Star Trek Chronology Notes

Miscellaneous Notes And A Little Speculation


After reading "Survivors" it's clear that there are two different New Paris colonies. New Paris was first mentioned in "The Galileo Seven" in the original series as the destination of the "Enterprise's" medical supplies. In "Survivors," New Paris is an ancient Earth colony settled sometime in the 21st Century--and completely out of contact with Earth and the U.F.P. until its rediscovery in the 24th Century. Tech Fandom has the original New Paris world settled in 2105 A.D. and a major colony. Since the TNG New Paris colony was apparently settled decades earlier, the later colony might have been named after the former world believed to be "lost." Anyhow, it's just a name, and in "Legacy" New Paris was simply called Turkana IV...

If the dating of the planet-killer by Spock in Blish's "Star Trek 3" novelization of "The Doomsday Machine" is accurate, then the Borg could very well be the oldest race in the galaxy. The Blish dates are highly questionable (and wrong in many cases) but they are still dates and sometimes the only sources available. If the over 3 billion years old figure is correct, then the Borg undoubtedly started out assimilating non-Humanoid races and bore little resemblance to the way they are known in TNG's time. Another interesting point is the interior of the anti-Borg planet-killer described in "Vendetta." Crystalline structures that harness all matter of energy: physical, kinetic, electromagnetic. In "Beyond The Farthest Star," the "Enterprise" encounters a gigantic alien pod ship derelict over three hundred million years old, once commanded by an insectoid being. Part of its interior consisted of ceiling-high energy accumulator wands: receptors to attract and store energy much like that in the planet-killer. Apparently the Borg absorbed this race also. And speaking of the Borg, it's assumed that the "mites" or "super Klingons" mentioned in "Probe" are in fact the Borg--something which the author intended and all readers seem to be in agreement with.

There are two different classes of "Galaxy" class starships. The first "Galaxy" class ships were commissioned sometime near the end of the 5-year mission. These are small, fast exploratory ships and the first manned vessels to pierce the Barrier and explore other galaxies--far-fetched, but I don't write this stuff! They are mentioned in Vonda N. McIntyre novels and in Diane Carey's "Dreadnought!" novel. The more familiar "Galaxy" class ships we are accustomed to were commissioned about a century later and have only the class name in common.

We know from "Peak Performance" that the "Constellation" class cruisers are at least 80 years old. In the novel "Time For Yesterday," another U.S.S. "Constellation" is destroyed. It is not the same ship from "The Doomsday Machine," nor is it the frigate of Ships Of The Star Fleet. This starship appears to be the class ship of the "Constellation" class of TNG, but Starfleet Prototype says that the "Constellation" class star cruisers were newly-proposed and still on the drawing boards (design tanks) in the 2290s... For more confusion read Diane Duane's novel "My Enemy, My Ally" featuring yet another U.S.S. "Constellation." It wasn't until the much later ("The Romulan Way") that this adventure could be accurately dated 2270 by working backwards. The book makes it clear that she's a new ship carrying the same name as Decker's starship, but the "Constellation" won't be laid down for another 3 years and won't be commissioned until the year 2275. In Addition, her name will be changed from "Constellation II" to "Truxtun" (according to several technical fandom references). The same also applies to the U.S.S. "Intrepid." There's an error in counting years here, but where? Then along comes Jackill's Star Fleet Reference Manual 2 saying that the "Constellation" class was authorized in 2285-- maybe that explains it... But the 3rd book in this series then says that another "Constellation" (an "Excelsior" class) was authorized in the same year bearing the registry NCC-1728-B! Then, as if this isn't enough to give any serious Trek historian a headache, the "Galileo" Class Star- cruiser S.O.R.M. (Ship's Organization and Regulations Manual) tells us that the "Constellation" class starcruiser was launched in 2299, nicely agreeing with the Prototype manual. But then it says that during its shakedown cruise, the engines generated a wormhole effect, destroying the ship. All hands were lost, the "Constellation" class was scrubbed, and the radically different "Galileo" class was developed to replace it. Then what of the U.S.S. "Stargazer," U.S.S. "Victory" and the U.S.S. "Hathaway" we've seen?! Conjecture: while the lead ship of the "Constellation" class was being built, at least the hulls of other class members were con- structed (perhaps the U.S.S. "Hathaway," justifying her age in "Peak Performance"). After the "Galileo" SORM was published (circa 2310) problems with the engine design (which Should have been solved decades back with the "Cheetah" class!) were corrected and production resumed, enabling the "Constellation" class to enter service. This would also justify FASA's corrected dates for the "Constellation" class, built in the 2220s and 2230s, though the illustration and specs in the TNG Officers Manual are quite erroneous. The Cheyenne Operations Manual also sheds light supporting this: "The highly successful, four-engine 'Constellation II' Heavy Cruiser design proved itself in trials and in typical ship operations in the early 24th century." Note the 'II' suffix and the classification of Heavy Cruiser...

As with the U.S.S. "Constellation," a Vulcan spacecraft called the "T'Pau" appears in the old novel "The Klingon Gambit." An old Vulcan ship of the same name was decommissioned at the Qualor II depot in early 2364 in "Unification." This may be the very same ship, but we will never know.

The "god" appearing in ST V may be related to the Cytherians of "The Nth Degree." Both of which originate from the galactic core region and are advanced non-corporeal entities. The novelization of ST V also leads one to believe that the Great Barrier was constructed to contain the creature--a Cytherian renegade sentenced to life imprisonment? Reasoning along the same lines, I suppose it's possible that the Redjack entity originating from 19th Century Earth in "Wolf In The Fold" might have been related to the entity calling itself Ronin in "Sub Rosa" which claimed to have been born on Earth in the 17th Century. Both were non-corporeal energy beings, one gaining sustenance from fear, the other apparently feeding on love. But if we keep grasping for straws here, we could also consider the "Day Of The Dove" entity as an offshoot. At least Ronin and Redjack both claimed to be from Earth and moved out into space as man did.

