Starfleet Command's Worst Decisions

[Lighthawk]

In the same line as Striker's worst captain X decisions, what would you consider to be the worst orders SF command has ever issued?

[Tsukiyumi]

Besides making Janeway an Admiral?

[Deepcrush]

Besides making Janeway an Admiral?

No that was a good move! It got her away from command! Being in charge of office 301B, department of payroll, is perfect!

[Lighthawk]

Aye, getting her out of the captain's chair was a good move. As Kirk said to Picard in Generations, being in the big chair is where you make a difference. In Janeway's case, it was a difference for the worse.

[Captain Seafort]

1) Putting children on warships
2) The TNG-era Prime Directive
3) Signing off on the design for the GCS
4) Aiming the full-scale test of the soliton wave at an inhabited planet ("New Ground")
5) Putting Sisko in charge of hunting down Eddington ("For the Cause", "For the Uniform")
6) Promoting Janeway to Captain

[Deepcrush]

1) Putting children on warships
2) The TNG-era Prime Directive
3) Signing off on the design for the GCS
4) Aiming the full-scale test of the soliton wave at an inhabited planet ("New Ground")
5) Putting Sisko in charge of hunting down Eddington ("For the Cause", "For the Uniform")
6) Promoting Janeway to Captain

Agreed all the way around!

[McAvoy]

I would say not going to war with the Dominion earlier. Mine the wormhole early so the combined Cardassian/Dominion fleet would be much more managable. Starfleet may not be ready but neither would the Dominion.

[Captain Seafort]

That depends on how ready Starfleet was for war. We've seen how well equipped they usually are, so an early start might have left them in an even worse position. Another problem might have been public opinion - they needed to demonstrate to the population as a whole that the Dominion wasn't just moving in forces to defend their Cardassian ally, but building up a force to conquer the Alpha Quadrant.

[Monroe]

Everything tactical.

No dedicated warships until later on.
No body armor.
No protective gear on away missions. Even into caves!
Phasers which are impossible to aim.
No ground vehicles worth anything.
No Air superiority vehicles such as fighters.


And then let's not forget holodecks which are incredibly unsafe. They would have been recalled so early on if they came out in real life. But I guess that is more of a Federation error not a Starfleet error.

[Sionnach Glic]

Every ship in the TNG era. They only got better again during DS9.
The uniforms from ST:TMP. Seriously, what the fuck?
Making Janeway a captain.
Putting Archer in charge of humanity's first true inter-stellar starship.
The TNG era Prime Directive.
Ship security and the Federation's ground forces.

[BigJKU316]

Not building Defiants in as large of numbers as possible as soon as the design was finished. Simply put it makes the most logical sense and it helps your exploration mission as you can release tons of longer legged ships to go out exploring if you have a solid core of defense ships back home.

The Defiant is the perfect modern Destroyer and there literally should have been hundreds of them running around. Escort was the perfect name for it because that is what it should have been doing in battle is providing close escort to major ships. Instead it was serving as a freaking flagship half the time.

And that brings me to my next, and possibly biggest gripe. WHY ARE THERE NO FLAG BRIDGES ON ANY SHIPS?

I just don't get it. How can you possibly expect to command a fleet and a ship at the same time? Who can do that? Sisko spent the whole war issuing orders through a single subordinate officer and spent most of his time fighting the Defiant. There should be a flag bridge for the commander of the fleet, distinct from the ships bridge. Command and Control was just so God awful I can't even begin.

[RK_Striker_JK_5]

TNG phaser design?

[Sionnach Glic]

Not building Defiants in as large of numbers as possible as soon as the design was finished. Simply put it makes the most logical sense and it helps your exploration mission as you can release tons of longer legged ships to go out exploring if you have a solid core of defense ships back home.

The Defiant is the perfect modern Destroyer and there literally should have been hundreds of them running around. Escort was the perfect name for it because that is what it should have been doing in battle is providing close escort to major ships. Instead it was serving as a freaking flagship half the time.

It's possible that the Definat class was simply too expensive to justify mass production. It'd certainly explain why there are so few examples of such a powerful ship around.

[BigJKU316]

Not building Defiants in as large of numbers as possible as soon as the design was finished. Simply put it makes the most logical sense and it helps your exploration mission as you can release tons of longer legged ships to go out exploring if you have a solid core of defense ships back home.

The Defiant is the perfect modern Destroyer and there literally should have been hundreds of them running around. Escort was the perfect name for it because that is what it should have been doing in battle is providing close escort to major ships. Instead it was serving as a freaking flagship half the time.

It's possible that the Definat class was simply too expensive to justify mass production. It'd certainly explain why there are so few examples of such a powerful ship around.

I just don't see that. Cost for ships is almost always a function of size, at least among warships. Electronics and weapons are the biggest drivers of cost but they scale pretty much with size, because you build the ship to carry the electronics or weapons. Ship design pretty much starts with "What do we want it to do and what do we need to do that?" then you design the hull to hold all those things.

The Defiant might have more weapons, but it has less sensors, no science labs (which in many cases would be the most expensive spaces on major ships) no holodecks and less creature comforts. Initial cost would be high to cover weapons development I would guess, but that is a fixed cost once developed, going forward your unit cost would actually drop the more you made as you found efficiencies in the production line.

When compared against other Federation ships the Defiant should be much cheaper on an ongoing production basis.

[Sionnach Glic]

The Defiant is also capable of taking on vessels many times its size, indicating that there's some seriously powerful weapons and generators built into it, comparable to much larger ships. The cost of not just building those, but also miniturising them enough to fit into such a small hull can't be low.

Really, there are only two realistic reasons as to why Starfleet never built more Defiants. Either because of mass stupidity (and as one of Starfleet's more vocal critics on this site, I'd have no problem believing that), or because there was some other factor preventing their production. In this instance I'm willing to give Starfleet the benefit of the doubt.