The Five Year Mission

[Garm Bel Iblis]

Was it ever stated on screen when the 5 year mission began? It seemed that in Where No Man has gone before Kirk and Spock had a good friendship and seemed they had been serving together a long time.

Could WNMHGB be late in that first year? middle of the second? that would synch up with the new timeline a little better created in Trek XI.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I've read that "Where No Man..." takes place in 2264, the year before the 5YM began, owing to the lack of Kirk's monologue on the intro, as well as the slightly different sets and uniforms. Of course, this timeline was trying to fit in a couple of hundred novels around the episodes

The 1994 Star Trek Chronology put "No Man.." at the start of the second year of the mission, saying the stardate of (something like, can't remember exactly OTOH) 1324 (I know it started with 13, I'm guessing the rest - you'll see why in a second) meant the episode took place 13 months and 24 days into the mission. They make this claim shortly after reminding us that TOS stardates are random 4-digit numbers with no rhyme or reason

After seeing STXI, which starts the mission in 2258, I wondered if maybe the 5YM we saw was actually Kirk's second on the Enterprise. I'm sure there are lots of little reasons why that can't be the case, but it's an interesting thought.

 

[A beaker full of death]

I've read that "Where No Man..." takes place in 2264

no. It takes place sometime in the future. An unspecified year. An unspecified century. The Okudas pronouncements are not authoritative as to a work that was complete decades earlier.

1324 meant the episode took place 13 months and 24 days into the mission. They make this claim shortly after reminding us that TOS stardates are random 4-digit numbers with no rhyme or reason

They are. Totally meaningless.

OP, don't take that 5 year mission stuff too literally. It was never mentioned in the series and was never considered in the writing.
This was episodic television. Except for the very rare occassion in which prior episodes were referenced, there is absolutely no basis for believing episodes occurred in anything resembling production order.

 

[F. King Daniel]

It can be fun to try and figure out what order the "events" happened, and at what point in the future it all took place, using all the clues and evidence available (yes, I know it's just a tv show and not some archeological expedition, and there is no secret pattern to find), including using reverse-continuity tidbits dropped into much later Star Treks, like Voyager's "Q2" which stated that Kirk's five-year mission ended in 2270, and the dates given in STXI (where stardates aren't random numbers but earth years).

 

[Wingsley]

Was it ever stated on screen when the 5 year mission began? It seemed that in Where No Man has gone before Kirk and Spock had a good friendship and seemed they had been serving together a long time.

Could WNMHGB be late in that first year? middle of the second? that would synch up with the new timeline a little better created in Trek XI.

In the confines of TOS itself, no. Within TOS, taken by itself, there are contradictory references as to when TOS takes place. Much of canonical references to the "dating" of TOS were superimposed over the TREK franchise by subsequent movies and series.

Having said all that, these superimposed references, (which are not necessarily consistent, either) have over the years established "Where No Man..." as having taken place in 2265 and the Enterprise's famous five-year-mission as having ended in 2270. Since "Where No Man..." was filmed in 1965, it would seem that the (roughly) implied "official" position of Paramount (again, having slowly and gracelessly evolved over the years) that a given TOS ep would be (roughly) set some 300 years after it was filmed in Hollywood. So if an ep was produced in 1967, it can be assumed to be set in (roughly) 2267.

The logic behind this is far from perfect, to be sure. But it does "work" if you don't take it too literally.

As for whether "Where No Man..." is technically part of the "five year mission", well, that depends on how literally you drink the Paramount Kool-Aid. It was never made clear what was meant by a "five year mission" to begin with. What does it mean? What does it entail? One could extrapolate either way. Was the Enterprise modified/refit after returning from Delta Vega, thus suggesting this to be the point at which the five year clock started ticking? Or did the five year clock start when Kirk took command from Pike, presumably some time before the ship received orders to leave the Galaxy? You can make arguments either way.