The animated episode "The Magicks of Megas Tu" poorly fits into the timeline with ST V's Great Barrier at the galactic core. You know Kirk's quote of how no probe, no starship has ever successfully returned... Yet in the cartoon, the "Enterprise" not only made it to the center of the galaxy but also entered another dimension/universe and encountered the inhabitants of Megas Tu. Unsolvable inconsistancy? Not quite. The novelization (Star Trek Log 3) includes dialog about the ship not being quite at the galactic center, although it's strongly implied that they are very close. The 'fireworks' effects could also be from the Great Barrier. When drawn to Megas Tu the 'magic' powers are the highlight of the animated episode and much nonsense transpires before the crew are placed on trial by the paranoid Megans. Kirk battles the prosecutor and wins (perhaps too easily?) the lives and freedom of his crew to return home. I believe that immediately after Spock's final lines debating Lucien's place in mythology, the Megas pulled the same trick as the Paxans did to the crew in "Clues." Their memories of Megas Tu were erased and the ship's logs doctored. The mental powers of the Megas could very well have accomplished this--without going against their word of helping the ship get home and of welcoming any new visitors to Megas Tu.

The Klingon homeworld in Tech Fandom is known as Kazh, the second planet orbiting the binary star Klingonki Kazara. The novels and FASA call it Klinzhai. Other sources, and the oldest of novels, call it Klingon, Klingonii, or just Kling. Some people have argued that just as our world has many names in many languages, so does the Klingon planet. Others claim that Klinzhai and Kazh are two different worlds. I've tried to keep the name consistent with the source material. Now with ST VI, the name Kronos has been offered and there is no concrete information to support this world as being the homeworld. Some believe that Kronos was the original homeworld in ST VI and the planet seen in TNG is another homeworld resettled. Quite frankly all I had managed to interpret from ST VI and the novelization was that Kronos was a major world in the empire whose atmosphere was damaged by the subspace shockwave. In any case, I've tried to keep the planet's name consistent with the source for each entry. At long last some light has been shed on this problem in the 3rd season Deep Space Nine episode "The House of Quark" when Quark is brought to Kronos and states that it is the Klingon homeworld. Yet this does not necessarily mean that Kronos is the homeworld during the original series, nor necessarily the only homeworld.

FASA and certain novels maintain that the Klingons in the original series were "Human fusions." Tech Fandom and Roddenberry reject this idea, claiming that there are different racial groups of Klingons. I like to think of the "Fusion" concept as an early U.F.P. explanation for the physical differences, no doubt originated by Dr. Emanuel Tagore, which was proven wrong [TOS #16]. The Deep Space Nine episode "Blood Oath" brings back three classic Klingons: Kor, Koloth, and Kang. They all, unfortunately, have ridged heads! Some fans accept that Klingons have always appeared this way and "Blood Oath" is the definitive answer. Not so. Fusion backers claim the head ridges become more pronounced with extreme age in the "Fusion" races, becoming dominant in Klingons' upper years. The multi-race backers simply go along with the ridge development being tied into aging much like wrinkles and sagging skin in Human aging (which seemed almost absent in the 130+ year old trio!). Yet selective-breeding and controlled gene pools is very plausible (and indicated in the Star Fleet Medical Reference Manual) at least in certain eras and/or castes/races. The uniformly-ridged 'berserker' Klingons glimpsed manning the warships in ST-TMP's opening are possibly examples of this breed.

The U.S.S. "Lynx" timeship blueprints place the Eugenics Wars only 218 years before the launching of this unique starship. It is probably another typo. Swapping the 8 and the 1, making 281 years, is more reasonable and fits the facts: the incorporation of a cloaking device and the modern Class 1-b hull. This places the launch/commissioning around 2275 and not 2212. The entries provided in the Chronology from these blueprints also assume that each mission was undertaken as outlined and that the "Lynx" project proceeded as planned. Now with the publication of Jackill's 2nd Star Fleet Reference Manual, however, we can more accurately place the "Lynx" around late 2274 at the latest since authorization for "Einstein" class timeslip vessels came in February of 2275 and represent a superior ship design placed into series production.

Few dates are established for the journey of "The Devil's Heart" in the novel of the same name. I have tried my best to fit the history of this stone with what has already been established but the dates are rough approximations for the most part. The novel is set in 2368 shortly after "I, Borg" as the stardate and material suggests. T'Sara started digging for the Heart 10 years prior to this. Later we learn that Atropos had been selectively deserted "for centuries" prior to the stone being passed onto the Collector when Atropos had prospered for a century. This goes all the way back to "The First Empire" founded by Kessec which seems to clash with FASA material which states that the first emperor was Kahless (and this only holds water if we assume this is Not our Kahless The Unforgettable, of course). Considering that the first slave race was annexed in the 1990s and that Kahless died shortly afterwards (the novel states that the Klingons had the blood of a dozen races on their hands during this era) I approximated 2010: after the rise of Kagran to the throne. Yet for all we know, Kessec might have been Kahless if we were to throw out the FASA information. I suppose it all depends on how you define the First Empire and when it started. Dates prior to this when the Heart is in Romulan and Andorian hands are framed by FASA sources. They seem to fit reasonably well. The biggest problem is with Garamond who not only had the stone handed to him by Surak (around 60 B.C. which can't be more than a few years off) but apparently departed with S'Task's followers (150 A.D.??) and lived to a ripe old age on Romulus long before their rediscovery of space- flight. He was said to have lived to be nearly 300 years old (Earth years, Romulan years, Vulcan years???). The voyage alone had to have lasted at least a century, and probably several. The only logical explan- ation is that Garamond lived to be about 300 not counting time dilation effects experienced at the near-light speeds of the Vulcan generation ships. This, plus the longevity which holders of the Heart seem to possess (barring accidents) accounts for his age.

