Talk: Crew (comic)

Chronology

The periods of time mentioned in the series throw the odd spanner in the works, so thoughts on how to place these please: The first issue in the series is set before the Enterprise is commissioned, which makes it 2245ish, the forth issue is set five years after that (and the third three months prior to the forth), the fifth issue is then set three years later still, however shows the Enterprise still under command of April, when by 2253 is should be under Pike, curiously enough though that last issue also features Spock, and 2253 is at least when he is meant to come aboard the Enterprise. I can see three options:

1. Keep with those dates, making note that the last issue is set in an era when Pike is ordinarily in command.
2. Ignore the usual commissioning date of the Enterprise, place the last issue as late in April's command as possible (2251) and extend dates back from there (making the first issue 2243)
3. Ignore either the five year or three year reference to compress the series into the 6 year window afforded by conventional chronology placements.

Thoughts? --8of5 12:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

The other minor Spock issue is that the Vulcans Alien Spotlight issue suggests that Pike was the one to bring Spock aboard (and indeed, that is portrayed to be Spock's first mission with the Enterprise). I can be flexible with the date on the last one, as it (for all we know) could be April's final mission as Captain. -- sulfur 13:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

On the "uncommissioned Enterprise" era, we know the ship was being shaken down at least that early, as the novel "Final Frontier" takes place before the Ent commissioning but also around Kirk's 10th birthday -- definitely placing it in 2243. Crew #1 probably could take place not too long after that in later 2243, but with just enough time elapsed for the NX-1700 to be brought into service, as shown in Crew.. -- Captain MKB 18:26, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Spock, several sources suggest Spock joined the Enterprise crew at least a year or two into Pike's command, his being on the Enterprise under April in this series is odd and pretty much irreconcilable with all the other early-Spock stories I know of (plus a poor bit of editing by IDW if you ask me).

Final Frontier is currently in 2244 on the chronology. I've not read it myself, but from the information on the Enterprise article, it suggests the Enterprise was only half complete in 2244. Sure it would ready for a shakedown in 2243? --8of5 04:36, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Kirk's 10th birthday is undeniably 2243, firmly placing Final Frontier in 2243, and the ship was most definitely being shaken down in the novel -- with all major weapon/drive/operational systems working, but interior construction not complete (some sections were unheated and sealed off).

I'd wonder if "half-complete in 2244" is an error by a Memory Beta archivist making assumptions based on the 2245 commission date. That is unless there is a source someone could cite? -- Captain MKB 04:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I don’t have the novel to check myself, but the timeline in Voyages of Imagination definitely places the book to 2244. --8of5 04:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Odd, since that would more coincide with Kirk's 11th birthday. Do we have to go by Voyages if it's contradictory to the novel itself?

The chronology does note "The letter from George Kirk Sr. to his children dated May 10 2183, has been disregarded" if that means anything to you?

And maybe, there is precedent for us overriding the Pocket chronology (Vulcan's Glory is a year later to mesh with when Spock comes aboard in Early Voyages, some of the Borg creation stories have been moved further back in time to comply with sources stating the Borg being much older, etc)

There's also a placement for the first chapter of The Counter-Clock Incident novelization in 2244; any idea if that could have anything to do with pre-launch Enterprise? (don’t have that book either!) --8of5 04:57, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Kirk's tenth birthday is mentioned numerous times in the book, starting on page 15 in a conversation between Lt. Reed and Commander George Kirk. It's an overriding theme, as Kirk (in flash-forward sequences) is reading the letters George wrote. The "2183" date is part of the SFC timeline, as in "2183 SFC" here on MB (we don't disregard it in quite the same way) -- and that doesn't alter Kirk's 10th birthday taking place in 2243.

Counter-clock incident has a strange flashback chapter, date unspecified, where Robert April commands the first actual cruise of the Enterprise (already named at the time). I believe the earlier cruises fit in as they were on an unnamed ship, not yet called Enterprise, and in the Final Frontier case, highly classified and denied by recorded history. -- Captain MKB 05:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I guessed that might be the case for the 2245 listing of Counter Clock (for chapter 1, sections 2-5) there is before that the 2244 listing (chapter 1, section 1). Anywho, so you would propose moving Best Destiny to 2243, and place the first Crew issue after it? --8of5 05:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Let's also note that Final Frontier used dates from the Star Trek Spaceflight Chronology (thus the 2183 date on the letter). In the SFC the official introduction date for the Constitution class was 2188 (and thus equivalent to 2245 in the standard timeleine). Construction of the class began six years prior (in 2182), and likely had several redesigns as important technologies became available (e.g., Daystrom duotronic computers in 2183 (2243 standard date), full crystal dilithium moderation in 2186). The two chronologies aren't a nice, neat match, but there is some wiggle room that can be attributed to design changes. When Voyages places events that originaly used SFC dating, you always have to check what the rationale was. (For a couterexample, IMO it uses the wrong markers to date The Final Reflection, and so Voyages dates it about 10 years later than it should be.) Hope this adds some useful context.--Emperorkalan 05:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, EK -- possibly some "years" in the SFC timeline will take place over varying lengths of time compared to the "actual" timeline -- which is why I try to treat them as "stardates" (using the FASA formula) when referring to them in-universe compared to our canon-derived timeline. For example "... in the 2240s, on reference stardate 1/83, ... and then on stardate 1/88.

Final Frontier in 2243 I'd say is elementary -- the Final Frontier page itself already reflects this, since I knew of no other sources saying different when I worked on that. As to the first Crew issue being after it, I'd also agree to that suggestion. The Final Frontier unnamed ship was unmarked, while Crew shows the "NX-0002" markings -- indicating a later point in the ship's evolution. This means Crew would be later in 2243, or in 2244, depending on where its own internal date references place it.

Counter-Clock, I think I recall the earlier segment, but I'll have to find a way to check. There was a part where April is promoted in rank while the ship was being built. He marvels that the design of the ship they're building was derived from an 20th century technical manual that had futuristic designs in it (a horrifying reference to the Star Fleet Technical Manual). If my recollection was correct, neither segment had any kind of definitive date reference except possible numerations of how many "years before" TOS it had taken place, meaning they are somewhat flexible for us to quantify in comparison to other sources. -- Captain MKB 05:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't have the details readily available, but April was at or nearing 75 years of age at the time of Counter-Clock. It didn't give any specific dates because those didn't exist when it was made. Can anyone say if there was dialogue to the effect that he was 25 years younger and the age when he took command of the Enterprise (originally, not in the episode), or if his age was inferred from the relative de-aging of other characters?--Emperorkalan 05:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)