Voyagers writers and Memory Alpha don't know when Voyagers final 3 episodes are set. ( lemmy.world )

jaelisp , 6 months ago

They’ve never been consistent in how stardates work and only really just try to make sure they run in a chronological (if inconsistent) order. I’d wave off exact translations of stardates for this reason.

But also allow for human error. I know an event which miscalculated how long they’ve been running based on failing to understand how anniversaries work, and thus have put out a whole lot of material stating they started running a year earlier than they actually did. They could have checked the archives, but didn’t.

Given how Trek is about the human condition, I think character’s messing up basic facts is as good a canon fix as “The Doctor lies” is for Dr Who.

Stormageddon47 OP , 6 months ago

Stardates have been very consistent since TNG with each season being one year starting with stardates beginning 41xxx being in 2364 with Encounter at Farpoint. Then dates starting 42xxx being 2365 and so on so the further through the seasons you go the stardates move up consistently.

And within each season the third, fourth and fifth digits also increase consistently as they progress through a calendar year.

It’s the writers not keeping track of what happened on particular stardates that’s the problem and with well known fan databases like Memory Alpha also making mistakes like stating stardates beginning 54xxx are 2378 when in fact they are 2377.

If the writers wanted to make these things consistent in the case of Homestead for example as it had already been established in First Contact when first contact was they could still have had the party but made something like Zefram Cochranes birthday.

These are the kind of things I notice when watching Star Trek. I tend to spot the continuity and filming mistakes but rather the in-universe plot holes.

Like when an episode makes a big deal about having to go AROUND something they forget they’re in space and could just as easily go above or underneath it instead.

Or the big plot hole in Voyager.

They say it would take 75 years to get home at maximum speed. But at warp 9.975 it would only take a little under 15 years and as we know from when Paris is being flown to the ship Lt Stadi states the ship has a “sustainable cruise velocity of warp factor 9.975”.

These things bug me. They don’t annoy me, just a few niggles I have.

sensibilidades , 6 months ago

Wait, does that mean that the earliest stardate they can reference only goes back to 2323?

JWBananas , 6 months ago

Maximum warp is not maximum cruising speed, even negating the need to refuel.

Stormageddon47 OP , 6 months ago

It is said in the pilot that their top speed and sustainable cruise velocity is warp 9.975.

At that speed 75,000 light years would take 14 years 7 months. Even stopping for fuel and maintenance every 5,000 light years would probably only add a year or two.

Even warp just 8 would be 73 years 3 months.

The Enterprise G could cover it just 2 years 4 months.

JWBananas , 6 months ago

https://startrek.website/pictrs/image/dbddcde5-7b61-4876-a793-a659afd3e155.jpeg

Stormageddon47 OP , 6 months ago

On-screen dialogue is cannon which states repeatedly that Voyagers maximum speed is warp 9.975. For how interesting these tech manuals are they aren’t considered cannon.

However I had no idea there was a Voyager technical manual. Do you have a link to the whole thing?

JWBananas , 6 months ago

Google Lens turned up this: cygnus-x1.net/…/star-trek-voyager-technical-manua…

Stormageddon47 OP , 6 months ago

So the writers had a manual their disposal and still managed to make a shocking number of mistakes.

aeronmelon , 6 months ago

Whatever they said, Warp 9.975 is NOT the maximum sustainable speed of an Intrepid-class starship. It’s the maximum possible speed… for a few hour at best, before the warp core needs to be powered down to prevent everything from melting.

It’s not a stretch to assume that the initial 75-year estimate was based on average sustainable speed and taking into account time needed to stop, refuel, maintain, repair, etc. Over that long a time, it wouldn’t be enough to just pour more deuterium into it. Most of the warp engine would have to be rebuilt or replaced.

Also, the computer was struggling to figure out exactly where they were, so it might have been off by a few years at first. When Seven built astrometrics, they immediately updated their ETA.