Careful scrutiny of the chronological references within the most recent episodes of The Next Generation may reveal some missing time. Possibly as much as a Year or more is unaccounted for prior to the 7th season episodes (and DS9's 2nd season)! In "Parallels" Captain Riker of the alternate timeline tells Worf that he was captain of the ship for 4 years, "ever since Captain Picard was killed with the incident with the Borg." "The Best of Both Worlds" was set at the end of the 3rd season and at the beginning of the 4th--less than 3 and a half years prior to "Parallels" if we assume that 1,000 stardate units = 1 year. Also in the same episode, Data tells Worf that the Klingon married Deanna Troi exactly 2 years, 1 month, and 12 days ago as an outcome of Deanna caring for Worf following his back injury in "Ethics." But "Ethics" was midway through the 5th season--just 1.8 years before "Parallels." Maybe certain episodes occurred at different times in the multiverse of alternate timelines? Picard reminds Ensign Sito of the 'daredevil stunt" pulled at the Academy 3 years ago in "Lower Decks." He must be referring to Wesley's forbidden maneuver in "The First Duty" as the same actress is playing the same character involved in the incident. But "The First Duty" is a 5th season episode and there's less than 2 years between these two episodes! Yet in a 7th season episode such as "Thy Own Self" Deanna accurately recalled the correct span of time from when she had temporary command of the "Enterprise" ("Disaster"). Deep Space Nine only made matters worse. In the episode "Cardassians" Molly O'Brien is said to be 3 years old, but she was in- disputably born in "Disaster" which is a 5th season episode which would make her closer to 2 since the DS9 episode is set early in its 2nd season. Even worse is Peter David's novel "The Siege," set during DS9's first season, with the subplot of Molly celebrating her 3rd birthday! And the next-to-last DS9 episode of the 2nd season "Tribunal" features Kira saying O'Brien's daughter is 5 years old! The episode "Second Sight" kicks off with Commander Sisko's personal log entry stating that it's the 4th anniversary of the Wolf 359 battle where his wife Jennifer died. The time differential is a fraction over 3 years and well under 4 years whether you subtract the stardates or go by the episodes' placements in each season. A later DS9 episode, "The Wire," gives us more of the same. Garak claims he began to switch on his pain-relieving implant 2 years ago (say, late 2368) to help cope with the DS9 station environment. Yet, all of his accounts emphasize his discommendation as happening immediately before the Cardassian withdrawl of Bajor: about a year later in 2369... Maybe the DS9 personnel are sticking with the "local" Bajoran years with may be shorter than Standard years? Pretty wild and with all this data we could almost conclude with certainty that there's a missing gap of time (much like with the classic series' gap between "Court Martial" and "The Menagerie") but other references ("Thy Own Self") work against it as do the stardates which still pinpoint the general placement of the episodes within the broadcast seasons.

Speaking of DS9, the dating of the novel "Betrayal" has been corrected. When published, the events were believed to be contemporary (i.e. set during the then-current season). The newer novel "Valhalla" is a loose prequel to the events in "Betrayal," namely the Cardassian power struggle, and the author's note also clearly states that "Betrayal" follows it. This isn't as bad as it appears as there were few chronological references to date "Betrayal" in the first place. "Valhalla" on the other hand makes it clear that it's an early 2371 story with the reference to the "Defiant" not at the station (probably picking up where the previous DS9 novel "Proud Helios" left off) and a later chapter insinuating that the story is set before "Civil Defense."

I understand that some people are confused over Federation Member Worlds and the number of worlds in the U.F.P. New civilizations accepted into the U.F.P. receive either Full or Associated member status. The large bulk of U.F.P. member (or allied) systems are Associate members and number in the thousands by the 2280s. Full members (which number under 30 by the year 2268) are given greater attention in the Chronology and their admission numbers are noted. Full-status member worlds have higher status than Associate member worlds in the U.F.P. and are represented on the Federation Council, and are regular contributors to the Federation Treasury etc. Associate member status wasn't confirmed on-screen until the recent TNG episode "Attached." The V episode "Innocence" has Captain Janeway state that the Federation is comprised of over 150 worlds--presumably planets granted full membership.

UFC stands for United Federation Catalog. It is a survey number assigned to less well known systems, prior to receiving proper names (if ever). It was a product of Star Trek Maps to add consistency to the wide range of unnamed planetary systems. So the Treknical designation for Planet M-113 in "The Man Trap" would be UFC 113 (the M apparently indicating the sole Class M world in the system). Another variation on this is the duplicate Earth in "Bread and Circuses" logged as Planet 892 IV which would be UFC 892 using this nomenclature (IV indicating the fourth world orbiting this star), or later more commonly known by its common name of Magna Roma in both the novel "The Captain's Honor" and Johnson's The Worlds of the Federation.

After typing in loads of entries which make references to quadrants, I think they deserve a little explanation. There are at least two systems in use here which, to prevent confusion, I will call Fleet Quadrants and Galactic Quadrants. The former nomenclature was used in the original series, but better defined and made popular in technical fandom manuals, with its roots in Star Trek Maps which defined U.F.P. space. Federation space is divided into five major sections: 4 quadrants and a central sphere called Quadrant 0 (though not really a quadrant at all). This sphere is 90 parsecs in radius and is centered on the central navigational beacon (at coordinates 0,0,0). Quadrants 1 through 4 encircle the beacon and are subdivided into 8 Subquadrants (Quadrant 1 North & South, Quadrant 2 North & South etc.). They are further divided into Sectors. Star Trek Maps (and other Tech Fandom works) further state that in the timeframe of the original series, a "Constitution" class heavy cruiser was assigned a Subquadrant for patrol duty, though deviation from the Subquadrant is not uncommon due to special assignments--which the "Enterprise" is famous for! Below is a table for quick reference showing the original Fleet Quadrants assigned to the "Constitution" class as well as individual coordinate signs:

