Startrek military refrences

Post by **Teaos** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:28 am

If anything they did the opposite of the burnout story. By the 6th season he was pretty much planning the war.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:32 am

Teaos wrote:If anything they did the opposite of the burnour angel. By the 6th season he was pretty much planning the war.

Uh yeah, it seems Starfleet doesn't have a General Staff or an Int Branch.

Post by **Teaos** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:38 am

Well they have never fought a war on that scale before so they are not in practice but you'd think they would learn pretty damn fast.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:42 am

Teaos wrote:Well they have never fought a war on that scale before so they are not in practice but you'd think they would learn pretty damn fast.

Perhaps not but you'd think that Admirals would still have staff, is one guy coordinating the entire Starfleet Operations division (for example)? Thats a pretty easy practice to carry over, building experiance takes time though.

Post by **Mikey** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:23 am

Especially if the go-to guy is burnt, as we've mentioned, and whose only real combat experience that we know consists of running for an escape pod.

Post by **Teaos** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:39 am

Especially if the go-to guy is burnt, as we've mentioned, and whose only real combat experience that we know consists of running for an escape pod.

Well technicaly that speaks for 95% of Starfleet at the start of the war.

Sisko did a good job for a SF officer in the end but thats because they changed his character.

Post by **Mikey** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:00 am

No doubt he did a pretty good job, although that was endangered by his monomaniacal tendencies - the point is, what was he doing in tha tposition in the first place? If DS9 was supposed to be a backwater to push a burnt-out officer out of the way, why does that officer end up being the architect of your war effort? I understand about not removing him from DS9 because of the Bajoran religious issue (good point GK,) but how do you have a mentally-scarred, monomaniacal, vengeance-driven guy go from "under-the-rug" post to strategic overseer?

Post by **Teaos** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:12 am

I would of had him as PART of the war team. He had the type of first hand experience with the Dominion you just cant buy. But to have him pretty much leading it...

Enkidu · Post by **Enkidu** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:36 pm

I also find it bizarre that almost every ship, from a state of the art giant cruiser with a thousand people on-board, to a 80 year old vessel running supplies with a crew of twenty is commanded by an officer of the same rank. This is compounded by the rare exception of the Prometheus, a Nebula class, one of Star Fleet's largest, newest starships, been commanded by a Lt commander! I suspect that the Prometheus should have been a Oberth and that the old chestnut of reusing SFX shots is to blame for that one.
I suppose seniority within ranks could be wheeled out in defence. I don't know about modern navies, but it was, IIRC, very important in the 18th/19th century Royal Navy. I think the RN of this period is a pretty good analogy for starfleet, as it was a huge organization, technically advanced, and besides combat also took part in exploration, survey, scientific, "colony support", diplomatic, and VIP transport missions.
Thought most of their vessel's were commanded by officers below the rank of Captain.....

Post by **Teaos** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:52 pm

They probably made them all captain so as not to confusethe audience with a rank captain with the ships captain.

Post by **Tsukiyumi** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:55 pm

If you take command of a vessel, aren't you officially the "captain", regardless of rank?

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:56 pm

Enkidu wrote: I suppose seniority within ranks could be wheeled out in defence. I don't know about modern navies, but it was, IIRC, very important in the 18th/19th century Royal Navy. I think the RN of this period is a pretty good analogy for starfleet, as it was a huge organization, technically advanced, and besides combat also took part in exploration, survey, scientific, "colony support", diplomatic, and VIP transport missions.
Thought most of their vessel's were commanded by officers below the rank of Captain.....

It was and still is, get a group of officers together and you get to watch them play the "commission date game". We know that SF doesn't bother with this as Ransom has been a Captain since Janeway was a Junior Officer and he commands a Nova. And there are Captains senior or peers with Picard who command an Excelsior.

Post by **Teaos** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:58 pm

Starfleet and the Federation as a whole is all about personal betterment. Seniority would count for sh*t to them. Its who deserves it.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:58 pm

Tsukiyumi wrote:If you take command of a vessel, aren't you officially the "captain", regardless of rank?

Captain is a rank and an appointment. One can hold the appointment of Captain while holding a lesser rank. Essentially the ships CO is always granted the courtesy of being called "Captain". It's such a big deal that embarked ground troops with the rank of Captain are addressed as "Major" while on ship.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 1:00 pm

Teaos wrote:Starfleet and the Federation as a whole is all about personal betterment. Seniority would count for sh*t to them. Its who deserves it.

You'd think there would be an incredible amount of backstabbing, favour-currying and positioning as everyone tries to get a better posting. Rather like a RL officers board.