Consider this: Capt. Kirk was ordered to take the Enterprise on a deep, deep space probe into a supposedly dangerous extragalactic area. The Enterprise discovers what's left of the S.S. Valiant, and it's not clear if that's what Kirk was sent there to find or if this discovery was a surprise. After clashing with the Barrier, the Enterprise is crippled and suffers casualties. The dialogue in the story suggests the ship's crew is able to effect repairs while at Delta Vega and then returns to the nearest home port, however, it is not explicitly spelled out that this is what happened. Did the Enterprise return to starbase, or did Kirk go back out to probe again before going home?

Could "Where No Man..." have been an aborted mission by itself? When the barrier was (supposedly) documented by a Federation starship for the first time, perhaps that mission was scrubbed and the Enterprise was subsequently recalled, refit, recrewed and reassigned with an entirely different (five year) mission.

You could make an equally persuasive argument that Starfleet sent Kirk and company to investigate some garbled signal, after having previously sent out probes into that area, and maybe Kirk had some idea what he would find there. So maybe Starfleet had suspicions about what was "out there" beyond Delta Vega, and the Enterprise was sent there for a limited short-term mission before returning to home base for refit before starting the new mission.

We don't really know.

We assume that Enterprise returned to home base immediately after Delta Vega, then was refit under Kirk and Scotty's direct supervision, and then TOS began some time after launch. You can therefore make the argument that the five year clock did not start ticking until after that launch.

When it comes to Kirk knowing Spock and/or Mitchell prior to their extragalactic voyage, it is entirely possible these men served together before the probe. Where they may have served together and in what capacity was never made clear. Spock said he served with Pike for over 11 years. And Kirk told Mendez he met Pike for the first time "when he was promoted to Fleet Captain. I took over command of the Enterprise from him." Depending on how you take this, Kirk could have briefly served as Pike's XO (or as a junior captain in a flotilla under Pike's flag) before assuming permanent command of the Enterprise. Again, depending on how you take the most recent movie, we still don't know.

 

[startrekrcks]

Isn't STXI set before the 5 year mission?

 

[Timo]

It takes place sometime in the future.

No. It doesn't take place at all. It was filmed as a pilot and not intended to be aired at all - so any pretense that it did eventually turn into a Star Trek adventure is total nonsense, completely unauthoritative, and an insult to the original creators of the pilot. Plus it raped their childhood.

After seeing STXI, which starts the mission in 2258...

Except that it doesn't. And I dare predict that the second movie with that cast is not going to be related to any five-year missions, either...

The dialogue in the story suggests the ship's crew is able to effect repairs while at Delta Vega and then returns to the nearest home port, however, it is not explicitly spelled out that this is what happened. Did the Enterprise return to starbase, or did Kirk go back out to probe again before going home?

If we accept that Kirk didn't return so far home that he'd have gotten a full set of repairs, a proper crew rotation, and a fill-up on dilithium crystal spares, then many a thing from the early regular episodes becomes more logical. But even if Kirk remained at the far frontier, new orders could have reached him. And, just like in TNG, it does seem as if a truly ambitious mission were aborted and followed by a more generic set of adventures.

You could make an equally persuasive argument that Starfleet sent Kirk and company to investigate some garbled signal, after having previously sent out probes into that area, and maybe Kirk had some idea what he would find there. So maybe Starfleet had suspicions about what was "out there" beyond Delta Vega, and the Enterprise was sent there for a limited short-term mission before returning to home base for refit before starting the new mission.

Sounds reasonable. When Kirk ventures into the Barrier, risking all, he quotes as the reason the need to find out what dangers lie ahead for those who might come after our heroes. Quite possibly his assigned mission was one of opening the path for a true out-of-the-galaxy expedition.

