Stocker got his rank by some path other than practical command experience in the field, and he isn't expected to command a ship. Stocker's educational attainment, the outstanding reports and studies he authored, the favor he earned with higher-ups, and his seniority probably got him his gold braids. He's a headquarters guy.
Kirk's the CO of the Enterprise. He's in charge.
That is true, but even so, a higher ranked officer is generally not going to refer to him as "sir" and be so deferential.
Well he's also an incompetent desk jockey who's probably in awe of Starship Captains.
That's fair. Until such time as he sees an opportunity to seize command from Kirk and almost get everyone killed, of course.
AI gave me this.
Yes. By naval tradition, whoever is in command of the vessel is the Captain, and they are addressed as "Captain" or "Sir" by everyone on board, regardless of the crew's actual ranks.The title is tied to the authority and responsibility of command, not the individual's specific rank or pay grade. This convention dictates several protocol rules:The Rule of Command: The person in command of a ship acts on behalf of the owner or the state. Even if a higher-ranking officer (such as an Admiral) is aboard for transit, the Captain retains tactical and operational command of the vessel.The Override Effect: Because the Captain holds ultimate authority over the safety and security of the ship, all aboard—including higher-ranking military officials—must defer to the Captain regarding the vessel's operations
Yes. By naval tradition, whoever is in command of the vessel is the Captain, and they are addressed as "Captain" or "Sir" by everyone on board, regardless of the crew's actual ranks.The title is tied to the authority and responsibility of command, not the individual's specific rank or pay grade. This convention dictates several protocol rules:The Rule of Command: The person in command of a ship acts on behalf of the owner or the state. Even if a higher-ranking officer (such as an Admiral) is aboard for transit, the Captain retains tactical and operational command of the vessel.The Override Effect: Because the Captain holds ultimate authority over the safety and security of the ship, all aboard—including higher-ranking military officials—must defer to the Captain regarding the vessel's operations
Captain is in direct command of the ship, and Stocker was not in Kirk's immediate chain of command. A certain level of decorum and respect is offered to the CO of a vessel.
It's just a polite courtesy. Stocker is a higher rank than Kirk, but he's not his boss, Kirk gets his orders from a chain of command that Stocker's not a part of. In real life if a lieutenant relieves an ensign as officer of the deck, the lieutenant says "I relieve you sir." It's acknowledging that at that moment, the ensign, not the lieutenant, is the captain's representative and is shown respect for that.
I don't think it's common usage. I haven't heard of a ship's captain being referred to that way (as a standard courtesy) in modern times.
In addition to what J.T.B. said, there was an archaic tradition of using "sir" for all gentlemen at one point. A famous story about Dewey and Farragut during the Civil War is a good example:
Last edited:
In The Bounty (as in "Mutiny on") with Anthony Hopkins and Mel Gibson, Captain Bly constantly addresses subordinate officer Fletcher Christian as Sir, even when he's furiously scolding the guy. In no way does it make Fletcher the boss.
Another little touch of dyed-in-the-wool good manners: more than once, Bly shouts "God damn your hide!" -- never "God damn you." No matter how angry, the Captain wasn't condemning a man's soul.
Stocker is a staff officer, with no line experience. Kirk is a line officer. There are staff officers with line officer experience, but Stocker acknowledges he isn't one of them. Line officers can command a vessel, staff officers without line experience command a desk, or provide technical expertise. The line officer in command on a vessel outranks all staff officers on the vessel, in command decisions regardless of the staff officer's rank, if Kirk was to visit Stocker at Stokers office, and not on the ship, where Stocker was in charge, then Kirk would show deference to Stocker.
Last edited:
So everything said here being true, why did regulations permit Stocker to assume command? Obviously Kirk, Spock, and Scotty were all incapacitated. But why didn't command fall to the next person in the ship's regular chain of command, which I assume would either be Uhura or Sulu, both of whom were unaffected by the ailment?
Also, even for a staff officer who has never served on a starship, "Let's save time by blowing through the Romulan Neutral Zone" seems especially boneheaded. Surely anyone who rose to the rank of Commodore, even if they were deskbound their entire career, would know that you don't go traipsing into territory where you are forbidden by treaty and likely to be attacked by the Romulans.
Also, even for a staff officer who has never served on a starship, "Let's save time by blowing through the Romulan Neutral Zone" seems especially boneheaded. Surely anyone who rose to the rank of Commodore, even if they were deskbound their entire career, would know that you don't go traipsing into territory where you are forbidden by treaty and likely to be attacked by the Romulans.
That is correct, if the writers knew how things really worked on vessels, then there wouldn't be a story, because staff officers with no line experience would not be allowed to do what Stocker did. In reality the highest ranking line officer should be the one to assume command. As far as I know it should be either Sulu or Uhura, depending on who had seniority in rank. Neither one of them would have gone into Romulan space, just to get to Stocker's Starbase assignment using the shortest route possible.
I don't think he's a staff officer as such. My impression is that he's a line officer who came up through the shore side of Starfleet, and has been appointed as the facility commander for Starbase 10 (like Stocker at Starbase 11, who was a former starship captain).
The episode specifically addresses why he accedes to command rather than Sulu, Leslie, Uhura, etc.:
It sounds like Stocker is legally qualified to take charge of the ship, but wouldn't normally have the authority underway to supersede any of the ship's senior officers.
Is it possible that Stocker once commanded a spaceship in Starfleet, but never a starship?
This episode explodes the wisdom of the ship's most important officers going out on every errand. The ship needs them. But the way most stories are structured, the ship isn't the thing. The ship is just the device that gets you to the story. Kirk and Spock had to get out there and take chances for dramatic reasons.
It reminds me of the late 1970s "home computer" revolution. I had to buy one, because the computer was "the thing." I wanted it for its own sake. The home computer in 1978 was a solution in search of a problem. By the late 1990s, when the Internet became more useful and the Eugenics Wars were over, a home computer wasn't the thing anymore. It was just the thing that got you to the thing.
It reminds me of the late 1970s "home computer" revolution. I had to buy one, because the computer was "the thing." I wanted it for its own sake. The home computer in 1978 was a solution in search of a problem. By the late 1990s, when the Internet became more useful and the Eugenics Wars were over, a home computer wasn't the thing anymore. It was just the thing that got you to the thing.
Per the script, there are Starfleet regulations that force a flag officer to take command if senior officers are incapacitated even of a starship, so, that's that. Giving command over to a junior officer (Lt. and lower) would be a breach of regulations. All of Stocker's decisions about the competency hearing and taking command is by the book; he was doing the right thing. Now his command decisions are horrible; sucks to be the Enterprise. YMMV
Similar threads
