Command Dilemma in Doomsday Machine

[J.T.B.]

I realize there may be no exact real life analogue in today's militaries, but I was interested in the thoughts of any of our knowledegable military folks about how two command dilemmas that presented themselves in "The Doomsday Machine" would be handled in real life. To wit:

1. Commanding officer puts first officer in command while off the ship. Higher ranked officer, but not one actually posted to the ship, comes on board. Can higher ranked officer assume command, or does the ship's actual first officer have the right to stay in command based on being assigned to the ship and having been put in command by the ship's commander?

2. Ship's commanding officer is now actually in communication with the ship. Higher ranked officer still asserting that he is in command. Can the legitimate commander of the ship assert his authority to hand command back over to his first officer, or does the flag officer win that battle?

Just curious...

Under US Navy regulations, a flag officer who is qualified to command at sea is in charge, period, whether he/she is assigned to the command or simply a passenger. If a flag officer is a passenger he/she may choose whether to exercise that authority or not, but the vessel is required to fly his/her flag. The principle behind that is that command of vessels is a pre-requisite for line flag rank, so the flag officer qualified for command at sea would be the most experienced officer present. Obviously this does not come up much these days as most admirals travel by air.

It's a different story for officers below flag rank, where command is limited to assigned officers. An officer senior to a vessel's CO who was aboard as a passenger would have no command authority on that vessel unless designated by a superior.

As far as relief on medical grounds: Obviously this aspect makes for good drama, so might as well just accept it and not look to closely for real-world parallels. Read or at least see The Caine Mutiny for a more realistic look at some of the drawbacks and pitfalls of relieving a commanding officer, even one who might be psychologically unfit.

Justin

 

[MikeH92467]

^^^Beat me to the Caine Mutiny reference. Relieving a commanding officer on psychological grounds in the Navy would definitely be a career shortening move, unless you had full psychological workup to confirm something schizophrenia that would disable him/her from making rational decisions (not just "bad" decisions). A chief medical officer might be able to do it, especially since McCoy was presented as an expert in psychology in "Court Martial", but it wouldn't be the first choice..more like a desperate last resort.

 

[Tribble Herder]

Ah. So, if it was just Captain Decker of the USS Constellation, Spock would've been well within his rights to tell him, "With all due respect, get your ass off my bridge."

One step in the pay grade makes quite a difference, apparently.

 

[J.T.B.]

Ah. So, if it was just Captain Decker of the USS Constellation, Spock would've been well within his rights to tell him, "With all due respect, get your ass off my bridge."

One step in the pay grade makes quite a difference, apparently.

That's assuming that Starfleet's rules in that area are comparable to the USN's, but we know they aren't exactly: Como. Stocker, with zero space command experience, would not be qualified to command at sea in the USN, but is apparently fully within his rights to place himself in charge of Enterprise. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but there it is.

It does seem that the dramatic requirement of having an officer out-rank Kirk in "Doomsday" is the reason for showing a commodore commanding a single ship, rather than a starbase or task force.


Justin

 

[Timo]

...Although we can always argue Decker did have a task force, dispersed for exploration. Since the DDM jammed communications, he just couldn't reach it!

Timo Saloniemi

 

[J.T.B.]

...Although we can always argue Decker did have a task force, dispersed for exploration. Since the DDM jammed communications, he just couldn't reach it!

I quite agree, my pet theory has always been that three or four cruisers were into divisions or three or four ships (or squadrons or whatever you prefer), and one of each division was commanded by a commodore whose second hat was as division commander. Normally this would be a "paper" organization as the ships would be dispersed here and there on patrol, exploration, diplomatic missions and so on, but if need be the division could assemble as a task force similar to the one in "The Ultimate Computer."

Justin

 

[Tom]

Here is a thought, there should have been a Starfleet provision that would have suspended his command priviledges until a hearing could be held to investigate the severe loss of life under his command. Is it right to let a flag officer lose all his crew and ship and them let him simply take command of another ship because he held a higher rank? All of his command priviledges should have been immediately suspended upon the revelation of what happened to his crew, Starfleet would then later hold an investigation to determine if said flag officer is still fit for command.

 

[Timo]

But the military has to give its officers the full right and support to have their men killed. After all, if the officer doesn't have that specific authority, how can any mission be completed? No army can win wars merely by having its men fight to defend their own lives; sacrifices for a greater purpose have to be built into the very fundaments of the organization.

