HOME | DD
thefirstfleet — Star Trek timelines explained
#chart #discovery #enterprise #reboot #star #timeline #trek
Published: 2017-10-24 20:32:48 +0000 UTC; Views: 7496; Favourites: 94; Downloads: 97
Redirect to original
Description
My interpretation of the current state of the Trekverse, with all the reboots and re-interpretations...Related content
Comments: 124
That's okay. I always get confused wether Enterprise is relevant, especially when it comes to how many starships bore the name. The Enterprise-E is classed as the Sixth starship to bear the name (as in Starfleet vessel), and in DS9 "Trials and Tribble-ations", it is stated that there have been six ships to bear the name. Since this was filmed before ENT was created, this means the original Enterprise, the Enterprise-A, the Enterprise-B, the Enterprise-C, the Enterprise-D, and the Enterprise-E.
The writers really have made things complicated haven't they!
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Oh yeah, lots of continuity errors across all of Trek. That said yes, Enterprise is considered relevant. You must remember too that the NX-01 herself is not a Federation starship, its United Earth Starfleet.
And if you follow the soft canon novels, the Enterprise is retired upon the signing of the Federation charter. Thus there is no Federation starship to bear the name until the NCC-1701.
Now, this assumes you follow soft canon, which is open to interpretation. If you are like me, you mix soft canon with head (or personal) canon. So in my story I am writing now, the NX-01 became NCC-001, Federation Starfleet's first ship. All the other surviving ships from the Earth-Romulan War (as in my head canon Earth built a large fleet of ships like the Intrepid and Delta types) were given numbers up to 149, with the first Federation joint built ship, the Daedalus being NCC-150, as stated on its canon model.
In said story Enterprise served until 2170 when she was finally retired. Then in 2182 when a new cruiser class was being launched, the new Enterprise (which I have deemed 'The Lost Enterprise' under the theory of the same name), the NCC-1051. This is part of my story of course so not canon but. So if you follow my stuff, Enterprise-E is the 8th ship to bear the name. Which is only 2 more on the list so, not too much deviation.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
How's this for explaining the events seen in ENT!
In order to protect the timeline better during the Temporal Cold War, Daniels' faction secretly altered the timeline themselves, creating a new one that branched off from the original. The original timeline carried on safe and sound (no NX-01, no Xindi attack on Earth etc...), and the new one bore the brunt of the different TCW factions manipulations (Klingons encountered earlier than 2223, Romulans before 2156 etc...). In this new timeline Daniels was safe to inform Archer of the future events of this timeline.
When the TCW ended the new timeline was allowed to continue, safeguarding the unaltered original in case a new TCW started.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Too complicated and again assumes ENT is separate from all but one of the timelines when it in fact is not. Whatever happens, whenever it happens, the events in Enterprise are the basis for the creation of Starfleet and The Federation. Even the Kelvin timeline acknowledges this to some extent in the form of ST
You have to remember, Trek is literally riddled with continuity errors because the writers of the Original series couldn't see the future. So writers over the years have tried to keep things to where they make sense. You could argue why Enterprise isn't mentioned in TOS and TNG is simply because it wasn't relevant in any conversations between characters in said series. Though as I recall there is a tie-in at the end of Enterprise to TNG in its final episode. But still.
You have to assume that everything not explicitly stated as either alternate or Kelvin timeline is on the same timeline, thus ENT, TOS, TAS (if you accept TAS to begin with, I don't), TMP, TNG, the TNG movies, and anything after.
Not to mention the myriad of soft canon books which are open to both interpretation and acceptance. Plus anything fan made which falls under your personal Head Canon.
Now you see how complicated it gets when you don't add in all the timeline splits Anno? Just stick to the K.I.S.S. method my friend, makes life easier.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
There was the Space Shuttle Enterprise, which gave its name to the Warp Ring Enterprise which gave its name to the NX-01 which gave its name to the second Constitution class ship Enterprise, first Enterprise in Starfleet and the Federation. The others were Earth military and paramilitary groups. Then 5 direct descendants of the 'USS Enterprise NCC-1701' (which is the ships full name)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Its easy for people to forget about earlier ships. Most people don't know about the CV-6 Enterprise that gave the 1701 her name. Most decorated ship in WWII and participated in more battles than any other US ship. Ask anyone about her and they may remember CV-65 the first nuclear powered carrier or the upcoming CV-80. So its easy to believe officers in the late 2300's could forget a ship from the 2150's
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
They wouldn't have forgotten about the NX-01, seeing all the major events it's crew took part in. So why wasn't it in the line up on the TMP Enterprise (the ringship was), or on the wall in the Enterprise-D's conference lounge, or amongst the models on the Enterprise-E?
