What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[cooleddie74]

Wasn't he called an Admiral in Relics? My memory might be failing me.

No, he was called Captain Scott.

 

[Xhiandra]

No, he was called Captain Scott.

K, I misremembered.

 

[Vale]

I don't think there are too many captains, but at this point I do think there are too many starship classes.

I mean, seriously! You've got, what, like 20 starship classes active in the late 24th Century now? It's getting a little ridiculous! Why have so many ship classes? Use the ones you've already got! What's the point of an Akira when you've already got a Nebula? What's the point of a California when you'e already got a Saber? What's the point of a Parliament when you've already got a California!

Starfleet: "Here's our twenty plus active starship classes! There's loads more probably that you haven't even seen! And all our active ships will look completely different in a decade or two anyway! MOAR DESIGNS!"
Klingons: "Here's our four ship designs, two of which we've been using for over a century. Qapla'!"
Romulans: "WARBIRDS FTW!"

I agree, there's no reason the Cerritos couldn't have been one of those background TNG era ships, like the Cheyenne-, New Orleans-, or Freedom-classes. I'm all for moving away from things like the innumerable Miranda-, Oberth- or Excelsior-classes of TNG and DS9, but there's already so many era-appropriate canon classes of ships we've barely even seen.

 

[Tim Thomason]

Starfleet: "Here's our twenty plus active starship classes! There's loads more probably that you haven't even seen! And all our active ships will look completely different in a decade or two anyway! MOAR DESIGNS!"
Klingons: "Here's our four ship designs, two of which we've been using for over a century. Qapla'!"
Romulans: "WARBIRDS FTW!"

Except that the Klingons and the Romulans generally represent one dominant culture each (with many subjugated cultures, presumably), whereas the Federation represents 150+ equal warp-capable cultures. Minimum, they need 150+ ship classes, probably much more. There's no reason why Henry Archer's design lineage needs to be more important than Sunak of Vulcan's or Greshlarigm of Miracht's or Thranishar ch'Zari's. Diversity of ship designs has always been a core strength of the Federation... even if the Picard finale forgot that fact.

 

[Sci]

Except that the Klingons and the Romulans generally represent one dominant culture each (with many subjugated cultures, presumably), whereas the Federation represents 150+ equal warp-capable cultures. Minimum, they need 150+ ship classes, probably much more.

I mean, I prefer to think of Starfleet as a design lineage distinct from those of the Federation's Member cultures.

There's no reason why Henry Archer's design lineage needs to be more important than Sunak of Vulcan's or Greshlarigm of Miracht's or Thranishar ch'Zari's.

I like to think of the Constitution class as a combination of design lineages from the founding member worlds. The saucer coming from Earth, the use of dual hulls with a neck coming from Vulcan, the engineering hull from the Andorians, and presumably some interior technology from the Tellarites. But that's just my headcannon.

Diversity of ship designs has always been a core strength of the Federation... even if the Picard finale forgot that fact.

Has it, though? We literally never saw another starship class until TWOK. For most of ST history, the two main ship types have been variations on the Constitution and Miranda. It was only after FC that we started seeing a bunch of different starship classes instead of a small handfull.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Wasn't he called an Admiral in Relics? My memory might be failing me.





Yes, there are other roles, but it remains that in those roles, you have hundreds of subordinates for a few higher ranks. It stands to reason that not everyone of the lower-ranked characters would make it to the higher ranks, regardless of role.
Doesn't matter that it takes years: if you take all Ensigns in 2382 and they're all Captains or Admirals by 2425, you've got as many leaders as followers. Unless Starfleet recruits exponentially.
Some would die in the line of duty, some (most, I would expect) would stop at a given rank, some would just leave Starfleet and do something else. Wouldn't that be more interesting, when writing these alternate timeline episodes? In fact, statistically, I'd expect that perhaps none of the "hero ship" would end up promoted that high.
The writers do think about it in regular episodes (for instance, Worf leaves Starfleet, Tasha and Data die, O'Brien never becomes an officer, ...), but as soon as there's an alternate future, a random Ensign/Lieutenant gets catapulted Captain as shorthand for "years have passed".

You're making a huge leap in logic, though, to get from 'a random ensign becomes captain in most alternate future episodes' to 'all Ensigns become Captains'. The second statement clearly isn't true. And even if our main heroes are theoretically overrepresented in the Command ranks over the total courses of their careers, that doesn't mean their career paths are representative of all Starfleet officers. Tv shows, by definition, are supposed to follow extraordinary people most of the time.

 

[at Quark's]

I don't think there are too many captains, but at this point I do think there are too many starship classes.

I mean, seriously! You've got, what, like 20 starship classes active in the late 24th Century now? It's getting a little ridiculous! Why have so many ship classes? Use the ones you've already got! What's the point of an Akira when you've already got a Nebula? What's the point of a California when you'e already got a Saber? What's the point of a Parliament when you've already got a California!

