How Many Captains Per Starship?
- Thread starter Steve Willis
- Start date
NASA might be useful here; I'd have to check to see if any of the serving military Gemini/Apollo commanders were outranked by their crewmates, but Armstrong had left the Navy as a Lt (jg), but was commander even though Aldrin, Collins and Scott had all reached higher ranks.
Yeah, that was pretty common back then. I don't know the specifics of that detachment, but I would be very surprised if it included any captains. With chronically under-strength regiments and companies being the basic field unit, a first lieutenant was a fairly big noise on the frontier. And the times were different; unlike an 25-ish year old officer that we would picture today, Frank Baldwin was 35, a Civil War combat veteran with about 15 years of service.
Could be, but it's notable that such confusing practices were ended a long time ago, because of the considerable problems they created. Systems of decorations, for example, have replaced brevet rank awards much more effectively. The difference between Regular, Reserve and National Guard has also largely disappeared except on paper; regardless of origin you are what your grade is in any kind of unit. If I were to make an educated guess, I would not expect Starfleet to go back to some kind of more complex, you-can't-know-the-officers-without-a-scorecard arrangement.
Yes, true. Those cavalry westerns often got details of post-1872 uniforms wrong, but I suspect that was intentional. Thursday, wearing his lieutenant colonel straps on a major general's coat, was subtly reminding everyone of his former status, even though he protested verbally that he wanted to be referred to by his current grade. It's part of his somewhat disruptive character and way of asserting himself within the regiment.
Other aspects of that picture, such as the absence of majors and the advanced age of some of the captains, were pretty accurate.
It doesn't really matter as NASA missions are civilian operations and serving officers are detached from military duty. Whomever NASA assigns to be in charge, is in charge.
I think that ironically the Abramsverse might provide an explanation for the difference in Pike and Kirk's ranks as 'Captain'. Basically, Pike's Enterprise was acting as a (heavy) patrol ship on the 'home front' (so his smaller crew was likely mostly engineers and other technicans (ie Spock is the Science Officer because he's literally the only dedicated researcher on board), in fact, they don't even seem to have security personnel. Whereas Kirk is on the Five Year Mission out on the frontier so gets the higher rank because he has more autonomy.
Incidently, Archer's rank of "Captain" could just as easily correspond to USN Lt Commander (which Kirk's braids resemble) as it does to a USN Captain.
Right, but commodore is not a rank in the US Navy. It is a title. As captain is a title when used in denoting the commanding officer of a vessel.
A commanding officer is highly trained for the position, and the position is called captain. You don't get to be a commanding officer just by virtue of having been promoted to the rank of captain. The difference between title (position) and rank (service grade) is the explanation to the op's question.
Harriman is the commanding officer, and he's the captain of the ship. Kirk is never in command, although he wants to be, and it seems Harriman would like him to take the reins. That's the point of the scene, really. Kirk's impulse is to take charge. He sees that the young Captain Harriman is floundering a bit and looking to him for answers simply because he (Kirk) is there. Kirk decides that if this guy has any chance of being an effective commanding officer, he is going to have to make his own choices; effectively "take risks."
If you have three officers of the same rank and the same ship, order of precedence is decided by the positions Starfleet assigns them. It is almost certainly unusual to have three "captains" but then the Enterprise is a special ship with a celebrated crew.
I'm the Captain!!!
I had noticed during the trial scene and always thought it was either a goof on the costumers part or something Scotty chose to do for some unknown reason (maybe betraying his position as Captain of Engineering by tampering with Excelsior) but as he starts the film wearing a jacket which in the film before had a completely different rank it seems more like a simple mistake on the part of the costumers.
Though we can also consider that he somehow got hold of a Starfleet engineers waistcoat and a white undershirt, we could suggest he was wearing the former under his jacket the whole time in TSFS but the shirt is harder to reconcile.
There was still Kirk, in demoting Decker he also reduced his rank down to Captain which is backed up by his uniform braid along with dialog (which can be argued he's called that because he's acting as the Captain though in TWOK he's still referred to as Admiral)
Pike wore the same braid on his uniform in 2009 as Kirk did at the end of the film though so at that point they are both officially Captains, earlier Kirk is "Captain Kirk" while still being technically a Cadet (though monitoring of him while on the Vulcan mission lists him as a Lt), Pike's saying "Im not the Captain anymore Spock, you are" and Sulu referring to himself as "Captain Sulu" while threatening John Harrison on Kronos.
Definitely continuing the precedence that was set in DS9 with Nog's conversation about Dax, gives a different take on "Captain Chekov" during TFF and has been the norm in a number of shows and movies about the USN which I would assume comes from their technical advisers.
As for Pike wearing what will later be a Lt during the Cage and Kirk a Commander during WNMHGB... I put that down to the costumes having not been thought out yet.
