Star Trek: Star Fleet Technical Manual

[Typhonis 1]

Star Trek: Star Fleet Technical Manual by Franz Joseph. Anyone else have a copy of this 1970's book?

How does it stand up to 'modern' Trek information ? Is it still a good source or is it merely nostalgia?

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Star ... cal_Manual

[SpottedKitty]

Still pretty good, I'd say, although there is a thoroughly eclectic mix of valid probably-canon background info (e.g. the equipment and ship deck schematics), and almost completely non-canon material that never appeared in any episode or movie. I still haul it out now and then to read bits of it.

[Tribble]

I haven't read it, but IMO I would imagine TNG-era and ENT-era effectively retcons a lot of it since they take place in the same universe. Or at least any specific info regarding speed, weapons yields, shield strength etc.

I suppose if it were a "TOS-only" debate (which wouldn't be really fair since TNG-era and ENT are canon, but whatever) I would place it in the same category as the TNG/DS9 manuals - canon, except where the series/movies contradict it.

[Batman]

Except that for Trek none of the manuals regardless of era are canon. What you see on the screen is what you have.

[Prometheus Unbound]

A special case is made for "non-fiction" reference books such as The Star Trek Encyclopedia, Star Trek Chronology, TNG Technical Manual and DS9 Technical Manual. Unlike the novels and novelizations, these reference manuals have never been explicitly named as non-canon, and the fact that they were officially sanctioned by Paramount and given to episode writers as guides serves to give them an aura of credibility. Roddenberry himself considered it part of the "background" of Star Trek.[19] Meanwhile, Michael Okuda and Rick Sternbach, two art and technical consultants since Star Trek: The Next Generation and the authors of several of these reference books, considered their work "pretty official".[20] However, they stop short of naming the books canon, leaving the debate open.
Star Trek writer and co-producer Ronald D. Moore dismisses such official material as "speculation", and says that the writing staff did not consider it canon.[21][22] However, Viacom, the parent company of Paramount, seems to believe differently. In a series of posts to the official Star Trek website's forums, Viacom Senior Director Harry Lang left no doubt that he considers the reference books as canon.[16][23]


wiki

[TOSDOC]

I still have it in the basement. It's a fun read, and was useful when I made a few props such as a 3D chess set or some of McCoy's instruments. I don't think I'd dream of pulling it out for a debate.