Not surprising as it is a civilian organization, the ships' officers don't hold commissions and there are no flag or flag-equivalent officers.
Justin
Did Kirk captain any ship before Enterprise?
- Thread starter RB_Kandy
- Start date
Not surprising as it is a civilian organization, the ships' officers don't hold commissions and there are no flag or flag-equivalent officers.
Justin
Which then could explain that the title of "pride of the fleet" passed from Lexington to Enterprise prior to TMP where Starfleet uniforms (e.g. Admiral Kirk) now wear the insignia of the Enterprise placed in front of a circular insignia (another fine starship?). By the time of WOK it's again the insignia of Enterprise placed in front of what could be a rectangular insignia.
Bob
It wouldn't stretch credibility too much if we assume that Kirk "merely" served as a first officer somewhere prior to assuming command of the Enterprise IMO. Remember that most first officers on Star Trek are depicted as quite competent and seemingly capable of commanding a ship on their own already.
Was Spock ever depicted as any less competent as a commander in comparison to Kirk? I wouldn't think so, Spock just wasn't interested in commanding a ship. Given their age difference, Riker was probably less exprienced than Picard, but he was nonetheless qualified to command a ship (he had actually turned down a command of his own in order to serve as Enterprise's first officer). There was also no evidence whatsoever to support the assumption that Chakotay may have been in over his head as captain of Voyager.
The command capabilities of first officers are usually depicted as being on par with or almost equal to actual captains. So maybe Kirk has served as first officer of a starship for a couple of years before becoming captain of the Enterprise. This doesn't neccesarily mean that he was an inexperienced or even inept officer when assuming command of the ship.
Was Spock ever depicted as any less competent as a commander in comparison to Kirk? I wouldn't think so, Spock just wasn't interested in commanding a ship. Given their age difference, Riker was probably less exprienced than Picard, but he was nonetheless qualified to command a ship (he had actually turned down a command of his own in order to serve as Enterprise's first officer). There was also no evidence whatsoever to support the assumption that Chakotay may have been in over his head as captain of Voyager.
The command capabilities of first officers are usually depicted as being on par with or almost equal to actual captains. So maybe Kirk has served as first officer of a starship for a couple of years before becoming captain of the Enterprise. This doesn't neccesarily mean that he was an inexperienced or even inept officer when assuming command of the ship.
Last edited:
Well, it varies depending on the depiction but, yes, he was at times portrayed as less competent as a commander than Kirk. The first example of that which comes to mind is "The Galileo Seven," when Spock is in command of a shuttle mission rather than the ship, but shows extreme limitations of his command abilities owing to his insistence on a "strictly logical" philosophy.
^But "The Galileo Seven" made a big deal about it being Spock's first command experience, and he did surmount that limitation at the end of the episode. So I don't think it's fair to say he was portrayed as less competent throughout the series. He just had a learning curve early on.
Meh, it was a minor error and outside of the age error the timeline was spot on, at least I think it is.
Well, he angers his underlings in both episodes. But in the first, he acts rashly, choosing high risk alternatives, and gets people killed. In the second, he acts with premeditation (and during-meditation!), ignores the obvious but fruitless courses of quick action, and succeeds in everything at the cost of no lives. That IMHO is Spock at his best, and this amounts to a triumph. Even when Kirk and McCoy's inferior choices at the teaser result in considerable jeopardy.
Timo Saloniemi
Granted, Spock may have not been at his best in The Galileo Seven. But I'd say neither was Kirk in Obsession, for example.
So my original point still stands? Nobody is infallible, but they're both capable officers.
So my original point still stands? Nobody is infallible, but they're both capable officers.
I think Kirk was a wonderfully flawed character. Obsession, Deadly Years, even Naked Time, really highlight some of his borderline traits.
Spock certainly did say that. But it's not something to be taken literally. The circumstances were emotional: I think Spock was just indulging the tendency of officers & crew to say their ship is the best ship, and their shipmates the best crew.
Think of the string quartet playing on the deck of the Titanic, and imagine the first violin saying to the others, "It's a privilege to play with you gentlemen, you are the finest players in the world. Now let's pick up the waltz, one-two-three...." Then the ship sinks. It's a traditional powerful, noble sentiment. But it's not necessarily to be taken literally, ie that viola player really is the best in the world.
Point being, Spock said it, but it's not relevant to this talk of flagship / not flagship etc.
Similar threads
