29th century uniforms[]
Shouldn't we talk about the uniforms worn by Braxton, Ducane, and the crew of the USS Relativity here? — THOR =/\= 23:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Thor. I would need more time than I have and would need to rewatch the episodes of Voyager with the alternate futures (there was more than one).--Lifeisharsh20 06:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)Lifeisharsh20
Anti-time circa 2395~2422 uniforms[]
I was wondering that since in all three series (TNG, DS9, VOY) that showed a "wrong" or alternative future have the same uniform style, if it could be assumed that none of their actions would affect Starfleet's uniform design? As in, if those uniforms would normally come anyway. Though I suppose since none of them were the "official" timeline of Star Trek, might as well assume the uniforms aren't official anyway until the writers decide it is. (Personally, I like those uniforms too, nice and colorful compared to the increasingly less colorfull uniforms from DS9 to Star Trek Nemesis, heh) --24.22.214.92 21:09, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- I quite agree. They're consistent (across three different series - which seems to imply that the writers intentionally reused them as an accepted cannon for that time period). Also, none of the actions changing these alternate futures would have been of the kind that would have altered the development of the uniform. Don't the c. 2395-2422 uniforms deserve their own page?
- Heh, I was half-expecting no replies. After thinking of it for a bit, I'd personally keep it in the alternate timeline page until it is confirmed as the official timeline uniforms. It just might be as simple as re-using the uniforms whenever an alternative future is needed (Star Trek II uniforms were re-used in TNG as having been in use until 20 years before the show or even sooner; probably just because they didn't want to invent entirely new uniforms for those brief moments). Not to mention, having the TNG-style Admiral uniforms would have required them to revert the 2373 style uniforms (which is unlikely in my opinion). --24.22.214.92 22:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Why are the 29th century uniforms considered "real" and yet the uniform first seen in TNG: "All Good Things..." isn't? All timelines after 2395 show that uniform at least until 2422, unless you are still on Voyager in the Delta Quadrant. - Archduk3 03:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Starfleet uniform (29th century)[]
Merge[]
Why is this considered a "real" uniform and yet the uniform first seen in TNG: "All Good Things..." isn't? All timelines after 2395 show that uniform at least until 2422, unless you are still on Voyager in the Delta Quadrant. - Archduk3 03:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- Because all those timelines are explicitly reversed within the episode. We don't know for sure what a future uniform would look like when Benjamin Sisko didn't disappear in 2372/Deanna Troi never died in the 2370s/the Voyager returned in 2378. Heck, Voyager's early return might be the deciding factor in the uniform designs. The 29th century uniform, unlike the 2390s/2420s-style, is never identified as being in an alternate universe.--Tim Thomason 03:24, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I have this going on both pages and in Ten Forward, but the not one timeline has shown a different uniform for this time, even the one where the Star Trek: First Contact uniform was never used. (DS9: "The Visitor") - Archduk3 03:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'll reply here as well but next time keep your conversation in one place. The futures of all of star trek has been reversed or repaired and thus changed. No future is certain except those happening in the "present" of star trek and therefore no uniform will ever be finalized until that future becomes the present in the show. Anytime you see the future those uniforms aren't real since they're part of a future that may or may not ever actually happen due to the events in the show. — Morder 03:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- I see what you're saying now - sorry, for some reason I read it differently (in relation to your forum post as well). Hmm...I'll have to watch this episode again to see what Tim is saying though based on what I remember he does seem correct. — Morder 04:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I do agree with him as well, but since the 29th century uniforms is listed with the "real" uniforms, even though there is a clear difference between them the two times they are seen (VOY: "Future's End", "Future's End, Part II", "Relativity", suggesting that they are alt uniforms as well, and subject to being changed as the timeline is revealed. So this page should be merged with the alt uniforms page. - Archduk3 04:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- As 29th Century timeships are protected with temporal shields, wouldn't that suggest that their uniforms are "real", as their mission would be to restore the timeline to the way it was(which resulted in those uniforms)?--31dot 10:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- Well, Daniels, Future Guy and the other players in the TCW seemed to be somewhat "shielded" from whatever damage the other player, respectively, did to their past - yet none of their timelines turned out to be Trek's main timeline, or did it?