Also, some of what we learn of Dr. Dehner's mission sounds like she expected to only stay aboard for a short while and then report back. Wouldn't work if the ship were headed out into the deepest unknown.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Anticitizen]

It's possible that the Enterprise we saw in the series was undergoing a particular 5-year deployment. That doesn't mean that Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc didn't serve on that same ship in a previous deployment. I think of it as the current military's framework - you sign up for service for X number of years, and at the end, you can choose to leave or re-enlist, McCoy's 'reserve activation clause' notwithstanding. If you signed up for duty and were posted aboard the Enterprise, you were making a five-year commitment for duty. At the end of those five years, the ship came home, and staffing/roster changes occurred - some people went back home, others were reassigned to different ships, some stayed aboard. The ship would undergo maintenance and refitting, and perhaps that weird whatever-particle sweep/scan/cleansing the Ent-D underwent in that TNG episode, etc. (Pardon my memory, I'm primarily a TOS-ite.) In the interim, during the five-year mission, various people came and went as replacement staff - you've gotta fill in for all those dead redshirts after all

 

[Ssosmcin]

Actually, Star Trek II did a pretty good job with the 23rd Century label. If we go by the most consistent time frame stated, the series takes place in the final years of the 22nd century. Roughly 200 years after Khan left earth, and 200 hundred years after Kirk is captured at Cape Kennedy ("That oughtta be just about right"). Squire of Gothos confuses things a bit, but everyone ignore that. So, the first season take place around 2197. That would put TWOK at 2212 - which is the 23rd century. BUT...McCoy's bottle of Romulan Ale has a year of 2283, and "it takes this stuff a while to ferment." So unless McCoy traveled through time, or there was a misprint on the label, that kills the calculations.

Of course, if we go by the inconsistent years stated throughout the series, that mean Zephram Cochrane disappeared in 2047, and will discover "the space warp" any time now...

Yeah, I know it's all just TV...

 

[Wingsley]

There's another "Menagerie" wrinkle to consider:

Remember the scene where Commodore Mendez introduces Kirk and company to the disfigured Pike for the first time? If you will recall the scene in the hallway prior to Mendez opening the door, Mendez remarks to Kirk that Pike was a "big, handsome man, about your age". But if Kirk and Pike were even within five years, Kirk would then have to be considerably older than what we were shown in TOS. Remember, Pike was shown commanding the Starship Enterprise on an interstellar deployment 13 years before his "delta rays" injury.

Go figure!

 

[Mytran]

That wrinkle is pretty much constrained to Commodore Mendez' comment though. Kirk is either 33 or 34 at the time of the episode - perhaps Mendez simply meant that Pike was in his "prime" before the accident. With the advent of 23rd Century medicine, perhaps that period covers a man into his 40s?

As for the "2283" romulan ale date - it's Romulan ale! Why should we expect ithere to be a Terran year on it?

 

[Warped9]

The way I put my chronology together WNMHGB takes place in 2270 some months after Kirk takes over from Pike. Within about a year after that I have the Enterprise refitted and embarking on her 5-year voyage around mid 2271.

As you can see I don't have much time for the "official" chronology put out by Pocket books. I think they chose 2265/66 just because it kinda gels with 1965/66.

I prefer my chronology a little less cute and tidy.

 

[Timo]

Mendez remarks to Kirk that Pike was a "big, handsome man, about your age".

Emphasis on "was". He no longer is a big, handsome man, so why would he be about Kirk's age, either?

I can't for a moment believe that the writer of that line intended anything other than "Kirk now is what Pike was then - which is a bit scary, in terms of what Kirk perhaps will be". I mean, the writer in all likelihood wasn't an idiot. And he put quite a bit of emphasis on Pike being Kirk's predecessor if not quite mentor: higher rank, old colleague of Spock, handed over the ship to Kirk. He wouldn't have contradicted himself.

Pike was shown commanding the Starship Enterprise on an interstellar deployment 13 years before his "delta rays" injury.

Indeed. Of course, that deployment showed him more or less collapsing under the strain of an assignment Kirk would have considered a milk run. Perhaps that goes with him wearing the same rank markings as the Lieutenant known as Number One? The grey on his temples might not be due to age at all, but to the strain of being an exceptionally junior officer trusted with a giant starship...

Timo Saloniemi