10.7 Acknowledgements

Author’s Comments:

For this issue I’d like to thank the very creative Warped9 for his many “what-if” STAR TREK photoshopped pictures he’s posted on the Internet over the past two years. You’ve certainly gave us all food for thought. You’ve also allowed me to cover one or two illustration holes I would have otherwise had to fill with lesser works in this and other volumes of the FSC.

I’d also like to say a special “thank you” to Jan-Hendrik Kobarg (“The Andorian” of the Deep Space Station K7 website, an FSC mirror), the mystic sage “Cluttered Mind,” and Federation Reference Series author Aridas Sofia for reviewing the drafts of this issue prior to release. They caught a lot of my early mistakes and helped me resolve several canon and fanon issues regarding this important period in TREK’s history.

Those of you who swear by the Prime Two timeline (Okuda chronology) are probably going to be rather upset by my listing an “early” launch date of 2223 for the Enterprise. Whatever it is you’re going to say, whatever arguments you’re going to drop in my email to “convince” me that 2245 is the “correct” launch date isn’t going to work. My dating is based on what’s shown on screen in TOS and TAS as well as the original TOS preproduction documents. James Dixon argues the point well for the so-called “early date” in his musings on the subject, and I’ve had several interesting discussions myself with Aridas Sofia, Bernard Guigand of Treknografix, and many others on the subject. At the risk of spoiling Dixon’s excellent dissertation, here’s how I came to the conclusion that an “early” date of 2223 worked for my Prime One timeline:

1. Almost all major fandom works (prior to Okuda’s slipshod timestream meddling and with the notable exception of the efforts of TREK magazine) give the dates for TOS as 2260-2265. The basis for this is Chuck Graham’s original 1974 fandom timeline from The Menagerie fanzine and reprinted, used, and elaborated upon by Geofferey Mandel in all of his old fandom publications (Star Fleet Handbook, USS Enterprise Officer’s Manual, Star Trek Maps, et al). It was derived from extensive analysis of on-screen evidence from both TOS and TAS (read Dixon for the dirty details). Since this document is based on an updated and corrected version of that timeline then it too uses the 2260-2265 dates for TOS.
2. Several pre-production TOS documents exist (one of which was reprinted in The Making of STAR TREK by Stephen Whitfield) that give an approximate age of 40 years for the Enterprise at the time Kirk took command. A number of “old school” TREK fans appear to interpret this literally, which is from where the 2221 date comes. Since the first season of TOS roughly corresponds to the year 2261 per the Graham/Mandel timeline, then 2261 − 40 = 2221. I interpret this 40-year figure as an approximate date based on information from other sources. Still, I’ll be the first to agree that 2221 is the earliest possible date for the launch of the Enterprise. It probably happened a little later than that and apparently did so based on my interpretation of the available evidence.
3. The reason why I do not accept 2221 — or Okuda’s 2245, for that matter — as the Enterprise launch date is based on the following:
   • The established “fact” that at age 30 or 31 (given your source) James T. Kirk was the youngest starship captain in Star Fleet history is backed up by both on-screen evidence (TOS “The Deadly Years,” for starters) and the majority of licensed and unlicensed STAR TREK works. Before him was Christopher Pike, his predecessor, at age 33 (per Mandel’s EOM).
   • We know that Robert April was the first captain of the Enterprise per TAS (“The Counter-Clock Incident”). Even Okuda has conceded this point.
   • There is considerable on-screen evidence in TOS, TAS, the original franchise movies, and even into TNG, DS9, and VOY that the mid-to-late 30s age range is fairly common for Star Fleet starship commanders. Younger candidates (such as Kirk and Pike) are sometimes accepted based on demonstrated exceptional command ability. I could cite many examples, but I’ll choose a well-known one. TNG’s William Riker was offered command of the Melbourne at age 31 for the very reason stated above. He turned it down, of course, and stayed as Picard’s executive officer for several more years. The fact that he was offered it at all, though, given his youth, serves to prove my point.
   • Based on all of the above, Robert April couldn’t have been any younger than 34 (or a late 33, possibly) when he became the first captain of the Enterprise. If he had been any younger then April would have been the youngest starship captain in Star Fleet history prior to Kirk, not Pike. The subject of April’s age is never mentioned when he discusses taking command with Kirk briefly (“The Counter-Clock Incident”), so in TAS it’s probably safe to say he was in that median age group favored by Star Fleet for initial starship command. An age of 34 falls within this median range. The original TOS production documents say that April was “about 34” when he was envisioned as commanding the Enterprise.
   • Robert April was 75 years old when he visited the Enterprise in TAS (“The Counter-Clock Incident”). Kirk states April’s age onscreen as part of his log entry. Bouncing his retirement age (75) against the earliest age he assumed command (34) of a brand new starship Enterprise — 75 − 34 = 41 — which means Robert April took command of the Enterprise 41 years prior to the events depicted in TAS. This happens to agree with the approximate 40-year figure given in the TOS pre-production documents. The 40-year figure was taken into account by both the writers and producers of TAS per their own account; hence its consistency with the TOS evidence. Now, we know that the Graham/Mandel timeline puts TAS in 2264, so April’s visit to his former command at age 75 also took place in 2264. One last bit of math left to do — 2264 − 41 = 2223 — and that’s how I got 2223 as the launch date for the Enterprise.
4. The only other thing I’ll say at this point is that the 2218 launch date as given in certain high-brow fandom works, such as Ships of the Star Fleet Volume 1 and the Federation Reference Series, is now generally conceded to be in error. At least one of the authors behind those works has privately admitted to me that 2218 was too early a date, again based on April’s age at the time he took command. Star Fleet has yet to appoint a 29-year old starship captain, folks, based on current onscreen evidence. The author in question also agrees with the accuracy of an early 2220s launch date. Others may use other methods for their calculations, but all of us “old school” fans tend to arrive at the same approximate figure: an original launch date for the Enterprise in the early 2220s. We may quibble on the exact year, but we’re all agreed on the period at least. This “early dating” is based on direct evidence, both on-screen (in both TOS and TAS) and in the actual TOS production documents themselves. If you insist on swearing by Okuda’s chronology, though, (or the absolutely screwed up TREK magazine/SFC/FASA chronology) and refuse to ignore this evidence, then you’ll never accept my dating nor that of any of the other “early” launch date advocates. All I can say there is that you’re ignoring the obvious in favor of official pronouncements, however obviously flawed or incorrect they may be. Oh, well. Believe what you will and be happy. Add two decades to my dates and “adjust” them at your leisure, if that will make you feel better. At least we can agree in enjoying STAR TREK, can’t we?

