Clearance code

What was Chekov's clearance code? I only heard "Wictor Wictor". ;) - JustPhil 15:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe it was "Victor Victor 2." --TimPendragon Hail 20:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
"Nine five wiktor wiktor two" 19:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

How did the destruction of the Kelvin lead to the change in Chekov's birth?

My personal opinion is that Chekov should have been left out of this movie and have instead been reintroduced in the next film.

Besides, he was annoying. --Chris 16:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe someone very close to Andrei Chekov died on the USS Kelvin and Andrei mourned for him/her these additional 4 years before becoming the father of Pavel. No, really, there are many possibilities. QuiGonJinnTalk 17:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Or he was lying at some point. --Alan 17:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
The difference is actually reversed QuiGonJinn. Chekov in the prime timeline was born in 2245, four years after his alternate universe counterpart. This can be explained by the idea that Chekov's parents met four years earlier as a result of the destruction of the Kelvin. When a ship is lost like that, a lot of things can happen which would cause people to meet where they normally wouldn't have. Maybe in the prime timeline someone who died on the kelvin in the alternate timeline was on a ship with one of Chekov's parents but in the alternate timeline this person was replaced by the other one of Chekov's parents. IndyK1ng 17:57, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Oh, my bad. You are right. QuiGonJinnTalk 18:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Oh come on IndyK1ng! That's impossible for the same exact person to be born 4 years earlier. That's simply a bug in the film. ;) Can't do anything about it. --Jamjumetley 18:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
It is a bug. But the one that can be explained by the effects of the reality change. QuiGonJinnTalk 18:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you're attempting to be sarcastic or not (if you were, you failed) but it is possible. Also, I didn't say it was the exact same person, I merely stated that he has the same parents. Whether his genetic code is the same is definitely questionable. This explains why he appears to be much more intelligent than his prime universe counterpart (though this may only be because nothing on this level is shown in the series ie. him transporting people moving at high speeds) IndyK1ng 18:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
It is most certainly not a bug, since they wouldn't want to have a 13-year-old Chekov in the movie. They changed his birthdate specifically because he wouldn't have been able to be introduce in the film otherwise. It is quite possible that he has a different genetic code, but I'm not complaining that they replaced a crappy character with an intelligent, interesting one.– Bowenthebeard 18:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I think it's possible for there to be a change in Chekov's birthdate. Butterfly effect, anyone? Maybe Chekov's father survived the Kelvin, he realized how short life was, and decided to have a kid as soon as possible. --JustPhil 18:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
That's a pretty decent point, Phil. My whole take on it is that the Kelvin destruction was probably a media circus, or at least an event that dictated policy of the military differently. It was heroic enough to become a major study at Pike's Academy tenure.
A good theory is that the Kelvin incident, through the effects of fear, aggression and paranoia caused in citizens by an unexplainable outside attack, prompted an increase in Starfleet recruitment, as well as being an influence in ship design and weapon design in that the Federation didn't want their weapons to be useless against advanced technology they had seen in action.
One additional possibility is that the Federation gained knowledge from the Kelvin's sensor logs -- if the explosives used could be reverse engineered by the Federation based on recording taken at the scene, we would have to account that the alternate reality ships had greater weapons technology, based on the fact they were using future technology. They would have won more historic battles, and avoided others, creating a different dynamic of Federation expansion rippling outward from Nero's epicenter. The increase in recruitment or expansionism, and conflicts that came with, could have also resulted in any major baby booms of the early-to-mid-century happening at different times, meaning individuals would be subtly changed. -- Captain MKB 18:47, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Of course, it's also possible that the prime-Chekov was frozen in stasis for four years, thus changing his age; while the alter-Chekov was never put in stasis -- this line of speculation explains why they could be the same person but be different ages. -- Captain MKB 20:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
That's stretching it a bit, but maybe.- JustPhil 21:03, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
No. Just no– Bowenthebeard 04:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, but you're all overlooking that the 2245 date is based on the assumption that "Who Mourns for Adonais?" took place in 2267, which is merely an educated guess of the ST Chronology. Only a few TOS episodes (such as Journey to Babel) can definately be placed in a certain year. -- 06:01, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, it had to have taken place in the late 2260s. "Q2" established that James T. Kirk's five-year-mission aboard the USS Enterprise took place from 2265 through 2270. For more examples of episodes with a specified date, "The Trouble with Tribbles" took place "one hundred and five years" before "Trials and Tribble-ations". The latter was set in 2373, which means the former took place in 2268. Also, Star Trek confirms that James T. Kirk was born in 2233, and in "The Deadly Years", Kirk is 34, meaning that episode had to take place in 2267. If Chekov was 17 in 2258, he would be 22 in 2263 (2264 at the latest), but "Who Mourns for Adonais?" cannot be set anywhere before 2265, as per "Q2." So, it's pretty clear that something happened in the alternate reality to allow Chekov to be born four years earlier than he was supposed to be born. --From Andoria with Love 08:04, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I think everyone is overlooking the most obvious answer: the Pavel Chekov in the film is NOT the same person who exists under that name in the "prime universe." In this reality Chekov's parents, for whatever reason, ended up having a son 4 years earlier than in the reality we know; as in the "prime universe," they named their son Pavel. That would explain why this "version" of Chekov is apparently a boy genius when we've never heard anything like that about the "prime" version; it's because this is, genetically, a completely different individual. Having been conceived & raised by the same parents, he'll have many similarities with his counterpart, but he is still a completely different person who just happens to have the same name. lonenut2000
I know I'm coming in late for this, but I'm not sure why this theory is dismissed out of hand. Given what we know about the Trek universe, it's neither impossible nor improbable to accept some kind of stasis/time travel/time dilation explanation for the differences in Chekov's ages. After all, the only reason 2245 is the accepted canonical date for Chekov's birth is because we extrapolate backwards from "Who Mourns for Adonis." It's possible, in the Trek universe, for Chekov to have only aged 22 years in the prime universe while still having been born in 2241. Alternatively, it's equally possible for Chekov to have aged seventeen years in the alternate universe in spite of having been born in 2245. I think it's the best possible solution. -- 20:01, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Nuclear nitpicks