I remember one of the old Star Trek Monthly magazines coming with some colour prints in one issue which included early publicity shots of Kirk, Spock and Rand (with a different hairstyle and wearing one of the gold tunics with the baggy collar) and from memory I think they had what looked like a metal band (or 2) round each wrist.
So insofar as a ship's captain is the commander, ordinarily a Captain is the commander. On the other hand, on smaller ships a Commander may be the commander without being a captain. Conversely, on bigger ships one may well be a Captain without being the commander, even though one outranks Commanders. Crystal clear! ;-)
Interestingly, the dialogue in TSFS conflicts with the rank bars. Scotty may be wearing a Captain's insignia on his jacket, but when he identifies himself to the ship's computer to enter the destruct code, it's as "Commander Scott."
Interestingly, the dialogue in TSFS conflicts with the rank bars. Scotty may be wearing a Captain's insignia on his jacket, but when he identifies himself to the ship's computer to enter the destruct code, it's as "Commander Scott."
Its generally been assumed Scotty would know the Enterprise computer hadn't been updated to recognise his updated rank as the ship was due for decommissioning and so wouldn't be receiving data updates.
Personally this is what I go with and TVH being a goof when it comes to his rank and change in uniform undershirt along with Checkov's completely different outfit while everyone else's clothes are exactly the same as in TSFS.
Personally this is what I go with and TVH being a goof when it comes to his rank and change in uniform undershirt along with Checkov's completely different outfit while everyone else's clothes are exactly the same as in TSFS.
As many as they damn well please!
Chekov's costume actually changes halfway through their trip to Genesis:
He's wearing the infamous "Pilgrim" costume while they're stealing the Enterprise, but by the time they're getting closer to the planet and trying to hail the now-obliterated Grissom, he's swapped the dorky collar for a black turtleneck similar to the ones worn by the enlisted crewmen. When they beam down to Genesis while the Enterprise self-destructs, he's traded the pinkish coat for the brown leather jacket he'll wear during TVH.
In this post, @JonnyQuest037 unearthed an old Koenig interview that shed light on his horrendous costume.
Could that be a case of as the Enterprise was set to be mothballed it hadn't recieved any computer updates i.e. Scoty's promotion. So as far as the Enterprise computer was concerned Scotty was still a Commander.
You know other than the leather jacket I had never noticed the other changes, I guess it makes sense as they would have had a least a couple of hours to fill on the trip back... Interesting insight into the making of TSFS.
In Trek, the stories are plot driven and the rank/position stuff often gets muddled. If the plot demands that the assistant chief engineer assumes the conn for part or most of the episode, that's what's going to happen.
In the real world, things work a good bit differently. Once again I'll point to the example I know best: the USN.
The basic question is either 'how many people aboard a ship can hold the rank of captain at one time' or 'if there are 4 captains aboard, who is actually the captain?'
In the Navy, there are two sorts of officers. Unrestricted line officers, and restricted line officers. Examples of unrestricted line officers include: surface warfare officers (ship drivers), submarine officers, naval aviators, naval flight officers, or SEAL officers. Examples of restricted line officers include: supply officers, medical officers, nurses, civil engineering duty officers, intelligence officers.
The major difference between restricted and unrestricted line officers is what is referred to as the 'line of command.' On all naval combatant commands, the line of command is limited to unrestricted line officers. What does this mean? I'll use a simpler example than an aircraft carrier because that one is pretty convoluted even when you have experience in the Navy. Instead, I'll use something a bit smaller: a cruiser.
So, say the officer complement of the cruiser looks something like this (this is not necessarily 100% accurate, but works as an example):
Commanding Officer: a captain (O-6)
Executive Officer: a commander (O-5)
Various department heads: (O-3/O-4)
Various division officers (O-1/O-2)
Aviation Detachment Officer in charge (O-4)
Aviation Detachment officers: (O-1-O-3)
Chief Medical Officer: (O-5)
Nurses: (O-1/O-2)
Supply Officer: O-3
So, say a missile hits the ship right in the wardroom at lunchtime and kills every officer on board except the OOD (an O-3), the conning officer (O-1), the doc (O-5), and the aviation detachment officer in charge. (O-4). Who is in command of the ship?
ANS: The aviation detachment officer in charge. Why? He/she is the senior surviving unrestricted line officer aboard. But what about the CMO, who is an O-5? He/she is NOT ELIGIBLE to assume command because he is not in line of command. This is because as a doctor, he is a restricted line officer.
But, you say, what about the O-3 OOD, who is a surface warfare officer (unrestricted line) and more qualified than a helicopter pilot to command the ship? Doesn't matter. In the event of a catastrophe, the line of command is the line of command. The det OIC for the aviation detachment is senior officer in that line and is expected and required to take command. Now is he going to listen to everything the OOD has to say and take his advice? You better believe it, but command of the ship is his until he is relieved by higher authority or is himself incapacitated.