Fleet Subquadrant              X Y Z  Starship   Fleet Base   Comment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quadrant 0  ----------------    ALL   "Potemkin"        1    180 pc sphere
Quadrant 1, Northern Sectors:  + + +  "Intrepid"        7    Home Systems
Quadrant 1, Southern Sectors:  + + -  "Farragut"       28    Antares
Quadrant 2, Northern Sectors:  - + +  "Valiant"        27
Quadrant 2, Southern Sectors:  - + -  "Constellation"  12    Rigel/Orion
Quadrant 3, Northern Sectors:  - - +  "Exeter"         11
Quadrant 3, Southern Sectors:  - - -  "Enterprise"     19    Unexplored
Quadrant 4, Northern Sectors:  + - +  "Yorktown"       25    Deneb system
Quadrant 4, Southern Sectors:  + - -  "Kongo"          17
The "Constitution," "Excalibur," "Hood," "Lexington," and "Defiant" have military or defense assignments. The "Republic" is used as a cadet train- ing vessel. With the loss of various "Constitution" class vessels, some switching around of patrol quadrants occurs. Starbases assigned to each quadrant actually border on the grids establishing each quadrant, so each ship is not restricted to the one base in the subquadrant--rarely the case with the vast distances these vessels patrol. Fleet Bases also are not the only support bases available for these starships but only imply control of the designated subquadrant. The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine use Galactic Quadrant nomenclature which is based around splitting the entire galaxy up into Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta Quadrants. Alpha and Beta represent the lower half of the explored galaxy. Gamma and Delta represent the upper half of the galaxy, opposite the central core and are unexplored (until DS9's wormhole was discovered, that is). From my under- standing, the old and new systems relate to one another as follows: Alpha Quadrant is composed of Fleet Quadrants 1 and 2 and Beta Quadrant is composed of Fleet Quadrants 3 and 4. Fleet Quadrants and Galactic Quadrants use entirely different sector notation which I will not get into here (to save space!).

Too many ships in the fleet? Maybe. This is one of the problems faced with a unified interpretation of Star Fleet ships by different writers spanning more than two decades. Same reason that it's simply best Not to meld the different interpretations together--that FASA, Tech Fandom, Star Fleet Battles, and live action episodes/films should be viewed as occurring in alternate timelines. FASA seems to give us the most ships (it's a gaming universe) and "mainstream Trek" the least (due of course to budgetary restraints). But in support of one universal timeline, here are some arguments For all these starships at Star Fleet's disposal:

  1. The immense size of Federation space...
    During the original series, the Federation sphere of influence is At Least to Rigel, Deneb, and Antares (as defined in Star Trek Maps --this is an extremely conservative figure). This is roughly a bubble 500,000 parsecs thick encompassing some 6 million stars. Star Trek Maps states that of these stars, there are well over a thousand inhabited star systems. That's A Lot of space to patrol and 12 "Constitution" class heavy cruisers won't cut it. Much of this volume is also unexplored and deemed "Treaty Exploration Territory" (which by TNG's timeframe encompasses nearly a quarter of the galaxy).
  2. Not all ships listed are necessarily in service at the same time...
    Starships are constantly being laid down, launched, commissioned, drydocked, decommissioned, and scrapped. Don't be awed by ship class listings for they can be deceiving.
  3. Older ships can be converted into newer ships...
    This is the rationale behind the many of the heavy cruiser class ships in fact. While there are new-build vessels to supplement these classes as older ships are withdrawn from service or lost in the line of duty, many heavy cruisers are upgrades of older classes. A dozen odd ships comprising the original "Constitution" class were refitted to the "Bonhomme Richard" configuration. They were in turn upgraded to "Achernar," "Enterprise," "Constitution (II)," and/or "Enterprise (II)" as new designs were developed. Again, class listings can be confusing on a glance when the Same ship exists in several classes. When ships are decommissioned they are rarely destroyed if salvagable. Engines and other components can be reused at ship yards for some time. This is a lot less costly than building all-new components for space vessels. It's also not unheard of to rename and renumber ships.
  4. Ships listed as "authorized" need not mean "built."...
    Nor built at the same time. Treknically the humungous lists of starships at the bottom of the class list pages in the Star Fleet Technical Manual were only authorized or ordered. Ships of the Star Fleet (among other references) state that not all ships in each class were built due to budgetary restrictions and other factors which reflect the need for large numbers of each class. This is especially true of the dreadnought classes; the largest and most costly of starships. Starships also need not be built immediately (Ships of the Fleet features several examples including the "Dollond" and "Doppler" class transport/tugs). Construction can be placed on hold for various reasons, and unfinished hulls can be "recycled" (one advantage of the modular designs of ships in Star Fleet).
  5. Starships have a limited service duration...
    Especially in times of war. 20 years is usually a healthy life for a starship, afterwards it's either decommissioned or upgraded. If upgraded, it may become a member of another class. If decommissioned, there's a lot of valuable metal and alloy to build newer ships from (scrap depots as we saw in "Unification" are presumably rare in the U.F.P. and the novelization agrees). Now introduce a war: The Four Years War of FASA or one of the many border wars which permeate Star Fleet Battles. Ships are lost as fast as they are commissioned. The war effort breeds more ships and not just the purely exploratory or scientific vessels shown on screen but destroyers, frigates, dreadnoughts, and all the many varieties of each type. To support these ships and the construction of more, the number of transport vessels and freighters increase. Before long, multiple classes of new-build warships are not only justified, they're logically needed to defend those half-a-million parsecs comprising Federation space.