RE: This is a mistake: A Russian person with a heavy accent speaking English has trouble pronouncing W's (the sound is not is the Russian language) and may replace them with V's, so Chekov should have been able to pronounce 'Victor' correctly. He would not have been able to pronounce 'Whiskey' (W in the NATO phonetic alphabet) correctly and would pronounce it 'Viskey'. We are not sure if this was a grammatical error in the script, a miscommunication, an easter egg, or an evolution or change in the Russian accent over the tens of decades.

See MA:NIT. And it's wasn't a "mistake" in Star Trek - Chekov has always done that. That's the gag.– Cleanse 10:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

not the same person and here is why

the Chekov in TOS has the 1st name of Pavel, in this movie was he not called Chekhov after the playwright with the H in the name, also i thought the 1st name he used was Anton not Pavel? i figured this was Pavel Chekov's older brother The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Huh? That makes no sense. In the movie, his name is "Pavel Andreievich Chekov". The intent was that it's the same person, just younger. — Morder (talk) 22:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Why the Y?

Is there some reason for the spelling "Andreyevich," with a "Y"? The subtitles on my DVD spell it "Andreievich." -Bridge 17:53, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

It, like all of the other instances, was changed by an anon back in June. He commented on one of the talk pages as follows:
I have a minor nitpick - 'Андреевич' should be romanized 'Andreyevich'.
So... it's the "proper" translation, but incorrect according to Trek. -- sulfur 18:20, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I see. That's why I didn't change it; I was afraid there already had been a discussion elsewhere. But what is the policy? Do we spell it Trek's way, or the "proper" way? -Bridge 18:28, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Never mind; I see you've taken steps to clarify. Cheers! -Bridge 18:30, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.