Star Trek Chronology

[Jinn]

Well we do celebrate First Contact Day, so why not?

EDIT: And maybe in one or two hundred years someone will find these archived TrekBBS posts and mistake them for prophecies. At least they'll be prepared then.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

And Captain Picard Day.

 

[Landru1000]

Since they've already established that the 5YM ended in 2270 and put a gap of 2 1/2 years between TOS and the first movie, I don't see how TMP could be anything but 2273.

According to the preview pages of the Encyclopedia posted on StarTrek.com, "The 2271 date for Star Trek: The Motion Picture is itself somewhat conjectural in that it is based purely on the 18-month refit time for the Enterprise." That seems to ignore Decker's comment about Kirk not logging a single star hour in two-and-a-half years.

 

[Christopher]

According to the preview pages of the Encyclopedia posted on StarTrek.com, "The 2271 date for Star Trek: The Motion Picture is itself somewhat conjectural in that it is based purely on the 18-month refit time for the Enterprise." That seems to ignore Decker's comment about Kirk not logging a single star hour in two-and-a-half years.

Also, it can't be correct given that VGR: "Q2" said the 5-year mission ended in 2270. I'm astonished that the new edition still hasn't corrected that outdated estimate. TMP can't possibly be any earlier than late 2272.

 

[ryan123450]

If they did a poor job on the timeline, and still didnt include TAS, this update isn't shaping up to be very impressive.

 

[Galileo7]

If they did a poor job on the timeline, and still didnt include TAS, this update isn't shaping up to be very impressive.

If the included TAS, then I could tolerate the timeline errors. No TAS, no buy.