five-year mission" exists as a concept.
I mean, yes, it's in the opening credits, and all over the fandom. But does Starfleet decide to send ships on five-year assignments specifically? The heroes never discuss such a thing. It just looks like the Enterprise was on assignment for what in retrospect turned out to be five years, but might just as well have been three, or thirteen.
It's virtually impossible to tell what lasted five years exactly. The ship had been in service before that; she continued in service after that. Why single out this particular five-year stretch of the ship's overall service life?
As Kirk might be the one dictating the opening credits, in-universe, for some reason (perhaps as part of his autobiography?), perhaps he just means HE was out there, commanding the Enterprise, for five years? We know he prides on this thing in his CV, as per ST:TMP where it's the argument that wins him the command of the ship back when V'Ger threatens Earth.
In the latest movie, the alternate Kirk does say he's all hot and bothered by this upcoming, unprecedented mission of spending five years straight in "deep space" and "uncharted territory". Since this is termed a "new program" rather than just a "mission", it may affect more than one starship, although clearly Kirk hopes to command the very first. But that's already very different from what we saw in TOS: the original Kirk did not spend five years in "deep space" or "uncharted territory", but often shuttled between nearspace targets, hauling supplies or personnel between A and B; ran combat patrol in backwater areas; engaged in testing, training and shows of force; and even fiddled with odd hobby projects such as pushing asteroids around.
We never hear of any other ship performing a five-year mission, or indeed an X-year mission for any value of X. Indeed, we never hear of the Enterprise performing such a mission, except in the opening credits of TOS, and those need not be part of the Star Trek universe (that is, it's Shatner speaking there, not Kirk). But we do see other starships do the sort of work that the Enterprise does. Many a TOS plot actually has Kirk finish what some other starship skipper started, indicating that the only thing special about Kirk may be the fact that he survives to tell the story...
Timo Saloniemi
I mean, yes, it's in the opening credits, and all over the fandom. But does Starfleet decide to send ships on five-year assignments specifically? The heroes never discuss such a thing. It just looks like the Enterprise was on assignment for what in retrospect turned out to be five years, but might just as well have been three, or thirteen.
It's virtually impossible to tell what lasted five years exactly. The ship had been in service before that; she continued in service after that. Why single out this particular five-year stretch of the ship's overall service life?
As Kirk might be the one dictating the opening credits, in-universe, for some reason (perhaps as part of his autobiography?), perhaps he just means HE was out there, commanding the Enterprise, for five years? We know he prides on this thing in his CV, as per ST:TMP where it's the argument that wins him the command of the ship back when V'Ger threatens Earth.
In the latest movie, the alternate Kirk does say he's all hot and bothered by this upcoming, unprecedented mission of spending five years straight in "deep space" and "uncharted territory". Since this is termed a "new program" rather than just a "mission", it may affect more than one starship, although clearly Kirk hopes to command the very first. But that's already very different from what we saw in TOS: the original Kirk did not spend five years in "deep space" or "uncharted territory", but often shuttled between nearspace targets, hauling supplies or personnel between A and B; ran combat patrol in backwater areas; engaged in testing, training and shows of force; and even fiddled with odd hobby projects such as pushing asteroids around.
We never hear of any other ship performing a five-year mission, or indeed an X-year mission for any value of X. Indeed, we never hear of the Enterprise performing such a mission, except in the opening credits of TOS, and those need not be part of the Star Trek universe (that is, it's Shatner speaking there, not Kirk). But we do see other starships do the sort of work that the Enterprise does. Many a TOS plot actually has Kirk finish what some other starship skipper started, indicating that the only thing special about Kirk may be the fact that he survives to tell the story...
Timo Saloniemi
Also, all eight were doing the same thing the Enterprise was doing.
That is, the Excalibur, Lexington, Hood and Potemkin played the same wargames as the hero ship in "The Ultimate Computer". The Exeter and the Constellation had been surveying the same area of space where the hero ship eventually stumbled upon them (which sounds like poor coordination by Starfleet!). The Potemkin was also supposed to pair up with the hero ship for a survey in "Turnabout Intruder" and be another part of a medical relay chain in "Pirates of Orion"; she also underwent maintenance alongside the hero ship in "Court Martial".