In like manner, if a Commodore loses one ship, he must retain the authority to send more into the breach until the mission is completed. Mere combat losses are no grounds for an incompetence hearing, not while the fight is still on.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Wingsley]

^ Great comments from J.T.B. and Tom above.

Back to the O.P. for a moment:

I realize there may be no exact real life analogue in today's militaries, but I was interested in the thoughts of any of our knowledegable military folks about how two command dilemmas that presented themselves in "The Doomsday Machine" would be handled in real life. To wit:

1. Commanding officer puts first officer in command while off the ship. Higher ranked officer, but not one actually posted to the ship, comes on board. Can higher ranked officer assume command, or does the ship's actual first officer have the right to stay in command based on being assigned to the ship and having been put in command by the ship's commander?

2. Ship's commanding officer is now actually in communication with the ship. Higher ranked officer still asserting that he is in command. Can the legitimate commander of the ship assert his authority to hand command back over to his first officer, or does the flag officer win that battle?

Just curious...

I do not know enough about military chains of command and protocol to answer the O.P. intelligently, but again, I want to thank the O.P. for starting this thread.

There is another distinctive issue tucked away in all of this that may have been overlooked. I do not know if it is applicable to any of today's modern armies or navies. Consider this:

Three of TOS' commodores, Stone, Mendez and Stocker, asserted authority in one way or another (the illusion of Mendez especially, through Starfleet Command's orders) of command over either Kirk or the Enterprise.

I have a theory about how this works, and it is not related to divisions or any other direct squadron organization. Here goes...

While it is possible that Starfleet flag officers (senior officers above the rank of captain) may command specific spacecraft or flotillas of same (task forces, fleets, etc.), I would like to suggest that command officers such as these could also command territories. Think of it this way. While it is possible that Stone was a "portmaster" in charge of Starbase 11's internal operations, he seemed to assert authority over Kirk even before the legal proceedings began. (Kirk did report to him to begin with.) Could it be that these flag officers are not just in charge of a given base or flotilla, but also the sector of space that the base is located in?

I've read one theory on these boards that Starbase 11 was so named not because it was the 11th such facility to be commissioned, but because the base is located in Sector 011. If this is the case, Stone and/or Mendez may command not just the base, but also all starship activity in Sector 011. The base may be where the office is located, but the sector may be the assignment. This would also correlate with Admiral Komack's subspace radio paging of the Enterprise heard on the bridge's loudspeakers in "Amok Time" when he identified his command as Sector 9.

If this were the case in "The Doomsday Machine", Commodore Decker could have been assigned to the sector where the L-37x systems were located. If Decker were the ranking flag officer for that sector (making it his territory), then any Federation ships entering that sector at least could be subject to his command. So, for sake of argument, let's call this territory Sector 292. If Decker's territory were Sector 292, and there is not yet a base in Sector 292, Decker was instead assigned a flagship to serve as his mobile command base: the Constellation. In light of the ongoing emergency in the L-374 system within Sector 292, Decker asserted his territorial authority as the sector flag officer to assume command of the Enterprise.

Does any of this make sense? I have no idea if there is a modern military analogue to this or not.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Stocker, with zero space command experience, would not be qualified to command at sea in the USN, but is apparently fully within his rights to place himself in charge of Enterprise. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but there it is.

There are three possibilities that I can see:

1) Stocker might not be fully versed on command regulations, such that he assumed his rank gave him the authority but it really didn't

2) Stocker simply didn't care, and willingly BROKE regs just so he could get the chance to command a ship

3) Because of the hyper-aging disease, there was no one left on the ship *but* Stocker who could conceivably have taken over command.

 

[Timo]

Or perhaps all people who reach Commodore rank are supposed to possess sufficient starship experience, but Stocker was a rare exception to the (written-down and relevant) rule due to unknown circumstances.

However, please note that Stocker's lack of experience is a subjective judgement by the mentally disabled Kirk. Quite possibly, Stocker is fully qualified to command the Enterprise, quite regardless of her senile former skipper calling him "a chair-bound paper-pusher." That Stocker hasn't commanded a starship before need not mean squat, as starships elsewhere in TOS are a specific type of space combat vessel rather than a generic catchall term for them; in these terms, Stocker may be a veteran star cruiser commander, or at least a star destroyer CO.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I think I'm gonna have to go with #3 as I stated above. AFAIK, Stocker was the only senior officer on board well enough to assume command. If there were any junior officers who could have, I doubt they'd have had much more experience at situations like this than Stocker did. And, also AFAIK, after the whole thing was over Kirk didn't even blame Stocker for doing what he did. It was your classic situation that you can't even describe without using the word "cluster".

