The Passage of Time in the Movies

[Komack]

Although I have watched the Star Trek movies countless times, I have always been confused about the length of time which has passed in the Star Trek universe between the films. Specifically:

(1) After Star Trek: TMP, did the crew have a second, five year mission? How much time did Kirk get to captain the newly refurbished Enterprise before being bumped back to Admiral?

(2) A similar question re Star Trek IV. They get a new ship (NCC 1701-A), and we get to see her on one mission (Star Trek V). How much time did Kirk and the crew have aboard the Enterprise A before her decommissioning at the end of Star Trek VI?

If these questions have been asked and answered before, I apologize.

 

[apenpaap]

1: Though canon doesn't say anything about this, many fans assume he had a second five-year mission between TMP and TWOK
2: Memory Alpha says there's 7 years between TVH and TUC.

 

[Jeyl]

1: Though canon doesn't say anything about this, many fans assume he had a second five-year mission between TMP and TWOK
2: Memory Alpha says there's 7 years between TVH and TUC.

Unfortunately we only got to see their worst endeavor.

 

[sbk1234]

Going by what's been shown or mentioned on screen, it's never been said that they have had other 5 year missions. Personally, I think it is a bit narrow in thinking to assume that they always send out their Enterprises for 5 year missions. While it wouldn't change anything to believe that they did, it would also not change anything to believe that they didn't.
In my own fannon, I like to think they did spend more time out there on both ships, but not for the 5 year time span. To me, that just seems too contrived.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Kirk stated in a TV Episode in which him and LCDR McCoy were aging out of control that he was 34. It was approximately two years after he had got command of the USS Enterprise, when at that point he was 32. Other sources stated he was 34 when he attained command of USS Enterprise. Considering he had command of the USS Enterprise since 2264 or 2265, assuming the first statement from the TV-Series is correct (that he was 32 when he received command of the USS Enterprise) he would have been born in 2232 or 2233 (If he received command of the USS Enterprise in 2264 he would be born in 2232, if he received command of the USS Enterprise in 2265, he would have been born in 2233), and if the later statements that he was 34 when he attained command of the Enterprise, he would have been born in 2230 or 2231.

The actor, William Shatner was born March 22, 1931 and was 34 during "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and 35 during the time of the TV Series which aired September 9, 1966.

It would appear by what was stated in TMP that somewhat over 2.5 years had passed between the end of TOS and TMP. Since Kirk had been in command of the USS Enterprise since 2264 or 2265 for what would have been a full five year mission, it would have been 2269 or 2270 when the Enterprise returned to dock (assuming the ship arrived home after the 5 years were up -- if it spent five years in space, then returned home it would be longer). Two and a half years later would have placed the timeline between 2271 or 2272 at the earliest and 2272 to 2273 at the latest (depending on what time of year the USS Enterprise left dock at the start of the five year mission, early in the year it would have probably still been 2271 if they left in 2261, and 2272 if they left in 2265, late in the year it probably would have been 2272 to 2273).

In terms of age, James T. Kirk would have been as young as 37 to as old as 43 (maybe 44 depending on what time of year he was born - if he was born in late March like William Shatner, he would be 43 at oldest) depending on his age when he attained command of the USS Enterprise, what time of year it was when he attained command, and what year it was when he attained command of the ship.

William Shatner in comparison, who was born March 22, 1931 was around 47 or 48 (depending on when they started filming, I think it was in 1979 so he was probably 48) during the filming of the movie and 48 when the movie premiered December 7, 1979. This is why he looked so much older in the movie (plus his hair was thinning -- something which has understandably been a touchy subject for the actor, so he had to wear a wig which unfortunately didn't look at all like his real hair in either color, hair-type, or thickness.)

In Star Trek II, Kirk was celebrating his birthday. It was mentioned either in the script or in some of the writings that Kirk's character was turning 49. Other sources say he was 52. Assuming Kirk's character was 49, and he was born in 2230 or 2231 (which assumes he was 34 when he assumed command of USS Enterprise) he would have been 49 in either 2279 or 2280; if he was born in 2232 or 2233 (which would assume he was 32 at the time he attained command of the USS Enterprise) he would have been 49 in 2281 or 2282. Assuming Kirk's character was 52, and he was born in 2230 or 2231, the year would be 2282 or 2283; if he was born in 2232 or 2233, the year would be 2284 or 2285.