ENT has really messed up the Trek continuity, as it has already been established that Earth's first contact with the Klingon Empire took place in 2223, and had resulted in ongoing hostilities. It has also been stated that the orginisation known as Starfleet was created in 2161, alongside the Federation (before that Earth had the United Earth Space Probe Agency).
Plus the Romulans weren't encountered by humans until 2156, which started the United Earth/Romulan Empire War (2156-2160). Both sides fought using "lasers and nuclear missiles" and the Romulan ships had "no cloaking devices and primitive warp drives".
The events and background in ENT were quite possibly created by the Temporal Cold War, and weren't corected afterwards, resulting in an altered timeline (these do have a habit igpf eventually being corrected).
All the information I've got is from the Star Trek Chronology, which was actually created for Trek writers to use in order to keep the continuity straight. All the information in it comes from Trek episodes and films.
And the first STARFLEET ship to bear the name Enterprise is the USS Enterprise NCC-1701, launched in 2245 under Capt. Robert April, with Cmdr. George Kirk as First Officer (before this Kirk had only served on Starbase's, which puts a dent in JJ's timeline).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
-The same reason why the Enterprise-C you see on screen does not match the Enterprise-C see in the D's conference room. Things change as time goes on. Thats because Enterprise (show) didn't exist yet.
-Kirk asks for an immediate past history of the quadrant. Quadrants were used in TOS to define small regions of space, not 4 regions of the galaxy. For example: Quadrant 9, Quadrant 904, Quadrant 448. Spock says in this Quadrant UFP and KE have been in conflict since the initial contact. So both parties tried to settle the area at the same time and it lead to War, starting with the inconclusive battle of Donatu IV. Also the implication of kirks request for Immediate past history might not include events from a century prior. Where Klingons and Earth had a problematic history. Also the UFP did not exist at that time, and this the UFP might not have had any interaction or relations with the klingons until they both moved into the Donatu IV system. Thus a disasterous initial encounter lead to war. Ent and Disco both fit into this understanding.
-UESPA oversaw Earth Starfleet missions in the Jonathan Archer times. They even contributed to the construction of the NX-01.
You can't take TOS material as solid fact. It is constantly retconned or even simply ignored by all Star Trek series, even TOS abandons its own lore at times.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Reading all the comments, its amazing how much vitriol there still is over "canon" vs "non-canon" vs. whatever the hell Discovery is.
I've given up on it all.
(And this from somebody with 174 plastic star trek model. in his closet/storage room ).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I doN't care about canon, I have my own fanon, which is enough for me. Hail the USS Polaris
I just wanted to show my interpretation of the timelines.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, I know. 
I'm a fan that can quote original episodes line-by-line, and Discover just didn't do it for me. I view it as it own thing, and as a failed experiment on many levels, both behind and in front of the screen.
And your interpretation is the way most view the timelines, I certainty view it as that way.
I'm just fried from it all of late. "MY" Star Trek is gone, and it's not coming back.
I'm just too tired to care this week anymore.
I have other, far more important, issues in my life of late.
I do like the artwork however, that's why I watch you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Nope! It's all nonsense...
This is something that I knew would happen as soon as STD came on the scene. It's this desperate need for Trek fans to explain away all the inconsistancies, whether it be to shoehorn in a previously rejected starship into an already overburndened design legacy, or trying to explain away inconsistancies by connecting things that are completely unconnected, or in this case seperate everything into 'other timelines'... (not that I can talk as this is something I used myself as a form of self-preservation of my own internal Star Trek continuity and sanity ) ... when it gets to this point, it all becomes somewhat exasperating and cringeworthy.