The Defiant in "Tholian Web" is the only ship that isn't tasked with the very same mission the heroes in that same episode are performing, but she is met in unsurveyed space, supposedly distressed while surveying; the roles could easily be reversed there, too.
The final starship in the mix would be the unseen Intrepid, tasked with the same "investigate why Gamma VII doesn't respond" thing as our heroes.
Summa summarum, we never heard of another starship in TOS doing something the hero ship would not do. Except for perishing, of course.
Timo Saloniemi
That is, the Excalibur, Lexington, Hood and Potemkin played the same wargames as the hero ship in "The Ultimate Computer". The Exeter and the Constellation had been surveying the same area of space where the hero ship eventually stumbled upon them (which sounds like poor coordination by Starfleet!). The Potemkin was also supposed to pair up with the hero ship for a survey in "Turnabout Intruder" and be another part of a medical relay chain in "Pirates of Orion"; she also underwent maintenance alongside the hero ship in "Court Martial".
The Defiant in "Tholian Web" is the only ship that isn't tasked with the very same mission the heroes in that same episode are performing, but she is met in unsurveyed space, supposedly distressed while surveying; the roles could easily be reversed there, too.
The final starship in the mix would be the unseen Intrepid, tasked with the same "investigate why Gamma VII doesn't respond" thing as our heroes.
Summa summarum, we never heard of another starship in TOS doing something the hero ship would not do. Except for perishing, of course.
Timo Saloniemi
They were on a long term assignment, whatever the duration...
The Mark of Gideon said:
I doubt Lexington and Constellation were on deep space, long term assignments with Flag officers in command.
In what sense? They made port calls frequently enough. They rotated personnel, up to Lieutenant Commanders. The only constant there seemed to be that the ship (which would be assigned somewhere all the time anyway, by default) had the same CO and XO for five years straight. Is that long term in the Starfleet context?
The latter at least was clearly in deepest possible space, encountering an extragalactic visitor in circumstances that allowed Spock to deduce it was extragalactic after following a trail spanning a dozen star systems at most (i.e. the "border" must have been right next door). Would it be rare for Commodores to command individual ships (as we never learned of either of these two ships having a separate CO in addition to the flag officer)? Or common, with Kirk and Tracey being rare exceptions? Given the narrow scope of TOS, there simply are many questions we can't conclusively answer, and a context we can't truly grasp.
But if they have that much remaining towards the end of their three onscreen years, then it's not indicative of a five-year mission specifically. And if they always replenish to five-year capacity when pulling to a starbase, then that, too, fails to establish five-year mission length.
Timo Saloniemi
That's falling into the Modern Trek system of one season equals one in-universe year. We simply don't know how deep into its mission that the Enterprise was suppose to be in "Mark of Gideon".
Well, anything differing from "it's their second month" would suffice, really. But this is a third-season piece, with the stardate near the absolute top of the range, and comes after, say, "Day of the Dove" that made reference to being two years after "Errand of Mercy". We'd really have to swim upstream to try and imply that everything about TOS is in fact upside down and late episodes come early in the "real" timeline.
More fundamentally, though, Kirk returns to home base (one or six of them at any rate) in every season, and arguably zeroes his mission hours that way. We're aware of no limiting resource that he couldn't and wouldn't replenish so often that it ceases to be limiting.
Timo Saloniemi
More fundamentally, though, Kirk returns to home base (one or six of them at any rate) in every season, and arguably zeroes his mission hours that way. We're aware of no limiting resource that he couldn't and wouldn't replenish so often that it ceases to be limiting.
Timo Saloniemi
I always took the term to mean that the Enterprise was away from it's home port of Earth for five years. And that it would only return for periods of crew training and heavy maintenance. Such as antimatter refueling. Basically the same thing that a US aircraft carrier would do between tours. that doesn't mean they can't visit other star bases or interact with other ships. It seems that after WNMHGB the ship sustained damage to it's engines and and to return for a minor refit. The ship has obvious changes afterwards. since the warp nacelles change appearance. I wonder if we can assume that the nacelles would be swapped out for newer versions. That and the navigational deflector gets smaller.