In comparison, the movie was being filmed in 1981 and 1982, and William Shatner would have been anywhere from 50 to 51 years of age (I remember the filming schedule was rather short, however if it started prior to 3/22/81, he would have been 49 briefly).

Granted there are a lot of variables here, as exact details of the show are not known such as what exact date the ship left dock, what date it arrived back in dock at the end of the TV series, exactly how much time passed between TOS and TMP (It said over 2.5 years, which means less than 3, but it could be 2.6 years etc). It is also not entirely clear what year the Captain was born in. I don't know if his birthdate was ever specifically stated.

It is stated that the Constitution-Class vessels flew on 5-year missions. However it is never clearly stated how much time went on between refits...


CuttingEdge100

 

[Praetor]

Good analysis, CuttingEdge101, but you left out the references to it having been fifteen years since Khan was ditched on Ceti Alpha V by Kirk. Also, 'Star Trek: Voyager' later confirmed on-air that the Enterprise's original five-year mission lasted from 2265-2270. 'Space Seed' was said to have happened in 2267, placing TWOK in approximately 2282, rounding up or down no more than 1-2 years to allow for the characters rounding down to 15 years.

I'd be content to round up and assume that TWOK happened in 2284, and Kirk's actual age isn't so much a factor as is his birthday coinciding with the training cruise aboard the Enterprise and therefore causing his emotional stress. One might in fact let a month or so elapse between the opening scenes of the movie and the actual training cruise. This would all coincide better, IMO, with TVH and the 2286/1986 correlation there. It would also allow for the retirement Kirk mentions in 'Generations.'

And I do think the crew went on another five-year mission between TMP and TWOK. I think after TVH though they probably only went on 'special assignments' but might have also been a part of the 3-year 'gaseous anomaly' bit.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Praetor,

Yeah, that's a good point. I actually forgot that particular detail about it being 15-years.

However, it's hard to tell how accurate that is as people sometimes say "that was like ten years ago" even if it was say 9 or 11 years ago.

 

[Praetor]

Well, that's what I meant about it being within 13-17 years, so then they could still say '15' and mean anything along there.

I personally like rounding the movie close to 2285 for the reasons I was saying - which has a lot to do with the fact that those in charge basically decided that certain events took place in certain times and attempted to reference that into being, making it difficult to really draw any other conclusions despite contradictory evidence.

When you think about it, II and III have to take place within a relatively short period of one another - and I think IV specifies it having been eight or so months since the crew went into 'Vulcan exile' - which could be figurative or literal, and could reference their actual arrival on Vulcan, or an unseen event in which the Vulcan government granted them an 'official' exile status. V could take place no less than however many weeks Kirk and Scotty discuss after Kirk comes back to the ship, or it could take place longer. And all we really know about the majority of VI is that it has to take place at least three years after V (for Sulu).

So it's all rather subjective and open to interpretation, IMO. I'm not sure if anyone has tried computing the stardates, for what that's worth.

 

[Timo]

It said over 2.5 years, which means less than 3

Why would over 2.5 mean less than 3?

In TMP, we learn that the ship has been docked for a refit for the past 18 months, and that Kirk has not logged a single star hour for the past 2.5 years, but nothing in the movie tells us how long it has been since Kirk's TOS adventures. It may well be that those adventures are nearly a decade in the past at that point, and that TMP indeed takes place at the timepoint suggested by the ages of the actors.

Indeed, that is supported by the dialogue of the movie: it has been "over 300 years" since the fictional Voyager VI was launched, while the audience would know that the real Voyagers I and II were launched in 1977. The concept of "fictional date is airdate plus three centuries" would then hold, and TMP could take place in 2279 or so.

