TMP Theory on Captain Archer

[Tenacity]

No. It's constantly referred to as a Starship throughout the entire series.

But do the people in the 24th century consider it to be a "starship?" In Bread and Circuses, Captain Merik said that his survey vessel (the Beagle) wasn't a starship but a spceship. It was a small class four stardrive vessel, with a crew of forty seven, yet only a spaceship.

ENT acts as a direct prequel to a lot of TOS stuff.

But is different in some important ways too, the timeline that comes from details in the first four series are radically different in ENT's timeline.

"These Are the Voyages..." (ENT) shows that ENT and TNG (and thus TOS, TAS, DS9, and VOY) take place in the same timeline.

Not really, the characters of Riker and Troi look noticeably different than they did in TNG, Troi's clothing is a different color.

And with a major crisis in progress, the Riker from "our" TNG would not be spending LARGE AMOUNTS of time playing on the holodeck, it wouldn't be in line with his previously displayed behavior.

 

[MarsWeeps]

But do the people in the 24th century consider it to be a "starship?" In Bread and Circuses, Captain Merik said that his survey vessel (the Beagle) wasn't a starship but a spceship.

Well, you would have to provide some type of on screen evidence that the people in the 24th century ignored the fact that NX-01 was called a Starship during its time and then somehow was retroactively demoted to being only a Spaceship years later. What's the difference between Spaceship and Starship anyhow? What prevented Merik's ship from being called a Starship? Was it because is was it was in the merchant service? Kirk's Enterprise was both referred to as a Spaceship and a Starship (USS = United Space Ship, mentioned on screen.)

 

[locutus101]

I think it's at least plausible that, if we accept the alternate timeline approach to First Contact instead of the predestination paradox one, the ship may have been renamed 'Enterprise' following Cochrane's hearing of the name and Lilys time aboard. Simply changing the name would neatly explain why didn't come up later when discussing the 'fifth starship to bear the name' and so on, as well as the various displays of Enterprises. Perhaps pre First Contact timeline, the NX-01 was called 'Phoenix' or 'Endeavour' or something.

Or maybe there wasn't one. Remember that in the perfect colony "The mastermind society" or something like that. The manager of the society didn't even know of the transporter device and that suggests that they departed at least ten years before the Enterprise, plus there was that other society with the clones and the drunken hicks. I mean all these people didn't need Archer to go way father than he'd ever gone with his "fast ship". To me it means that the timeline without Archer was way better than the one with him (what with the cave people and the cowboys in the expanse). I mean, the same event that made the Archer's enterprise exist also started the xindi war and that inane temporal cold war.

 

[Tenacity]

The "non-Archer" timeline was certainly more advanced by the mid 22nd century. One conjecture (imo) is that (for whatever reason) the Vulcans never attempted to hold Humanity back, or the Vulcans did and Humanity would have no part of it.

 

[The Wormhole]

The "non-Archer" timeline was certainly more advanced by the mid 22nd century. One conjecture (imo) is that (for whatever reason) the Vulcans never attempted to hold Humanity back, or the Vulcans did and Humanity would have no part of it.

How do you figure? Vulcans weren't holding humans back in the Mirror Universe, indeed the humans actually conquered the Vulcans and made them a slave race. Yet the Terran Empire Starfleet isn't much more advanced than the Prime Universe one. I think the only real advancement is that in the MU they already had talking computers in the 22nd century.

 

[WebLurker]

The "non-Archer" timeline was certainly more advanced by the mid 22nd century. One conjecture (imo) is that (for whatever reason) the Vulcans never attempted to hold Humanity back, or the Vulcans did and Humanity would have no part of it.

How? We knew so little about that era, since not much was established, and plenty of the "contradictions" were with fan theories, not actual canonical info

 

[YJAGG]

in yesterday's enterprise they mention the Archer system ...

 

[Tenacity]

How do you figure? Vulcans weren't holding humans back in the Mirror Universe

The mirror universe and it's reciprocal universe usually are tied together, similar technology, many of the same people (not all) existed and were in proximity to where they were in the opposite universe.