STD should have just been D, a standalone Sci-Fi show with no connection to Star Trek. By standing on it's own, it would have to evolve on it's own, create it's own legacy and value and interest from not only general Sci-Fi fans, but also Star Trek fans.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Yes but Discovery would fit fit ANY Canon at all points seeing the technology would never fit Pure TOS Canon by a long shot...which it doesen't.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I view Enterprise and Discovery to be prequels to J.J Trek in the Kelvin universe. Same as I consider both TAS and Star Trek Continues to be Canon along with TNG and DS9. Along with select Voyager episodes.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Impossible since Discovery takes place 2 years after Jar Trek.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I look at Discovery as a prequel to the Abrams Hard Reboot (NuTrek). It would allow for ENTERPRISE to have been real in this universe all of TOS, TAS, TNG, VOYAGER and DS9 would have been left to the prime universe to which DISCOVERY is in no way connected. From what I understand Discovery is set some 30 years before TOS time era. So, again I could accept it as a prequel to NuTrek (Abrams timeline) but NOT as part of the prime universe or prime timeline.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Impossible since Discovery takes place 2 years after Jar Trek.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So what year is is supposed to be set? TOS was set in 2266. Kirk first takes command in 2266 of the 1701. The events of STAR TREK 6 was 2293. The 1701 was destroyed at Genesis in 2285. The Enterprise "A" was commissioned in 2286. Sulu took command of Excelsior in 2290. The Enterprise "B" was commissioned in 2296. So, HOW is Discovery set 2 years AFTER STAR TREK if Star Trek goes on and on?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I didn't say Star Trek, not was it a typo. I call it Jar Trek, which is the Kelvin Timeline which is 2 years AFTER it. and 8 years before TOS, which is also 2 years after the Cage TOS.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
OK. I have not actually sat down to watch Discovery yet. I keep reading negative reviews that say basically not to waste my time with it. They are comparing Discovery to SGU in that it just derails everything prior to it and retcons the good stuff.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Unlike most Star Trek series, you have to watch it in order, meaning don't bother starting at episode 6, because somewhere your going to have to start at 1, and get the rest in. The comparision is fair considering where are we going with this series. If it is before TOS then somehow it all ties in somehow to the events that would lead to it. Yet there are new species, new worlds, new Technology, and other incompatibilities to answer for (such as Spore Drive). Then there are the purposed differences as it's about an individual more than persay a crew. Sure there are others, a Captain, and others, but this format is centralized as opposed to building Characters. SGU, I may have went 10 episodes until I gave up on that, and maybe it was experience that has my Threat Ganglia to give up in 4 episodes here, but that's me. It's my Opinion that seeing this adds nothing to my interpretation of Star Trek.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I am just a big stickler on continuity in these shows. I tend to nitpick and I shouldn't but I get passionate about my fandoms.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I am very Continuity minded. Even after ENT, I was satisfied an ATTEMPT was made to keep Continuity. From what I've seen of Discovery, Continuity is an After thought. Sure they kept some names, some star systems, even the neat sound effect of the bridge. They drop Easter Eggs like they are having a massive miscarriage, but still the continuity is ruined as if this is 2256, why does it feel like 2456? In one episode (the very first) it all started with a Cloaked Klingon ship, and from there add all those damn lensflare to say....this is not your fathers Star Trek, nor his sons, nor anything like it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
On another note, I read that Nicholas Meyer (director of STAR TREK II and STAR TREK VI and co-writer of STAR TREK IV with Leonard Nimoy) is preparing his own NEW STAR TREK project. We do not know if it is another new TV series or a Movie. Some claim that Discovery is dead after season 2 and that Nicholas Meyer's project will replace Discovery as a new TV show. Nicholas Meyer was linked very early to Discovery but dropped out of the Discovery project citing creative differences and lack of control of the final product. If he left over the technology issue I would not blame him. He may have gotten a bad feeling from it and I trust his judgment as he directed Wrath of Khan and The Undiscovered Country and co-wrote The Voyage Home with Leonard Nimoy. He worked with Nimoy again on the script to The Undiscovered Country. He has a great track record and IF he is doing his own STAR TREK project, Then I am super-excited.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I haven't read nothing definitive that he left the team. In anycase I did read an interview dated Septemeber 8, 2016 and noted some disimilar reasoning to the end product.
As stated in sciencefiction.com/2016/09/08/…
"It was about finding a space in the chronology to maneuver and create stuff. Bryan didn’t want to use the same characters from other series, and a 10-year pre-Kirk thing seemed perfect.”
Why was it perfect? Why not 20 years before Kirk, or 20 Years before the Enterprise is even built? What is this love affair with Kirk, and making a new series? Questions to be answered in TOS? If there are, it's been 50 years, which most of these are established.
adding the Synopsis of:
The brand-new “Star Trek” will introduce new characters seeking imaginative new worlds and new civilizations, while exploring the dramatic contemporary themes that have been a signature of the franchise since its inception in 1966.
Is pure nonsense. It's the Games of Thrones goes to Outer space. What is lacking is this fascinating future you want to be a part of. It was once said that DS9 may have portrayed the future a bit too dark. In this version it seems that this future is just as bleak as our existence today.
"The defining factor of Roddenberry's vision is the optimistic view of the future ... Once you lose that, you lose the essence of what Star Trek is. That being said… Star Trek has always been a mirror to the time it reflected and [the topical question now] is how do you preserve and protect what Starfleet is in the weight of a challenge like war and the things that have to be done in war."