This would only have to be modified to 2278 or earlier when taking into account TNG "Cause and Effect" which shows Starfleet personnel in the ST2 uniforms instead of the ST:TMP ones. Assuming, that is, that Starfleet would change all uniforms within a year, or whatever time interval we desire, and not e.g. prioritize the uniform change on USS Bozeman.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[ClayinCA]

Also, The Wrath of Khan has to take place in at least 2283 or -84, since Kirk's bottle of Romulan ale was dated 2283.

 

[Praetor]

It said over 2.5 years, which means less than 3

Why would over 2.5 mean less than 3?

In TMP, we learn that the ship has been docked for a refit for the past 18 months, and that Kirk has not logged a single star hour for the past 2.5 years, but nothing in the movie tells us how long it has been since Kirk's TOS adventures. It may well be that those adventures are nearly a decade in the past at that point, and that TMP indeed takes place at the timepoint suggested by the ages of the actors.

Indeed, that is supported by the dialogue of the movie: it has been "over 300 years" since the fictional Voyager VI was launched, while the audience would know that the real Voyagers I and II were launched in 1977. The concept of "fictional date is airdate plus three centuries" would then hold, and TMP could take place in 2279 or so.

This would only have to be modified to 2278 or earlier when taking into account TNG "Cause and Effect" which shows Starfleet personnel in the ST2 uniforms instead of the ST:TMP ones. Assuming, that is, that Starfleet would change all uniforms within a year, or whatever time interval we desire, and not e.g. prioritize the uniform change on USS Bozeman.

Timo Saloniemi

A very good point. I have been trying to figure out how long the production actually inteded to have passed by re-reading my Phase II book but so far I can't find a place where they've actually pinned it down. They may never have pinned it down. I'd argue that the closer to the ages of the actors the better, but I just don't know that it's totally feasible in this case.

Also, The Wrath of Khan has to take place in at least 2283 or -84, since Kirk's bottle of Romulan ale was dated 2283.

Which makes McCoy's 'it takes the stuff a while to ferment' and Kirk's 'ohh...' a rather funny moment. I wonder then if the original intention was that the movie was set A LOT later than 2283?

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Timo,

Why would over 2.5 mean less than 3?

Because Decker would have said "You haven't logged a single star-hour in three years" if it was three years or more since Kirk had been in space. He said "You haven't logged a single star-hour in over two and a half years"...

In TMP, we learn that the ship has been docked for a refit for the past 18 months, and that Kirk has not logged a single star hour for the past 2.5 years, but nothing in the movie tells us how long it has been since Kirk's TOS adventures.

I suppose you could argue that to be true. However it would appear considering that after the Enterprise got home, Kirk was promoted and has been working at Fleet-Ops since. It said he had worked at Fleet Ops for 2.5 years. It seems to co-incide with what Decker wrote.

In the novel, which while not perfectly Canon, seems to reflect Gene Roddenberry's intent that it was around 2.5 years after the TV series ended. He mentioned something about Kirk being around 40 or a little over 40. That would conform pretty well to the data given for Kirk's age, the time of the Enterprise's deployment, and the 2.5 year period he'd been at Fleet Ops.

Indeed, that is supported by the dialogue of the movie: it has been "over 300 years" since the fictional Voyager VI was launched, while the audience would know that the real Voyagers I and II were launched in 1977. The concept of "fictional date is airdate plus three centuries" would then hold, and TMP could take place in 2279 or so.

I suppose if you launched two voyagers a year starting in 1977 to 1979 you would get up to six. However, there are other details in the story which seem to reflect a period of somewhat over 2.5 years between ST: TOS and ST: TMP which I stated earlier.

This would only have to be modified to 2278 or earlier when taking into account TNG "Cause and Effect" which shows Starfleet personnel in the ST2 uniforms instead of the ST:TMP ones. Assuming, that is, that Starfleet would change all uniforms within a year, or whatever time interval we desire, and not e.g. prioritize the uniform change on USS Bozeman.

Good point, although truthfully speaking there were a lot of flaws in that episode. The Soyuz-Class was said to be obsolete in 2278, yet appeared to obviously be a Miranda/Avenger variant, all the other Miranda variants still were in service even in the 2360's and probably 2370's.