That is basically what I was wondering, if the others were doing the same thing as the enterprise, or if they were picking daisies while the Enterprise had the hard core mission.
I don't recall Potemkin being mentioned in "Court Martial"? Did you perhaps mean Intrepid here?
Ah, right. 
"Mark of Gideon" would have us believe that refueling wouldn't be an issue - one loadup may not last forever, but it will outlast the mortal coils of Kirk and Odona, much like the food supply of 430x5x365 days for the two will. OTOH, intense impulse maneuvering was said to deplete fuel within hours in "Doomsday Machine". So we have to wonder whether refueling could ever serve as punctuation for the five-year mission.
ST2 does suggest that Starfleet trains crews in batches, astronaut style (that "Enterprise class" simulator, perhaps, but at least McCoy's comments suggestive of a total crew swap).
It would perhaps be more satisfactory to think that the ship remained stranded in deep space for the duration of her early "regular" adventures, explaining why she's so fatally short on reserve dilithium, why her top officers have been reshuffled and double-tasked rather than finding an outright replacement for the lost Gary Mitchell, and why Spock's promotion to Commander hasn't yet hit the official records by "Court Martial"...
...Especially as those early engine and deflector features return in later episodes, suggesting the nacelle spires and endcaps are (and "always were") retractable and the deflector can expand and contract as needed. (Thankfully, there are few shots where the tall bridge would be likewise evident.)
I guess the main argument here should be that nobody in-universe ever suggests Kirk or the Enterprise were doing anything exceptional. Kirk encounters fellow skippers who make no reference to "his special mission". Kirk is referred to in a couple of 24th century discussions, but only in matters directly pertaining to his specific adventures, not in the sense of him having been a great historical figure who did something exceptional and is forever remembered (indeed, the gist of "The Naked Now" is "Kirk who?").
Timo Saloniemi
"Mark of Gideon" would have us believe that refueling wouldn't be an issue - one loadup may not last forever, but it will outlast the mortal coils of Kirk and Odona, much like the food supply of 430x5x365 days for the two will. OTOH, intense impulse maneuvering was said to deplete fuel within hours in "Doomsday Machine". So we have to wonder whether refueling could ever serve as punctuation for the five-year mission.
ST2 does suggest that Starfleet trains crews in batches, astronaut style (that "Enterprise class" simulator, perhaps, but at least McCoy's comments suggestive of a total crew swap).
It would perhaps be more satisfactory to think that the ship remained stranded in deep space for the duration of her early "regular" adventures, explaining why she's so fatally short on reserve dilithium, why her top officers have been reshuffled and double-tasked rather than finding an outright replacement for the lost Gary Mitchell, and why Spock's promotion to Commander hasn't yet hit the official records by "Court Martial"...
...Especially as those early engine and deflector features return in later episodes, suggesting the nacelle spires and endcaps are (and "always were") retractable and the deflector can expand and contract as needed. (Thankfully, there are few shots where the tall bridge would be likewise evident.)
I guess the main argument here should be that nobody in-universe ever suggests Kirk or the Enterprise were doing anything exceptional. Kirk encounters fellow skippers who make no reference to "his special mission". Kirk is referred to in a couple of 24th century discussions, but only in matters directly pertaining to his specific adventures, not in the sense of him having been a great historical figure who did something exceptional and is forever remembered (indeed, the gist of "The Naked Now" is "Kirk who?").
Timo Saloniemi
The opening theme narrative referencing the 5-year mission is a neat hook to the audience, but it's not something that really comes across in the series itself. Outside of the opening narration there is no reference whatsoever to the Enterprise's (or any other vessel's) 5-year mission. It's the same in TAS. There were references to it in some of the Pocket Book novels as well as comics. On the screen the first real in-universe reference comes up in TMP.
So prior to TMP one could somewhat dismiss the 5-year mission statement in the series' opening credits as essentially hype, but TMP fully brings it in-universe.
