^Beats me. I'm just offering up possibilities.
--Sran
--Sran
So Kirk makes the same mistake TWICE in accepting promotion?
- Thread starter enterprisecvn65
- Start date
I think the intent of the film is pretty clear from the bits we're given: 18-month refit of the Enterprise, two-and-a-half years since Kirk logged a star hour and Kirk's reference to "five years, out there".
I think it wasn't meant to be picked apart, line by line, for decades.
It is what it is.
It is what it is.
Agreed. But if we had that attitude about Star Trek generally, we would've quit talking about much of it a long, long time ago.
Agreed. But if we had that attitude about Star Trek generally, we would've quit talking about much of it a long, long time ago.
I don't think so. Home video and the internet and on-demand streaming has changed the way people watch this stuff.
I remember sitting around with my friends talking about the episodes we'd just seen and the ships and the props and the plots, for hours on end. What I don't remember is people picking apart scripts line by line, arguing over timelines and stardates and inconsistencies and blahblahblah.
For me, that sucks the fun right out of it.
But hey, I'm only 29 years younger than Shatner.
My point was that the film only indicates what Kirk & co. have been doing for the last three years. At no time does it indicate that ONLY three years have passed since the series. The "five years out there" line was obviously just there to trigger memories of the "five-year mission" introduction from the television show.
If you want to justify it in-universe, you could say that commanding a 5YM is a mark of prestige for a Starship Captain and that not all of them get to do it. It could be that the typical tour on a Starship is more like one to three years and only the truly exceptional ships/crews/captains go out there for a full five.
That would make it something like:
Kirk takes command of Enterprise from Captian Pike. Does a year or so of random missions.
Kirk takes Enterprise on a five year mission of exploration and other stuff.
Kirk then takes Enterprise to map the Xindi Sectors in detail for three years. Nothing happens. Kirk and crew are very bored. Kirk decided to take up an offer for promotion and leaves during the mission. Spock or Decker finish out the remaining year of the mission then report to Earth for Enterprise to get a much needed refit.
18 mouths later Admiral Kirk takes over as captain of Enterprise due to V'Ger.
Kirk takes command of Enterprise from Captian Pike. Does a year or so of random missions.
Kirk takes Enterprise on a five year mission of exploration and other stuff.
Kirk then takes Enterprise to map the Xindi Sectors in detail for three years. Nothing happens. Kirk and crew are very bored. Kirk decided to take up an offer for promotion and leaves during the mission. Spock or Decker finish out the remaining year of the mission then report to Earth for Enterprise to get a much needed refit.
18 mouths later Admiral Kirk takes over as captain of Enterprise due to V'Ger.
Agreed. But if we had that attitude about Star Trek generally, we would've quit talking about much of it a long, long time ago.
I don't think so. Home video and the internet and on-demand streaming has changed the way people watch this stuff.
I remember sitting around with my friends talking about the episodes we'd just seen and the ships and the props and the plots, for hours on end. What I don't remember is people picking apart scripts line by line, arguing over timelines and stardates and inconsistencies and blahblahblah.
For me, that sucks the fun right out of it.
But hey, I'm only 29 years younger than Shatner.
Heh, I'm pretty sure I remember similar conversations 25 years ago on the old Usenet alt.tv.startrek boards.
However, due to TNG's dominance at the time, I seem to recall that TOS/movie continuity inconsistencies were largely swept under the rug as there was a prevailing thought, which was encouraged and promoted by the Berman-era production folks, that TNG was the "correct" continuity moving forward and that any inconsistency was to be treated as a mistake by the prior production.
I'd also liken Kirk's statement to something someone might say during a job interview. When asked, "Why do you think you're qualified for this job?" it makes sense to given an answer that's relevant. Someone interested in joining an accounting firm isn't going to talk about the two years he spent waiting tables. He's going to talk about his education or previous jobs in business/finance, etc. Kirk saying "five years out there" may have been his way of citing his most relevant experience that would've prepared him for V'Ger.
--Sran
I would think commanding a starship on two different types of missions is a poor comparison to accounting vs. waiting tables.
^Whatever you might think of the comparison, my original point stands; if one interprets Kirk's statement to mean he was referring to command experience that would have prepared him specifically for V'Ger, it makes perfect sense that he'd mention his five years commanding the Enterprise on an extended exploratory mission as opposed to another assignment.
--Sran
--Sran
This, or a variation of this could work really well. I expect that most captains get stuck with dull but necessary work at one point or another (Sulu's time charting gaseous planetary anomalies springs to mind). Kirk's largely successful 5 year mission would still be a high point in his career and worth touting to Decker even if it occurred a while ago.
It would also mean that the new tech and uniforms need not be all that new by the time of TMP - they have the extra few years to be adopted by Starfleet before (in the case of the uniforms) being phased out some time prior to TWOK.
Finally, it puts a new spin on the extensive TMP refit - instead of a mid life cycle renovation, it is a last attempt to bring the old ship up to date with the rest of the fleet, perhaps even acting as a testbed for some experimental new technologies. However, while allowing her to keep pace with her contemporaries in the fleet, the update is not enough to bring the Enterprise to the forefront anymore. Consequently, she becomes a training ship just a couple of years after the refit is completed.
Last edited:
^The novels make statements to this effect, specifically Christopher's The Darkness Drops Again--in which it's written that the Enterprise completed a second five-year mission under Kirk after TMP. Following the ship's return in 2278, Kirk was recalled to the admiralty, at which time Starfleet ordered the Enterprise to undergo a months-long systems diagnostic to determine how her prototype engines and computer systems held up.