- In any case, from a purely practical standpoint - if some new chapter of Trek eventually gets written and attached to the end of its "prime timeline", some time after Star Trek Nemesis, it stands to reason that continuity with the uniform of a time-travelling guy from some VOY episode will be the least concern. We shouldn't give that uniform any greater weight than any other from "the possible future". -- Cid Highwind 12:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Shielded or not, this uniform is seen in only one episode, as the one seen in both Future's End episodes is clearly different (Since the 1st and 2nd seasons of TNG are not the one seen in the 3rd season onward), the slight color and collar differences have to make them different uniforms, and since they are suppose to be from the same time, on the same man, it seems that either the uniform was changed, or that some timeline changes have happened. Either way, one episode is not four, and that is how many support the "All Good Things..." uniform, even though they all "reset". The point about the ENT TCW is also valid, there is no way to be sure about their uniforms, seen at least once in the season 2 opener I think, so the 29th Century is also suspect. - Archduk3 18:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Well it's been awhile, but I still feel this page should be merged. - Archduk3:talk 16:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'm anti-merge. None of the stuff in All Good Things..., the Visitor, or Endgame have been proven. That's why it drives me nuts when people act like Crusher definitely became Captain of the Pasteur. We have concrete proof that this uniform existed in the prime timeline, it should stay. IT IS GREEN 23:27, December 5, 2009 (UTC)
What concrete proof? This uniform is only seen in one episode, since the "Future's End" uniform is different from this one; and the events seen in this episode involve paradox after paradox, until the whole episode is one giant paradox, which didn't even happen except in two people's memories. For all we know, the entire crew of the Relativity is as much a paradox as the ship itself, see: USS Relativity dedication plaque. - Archduk3:talk 08:29, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
Redux[]
Let's try this again, since the last time the discussion got bogged down in temporal mechanics. We have every real world reason to know these uniforms are a footnote if a Star Trek show is ever set in the 29th century, we know that between the two appearances of this style they did change, and we know that the USS Relativity, along with all of Starfleet, was wiped out because Daniels made a mistake in "Shockwave", suggesting that in universe these uniforms aren't set in stone either, nor is the future. Without getting bogged down with Star Trek temporal mechanics again, these uniforms shouldn't be treated as any more "real" or "permanent" than all the other future uniform information we have, and should be located in the same place. - Archduk3 11:52, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Support - I don't see these as any different to the AGT uniforms.–Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 05:04, August 4, 2011 (UTC)
Split[]
Now that Star Trek has surpassed the 29th century, and there isn't any indication that we should believe that these are alternate or parallel, as the 29th century is still part of the normal timeline (until it isn't), then there really shouldn't be any reason to exclude these from the main presentation any further. At the point of their initial inclusion in "Relativity", there were still a regular component or part of what was considered the prime timeline. –Gvsualan (talk) 00:15, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
- There is circumstantial evidence on both sides of the argument here, in that the temporal wars did exist and we know time travel was fairly common at one point, but we also have starships afterward with lower registry numbers and the uniforms/badges/ranks seen with the hosts of the Tal symbiont wouldn't seem to include these styles in the progression we saw. All of that and more can be waved away though on both sides, so no real help there. The main problem is we don't have any reason to assume these were "prime" either. The main reason for listing these here isn't that they are from "the future" of where Star Trek left off, but that they are from the future of the POV from the episodes they are in. Just because DIS moved past the 29th century doesn't make they any less from "the future" when we saw them, and until we see them again I would say they remain like all content from "the future" we don't eventually see happen in "the present", alternate until proven otherwise. Also, based on how "new" Trek respects "old" Trek, I would say the argument that the production wouldn't give care about these and would design their own uniforms holds all the water. - Archduk3 07:25, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Registry numbers and uniform designs are a superficial bullshit rationale for justifying Discovery. Those ppl have clearly never watched Star Trek before.
With that said, this is not on par with the obviously rewritten contemporary histories that otherwise appear here.
We have no reason to assume that the 29th century is not any more legit than the 24th century it interacted with, anymore than we can pretend to understand the 5-6 different versions of Braxton that exist, when their entire job is/was to maintain the integrity of prime timeline. –Gvsualan (talk) 20:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
- Well, having a general rule that "the future" is assumed to be an alternate timeline works with literally all instances of this happening, including these, since all the events in these episodes are alternate to one version of Braxton or another, which is letting the cat out of the bag about the "truth" of time travel in Star Trek, but we have far more reasons to assume that these are alternate timelines than we do to assume they are not.
- First, all episodes with Braxton involve alternate timelines, that's just a fact. At best the argument for some of this to be in the "prime" timeline is that some of the events at the end of each story are "prime." That's true to some extent, in that these people from alternate timelines interacted with people from the "prime" timeline and would be remembered and/or MA knows all anyway. It is pretty much said that the events of "Relativity" don't actually happen except in Seven and Janeway's memories, what with them being reintegrated with their past selves, so at least that episode must all be in an alternate timelime.