The Miranda class cruiser has serious issues regarding its origins and placement — or TOS existence, according to some fans I know. Apparently the TNG writers ignored the fact that the Reliant was conceived as an Avenger class starship per the original documents. The Miranda Wrath of Khan production designation has been used by the franchise ever since, though, and a franchise-sanctioned TOS-era Miranda put in several visual appearances in licensed works, most notably the Marvel comics story Cloak and Dagger (where the TOS-era version was first presented). This really gummed up the elaborate background that both Todd Guenther and Aridas Sofia had developed for the Reliant and how it came to be. Alexander Rosenzweig’s efforts at “fixing” a late date for the Miranda class blueprints has only made things worse, IMHO. On top of that there’s FASA’s old Anton still lurking in the background as the “first” unofficial Reliant precursor. My solution may not be the best, and those of you who don’t agree are free to go your own way. It works for me, though.

The apparent youth of James T. Kirk when he was commissioned as an officer has been the source of some consternation among Star Trek fans for years. It makes sense, though, once you realize that his was a wartime commission. Those of us who have either been in the service or are students of military history know that all militaries accelerate their officer training programs during wartime. The example that comes quickest to my mind is the U.S. Navy’s WWII-era “90-day wonder” program that cranked out ensigns as fast as it could. There are plenty of examples in history of military academies graduating their cadets and midshipmen early so they could go be part of a current war. Star Fleet would have been no exception. It’s the only sensible way to explain some of the seeming inconsistencies in Kirk’s pre-TOS service career without having to resort to some of the silly deus ex machinas used by some of the TREK novel writers (Preserver manipulation? Gimme a break!).

I’m well aware that some of the Class I starship pictures I’m using aren’t technically accurate for the period. If I were to be 100% accurate then all Class I starships prior to the Four Years War would be fitted with PB-18 warp engines and all post-war ones with PB-31 or PB-32 warp engines. PB-18s can be easily distinguished from later designs by their side-mounted rear intercoolers (see the Bering and Archon classes in Volume 10: The Baton Rouge Era). PB-31s are the “pre-TOS” warp engines, with their grilled rear cowls and “spiked” front domes. PB-32s are what you see in regular TOS and TAS episodes, with no spiked domes and half-globed rear cowls. I have yet to find any 3D renders of any Class I starships done with PB-18s and dreadfully few with PB-31s, though, so I’m forced to work with what I’ve got. I’d gladly welcome corrected pictures from anybody who has the artistic talent and time for such an effort.

