I understand your points, but to me are really minor. Non-hardcore Trek viewer would never pay attention to details like these. For them, T'Pol is the Vulcan chick with nice cleavage and Trip the beefy fellow in engineering, not Subcommander T'Pol and Commander Charles Tucker The Third. It's actually hardcore fan that would look at that, but they are already watching (to their much chagring, I will add).
You're welcome. But clearly I missed a thing or two... I'd seen, and forgotten, both of them! There are five more listed on Memory Alpha here along with a whole host of other Vulcan ranks. Whoops. And it has its own rank pin, so it's not just a title. Hurm. I guess my Romulan analogy falls short. I can't help but wonder if there are unseen Romulan captains hiding somewhere behind those Commanders we always saw, and Commander is more like Starfleet's Fleet Captain? For the Vulcans at least, I suspect it's more a case that Commander is like Starfleet Captain Upper Half and Subcommander like Starfleet Captain Lower Half, for lack of a better term, and then the Vulcan Captain is still above that. Oh well, if they can do away with emotions in a few thousand years, they can diverge in ranks too.
I guess that is where we will have to agree to disagree. To me only a hard core fan would know that T'Pol's sub-commander title is Vulcan and not tied to the ship she is on. The casual viewer wonders how a sub-commander is giving a commander an order, and she frequently called him "Commander" in the early episodes.
...But if ENT gave those Captains a dedicated rank pin, then we're screwed. Unless it's an artifact of translation, and those Captains (by position) actually wore the rank pin of Commander. Did ENT ever feature more rank pins than the one we saw on the Captain of the Ti'mur? As for Uhlan, that's possibly a translation artifact, too... In Earth history, Uhlans have been light cavalrymen, so there would be both "lowly Uhlans" and "highly placed Uhlans" and everything in between. Romulan Uhlans in the 24th century probably wouldn't go horseback, but the title would refer to a specific assignment, not to the rank or rating held at that assignment. Similarly, there might be "lowly Praetorians" and "prominent Praetorians", "lowly Onageriers" and "celebrated Onageriers" and so forth. Timo Saloniemi
I may be wrong but it was my understanding that When the Vulcans gave their rank to humans it was in standard English. so, Captain, Commander, Sub-commander, Lt., ensign was standard English translation of vulcans ranks. what the ranks were in vulcan could have been much different but Vulcans translated them into Standard English for the Humans. So Sub-commander would be a standard English Translation of a vulcan rank. As I have said I feel that the Vulcans confused Commander and Lt. commander because they didn't understand the difference. Their ranking probably had a rank between Commander and Lt which they translated in to Sub-commander to try to fit in to Lt Commander the nearest they could come to their Vulcan rank. T-Pol would then be subordinate to Commander Tucker. The rank between Commander and Captain does not exist in Starfleet or in standard Ennglish. Sub still means below and I believe that the Vulcans understood that much and designated their rank between Commander and Lt as Sub-commander in Standard English.
That would for me, and perhaps nicely since IIRC we never actually saw a Vulcan Commander, did we?. The Captain who crashed his ship in the 1950s had a rank pin that looks different from the 2150s variety. I like that, good sir. It seems to fit well with the TOS intention of 'centurion.' I wonder if Centurion or Praetorian might be a generic term for all Fleet officers (in the case of Centurion, as well as a rank), whereas, Uhlans are ground soliders? Additionally, I wonder if there's a way to reinterpret what Bochra told LaForge in 'The Enemy' regarding 'Centurion'?
I have always felt that this was a plausible argument. We know that Starfleet Commanders can have their own command, has anyone seen a Vulcan Sub-Commander to have their own command? I don't remember seeing any. If Vulcan Sub-commanders can't have their own commands, then that rank would appear to be inferior to the Starfleet rank of Commander. I think, perhaps because of T'Pol's hypnotic beauty, some people were mesmerized by her incorrect assertion that "Sub-Commander" outranked "Commander" when she made the presumptuous and misleading declaration in Borken Bow.