Sounds to me like the writers of Star Trek didn't take the level of dedication of some fans into account, that they would need to do more than just introduce a cool new ship design. That they'd also need to establish an in-depth, credible explanation as to why the class is necessary and what exactly differentiates its mission profile from that of an already existing class that looks suitable too, at first sight. I don't think the producers anticipated that level of world building. Might also be hard to make up, too. After all, we can only use actual navies as a very rough and distant analogy, and we don't really know what mission parameters would really be needed.

Yes, there are other roles, but it remains that in those roles, you have hundreds of subordinates for a few higher ranks. It stands to reason that not everyone of the lower-ranked characters would make it to the higher ranks, regardless of role.
Doesn't matter that it takes years: if you take all Ensigns in 2382 and they're all Captains or Admirals by 2425, you've got as many leaders as followers. Unless Starfleet recruits exponentially.

So how does this actually work in current militaries? I've come to understand that in the lower ranks promotions are fairly standard after set times if you don't really foul up at least, but that beyond a certain grade it becomes harder to get promoted, but I might be mistaken in that.

 

[MAGolding]

Environmental conditions probably play a part. Humans have our temperature we enjoy, Vulcans like it hotter, Andorians like it colder. If there were Tholians in Starfleet, they probably have temperatures of 207 °C. If the Xindi-Aquatics were in Starfleet they probably have unique ships where they can swim around in. Maybe if enough people from Melora from DS9's planet joined Starfleet they could all just fly around the ship.
I also just go with real world considerations and limitations. I like there being just some humans and a few aliens in the cast because the real world references or analogies people want to make are easier if you don't have to invent everything. Darmok has Picard talking about Gilgamesh to Dathon and maybe it could work if you insert some made up name in place but maybe not. Or Janeway can talk about the Millenium Gate and compare it to the Great Wall of China. Tom Paris can bring up all kinds of Earth minutiae.
I also can't fault past or even present productions from just having humans or human looking aliens on other ships or starbases. It's cheaper or maybe they just didn't think of it.
I think of it also like how in Star Wars there were only humans in the Rebellion until you get to Return of the Jedi and then there were heaps of aliens running the Rebel fleet. There were no women or aliens in the Empire in the films but even in the 90s I figured there were women just out of shot somewhere. Aliens I could go either way on but in the prequels Palpy is mates with Maul and Mas Amedda, so...

...and yet Jennifer on Lower Decks seems pretty comfortable as an Andorian on a Starfleet Ship. Nor do any of the many Vulcans we see ever complain of the cold.
In general the crews seen on Lower Decks, especially when it comes to background extras, seems a lot more diverse.

TOS "The Deadly Years" when afflicted with rapid aging:

KIRK: All right, Bones, I'm going up to the Bridge. Keep me posted. Spock?
SPOCK: I have a question for the doctor. (Kirk leaves) Doctor, the ship's temperature is increasingly uncomfortable for me. I've adjusted the environment in my quarters to one hundred twenty five degrees, which is at least tolerable. However, I
MCCOY: Well, I see I'm not going to be making any house calls on you.
SPOCK: I wondered if perhaps there was something which could lower my sensitivity to cold.
MCCOY: I'm not a magician, Spock, just an old country doctor.
SPOCK: Yes. As I always suspected. (leaves)

http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/40.htm

 

[fireproof78]

Yes, there are other roles, but it remains that in those roles, you have hundreds of subordinates for a few higher ranks. It stands to reason that not everyone of the lower-ranked characters would make it to the higher ranks, regardless of role.

I would imagine captain is a reasonable upper limit for most. Bearing in mind that Starfleet is huge, with ships, starbases, colonies, and logistics that all require supervision. Even in modern day US Navy has captains who sit as judges for court martial. I think there are enough needs and roles to allow multiple captains, at least.

 

[MAGolding]

.
....You could probably make a much better argument that Starfleet has too many Admirals, rather than captains, since I'm fairly certain we've seen almost as many admirals as we have captains (if not more) which is a bit of a weird ratio, especially since so many of the admirals seem totally unworthy of command of any kind which kind of calls into question how they became admirals in the first place....

Actually in a realistic space opera there should be a lot of admirals. Only a minority of officers would be admirals, but there would be far more positions for admirals than in a surface navy.

Suppose that every star system had a one star admiral in charge of the local defense force. And maybe there would be a 2 staradmiral in charge of the defense forces in every 10 systems, a 3 star admiral in charge of defenses in every 100 star systems, a 4 star admiral in charge of every 1,000 star systems, a 5 star admiral in charge of every 10,000 star systems, a 6 star admiral in charge of every 100,000 star star systems, and a 7 star admiral in charge of every 1,000,000 star systems.

A Federation ruling 1,000,000 star systems seens really vast. With aproximately 0.004 stas per cubic light year, 1,000,000 star systems would ocupy about 250,000,000 cubic light years, an incredibly vast region of space. If 250,000,000 cubic light years were a sphere it owuld have a radius of 390.796321 light years and a diameter of 781.59264 light years. But on a map of the Milky Way Galaxy where the galactic disc has a diameter of about 100,000 light years such a sphere would seem tiny. After all, there are at least 100,000,000,000 stars in the galaxy.