To avoid any confusion (and to toss out any ideas that I have been influenced by FASA in any way), I should say a thing or two about the "Transwarp Drive retrofit" mentioned in the very late 23rd Century. As early as the U.S.S. "Ingram" class blueprints, Transwarp was noted as being a failure. The TNG Technical Manual adds that certain engine components were integrated into later (standard warp drive) propulsion systems. Yet the Strategic Design Group's Starfleet Dynamics, NCC-1701-A Deck Plans, and especially Starfleet Prototype state that Transwarp had not failed and existing ships would be retrofitted with the new drive system. Originally described as utilizing the wormhole effect (ST-TMP) to gain an extra exponent velocity increase (Wf^4) in the Officers Requirements and Starfleet Dynamics manuals, the much more recent Starfleet Prototype manual states that the Transwarp Drive Retrofit involved the simple matter of fine-tuning the intermix and the installation of energy polarizers inside of the nacelles. This is a radical departure from the original Transwarp concept (by the same authors no less) and it is not too far fetched a notion to assume that post-ST III references to "Transwarp" are more in line with an offshoot of the original failed Transwarp drive--yet are erroneously called Transwarp due to the many support systems salvaged from the original Transwarp Drive Project. The Prototype manual even goes on to describe the resulting warp field as having a dynamic rippling texture--not unlike the drive field produced by TNG's "Galaxy" class starship. Certainly the nacelles on the "Excelsior" class ships in service in TNG's time are no different externally and our brief peek at Mr. Scott's engine room (and intermix shaft) in ST VI bears more than just a passing resemblance to the intermix core of the "Galaxy" class "Enterprise"--intermix flow and all. Simply the improved energy-generation systems in use on the original "Excelsior" were incorporated into the next generation of warp drive with the name Transwarp loosely tagged on in some instances. This explains the passing references to "Transwarp" in certain texts and blueprints (Joshua Class Command Cruiser General Plans).

All members of the "Enterprise" complement who die in the line of duty are noted, whenever possible, in the "Enterprise" Fatality line tagged onto each adventure summary. Not included are civilians and passengers not assigned to "Enterprise" duty. By the time the classic 5-year mission was completed, 94 crew members had met with violent death--according to Kirk in the ST-TMP novelization. Time permitting, I will continue this with NCC-1701-D and the novels.

Various 22nd Century spacecraft launch dates into the Ficus Sector come from the computer display on Picard's desk in "Up The Long Ladder." Only seen briefly, and not to be taken over-seriously, mission commander names like Roddenberry and Snodgrass are featured with numerous Buckaroo Banzai references. They don't necessarily conflict with anything and do appear in the episode so I included them. Though one wonders why so many people were so eager to reach the Ficus Sector in old DY-series sublight spacecraft. DY-500-C and higher are not documented anywhere. I speculate that many of these old craft were refitted with warp drive (pylons and nacelles attached?), justifying their change in series registries.

All NCCs provided for Star Fleet ships are taken from Technical Fandom references and are very consistent and reliable, having a long history with their continuity stretching back to the Franz Joseph Designs' days. FASA registries, on the other hand, are less so, but have been provided where there is no conflict or available NCC for the given ship. All ship construction histories come from the mainstream Treknical publications (mainly Ships of the Star Fleet). You might be puzzled by the coverage of many ships per class. This is because these dates are pre-TNG and most ship construction facilities other than those in Sol system (particularly Earth-based) are stardated. Most stardates from the 23rd Century range from difficult to impossible to convert over to Earth dates, so most haven't been included. The recent Star Trek Encyclopedia book by the Okudas reveals that they discount ALL of these old NCCs (namely the "Constitution" class starships) apparently because of a wallchart in Commodore Stone's office in "Court Martial" which contains a dozen or so NCCs (but No Names) of vessels. I go into more detail on this in my file on Starship Registries/NCCs, but the fact of the matter is that few fans have taken those numbers as representing "Constitution" class starships for the obvious reason that "Constitution" class ships were only one of many starship classes in service at the time. The list takes the form of a table with 10 rows of numbers down the left column and horizontal bars next to each number. The table is titled "STAR SHIP STATUS" and below that is "% COMPLETED." Most numbers are in the 16xx range and it's obvious that these are the vessels currently being serviced at Starbase 11 (probably ships smaller than the "Enterprise," maybe with planetfall capa- bility, undergoing routine maintenance at the starbase). It's even more illogical to assume that all of these ships, if "Constitution" class, would be All undergoing refitting at that one starbase at the same time (each starship is assigned a different patrol zone and for All ships of a class to be docked at the same starbase at the same time is unlikely). And there's not a single name attached to a single registry number! So what it amounts to is a chart of a dozen NCCs with no names, nothing to indicate they're "Constitution" class heavy cruisers (or even heavy cruisers at all for that matter regardless of class), All apparently in different stages of "completion" (is the "Enterprise" the Only ship of her class in service?) and most in the 16xx range (which alone should be a dead giveaway that they're Not "Constitution" class). Greg Jein took the dozen odd established "Constitution" class names, sorted them alphabet- ically, and then matched them up with these numbers and called them "Constitution Class" starships. Does this make Any sense? The Franz Joseph publications settled the "Constitution" class NCC problem conclu- sively, in my opinion, and furthermore both the "Enterprise" blueprints and Star Fleet Technical Manual (both containing the NCCs) were approved and worked out with Gene Roddenberry. The out-of-synch NCCs of the "Constellation" and "Republic" were settled by later Technical Fandom reference works as shown in the Chronology. So one would assume that, classic series NCCs aside, the Okuda numbers for TNG ships are correct. Not quite, unfortunately. The prime reason for this is carelessness. The Okuda graphic screen reproduced in Volume 15 of ST:TNG Magazine on page 35 was actually used on a bridge monitor screen. It lists 15 starship names, their classes, and their NCCs. If have no problem with this list since these are Next Generation vessels, there are no conflicts with episodes, and it was actually used in the series. However, Okuda's Chronology and Encyclopedia books aren't 100% consistent. The U.S.S. "Trieste" matches in number but the Encyclopedia calls her a "Merced" class ship instead of a "Yosemite" class ship. The U.S.S. "Zhukov" is listed in these two reference works as having the registry NCC-26136. The graphic lists it as NCC-62136. I believe a screen graphic takes precedence over a repetetive typographical error carried from one book to another. What is particularly annoying about the Encyclopedia's starship table is the number of conflicts between the numbers or the classes when compared to the book's individual ship entries and/or episodes. We saw the "Crazy Horse" in a recent TNG episode and it was clearly "Excelsior" class--yet the "Encyclopedia" states she's of the "Cheyenne" class (another new class we never heard of, just like the "Merced"). The "Saratoga" (of ST IV) is listed in the table as NCC- 1867 while the individual entry states NCC-1937 (Technical Fandom logs her as NCC-1892). I also have taken visual evidence over any of their entries. The U.S.S. "Bozeman" of "Cause And Effect" is seen with the registry NCC-1841 on her primary hull underside. The photos of the vessel in the Okuda books show her topside (never fully seen on the screen) as reading NCC-1941. 1841 is also more logical in keeping with the series of recorded contract numbers. The number of the "Yamato" clashed in the two episodes "Where Silence Has Lease" (NCC-1305-E) and "Contagion" (NCC-71807). I simply assume that she was assigned a new number between the two episodes rather than dismissing one and accepting the other. Finally there is the case of the class ship of the "Constellation" class star cruisers. The chapter titled "In The Design Tank" of Starfleet Prototype shows us the prototype U.S.S. "Constellation" tentatively numbered NCC-1017 (logical considering that was undisputably the number of the "Constitution" class vessel lost in "The Doomsday Machine"). I suppose a letter prefix might have been added after she entered service or the number may have been altered. In any case, the Encyclopedia gives her the unlikely registry NCC-1974. We get a good close-up of Picard's desk model in "Who Watches The Watches" and it clearly carries the egistry NCC-7100 (and curiously no name), yet his "Stargazer" was undisputably NCC-2893 in "The Battle." I conjecture that NCC-7100 was therefore the actual registry number of the "Constellation," being the class ship. Jackill's new ship manual goes with 1974 for the class ship authorized in 2285. I can only guess that a new NCC was assigned to her--perhaps even several times as the prototype evolved.