Following the diagnostic, the vessel was reclassified as a training ship and assigned to the Academy, where Kirk had been made commandant. Spock was promoted to captain, and Kirk was granted the privilege of using the Enterprise as his flag-ship for special missions. In the meantime, the ship was used to test several additional prototype systems but never again underwent a refit as extensive as the pre-TMP renovations, which explains why Starfleet viewed the ship as being obsolete by the time TSFS rolled around.
As an aside, the interior shots of Reliant suggest that the ship was as old if not older than Enterprise. Had Terrell and company succeeded in finding a test site for Genesis, would the vessel have been decommissioned as well? The events of TSFS suggest that a shift in starship classes was taking place, with the Excelsior-class coming online and the older models being phased out. The redesigned bridges seen in both TFF and TUC are also indicative of changes, albeit on a smaller scale.
--Sran
Following the diagnostic, the vessel was reclassified as a training ship and assigned to the Academy, where Kirk had been made commandant. Spock was promoted to captain, and Kirk was granted the privilege of using the Enterprise as his flag-ship for special missions. In the meantime, the ship was used to test several additional prototype systems but never again underwent a refit as extensive as the pre-TMP renovations, which explains why Starfleet viewed the ship as being obsolete by the time TSFS rolled around.
As an aside, the interior shots of Reliant suggest that the ship was as old if not older than Enterprise. Had Terrell and company succeeded in finding a test site for Genesis, would the vessel have been decommissioned as well? The events of TSFS suggest that a shift in starship classes was taking place, with the Excelsior-class coming online and the older models being phased out. The redesigned bridges seen in both TFF and TUC are also indicative of changes, albeit on a smaller scale.
--Sran
Yes, except that what I (and I thought Ithekro) suggested was some additional missions after the 5YM but prior to TMP.
Interesting point about the Reliant, certainly. Maybe the Miranda spaceframe was more adaptable to changes in technology than Enterprise's? It would explain why we carried on seeing them well into the 24th century!
Interesting point about the Reliant, certainly. Maybe the Miranda spaceframe was more adaptable to changes in technology than Enterprise's? It would explain why we carried on seeing them well into the 24th century!
That's my impression, as well. Memory Beta suggests that Miranda-class vessels could be reconfigured for specific missions with only minimal refit time. A ship like Reliant was designed for both combat and deep-space exploration (additional science labs, for instance), whereas the modified Soyuz-class was more of a border-cutter designed exclusively for combat, without the science facilities that Reliant would have had.
--Sran
Or it might simply be that the Constitution was the "special" or "sports" model vs. the "bread-and-butter", "workhorse" Miranda version of the same technology. The Miranda was actually the less flexible design, in every respect inferior - but by choice, because that made her cheaper, and ten were built for each Constitution.
The matter of longevity would then be one of sheer statistics of survival. The same problems would plague both ship types, the same strengths would enable constant refitting and overhauling, but the few Constitutions would disappear more quickly than the more numerous Mirandas.
For all we know, there were newbuild Constitutions in the 31000 registry range just like there apparently were newbuild Mirandas - but again in this 1:10 ratio, and thus we never saw any examples of the sportier type from that late batch.
The same might well go for Galaxy vs. Nebula, another pair of nearly identical-looking ships with no known differences in capabilities.
Timo Saloniemi
The matter of longevity would then be one of sheer statistics of survival. The same problems would plague both ship types, the same strengths would enable constant refitting and overhauling, but the few Constitutions would disappear more quickly than the more numerous Mirandas.
For all we know, there were newbuild Constitutions in the 31000 registry range just like there apparently were newbuild Mirandas - but again in this 1:10 ratio, and thus we never saw any examples of the sportier type from that late batch.
The same might well go for Galaxy vs. Nebula, another pair of nearly identical-looking ships with no known differences in capabilities.
Timo Saloniemi
^Which is also interesting, because the Galaxy-class was supposedly the most advanced type of starship ever built; according to LaForge, only Romulan vessels approached the Enterprise's design in terms of sophistication ("Romulan sensors are as good as ours.").
Yet, we see dozens of Galaxy-class ships during DS9, which suggests that either the Federation's ship-yards are much more efficient, or the Galaxy-class is actually considerably less advanced than other starship classes built later.
In any case, I'd love to know the in-universe reason for why the Constitution-class was ultimately mothballed. Given the problems the Enterprise had shortly after her launch, maybe other vessels suffered even more serious mishaps and were either destroyed or severely damaged.
--Sran
Yet, we see dozens of Galaxy-class ships during DS9, which suggests that either the Federation's ship-yards are much more efficient, or the Galaxy-class is actually considerably less advanced than other starship classes built later.
In any case, I'd love to know the in-universe reason for why the Constitution-class was ultimately mothballed. Given the problems the Enterprise had shortly after her launch, maybe other vessels suffered even more serious mishaps and were either destroyed or severely damaged.
--Sran
Or they just figured out better, faster ways to build them.
We're about the same age. It strikes me that you couldn't pick it apart that closely unless you could memorize it line by line with one viewing. In the pre-VCR era you wouldn't see it again for months, and the first paperback copy of a written script I remember was Harlan Ellison's for "City on the Edge of Forever," from the mid-1990s.What I don't remember is people picking apart scripts line by line, arguing over timelines and stardates and inconsistencies and blahblahblah...But hey, I'm only 29 years younger than Shatner.
But promotion to a desk could only be a mistake for Kirk in media land. Desk people do really crucial stuff toward making an organization run even if what they do isn't as exciting. The two Air Force desk officers I knew held some nostalgia for their active flying days but were quite glad to be free of the stress. You just get too old to keep doing it. Besides that going along for the ride at times isn't precluded by promotion.
Similar threads