And in a space battle fleet where admirals commmand units of space warships, there should be a lot of admirals.

Assume that a one star admiral commands a unit of 5 space battles, a 2 star admiral command 5 such units or 25 space battleships, a 3 star admiral commands 5 lower units and atotal of 125 space battleships, a 4 star admiral commands 625 space battleships, a 5 star admiral commands 3,125 space battleships, a 6 star admiral commands 15,625 space battleships, a 7 star admiral commands 78,125 space battleships, and so on.

There are only 6 officer's ranks in Starfleet below admiral - ensign, lieutenant j.g., lieutenent, lieutenant commander, commander, and captain. And Starfleet should have at least 6 ranks of admirals, and probably more, for the many levels of command above captain level commands. Any officer who rises to the top Admiral position in starfleet should spend most of their career being promoted from one admiral rank to another. If an officer is going to become a top admiral, all their promotions up to captain will be in the earliest phase of their career.

 

[MAGolding]

Yeah, starting with TMP it seems both Commodores and Fleet Captains were a thing of the past and then stayed that way until at least sometime between 2379 and 2399. I'm glad they resurrected the rank of Commodore even if the character in the series holding said rank was a Romulan impostor and traitor.

There are several different editions of TMP. At least one of them includes:

LIEUTENANT: This is comm station Epsilon Nine, calling U.S.S. Columbia. Come in Columbia. Respond!
COLUMBIA [OC]: (too faint to understand)
LIEUTENANT: This is Epsilon Nine. Am boosting output. How do you read this?
COLUMBIA [OC]: All right. (too faint to understand)
LIEUTENANT: Scout Columbia NCC six two one to rendezvous with Scout Revere NCC five nine five on stardate seven four one one point four. Further orders to be relayed at that time. Signed, Commodore Probert, Starfleet. End of transmission.
COLUMBIA [OC]: All right. (too faint to understand)

http://www.chakoteya.net/movies/movie1.html

So Commodore Probert is a charcter in at least some versions of TMP.

 

[cooleddie74]

True! Forgot about that dialogue. Good point.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Romulans: "WARBIRDS FTW!"

During the TNG era, they showed the Romulan Scout Ship 2x as far as I can tell.

 

[Xhiandra]

I would imagine captain is a reasonable upper limit for most. Bearing in mind that Starfleet is huge, with ships, starbases, colonies, and logistics that all require supervision. Even in modern day US Navy has captains who sit as judges for court martial. I think there are enough needs and roles to allow multiple captains, at least.

That doesn't solve it, in fact it makes it worse. Each additional supervisory role implies a larger number of subordinates, therefore more candidates.
In short, the bigger it is, the less likely it would be that "our heroes" would be the top of the top.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Klingons: "Here's our four ship designs, two of which we've been using for over a century. Qapla'!"
Romulans: "WARBIRDS FTW!"

Maybe there are tons of different Klingon and Romulan designs, but they all look the same to us humans because we're racist

 

[at Quark's]

And Starfleet should have at least 6 ranks of admirals, and probably more, for the many levels of command above captain level commands.

Perhaps they'd need to invent some new rank terminology to get around the 'x star admiral' bit, '7 star admiral' is stretching the admiral rank too much for my tastes.

 

[Nerys Myk]

here are only 6 officer's ranks in Starfleet below admiral - ensign, lieutenant j.g., lieutenent, lieutenant commander, commander, and captain. And Starfleet should have at least 6 ranks of admirals, and probably more, for the many levels of command above captain level commands. Any officer who rises to the top Admiral position in starfleet should spend most of their career being promoted from one admiral rank to another. If an officer is going to become a top admiral, all their promotions up to captain will be in the earliest phase of their career.

Why exactly again?

 

[fireproof78]

That doesn't solve it, in fact it makes it worse. Each additional supervisory role implies a larger number of subordinates, therefore more candidates.
In short, the bigger it is, the less likely it would be that "our heroes" would be the top of the top.

I don't see how. Our heroes are usually shown to be exceptional, in some way. So their careers are not automatically reflective of all careers.

 

[Vale]

Assume that a one star admiral commands a unit of 5 space battles, a 2 star admiral command 5 such units or 25 space battleships, a 3 star admiral commands 5 lower units and atotal of 125 space battleships, a 4 star admiral commands 625 space battleships, a 5 star admiral commands 3,125 space battleships, a 6 star admiral commands 15,625 space battleships, a 7 star admiral commands 78,125 space battleships, and so on.

Going on a combination of Morrow in STIII, "Bill" in STVI, Shanthi in TNG (whose rank insignia the production team admit to messing up), and Clancy in PIC, the single most senior officer in Starfleet appears to be a five-star admiral.

 

[cooleddie74]

Which I believe is called Starfleet Admiral, a rank that Admiral Bennett in TFF may also have held depending on whether or not the costume designers gave him the same rank pin as Admiral Cartwright in TVH.