• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Admiral/Captain Kirk Question

This makes sense and fits. He was acting as a captain as they went out on a mission with only one ship, but in reality, he's still an admiral. He was probably more comfortable with the title "captain". When Owen Paris took out the al-Batani, he could have probably done the same thing.
 
I always assumed Paris's mission on the Al-Batani was what got him the promotion...

Read Deny thy Father from the lost era mini-series. Paris is an admiral at SF academy, and decides to go back into space after the last semester of 2357 was over. He brings "ensign" Janeway with him.:)
 
Last edited:
I really hate to stir up trouble, but Marshak & Culbreath refer to Kirk as "Admiral, Acting Captain Kirk" in one of their post-TMP novels (I think it's The Prometheus Design). Not like it matters, I suppose...

Well, sure. That was their interpretation, and one that's reflected in other '80s novels that make Kirk an admiral in the inter-movie era (such as Dwellers in the Crucible and, I think, The Pandora Principle). Other authors have interpreted it differently, just as they've interpreted lots of other stuff differently.
 
I always assumed Paris's mission on the Al-Batani was what got him the promotion...

Read Deny thy Father from the lost era mini-series. Paris is an admiral at SF academy, and decides to go back into space after the last semester of 2357 was over. He brings "ensign" Janeway with him.:)

But we probably shouldn't shout this too loudly, for fear that the "why couldn't Admiral Janeway command Voyager" crowd get hold of it. :techman:

I personally assume it was Paris's superior rank that meant that if anyone at SFC had asked "can you do that" he could just turn round and pull rank (something vice-admiral Janeway and vice-admiral Kirk couldn't do.)
 
But we probably shouldn't shout this too loudly, for fear that the "why couldn't Admiral Janeway command Voyager" crowd get hold of it. :techman:

And yet admirals wouldn't exactly go around demoting captains and taking over their commands all the time. I rather like that some of Janeway's controversial decisions during her seven years lost in space may have lead to her being expediently kicked "upstairs" until things blew over.

I also can't imagine too many Voyager crew deliberately staying with the ship, or long-term missions, after seven years, so I have no problem that there are lots of new faces in the Relaunch.

As for Kirk's crew, what really stretched the friendship was ST V. Everyone still together, their careers on hold, to stay with Kirk.
 
But we probably shouldn't shout this too loudly, for fear that the "why couldn't Admiral Janeway command Voyager" crowd get hold of it. :techman:

And yet admirals wouldn't exactly go around demoting captains and taking over their commands all the time. I rather like that some of Janeway's controversial decisions during her seven years lost in space may have lead to her being expediently kicked "upstairs" until things blew over.

I also can't imagine too many Voyager crew deliberately staying with the ship, or long-term missions, after seven years, so I have no problem that there are lots of new faces in the Relaunch.

As for Kirk's crew, what really stretched the friendship was ST V. Everyone still together, their careers on hold, to stay with Kirk.

Were their careers on hold due to their own choice or Starfleet's? While they were exonerated, it doesn't mean Starfleet didn't hold a grudge. Plus, it was probably easier to keep an eye on them by putting them all on one ship.

Not that I necessarily buy that theory...
 
Were their careers on hold due to their own choice or Starfleet's? While they were exonerated, it doesn't mean Starfleet didn't hold a grudge.

No. If that was a ruling, it would have come out in the trial.

That makes no sense. A 'grudge' isn't a legal precedent. You can't tell me that the Commander of Starfleet gets dissed by Kirk and his senior staff (and made to look foolish to boot) and yet doesn't hold a grudge?

To me that was exactly what the Enterprise-A was. A holding facility for these seven officers until they proved themselves trust-worthy again.
 
To me that was exactly what the Enterprise-A was. A holding facility for these seven officers until they proved themselves trust-worthy again.

That's putting it a bit strongly, but I essentially agree. Otherwise there's no possible sense in putting three captains and four full commanders in a single command crew, rather than assigning them to at least three different ships.
 
Don't both Titan, and the Ent-E each have like 3 or 4 full commanders on them now? Or is it not as bad to have multiple Commanders when you have only one Captain?
 
Not sure about the Titan, but the Enterprise-E is a far larger ship with a larger crew. That almost necessitates having more higher ranked personnel to keep the chain of command going. Personally, at this point, I can't think of why Crusher shouldn't be a Captain. She's been a full Commander forever, and she's not command.
 
Don't both Titan, and the Ent-E each have like 3 or 4 full commanders on them now? Or is it not as bad to have multiple Commanders when you have only one Captain?

I can live with the commanders, so long as there are some lower-ranked personnel beneath them. It's a stretch, but it's not as unwieldy as having three captains in the same crew.
 
It should be mentioned that Spock was ":vulcan:happiest:vulcan:" serving under Kirk and preferred to do so. Vulcan's have a long life and he was in no hurry. He was just still a captain from when he was the in charge of the Enterprise pre-twok when Kirk had once again accepted promotion; while Scotty was a Captain by rank only and never had any desire to command his own ship. He just wanted to run his engine room.
 