We knew so little about that era, since not much was established

We know from pieces of dialog and displayed computer records. In the century before the events of ENT Earth was already sending out deep space exploration missions. A half century before ENT one mission was sent to research a nebula, the closest actual nebula is 400 light years.

Also a half century before, a British starship was sent on a interstellar diplomatic mission.

 

[Nerys Myk]

We know from pieces of dialog and displayed computer records. In the century before the events of ENT Earth was already sending out deep space exploration missions. A half century before ENT one mission was sent to research a nebula, the closest actual nebula is 400 light years.

Refresh my memory. What are you referring to?

 

[Tim Thomason]

Enterprise tells me that it happens in the Star Trek universe (TATV showing Riker and Troi, and the epilogue with the voiceover by Kirk, plus all the ties between TOS and TNG and DS9 and Voyager). So I choose to "believe" it at face value.

If Discovery comes along and tells us that Captain Archer was a fever-dream, I will have to accept that. Right now, though, the latest piece of official canonical media seems to state outright that they're all the same universe.

Not to mention all the secondary, official media (books, games, comics) that treat Enterprise as having happened with no 'explanation' otherwise. While they sometimes contradict one another, they are very neat and I choose to accept a large majority of them.

Anything made before 2001 won't contain any direct references to Enterprise, of course (except for back-references like Archer IV), so we have to sometimes squint our eyes and pretend in order to fit things together. It's easier for some than for others.

That said, the rec room display has received at least one semi-official explanation (Christopher Bennett's Ex Machina), and it's simply not intended to be all-inclusive in my judgment. The production art that I'm fond of paints Archer as becoming Federation President, so I don't think he could be reasonably painted as an evil torturer and whatnot.

Maybe he was a terrible President (a la GWB?) and history tends to gloss over his earlier achievements.

 

[Sci]

People are over-thinking this. The NX-01 wasn't included in references to earlier Enterprises because ENT hadn't been created yet. The simplest way to reconcile it is to assume they were talking about Federation starships named Enterprise, and not including the United Earth starship.

I do wonder why Picard didn't include such a historically important ship as the NX-01 in his displays aboard the D and E, but there comes a point where one just has to accept that this is all fictional and squint a bit instead of developing convoluted "it's not the REAL timeline" explanations. Maybe Archer defeated Picard's great-grandfather in the 2188 Federation presidential election and Picard holds a small grudge.

 

[The Old Mixer]

For all we know, every Enterprise had a separate shrine dedicated solely to the NX-01.

 

[locutus101]

For all we know, every Enterprise had a separate shrine dedicated solely to the NX-01.

I wonder why it's never mentioned. I have a personal theory about that.

 

[The Old Mixer]

We'd see less than an hour's worth out of every two weeks of these people's lives...they could be having long, in-depth conversations about the glory of Jonathan Archer and the NX-01 when the camera wasn't rolling.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I wonder why it's never mentioned. I have a personal theory about that.

See below

We'd see less than an hour's worth out of every two weeks of these people's lives...they could be having long, in-depth conversations about the glory of Jonathan Archer and the NX-01 when the camera wasn't rolling.

 

[locutus101]

See below

I don't find that very convincing. TOS is mentioned a few times in TNG, DS9 and Voyager. TNG is mentioned on DS9 and Voyager. And DS9 is mentioned on Voyager.

SO how come that ENT is never ever mentioned even once on any of these shows?

 

[Nerys Myk]

I don't find that very convincing. TOS is mentioned a few times in TNG, DS9 and Voyager. TNG is mentioned on DS9 and Voyager. And DS9 is mentioned on Voyager.

SO how come that ENT is never ever mentioned even once on any of these shows?

Because there is no show called Enterprise in-universe.

 

[locutus101]

Because there is no show called Enterprise in-universe.

I don't find that explanation satisfactory.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I don't find that explanation satisfactory.

It's true. There are no Star Trek shows in Star Trek. How weird is that?

 

[locutus101]

It's true. There are no Star Trek shows in Star Trek. How weird is that?

How is that an answer to my question?

I mean it's nice of you to give information I never asked for but how about saying something that is actually relevant to what I said?