Warp speeds expressed in the Chronology through the 23rd Century are based on the formula V = Wf^3 (Velocity relative to lightspeed being equal to the warp factor cubed). This also holds up for 22nd and 21st Century warp eferences, even though the warp scale wasn't established until the 2160s. At an undetermined point in the 24th Century, the warp scale was changed to V = Wf^(10/3) which holds up until warp factor 9, afterwards going asymptotic towards infinite speed at warp 10 (or so the ST:TNG Technical Manual says). All 24th Century speed references in the Chron- ology employ are based on this new scale. Note that a third, intermed- iate, warp scale apparently saw short term use circa 2275 as defined in Jackill's Star Fleet Reference Manuals. It combines elements of both scales: an unreachable Warp 10 infinite speed asymptote above warp 9 while maintaining the "traditional" cubed warp for under-warp 9 speed calcul- ations. Jackill is the only person to use this new scale so I am con- cluding that it was short-lived and phased out for whatever reason. All warp speed references from Jackill's have been converted to the classic V = Wf^3 system, with no asymptotic curve. This is hardly a problem since almost all maximum warp speeds from the Reference Manuals are warp 9 or under. (My number one problem with Jackill's: his ships from the 2270s up through the late 2280s only have warp 9 point-something capacity while other Treknical works indicate a growing increase in warp capacity, with some starships in the 2290s capable of warp 20 speeds! I can't com- fortably explain this glaring discrepancy to my satisfaction--maybe you can!) Whenever a reference is made to a ship's "warp capacity" the maximum (top) speed for that class is given. This is somewhat ambiguous at times as it can vary from reference to reference and is sometimes confused with emergency speed or flank speed. "All Good Things..." includes two references to Warp 13 speeds, either suggesting a revised warp scale extending beyond the unreachable warp factor 10 or else yet another TNG Technical Manual contradiction.

Certain references I've taken from "The Best of Trek" books. This series of books is generally a poor source of accurate information but is the only source of info on such things as 'The Fall of the Federation': a look at Trek's distant future, and 'The Rise of the Feder- ation Part I: The Eugenics Wars.' It's sad that after the first few books in this series they practically went all-out FASA, adapting the Space- flight Chronology books as "official" and bragging about dates in Star Trek Maps being wrong, and even concluding that the date of 2283 in ST II was a Romulan date. Jeffrey W. Mason's "chronologies" in TBoT #6 and #10 are plagiarized from SFC with the latter consisting of a few old novels chucked-in, supposedly filling in the adventures between the first two films. Pity that he never read the novels, just judged them by their cover art--as most were written in the 70s and clearly are set during the original five-year mission! Well, I suppose from his viewpoint that the "Enterprise" officers were all demoted to their old series ranks, kept their old yellow/blue/red uniforms...

Dates and information beyond 2372 A.D. are mostly drawn from works which have given us brief peeks into the future of The Next Generation. "Firstborn," "Imzadi," "Crossroad," and "All Good Things..." are four such examples. The problem with these is that events in each one are question- able since they represent alternate future timelines. The future of Star Trek is not accurately represented by any one of them--at least as far as "our" Trek Universe is concerned--and the writers of future episodes won't be restricted to follow them. As we saw in Generations the destruction of the "Enterprise" alone invalidates key events in "All Good Things..." Such is also the case with future-to-past time travel adventures, espec- ially those which imply there will be changes in the future time stream...

Throughout the Chronology, I've spelled Star Fleet as two words. Most early novels did as well as the classic Franz Joseph works. It's still split into two words in most Tech Fandom publications today, although "officially" it's Starfleet as used in TNG, the films, and even in the original series ('For Eyes of Starfleet Command Only' from "The Menagerie"). "Stardate" went in reverse: starting off as two words in "Court Martial" and going to one word--and sporatically back and forth in the films! As touched upon earlier, the proper way to spell certain Next Generation alien names and worlds can be tough to acertain. There are conflicts between the spellings in Paramount press releases, the Okuda books, the trading cards, TNG/DS9 mag- azines, novelizations, and even the closed-captioning in the airing of episodes. Typographical errors (also discussed previously) can end up getting ported over from one book to the next: "NooniEn" and "BrAttain" are two popular examples (though the latter actually being a typo is a matter of perspective). A good one to pay attention to is the Klingon sword pronounced as "Bat-Leck." It is actually a translation of "Sword of Honor" in Okrand's Klingonese. Literally this would be spelled (using Okrand's Klingon letter designations) as "batlh'etlh." The updated Klingon Dictionary spells it "betleH." Okuda transposed a couple letters and it ended up as "bat'telh" ("Bat-Telk"?) and it's already appeared in no less than 3 books like this since--at least one's a novel and I'm sure there are more to come. Today it's pronounced "bat-lef" and only Gene knows What it will be called in the future!