—Executive producer Alex Kurtzman on the balance between classic Star Trek and new elements in Discovery
Perhaps Alex should have done some kind of research as this has been covered in establish Star Trek way before Discovery in DS9, as well ENT.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The series that might have been: Back when Voyager was on, they toyed with the idea of a STAR TREK: EXCELSIOR series with Captain Sulu. They did have Sulu and company in a thirtieth anniversary special on Voyager but we of course never got a Captain Sulu on Excelsior series or even a movie. A missed opportunity. I also would like a series set in between the Kirk Era and the The next Generation series. There is almost 70 years of space there. We saw the commission of the Enterprise "B" and we know that the Enterprise "C" was destroyed defending a Klingon outpost from the Romulans, helping relations between Starfleet and the Klingon Empire. What about a series set about 20 years after the Enterprise "B" was first commissioned? There would still be a good 50 years (plus or minus a few years) before the TNG series and we could follow the adventures of another ship from the end of the "B" era into the beginning of the "C" era. THAT would be a great time setting for a series, set in between the lost lost years. It could still fit in with the Prime Time-line or Prime Universe. I wonder IF this is what Nicholas Meyer is thinking too? The ship would not necessarily need to be an Ambassador-class but could be an experimental one-off design from that era.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What was obvious when all of this started, they didn't want ANY past Star Trek Characters to ever appear. They didn't want an X year mission, they want an Anthology, simply because, it would be easier to pull the plug if it don't work out. I mean, HELL they don't want another Enterprise incident.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I actually like ENTERPRISE. To me it was far better than Voyager. DS9 had its own style with the psychodrama it delved into. Voyager was hard to watch as it was that bad to me anyway. ENTERPRISE renewed my spark of interest. The idea of the first ship before The Federation was formed. The first Warp 5 vessel on a mission of true exploration, going where no human had gone before. I still can rewatch it over and over like the original series. I can't do that with Voyager. Some episodes of Voyager I could barely get through once.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DSP- From the start, it felt like a Soap Opera. It was like yeah, you can miss an episode or two, but you can get into it. At first I was deciding where it was gong. Cardassian, Bajorian, Gamma Quadrant, or as some of these episodes went...no where. But I kept checking in to find out the the first Three choices were the set up. I loved DS9, and I can watch it all over again...except that one stupid episode whose name slips my mind.
VOY- How to take a great premise, and mucj it up with bad writing. I do like Voyager mind you, but like you said, an episode would come on, and I would groan and say There has to be something better on TV. There are plenty of winner episodes in VOY, it's just there is no good long STRINGS of good episodes. You get a good one, and then two not so great ones, then a great one, and then a meh one, etc, etc, etc.
ENT _ Season one, was OK, although I was expecting a different first contact with the Klingons, and Season Two languished. But I blame the one thing I thought was the absolutly stupid idea....THE TEMPORAL COLD WAR. By the end of Voyager, I had enough with Time Travel, and now you give me a series that depends on a Time Travel Backstory. Perhaps that's why I love season 4. NO XINDI, NO SULIBAN, NO CLOAKING DEVICES (cept In the Mirror Darkly), and no goddamn time traveling! I love that crew, and I'll accept it as cannon as it kept the future canon MOSTLY intact (Phased Cannons, and Photonic Torpedoes), just wish we saw the start of the Romulan-Earth war instead of that stupid 9-11 BS season Three!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Season 4 Of ENT seemed like its best episodes to me. I was sad that it did not go for a 5th season. Manny Coto took over from Rick Berman who left the show shortly after season 4 premiered. There evidently was a falling out between Berman and Paramount. Manny Coto helped write some of season 4 and his ideas were on track. He should have gotten to do another season of ENT and I bet it would have been great. Cotos ideas included the Augments and the idea that (some) people on Earth would oppose Aliens being on Earth. It set up conflict and that is when Trek thrives.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well Season 4 still personified the Story arc. Between Augments, Vulcans, and Unification, but they were great episodes. There was content that fit into the Canon. We actually get to see an Aenar as well. There was more substance, more commitment to the stories, and you were like, why didn't you do this 3 seasons ago. There was only one thing I didn't like about Season 4, the very last episode which I consider the worse episode ever.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not everyone cares for the 'Mirror Universe' stories. They can be a bit too far off course (no pun intended)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I liked them....to a point. DS9 was a bit Sadistic, and ENT was a bit.....too speculative.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, BUT we did get to see Jolene Blalock and Linda Park in those mid-drif uniforms. And we got to see Jolene's long blonde hair from under that dark wig. Captain Forest and Hoshi blew my mind.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I will say this much, the ENT version had better content.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree on that. Thanks for the chat.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I haven't really been a fan of Discovery. It just doesn't really feel like Star Trek to me, and every reference they make just reminds me that it isn't. I'll stick with your 'Real' cannon interpretation, even if it means throwing out some cool stories from STO.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'll stick with 20th century Trek, 21st century Trek has failed the further we've gotten into this century. I fear what will come next as it's progressively gotten worse.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Personally I prefer the simpler option
Kelvin Timeline: Completely separate universe with a Kelvin Prime Timeline.