The schematic of the Constitution as launched isn’t mine. It’s a horrible “NX-Constitution” that I got and doctored a bit from the Starship Schematic Database. I retooled the engines in order to bring it more in line with what it must have looked like per the many fandom musings on the subject.

I’m glad Aridas directed my attention to forgetting his Kiaga class perimeter action ship in my first draft of this volume. It’s quite a different beast than Activision’s Akula and rather popular with Internet-savvy TREK fans. It’s a 2240s-era design based on a starship class that was mentioned but never shown in Ships of the Star Fleet Volume 2. I’ve presented it pretty much the way it was developed on the TrekBBS. My only addition was the idea that its early phasers, the first ever deployed in Star Fleet service, could not fire a sustained beam like we see in TOS. Remember, this is an early phaser, something they had to literally kick out the door in order to get it to the war front — a weapon that was kludged and deployed before it was really ready for fleet action. Military forces do that kind of thing whenever they’re hard pressed, just as Star Fleet certainly was in 2246-2247.

Well, here we are. We’re on the threshold of the period in TREK history that everybody knows. There’s only two more volumes of the FSC to go, folks, so hang tight!

Regards,
— Richard E. Mandel

In-jokes and asides:

1. The picture of Admiral Shephard is actually that of Captain Draco Gideon from Star Blazers. WELL?!?!? As big an anime fan as I am, and as important as Star Blazers is (the “Japanese Star Trek”), you just KNEW I was going to slip in a Star Blazers reference somewhere!
2. Yes, that REALLY IS a picture of actor Steve Inhat as the young Garth of Izar. I had to do some digging to find a picture of him on the Internet that wasn’t from the TOS episode “Whom Gods Destroy.” It’s from an old Outer Limits episode, I believe, but I could be wrong. The horrible photoshopping is mine.
3. I deliberately used a lot of pictures and stills from Star Trek: The Animated Series this time around. It’s never been considered canon by the Church of Okuda but it is here in old-school TREK fandom. It’s just my way of acknowledging my roots. I got hooked on STAR TREK when the animated series first aired. I can still remember as a young boy sitting on the horrid green shag carpet of my parent’s living room, watching their old Zenith color TV (they were the first in our area to have a color set) and seeing “Beyond the Farthest Star” when it originally aired. I loved the animated STAR TREK because it was the first Saturday morning TV series I ever watched that invited me to come up to its level of storytelling, not the other way around (as with most TV cartoon fare). Maybe that’s why I’m such an anime fanatic today. I know the animated STAR TREK hooked me on the franchise for life.
4. Since Goldstein and Sternback decided to play The Time Machine card by having the U.S.S. Wells go back in time, I named the ship’s captain Neil Perry (from the TV movie) and his science officer David Filby (from the George Pal feature film).

Special thanks to:

• Jason Bogguess (Star Fleet Network)
• Eric Kristiansen (Jackill’s)
• Neale Davidson (Pixel Sagas)
• James Dixon
• Alan Dean Foster
• Bernard Guignand (Treknografix)
• Dana Knutson (FASA Corporation)
• Jan Hendrik Kobarg (aka “Kobi”, The Andorian’s Office)
• Geoffery Mandel
• Memory Alpha and Memory Beta
• Aridas Sofia (Federation Reference Series)
• Wikipedia

Visual sources:

• 3D Gladiators, Dan Abnett, Activision Games, Atrahasis, AxeMan3D, Steve Baron, Michael Bartel, BattleClinic, W. J. Casmir, Agatha Chamberlain, Heath Coop, Doug Drexler, D. T. Ericsson, Lee Fleer (Bantam Books), Ted W. Giebel, Mateen Greenway, Darrell Lawrence, Jeff Lee, Cyrille Lefevre, Jason “Vektor” Lee, Chris Martin, Terry Miesle, Outlance Shipyards, Neale Davidson, Paramount Pictures, The “Red Admiral,” Chris Ricci, SpaceArt Archives, Starship Modeler, Adam Turner, Warped9