While "Dark Mirror" agrees pretty well with the timeline in The Best of Trek, right down to the rise of the Imperials following the Eugenics Wars, along comes "Crossover" and the timeline after "Mirror, Mirror" is screwed! Obvious solution: Just as "Parallels" proved that there are Lots of different alternate universes out there, I am assuming that the same principle can be applied to our "Mirror" universe. After "Mirror, Mirror" it diverges and splits into two alternates: One in which the Klingons are conquered by the Imperials, and one in which the Klingons join forces with the Cardassians and conquer the Imperials. The pivot point rests with the success or failure of Spock.

John Betancourt's got the knack of screwing up stardates two out of two times. First in his DSN novel "Devil in the Sky" then with the V novel "Incident at Arbuk." In the case of "Incident" it begins at 48135.6-- Before Voyager's pilot episode! It's clearly set well into the series (page 3 says that Harry Kim had been aboard ship for months). Since this book had been published several weeks into Voyager's 2nd season, I am assuming that the stardate's 2nd digit was a typo and this adventure takes place stardate 49135.6, early into the 2nd season. And someone should tell him, or rather the editors at Pocket Books, that Rodinium doesn't have an 'h' in it (never had, never will!). He spells it that way half a dozen times in "Devil," twice in "Incident" and now it's cropping up in Diane Carey's "Station Rage." This started at about the same time that the editors began to unconditionally italicize the word Starship, probably so they can stamp a TM after "Starship Voyager" and "Starship Enterprise" (and sue any violaters!)... Anyhow, Betancourt is by no means alone. The next V novel "The Murdered Sun" ends with the stardate 43897.1 and is set at least post-"State of Flux." Even assuming that the 2nd and 3rd digits were transposed it doesn't fit. I therefore went with the assumption that it is actually stardate 48897.1 and logged it accordingly. And while on the subject of V #6, this novel gives Janeway's dog Another name (contra- dicting the novelization of "Caretaker"), which is similar to what became of Kirk's dog's name in Generations (Jake or Butler?). This novel also gives us such things as backup systems on "Voyager's" deck 32. What ARE Pocket Books' editors paid to do?

The commissioning stardates on the plaques in the U.S.S. "Cheyenne" Operations Manual are all off by several years. However, since all class members feature Earth launch and commissioning dates I have relied upon these first and foremost. The stardates are included in parenthesis whenever possible and their deviation may be assumed to be a function of these early (2340s) stardates. Other Earth dates given (predominantly launch dates) I have supplied with the usual approximated stardates, given in braces as usual.

Never before in my life had I read a novel (Trek or otherwise) literally Built Around a timeline. This is exactly the case with Judith & Garfield Reeves-Stevens' novel "Federation" which owes its life to Michael Okuda's chronology book. Having read my critique of Okuda's timeline, you already know my views on this topic. What was committed here is worse than the internal dating of "Sarek" and "Traitor Winds" combined! Yes, if any book's dates deserves special attention and correction, it's "Federation" for sure! So I'll dispense with the redundant chatter and tackle the dates in the order in which they appear in the novel...

You'll note that I moved up Ensign Ro's transfer off the "Enterprise" again. We have no specific date for this except that it was sometime before "Preemtive Strike" and after "Rascals." I really wish that the authors of TNG novels knew this.

What are Alcawellian Periods? In the first original Voyager novel "The Escape" Alcawellian history is divided up into 500,000 year chunks called Periods. The calculations are based on the following info: Page 37 has B'Elanna report that they travelled back 310,000 years. This is sub- tracted from the current year 2371 giving 307,629 B.C. Kjanders said he was from 3,071 Real Time, Period 889 (the same Period which all of U.F.P. history occupies) which was when the away team arrived in the past. Each Period has its own Real Time caldendar so it's 3,071 years since Period 889 began so the start of Period 889 was in 307,629 B.C. - 3,071 years (or more accurately added to the "negative" date) or 310,700 B.C. Using this as a reference year and subtracting (or adding) 500,000 years, the start of other Periods were calculated. The only glitch is the dubious question of how long an Alcawellian year is, which like so many other cases, can't be answered. Because there are at least 900 periods, I have limited my posting of the earliest periods for the sake of saving space. Otherwise pages of text would be wasted on "Period XXX begins on Alcawell" repeated one after another.