Original Timeline: ENT-DSC-TOS-TOS Movies-TNG/DS9/VOY/TNG Movies. However parts of all were removed from the time line as a result of the Temporal Cold War, such as the existence of cloaking devices in the ENT era.
Differences between DSC and TOS can be explained as TOS aesthetic actually belonging to the late 2100s/early 2200s as the Daedalus class shares the same design aesthetic as the Constitution class and the Daedalus class was completely retired in 2196 while the first Constitution class was launched in the 2220s.
Starfleet also rarely upgrades the exterior of a ship beyond minor surface changes (hence why the 24th century Excelsior and Miranda classes look exactly like their old 23rd century counterparts on the outside.
DSC actually makes some sense as a bridge between the TOS and TMP aesthetic and matches with the fact that, according to the original designer, the Miranda class never had an upgrade like the Constitution class.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DSC and TOS Technologies are totally incompatible, as well some of it may as well be the 25th Century at this point leaving all of it very uncanon.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I wouldn't say that. Discovery is a new ship (or newly refitted ship, hard to tell) full of prototype technology while the Enterprise is an older ship built on proven technology.
And before you complain about the touchscreen or holograms instead of more analogue controls, we've had all three for quite some time in real life and almost every time we go back to analogue controls after awhile.
The tech is not completely incompatible. I agree that it could and should have probably been handled a bit differently, but as with all things there have to be some compromises. While the core fanbase loves complete recreations of the original set and costumes, it's harder to sell that to the network since they assume that we're all the lowest common denominator and will not accept anything less than the newest and flashiest effects.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Swing and a miss. I'm talking the mechanics of Technology in 2256, not the Touch screens, and bells, and whistles we all enjoy now. I mean how could such a prospect as this Spore Drive never been mentioned? How did the Klingons get a cloaking device 12 years prior having the technology? How is site to site Transporting available when it was not practice due to precise pinpoint positioning not yet available until th 24th Century? From what I've seen this may as well be the 25th Century than 2256 which is apparently the least canon statement made about the series thus far. But hey I guess 50 years of anything can easily be dismissed as long as it says Star Trek on it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
How could such a prospect as this Spore Drive never been mentioned?
It's either going to be a failure or, if my theory is right, it's related to the Federation's experiments into Transwarp drive.
Plus there's this thing in literature called 'conservation of detail'.
How did the Klingons get a cloaking device 12 years prior having the technology
Clearly that's a major plot point that will be explained. It also makes a hell of a lot more sense than Enterprise where cloaking devices popped up everywhere in the 22nd century.
How is site to site Transporting available when it was not practice due to precise pinpoint positioning not yet available until th 24th CenturyExcept Scotty performed site-to-site transport in Star Trek IV and in A Piece of the Action.
From what I've seen this may as well be the 25th Century than 2256 which is apparently the least canon statement made about the series thus far. But hey I guess 50 years of anything can easily be dismissed as long as it says Star Trek on it.And from what I've seen, you haven't put that much thought into it and simply hate it because it's not exactly like the older Star Treks. Even though the biggest complaints about Voyager and Enterprise back when they were on the air was that they were too much like Next Generation.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So, if it failed it shouldn't be mentioned, which is why Voyager wasted so many episodes trying to resurrect Transwaro Drive.
Apparently you don't know your history, so I will ignore that lame answer.
It was performed twice, The Enterprise Incident, as well Day of the Dove, which also explains why it is preferable NOT to do it.
Now here's where we are in agreement seeing that the writing, the production, as well as the insight went to hell. None the less each and every series paid some kind of attention to the source material, which sadly I see no such effort in 4 episodes of Discovery. Sad fact you can call this series anything else but Star Trek, and maybe it would be interesting. But these long drawn out story arcs, with people I really don't care for. Overblown fx, with no logic why we need them to begin with (an EV suit over a shuttle....yeah...great move). Fanservice to a point it's embarrassing seeing nothing else really matters. These are the lessons that were never learned from Enterprise, and ramped up on a lever of the Game of Thrones. Nah, it's not Trek in my mind, and maybe some survivors on Corvan II would have been treated by a fully trained medical staff after being rescued instead of simply jumping away, and not come back, but in reality I guess that would have never happen either.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>