I've long accepted WNMHGB as happening before the actual 5-year mission given the look of the ship and the uniforms along with some of the personnel. And there is also the small note that the opening credits theme doesn't have the voice-over narration referencing the 5-year mission. Then one could assume a ship's refit in conjunction with a uniform change for Starfleet and the ship is subsequently embarked on its 5-year mission.
The 5-year refrence was possibly alluding to GR's hope the series would last five years and in extent one could assume that one season was supposedly equal to one year of the mission. But there is nothing that really cements that notion into fact in-universe. To that end one could accept that the three seasons we saw aired (minus WNMHGB) make up the bulk of the 5-year mission--maybe about four-and-a-half years. One could also accept both TOS and TAS (if you accept TAS) as almost the entirety of the 5-year mission.
There is room for interpretation and your mileage may vary.
So prior to TMP one could somewhat dismiss the 5-year mission statement in the series' opening credits as essentially hype, but TMP fully brings it in-universe.
I've long accepted WNMHGB as happening before the actual 5-year mission given the look of the ship and the uniforms along with some of the personnel. And there is also the small note that the opening credits theme doesn't have the voice-over narration referencing the 5-year mission. Then one could assume a ship's refit in conjunction with a uniform change for Starfleet and the ship is subsequently embarked on its 5-year mission.
The 5-year refrence was possibly alluding to GR's hope the series would last five years and in extent one could assume that one season was supposedly equal to one year of the mission. But there is nothing that really cements that notion into fact in-universe. To that end one could accept that the three seasons we saw aired (minus WNMHGB) make up the bulk of the 5-year mission--maybe about four-and-a-half years. One could also accept both TOS and TAS (if you accept TAS) as almost the entirety of the 5-year mission.
There is room for interpretation and your mileage may vary.
It is worth pointing out that TOS spans about 5,000 stardate units while spinoff shows assume 1,000 SD units comprise a year. This is quite unlikely to be a coincidence, but it is equally unlikely that the TOS choice of stardates reflected any "five years in three seasons" thinking yet.
One wonders what further we will learn on the subject in ST Beyond, considering that STID has now ntroduced the concept of a set-length (and indeed five-year-long) deep space mission to the Trek universe.
Timo Saloniemi
One wonders what further we will learn on the subject in ST Beyond, considering that STID has now ntroduced the concept of a set-length (and indeed five-year-long) deep space mission to the Trek universe.
Timo Saloniemi
I think the stardates were an interesting in-universe idea meant to give the series a sense of progression, but the fact the episodes were not aired in order of production makes that idea a bit wonky. I don't think it was really thought through the way later series might have.
To that end I stand by there being room for interpretation.
To that end I stand by there being room for interpretation.
I always believed (as alluded to by Warped9 above) that the "5 Year Mission" referred to the ship herself- indicating that the Enterprise would be on an extended mission without returning to Earth for major overhauls or refits for 5 years. I never felt like it meant the ship would be out there in the unknown by itself for 5 years. I also had always bought into the idea that "WNMHGB" took place before the stated "5 year mission" for the same reasons Warped9 points out, and that the Enterprise returned to Earth for major re-supply, re-staffing and re-fit prior to "The Corbomite Maneuver."
Interestingly enough, TNG left the viewer with the impression that the Enterprise was truly headed off into the unknown for an extended mission based on the dialogue and initial log entry in "Encounter at Farpoint." The families aboard even further reinforced this idea. Sadly (again) it never really came to be so.
Interestingly enough, TNG left the viewer with the impression that the Enterprise was truly headed off into the unknown for an extended mission based on the dialogue and initial log entry in "Encounter at Farpoint." The families aboard even further reinforced this idea. Sadly (again) it never really came to be so.
The reality is to depict a series with a ship firmly set out on the outer fringes of unknown territory is a fascinating idea, but it's something that would really have to be thought through and planned out to work. It would also preclude certain stories where we would see Federation officials interacing with our crew. A story like "Journey To Babel" or "Elaan Of Troyius" might not fit for a vessel that isn't meant to come back to familiar territory for an extended period.
Similar threads