It should be mentioned that Spock was ":vulcan:happiest:vulcan:" serving under Kirk and preferred to do so. Vulcan's have a long life and he was in no hurry. He was just still a captain from when he was the in charge of the Enterprise pre-twok when Kirk had once again accepted promotion; while Scotty was a Captain by rank only and never had any desire to command his own ship. He just wanted to run his engine room.

That doesn't count. When Spock was captain pre-TWOK, he was actually the commanding officer of the Enterprise. He wasn't sharing it with Kirk. Kirk was commandant of the Academy at the time, and sometimes used the Enterprise as a training vessel, but the ship only had one captain and that was Spock. As for Scotty, he wasn't promoted to "captain of engineering" until TSFS, and after that he only served under Kirk unofficially on the Genesis mission and aboard the Bounty. It's only after the trial in TVH that things get wonky with multiple captains on the same ship.

Besides, the individual preferences of the captains in question have nothing to do with it. Starfleet isn't a hobby; officers don't get posted on the basis of what they personally want, but on the basis of where the fleet chooses to assign them. And it's anomalous for Starfleet to assign three captains to a single ship. Maybe it can be excused in Scotty's case, since "captain of engineering" doesn't seem like a command-track posting. But when Kirk was dropped back to captain, realistically he and Spock should've been assigned to command separate vessels, like in the DC Comics run where Spock was put in command of the science vessel Surak.
 
As for Scotty, he wasn't promoted to "captain of engineering" until TSFS, and after that he only served under Kirk unofficially on the Genesis mission and aboard the Bounty. It's only after the trial in TVH that things get wonky with multiple captains on the same ship.
Well, Styles and Scotty would have been captains on Excelsior together had Scotty not stopped up the drain.
 
To me that was exactly what the Enterprise-A was. A holding facility for these seven officers until they proved themselves trust-worthy again.

That's putting it a bit strongly, but I essentially agree. Otherwise there's no possible sense in putting three captains and four full commanders in a single command crew, rather than assigning them to at least three different ships.


USN aircraft carriers can have more than one captain-ranked officer aboard at any given time -- the CO, the XO, the CAG and the Deputy CAG. For example, the Big E (Enterprise CVN-65) currently has a CO and XO that are both ranked captain (O6 paygrade). Traditionally, the CAG and Deputy CAG are also captain (O6).
 
To me that was exactly what the Enterprise-A was. A holding facility for these seven officers until they proved themselves trust-worthy again.

That's putting it a bit strongly, but I essentially agree. Otherwise there's no possible sense in putting three captains and four full commanders in a single command crew, rather than assigning them to at least three different ships.


USN aircraft carriers can have more than one captain-ranked officer aboard at any given time -- the CO, the XO, the CAG and the Deputy CAG. For example, the Big E (Enterprise CVN-65) currently has a CO and XO that are both ranked captain (O6 paygrade). Traditionally, the CAG and Deputy CAG are also captain (O6).

You're right. But Star Trek has traditionally shown us ships with one captain. Us simple folk might get confused if their was more than one on any given ship. :p
 
It should be mentioned that Spock was ":vulcan:happiest:vulcan:" serving under Kirk and preferred to do so. Vulcan's have a long life and he was in no hurry. He was just still a captain from when he was the in charge of the Enterprise pre-twok when Kirk had once again accepted promotion; while Scotty was a Captain by rank only and never had any desire to command his own ship. He just wanted to run his engine room.

That doesn't count. When Spock was captain pre-TWOK, he was actually the commanding officer of the Enterprise. He wasn't sharing it with Kirk. Kirk was commandant of the Academy at the time, and sometimes used the Enterprise as a training vessel, but the ship only had one captain and that was Spock. As for Scotty, he wasn't promoted to "captain of engineering" until TSFS, and after that he only served under Kirk unofficially on the Genesis mission and aboard the Bounty. It's only after the trial in TVH that things get wonky with multiple captains on the same ship.

Besides, the individual preferences of the captains in question have nothing to do with it. Starfleet isn't a hobby; officers don't get posted on the basis of what they personally want, but on the basis of where the fleet chooses to assign them. And it's anomalous for Starfleet to assign three captains to a single ship. Maybe it can be excused in Scotty's case, since "captain of engineering" doesn't seem like a command-track posting. But when Kirk was dropped back to captain, realistically he and Spock should've been assigned to command separate vessels, like in the DC Comics run where Spock was put in command of the science vessel Surak.

Spock relinquished command in TWOK due to the ship going out on an actual mission. TSFS as well as TVH saw our group not really serving Starfleet, but themselves, and Star Trek V had Spock on shore leave with Kirk. If you wanted to, you could assume that Spock may have not actually been serving on Enterprise at this point, but joined his friends when they were needed for the Nimbus III mission. Spock could have had the Surak at this time, but for some reason, it wasn't ready to go, so Spock stuck with Kirk. By Star Trek VI, the crew wasn't really out on missions anymore, and it could be argued that Spock wasn't really part of the Enterprise crew. He was working with the diplomatic corps.

This is quite a stretch, I know:rolleyes:...my apologies if any of this been refuted whether cannonically or in any of the literature...
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top