- Second, if the job of Starfleet in the 29th century is to maintain the timeline, then they suck at it; see every time travel episode before and since. Then again, the dirty secret about the timeline is that there is no single "prime" timeline. What we consider the "prime" timeline is full of instances of temporal incursions and paradoxes. From whales to if/when Voyager returned to Earth is all predicated on time travel, quite a lot of it, and "Parallels" mixed with "Year of Hell" and "Year of Hell, Part 2" pretty much proves that all time travel results in a new branch timeline, regardless of how it's presented to us the audience. All instances of time travel to the past seem to have happened in a timeline that require them to have happened, even if the events that lead to the time travel didn't happen, and we know the timelines themselves don't actually change because a temporally shielded Voyager doesn't just pop out of nowhere in the changed/"prime" version of the year of hell. If there was only one timeline, then that version of Voyager would always exist for the time it was shielded, and this would also be true for other things shielded from the effects of "changes" in the timeline. Since that doesn't happen, we can assume that Voyager is in another timeline from the one we consider to be "prime" from that point forward, even though that would be the "original" timeline.
- Third, these have never been "the present," or seen as "the past" from a show set afterward. All we know is that some temporal wars happened, they were bad, and apparently it is possible to put a genie back into a bottle because of reasons. Good thing warp travel is so hard in the future to deter people from trying a simple time warp every time Lois Lane gets killed, like if a child kills trillions, instead of stupid writer millions, of people and almost ends galactic civilization because a ship once crashed on a planet extremely close to the edge of a nebula. 29th century Starfleet is involved with maintaining the timeline, and then 31st century temporal agents aren't part of Starfleet, but the Federation/Starfleet says they fought the temporal wars in the 31st century in the 32nd century. That alone doesn't really line up well, so particular events and details like people, uniforms, insignia, etc. should all be considered to be alternate until proven otherwise. It really wouldn't be hard for them to throw this into a screen somewhere if they wanted to, as if any of their characters actually read instead of miming magic hands for CGI later.
- TLDR: all time travel results in alternate timelines, so "the future" is always alternate unless it's proven to be "the past" or "the present" at some point later, and DIS doesn't prove this past was the "prime" past anymore than multiple timelines with a gold Starfleet insignia in the 2390s made that "prime." - Archduk3 19:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
- So the general policy is to treat the future as a maybe until a story is fully set in that period because that stories canon is unlikely to be reversed. We clearly can begin to tell the hitory of post 24th century because of DIS3 Now we don't know anything about the 29th century except
- The Federation and Starfleet exists and thrive.
- They have advanced time travel technology and time travel policy
- Braxton was a captain of a timeship at the time.
- None of these facts were disproven by Dis3 and 1 and 2 were confirmed to be true before the temporal war and Burn. But wait! We also know that the events of the 31st century are also true because the events of DIS3 are built on the temporal war.
- TLDR: If the future is details that may be contradicted by later stories then we could ignore it BUT because New Star Trek stories are building on these stories and not contraicting their details and their is no evidence that their events were reversed we should treat them as valid canon-Dr.Autocorect25 (talk) 00:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
- So the general policy is to treat the future as a maybe until a story is fully set in that period because that stories canon is unlikely to be reversed. We clearly can begin to tell the hitory of post 24th century because of DIS3 Now we don't know anything about the 29th century except
- 1 & 2 aren't under debate here, only 3. There was time travel in TOS, and a policy for it by TNG and DS9, so those were already facts. DIS confirmed 1, but that doesn't mean 3 gets a pass. DIS didn't prove or disprove 3, so we still only have the VOY viewpoint and references for that info. If we want to be precise though, DIS actually did made changes to what we knew about this time, as we had a temporal cold war that got hot in ENT, and now we have temporal wars, as in suddenly there are more than one. Plenty of room to assume anything either way there, which is why we should be consistent with all stuff from "the future." - Archduk3 18:08, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
My argument isn't so much that these are or are not "alternate", despite the fact that from what we last saw, everything was "status quo" when Janeway and Ducane parted ways at the end of "Relativity". So keeping in mind we are supposed to write what we know, moreso than we are supposed to try to make sense of "facts", and regardless of the above, these uniforms clearly belong to the 29th century, no matter what our individual perception of that century's place in time may be. That really isn't up to us to decide. They clearly deserve to be incorporated into their own period of the timeline, just like every other century's uniforms are organized. The fact if whether they are alternate or not can be addressed there, most likely with a multiple timeline tag. –Gvsualan (talk) 19:03, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with Gvsualan. The fact is, that's a uniform of the 29th century. Let's split the article. Kind regards, -- Markonian 23:22, 22 May 2021 (UTC)