New readers of the novels will probably be unaware that "Possession" is a follow-up to "Demons." Both are by J.M. Dillard, though "Possession" carries the co-author Kathleen O'Malley (also unofficially responsible for co-authoring "Recovery"--considering the sub-standard writing of these two novels, by Dillard's standards, I tend to believe that O'Malley wrote both "Recovery" And "Possession"). To get to the point: "Possession" is a very weak sequel to "Demons" because of so few linking threads, and those few threads are often contradictory! "Obsession" is set sometime in 2370 (Alexander is aboard, the "Odyssey" has not been destroyed by the Jem'Hadar). The story makes endless references to the plague of madness on Vulcan 80 years ago when Skel was 10 years old. This would set "Demons" in 2290 or between ST V and ST VI Not during the end of the classic 5-year mission. Yet "Demons" is indisputably occurs during the "Dillard Era" of Trek as aforementioned, right down to the characters possessing their classic series ranks and the prescence of Dillard's famous characters Ingrit Tomson and Al-B (the latter dies in this story and his death is frequently alluded to in later Dillard works). I can only assume that a second plague of these entities struck Vulcan some 25 years after "Demons" and this is what "Possession" refers to. This second incident also involved a starship, Captain Picard says, and understandably never says which starship. Why this novel couldn't be a more truer sequel to "Demons" is anyone's guess. Possibly with Pocket Books' editors' discontinuity campaign, stronger ties between novels (even those written by the same person?!) were considered a no-no. Ironically, this supposedly started With other authors featuring J.M. Dillard's character of Ingrit Tomson in their novels For continuity! Possibly Dillard didn't write this novel and O'Malley did--and being unacquainted with her novels, O'Malley simply gauged the era of "Demons" by the cover artwork (Spock and McCoy in ST II uniforms) and simply pinned it to happening eight decades ago. Someone certainly doesn't care much for dating accuracy, for the next novel "Invasion! Book Two: The Soliders of Fear" pulls the exact same thing. It's set around 2370 (reference is made to Troi recently wearing the standard duty uniform and to Worf's reaction after seeing Kahless--post-"Chain of Command" and "Rightful Heir"), yet there are over half a dozen references to the first Fury encounter ocurring 80 years ago. "First Strike" is clearly set immediately after "Friday's Child" (2262, or if you prefer Okuda, 2267). 80 years ago in any case would be 2290, or between ST V and ST VI! In these instances I have ignored the 80 year differential entirely.

This is as good as any place to sort out the endless confusion over the Romulans' cloaking device, their warp drive, and the Federation's use of cloaking. It's certainly been debated to death and here are my solid thoughts on these issues. First, going by all of the many sources, the Romulans fought their first war with the Federation with warp-driven ships, at least the last years of it. Their acquisition of warp drive began with a ship they dragged back to the homeworlds as told in the novel "The Romulan Way" and in this Chronology. They did not just get warp drive technology from the Klingons shortly before "The Enterprise Incident" only modern 23rd Century warp drive. This problem comes about from Scotty's sizing up the Romulan Bird of Prey in "Balance of Terror" claiming the warship had simple impulse propulsion. Yes, impulse drive while cloaked. According to the McMaster blueprints of the Bird of Prey, the intense energy drain made warp drive and cloak impossible to use sim- ultaneously, thus Scotty's statement. This problem was apparently solved by TNG's time ("Tin Man") but not until after the movie era ("The Pandora Principle") but still the cloak was never 100% effective. You didn't think that the Romulans would be a threat during the first Romulan War and during "Balance of Terror" if they only had sublight ships, did you? Many fans DID. Which brings us to the Treaty of Algeron which forbids the Federation from developing and using cloaking technology in "The Pegasus." It's insinuated in "The Enemy" that the Treaty of Algeron ended the old Romulan War. Could be, but if this is the same treaty then how can it include an article on the development of cloaking technology if such tech- nology wouldn't exist for nearly a century later? Don't laugh, some fans actually believed that the Romulans fought using cloaks in the Romulan War. There are some obvious solutions to this. The first is that the Treaty of Algeron referred to in "The Pegasus" was a Second Treaty of Algeron. A second solution is that this cloaking article was an amendment to the original Treaty of Algeron. The third solution is that the Treaty of Algeron mentioned in "The Pegasus" wasn't the treaty which ended this first war but a much later treaty. I prefer either the first or second solution. Whatever it may be, this no-cloak law probably went into effect around 2310, and the original Romulan Peace Treaty ending the war is in the Star Fleet Technical Manual and does not mention cloaking devices. In "The Pegasus" it was stated that the treaty kept the peace for 60 years implying that it was made law shortly before the last contact with the Romulans in 2311 at the Tomad Incident. This fits nicely with what we know of Star Fleet's use and experimentation with cloaking technology (i.e. "Cry of the Onlies," "Traitor Winds" and more Treknical blueprints than I can count on two hands). History shows that cloaking technology was hardly ever found practical or useful in Star Fleet's history, so the removal of cloaking devices from ships of the line was a small price to pay for peace. One wonders what the Romulans traded off and some have suggested their energy plasma weapon which has not made an appearance since the original series.

Interested in yet another proposed timeline for Star Trek? This one was suggested to me by a fan who did not catch Data's 2364 in "The Neutral Zone" and perceived TNG's era a little earlier. The 5th season episode "Cause And Effect" has the "Enterprise" meet up with a movie era ship from 2278. It's stated that the U.S.S. "Bozeman" was time-looping for 80 years. Presumably it's a rounded figure, but if not: 2278 + 80 = 2358. The 6th season episode "Tapestry" feaures dialog between Q and Picard regarding the captain's near-fatal injury shortly after graduating from the Academy, the Class of '27 a key date. But Q says this was 30 years ago--if not a round figure, then the year of the episode is 2357. When Paramount first proposed the spinoff series Deep Space Nine, it was said to be contemporary with TNG, "set in 2360 A.D." This indicates that possibly even this late (1992/1993) the Paramount date-keepers thought that TNG was set in the late 2350s. This is no surprise considering that the Trek timeline was never a top priority. Where did this late 2350s timeline spring from? Coincidentally if we take McCoy's year of birth, 2218, from the Chronology (This one) and add 137 for the doctor's stated age in "Encounter At Farpoint" we get 2355 for the first TNG episode! The DS9 episode "Past Tense" was advertised as a time travel story where Sisko and Bashir are trapped "300 years in the past." Again, rounding the dates...but if not? The stated year of arrival was 2024, adding 300 would set DS9 in 2324 which is close to the old Spaceflight Chronology/FASA timeline. Coincidence? I think the Paramount staff may have access to a copy of the original U.S.S. Enterprise Officers Manual, especially in light of Scotty's year of birth (2222 given in "Relics"), McCoy's birth- date and middle initial (H for Horatio given in ST III), and other curiosities. The Spaceflight timeline is readily accessible to everyone through FASA's perpetuation, notably the TNG Officers Manual, so it is no surprise to see surfacing sporatically.


Contents | Prev | Next