Technically the Bozeman was originally supposed to be a Constitution Class vessel from what I read, but for one reason or another they decided to modify the hell out of a Miranda-Class vessel for the depiction.


CuttingEdge100

 

[Timo]

Kirk in TMP says that he has spent "five years out there dealing with unknowns [like V'Ger]", but he doesn't specify that his total space experience is limited to his TOS 5-year mission. The star hours he logged 2.5 years prior to TMP could have been unrelated to the TOS mission, and instead related to space missions that did not involve "dealing with unknowns [like V'ger]".

Regarding the Soyuz class, one might argue that the extreme modifications done on the model justify the dialogue. That is, the subclass would be readily and uniquely identifiable at a glance - and the modifications would be so extreme that once the scenario for which they were performed got outdated, the ship got outdated as well; there would be no sense in modifying it back to a baseline Miranda.

That's almost as good as having the Bozeman be identifiably TOS style. We might for example say that those odd turrets were sensors aimed at defeating early Klingon cloaks, and that they lost all purpose when Klingon cloaks were upgraded - a development that would plausibly happen in the late 2270s.

Of course, the writers were really operating from the old Chronology premise of TMP having taken place as early as 2271, and thus thought that there was plenty of "safety marigin" for introducing the new uniforms. That is, I assume the TMP uniforms could never have been used because they weren't available any more, but the choice of the year would have been made differently (say, the Bozeman might have been from 2287) if the writers really worried about contradicting the TMP timeline.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[cooleddie74]

Five year mission ends: 2270
TMP: Early 2273
TWOK: 2285

 

[Praetor]

Why TWOK in 2285, cooleddie? (I agree with the other two points.)

 

[cooleddie74]

Why TWOK in 2285, cooleddie? (I agree with the other two points.)

Because press materials at the time of TNG's debut in 1987 had the series described as being "78 years after the most recent adventures of Kirk and Spock," which was TVH(1986). And we know from Season 1 that TNG starts in 2364. 78 years before TNG is 2286. That is when TVH happens. TWOK and TSFS happen months before that, which I place in the year 2285.

 

[Praetor]

That's good enough for me, then. I was just curious what you'd based it off of.

 

[cardinal biggles]

^Plus, it also allowed the Romulan Ale a couple of years to ferment.

 

[cooleddie74]

Yeah, the bottle of ale was from 2283. Don't forget! That means the film by definition as early as 1982 had to take place after that year, even before Mike Okuda and his wife compiled the legendary chronology and timeline.

 

[Timo]

And we know from Season 1 that TNG starts in 2364.

To nitpick, we only know from Season 1 that said season ends in 2364... That is, 2363 is a viable starting date for TNG, too.

As for that bottle, some have suggested that 2283 might be a Romulan date. But what are the odds of that? "Fantastic" or "astronomical" won't cut it... And the very fact that Kirk can read the label suggests either that it was written in English for the export market - or then relabeled thus after having been exported (or stolen) from the Romulan Star Empire. It would make no sense for the year to remain Romulan when the rest of the label is translated.

2285 is my favorite for ST2:TWoK, too. If we take this stuff about "Space Seed" being 15 years in the past more or less literally, and allow for 17=15 (as formally allowed) but not for 18=15 (which usually would be considered an error, and banish the thought that Star Trek characters could make errors!), then said TOS episode would have to have happened in 2268 at the earliest. If TOS ends in 2270, that's no problem if you count it by seasons and match the third with the fifth year of the mission.

But what if you don't? The separation between "Space Seed" and the final episode (be it "Turnabout Intruder" or "All Our Yesterdays") is about 3,800 stardates, which might mean closer to four years, but this still works if ST2 is towards the end of 2285. Then again, ST2 has the stardate 8130, where "Space Seed" had 3141, suggesting they take place at the same time of the year, which messes up things a bit.

OTOH, if we assume that ST2 is in fact XY8130 and "Space Seed" is XZ3141 (that is, our heroes drop the first two digits from their dates just like we do), then intriguingly enough the difference would seem to be 15 years sharp... That is, assuming that Y=Z+1. Neat, huh?

Timo Saloniemi