 

[Knight Templar]

I think I'm gonna have to go with #3 as I stated above. AFAIK, Stocker was the only senior officer on board well enough to assume command. If there were any junior officers who could have, I doubt they'd have had much more experience at situations like this than Stocker did. And, also AFAIK, after the whole thing was over Kirk didn't even blame Stocker for doing what he did. It was your classic situation that you can't even describe without using the word "cluster".

I agree with this. Stocker himself even mentioned to Spock if he would "prefer to have a junior officer in command".

But.

The problem is during the first season of Star Trek, Sulu had been left in command of the Enterprise. In "Errand of Mercy" in not only a combat situation, but with war underway.

and Sulu was available in "The Deadly Years" and was not suffering from disease or disablement in any way.

The thing was that when "The Deadly Years" aired, it had basically been established on Star Trek that Scotty and not Sulu was the third in command of the Enterprise.

If you watch the first season episodes of ST closely, you can see that Sulu was supposed to have more authority in military situations than anyone except Kirk and Spock. It is obvious in "Arena", "Balance of Terror", "The Corbomite Manuever" and "Errand of Mercy".

But I think that the writers eventually decided that the Chief Engineer of the ship should have more authority than just the guy sitting at the helm.

 

[RPJOB]

There's also the strangeness of Stocker calling Kirk "sir" numerous times. It;s like they couldn't decide if he was Kirk's superior or subordinate.

Perhaps Decker's actions led to new regulations like Picard facing a court martial after losing the Stargazer. Take away your command authority until the facts can be determined.

 

[Anticitizen]

That's beans compared to Picard's apparent ability to take over the entire fleet in the beginning of First Contact - as a lowly captain that was supposed to be patrolling the Neutral Zone at the time...

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ I assume that the commanders of the surviving ships knew full well of Picard's experience with the Borg - and were quite willing to yield to him, especially since they were getting their asses handed to them at the time.

 

[Anticitizen]

^ I assume that the commanders of the surviving ships knew full well of Picard's experience with the Borg - and were quite willing to yield to him, especially since they were getting their asses handed to them at the time.

Yeah, I get that. I'm mostly just being a pain in the ass by bringing it up in this rather formal discussion about Starfleet protocol concerning chain of command.

 

[Tribble Herder]

Getting back to Decker, I'm thinking he was promoted to commodore relatively recently, and once he finished up on the Constellation, he'd probably be given a ground assignment (maybe one of Starbase 11's multiple commanders) or retire so he could spend more time with his family (I think it's safe to assume Will had made at least Lieutenant Commander by this point).

 

[Timo]

I assume that the commanders of the surviving ships knew full well of Picard's experience with the Borg - and were quite willing to yield to him

Although probably with a wait-and-see attitude, so that they would reserve judgement on whether to fire at the Borg at Picard's command, or to fire at Picard with all available weapons and then concentrate on the other enemy.

I'm mostly just being a pain in the ass by bringing it up in this rather formal discussion about Starfleet protocol concerning chain of command.

Well, Trek maintains consistency there, as 24th century Starfleet apparently grants the CO of the tactically superior vessel command powers over multiple vessels in a joint operation (VOY "Equinox"). Sounds logical, at least in a fleet where a lowly destroyer may be commanded by a person whose rank and time in service are the same as those of the CO of a giant battleship, and confusion would otherwise arise.

There's also the strangeness of Stocker calling Kirk "sir" numerous times. It;s like they couldn't decide if he was Kirk's superior or subordinate.

Having Stocker be a Commander rather than a Commodore would certainly clarify things.

Then again, it apparently is possible for a superior officer to extend that courtesy to an inferior, provided said inferior isn't too lowly in rank. During the exchanges where Stocker addresses Kirk this way, he is settling in at his role of passenger aboard Kirk's ship, and could well be actively trying to avoid creating a situation where Kirk would interpret Stocker as wanting to exercise command authority - especially if Starfleet rules and regulations are the same as the previously quoted USN ones and Stocker would automatically be the one in highest command.

The "Sir" is long gone by the time Stocker does exercise that authority...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Knight Templar]

IIRC, in the Voyager episode "The Equinox" they mention a Starfleet regulation that when more than one Starfleet ship is involved in an operation, the captain of the ship with "tactical advantage" (i.e the biggest, strongest, toughest present) has overall command.

Which makes sense.