Not that it makes any difference to its placement, but I reckon the way the ship was intentionally disguised to look like it'd been lying there since the 23rd century adds some ambiguity to that date.
Complete Star Trek Timeline (why not?)
- Thread starter Admiral Jean-Luc Picard
- Start date
Here's a nitpick. You place Prodigy season 2 and Children of Mars in different years, but the events of CoM take place simultaneously with the Prodigy finale.
Yes, because my understanding is only the very end of S2's finale took place the following year. I was focused on S2, not part of one episode.
Especially if you think the timeline should hinge on the age of a piano.
Who is James Dixon anyway?
Former member here. Compiler of an infamous timeline of the entire Star Trek universe, including all published fan fiction, no matter how dubious or contradictory.
He waged a personal battle against Mike Okuda's official chronology.
Current whereabouts unknown. Possibly RIP.
Linked below:
ASSIGNMENT EARTH's and TOMORROW IS YESTERDAY's flashbacks seem to have been omitted.Did I get this right? Nitpicking, commence!
And most anybody who disagreed with him about anything.
I have his timeline and there's a section of it where he praises George Lucas and Lucasfilms for keeping a tight continuity between the films and novels.
He must have lost his mind when George sold to Disney and Disney proceeded to jettison everything that he held dear.
He lost his mind a long time before that.
Oh he was a character for sure, and he was active online way before TrekBBS even existed.
Now If someone can add in the tiein novels and comics and all of memory beta listed books video games board games and novels (only where they don't trample on primary television/movie canon)....please
Speaking of this sort of this, there's a blog post I've kept a link to for many years which attempts to organize the entire canon into a canonical watch order
thestartrekchronologyproject.blogspot.com
They've kept it updated over the years, and I've always found this fascinating. It shows how some of the shows running concurrently interleave themselves together, so you can see how the galaxy was changing at the same time in, say, DS9 and VOY, which isn't super clear when watching them separately.
They do take some liberties with the watch order, namely the time travel episodes. Basically they try and place them based on where they tie into the Prime Universe, but honestly it's also an order for just what would make the most sense if you were unfamiliar with the franchise. Watching 5 minutes of that episode where Q sends the Voyager to the big bang isn't exactly an optimal viewing experience.
... And Now the Conclusion!
Here it is! The complete on-screen Star Trek Canon in chronological order. Enjoy! Number / Series / Title (Color coded by series) - A sm...
thestartrekchronologyproject.blogspot.com
They've kept it updated over the years, and I've always found this fascinating. It shows how some of the shows running concurrently interleave themselves together, so you can see how the galaxy was changing at the same time in, say, DS9 and VOY, which isn't super clear when watching them separately.
They do take some liberties with the watch order, namely the time travel episodes. Basically they try and place them based on where they tie into the Prime Universe, but honestly it's also an order for just what would make the most sense if you were unfamiliar with the franchise. Watching 5 minutes of that episode where Q sends the Voyager to the big bang isn't exactly an optimal viewing experience.
This is viewing order not chronological order, but I put the Short Treks "Runaway", "The Brightest Star", and "The Escape Artist" between "Saints of Imperfection" (DSC) and "The Sound of Thunder" (DSC).
I place the Deleted Scene of Georgiou being recruited into Section 31 immediately after "Will You Take My Hand?" (DSC).
Going forward, I'll watch the Section 31 TV Movie right after "Terra Firma, Part II", because S31 is what happens afterwards from Georgiou's perspective.
I place "Calypso"... it hasn't been six months yet. If you know, you know where I'd place it.
I place the Deleted Scene of Georgiou being recruited into Section 31 immediately after "Will You Take My Hand?" (DSC).
Going forward, I'll watch the Section 31 TV Movie right after "Terra Firma, Part II", because S31 is what happens afterwards from Georgiou's perspective.
I place "Calypso"... it hasn't been six months yet. If you know, you know where I'd place it.
It may do. The stardates do not imply this, but character dialogue definitely allows for it.
And unless Neelix was very, very confused - then 'Homestead' should be showing the 315th anniversary of Earth's First Contact day, in April 2378.
Perhaps he was wrong, however, and nobody bothered to correct him? Could not stand the puppy-eyes...
For reference, going by stardates, Voyager's Delta Quadrant traverse should begin around May 2371, and last until at least late December 2377.
Do you think this was a goof of the writers, not thinking of 1 season = 1 years, thinking about "real world" time of year and not in-universe time of year?
In my view the original mistake was establishing that a season of Trek takes place across an Earth calendar year, which means that every year there's a big cliffhanger at the end of December.
But actually there's very little on screen that lines it up this way. All we know from the 24th century shows are a few scattered dates. It just became accepted through the Okuda Chronology. But there's no reason that stardates can't be shifted to run from say, June to May instead.
Enterprise does fix this by using Earth dates that broadly correspond to the production dates plus 150 years. E.g. season 1 runs from April 2151 to February 2152.
But actually there's very little on screen that lines it up this way. All we know from the 24th century shows are a few scattered dates. It just became accepted through the Okuda Chronology. But there's no reason that stardates can't be shifted to run from say, June to May instead.
Enterprise does fix this by using Earth dates that broadly correspond to the production dates plus 150 years. E.g. season 1 runs from April 2151 to February 2152.
I always just assume that a "TV season" = about one year. Whether it's Jan. to Dec. or mid-year to mid-year doesn't matter all that much.
I always liked this approach for TNG-era Star Trek:
2364 - TNG S1
2365 - TNG S2
2366 - TNG S3
2367 - TNG S4
2368 - TNG S5
2369 - TNG S6 / DS9 S1
2370 - TNG S7/ DS9 S2 / ENT "These Are the Voyages..."
2371 - DS9 S3 / VOY S1
2372 - DS9 S4 / VOY S2
2373 - DS9 S5 / VOY S3
2374 - DS9 S6 / VOY S4
2375 - DS9 S7 / VOY S5
2376 - VOY S6
2377 - VOY S7
2378 - More of VOY S7?
2379 - Nemesis
2380 - Lower Decks S1
2381 - Lower Decks S2
2382 - Lower Decks S3
2383 - Lower Decks S4 / Prodigy S1
2384 - Lower Decks S5 / Prodigy S2
2385 - Prodigy finale?
2380's
2390's
2399 - Picard S1
2400
2401 - Picard S2-3
I may have botched the 2 animated shows time frame.
The problem is that Homestead is set in April 2378, but has a stardate of 54868.6, which suggests that April is roughly 86% of the way through a star year.
This is fine in itself - there's no reason why a star year must equal one Earth year - but that's what Okuda assumed for the Chronology.
What I'm saying is that the Berman seasons could easily run across Earth calendar years, and then Voyager fits perfectly. I don't think there are any issues with other episodes.
TNG S1 - 2364/65
TNG S2 - 2365/66
-
VGR S6 - 2376/77
VGR S7 - 2377/78
This is fine in itself - there's no reason why a star year must equal one Earth year - but that's what Okuda assumed for the Chronology.
What I'm saying is that the Berman seasons could easily run across Earth calendar years, and then Voyager fits perfectly. I don't think there are any issues with other episodes.
TNG S1 - 2364/65
TNG S2 - 2365/66
-
VGR S6 - 2376/77
VGR S7 - 2377/78
Doesn't this go against established canon, minus "Homestead?"
Similar threads