Take that to the next level and say you have four captains aboard ship, two of which are unrestricted line officers. One will be the commanding officer of the ship: it's his command, and he's THE captain. If he dies, the other captain who is an unrestricted line officer assumes command. If he dies, then neither of the two remaining captains (restricted line) may assume command. Command falls to the next unrestricted line officer in the line of command, probably the operations officer on board a surface combatant. (Assuming the other O-6 was also the exec).
Crazy as it sounds you can take to it extremes: the ship can be full of 20 year captains, 10 year lieutenants, and so on, all restricted line officers, and if EVERYONE in the unrestricted line is wiped out except the FNG O-1 straight out of OCS, guess who takes command? Yup. FNG is in charge. But you can bet he'll just be rubberstamping what the surviving non-coms and more experienced people are telling him needs to be done.
At that point you have met the definition of 'a ruined day.'
In the real world, things work a good bit differently. Once again I'll point to the example I know best: the USN.
The basic question is either 'how many people aboard a ship can hold the rank of captain at one time' or 'if there are 4 captains aboard, who is actually the captain?'
In the Navy, there are two sorts of officers. Unrestricted line officers, and restricted line officers. Examples of unrestricted line officers include: surface warfare officers (ship drivers), submarine officers, naval aviators, naval flight officers, or SEAL officers. Examples of restricted line officers include: supply officers, medical officers, nurses, civil engineering duty officers, intelligence officers.
The major difference between restricted and unrestricted line officers is what is referred to as the 'line of command.' On all naval combatant commands, the line of command is limited to unrestricted line officers. What does this mean? I'll use a simpler example than an aircraft carrier because that one is pretty convoluted even when you have experience in the Navy. Instead, I'll use something a bit smaller: a cruiser.
So, say the officer complement of the cruiser looks something like this (this is not necessarily 100% accurate, but works as an example):
Commanding Officer: a captain (O-6)
Executive Officer: a commander (O-5)
Various department heads: (O-3/O-4)
Various division officers (O-1/O-2)
Aviation Detachment Officer in charge (O-4)
Aviation Detachment officers: (O-1-O-3)
Chief Medical Officer: (O-5)
Nurses: (O-1/O-2)
Supply Officer: O-3
So, say a missile hits the ship right in the wardroom at lunchtime and kills every officer on board except the OOD (an O-3), the conning officer (O-1), the doc (O-5), and the aviation detachment officer in charge. (O-4). Who is in command of the ship?
ANS: The aviation detachment officer in charge. Why? He/she is the senior surviving unrestricted line officer aboard. But what about the CMO, who is an O-5? He/she is NOT ELIGIBLE to assume command because he is not in line of command. This is because as a doctor, he is a restricted line officer.
But, you say, what about the O-3 OOD, who is a surface warfare officer (unrestricted line) and more qualified than a helicopter pilot to command the ship? Doesn't matter. In the event of a catastrophe, the line of command is the line of command. The det OIC for the aviation detachment is senior officer in that line and is expected and required to take command. Now is he going to listen to everything the OOD has to say and take his advice? You better believe it, but command of the ship is his until he is relieved by higher authority or is himself incapacitated.
Take that to the next level and say you have four captains aboard ship, two of which are unrestricted line officers. One will be the commanding officer of the ship: it's his command, and he's THE captain. If he dies, the other captain who is an unrestricted line officer assumes command. If he dies, then neither of the two remaining captains (restricted line) may assume command. Command falls to the next unrestricted line officer in the line of command, probably the operations officer on board a surface combatant. (Assuming the other O-6 was also the exec).
Crazy as it sounds you can take to it extremes: the ship can be full of 20 year captains, 10 year lieutenants, and so on, all restricted line officers, and if EVERYONE in the unrestricted line is wiped out except the FNG O-1 straight out of OCS, guess who takes command? Yup. FNG is in charge. But you can bet he'll just be rubberstamping what the surviving non-coms and more experienced people are telling him needs to be done.
At that point you have met the definition of 'a ruined day.'
Last edited:
In Trek, particularly TNG, they sort of half-recognized the line of command deal and addressed it by having officers like Troi and Crusher go through 'special certifications' that allowed them to take command under special circumstances. Again, this is pure plot-driven drivel when examined through a critical lens.
You wouldn't let Ensign Raeder head down to sickbay and start doing surgery instead of nurse Ogawa if Crusher was dead, so why would you let Crusher run up to the bridge and assume command over Ensign Raeder, who actually knows what the hell she is doing on the bridge?
As an addendum to my post above this one, it IS possible in the Navy for restricted line officers to command shore installations. A buddy of mine (an O-6 supply officer) just came back from being the commanding officer of naval supply activities in Yokosuka, Japan. But commanding a shore-based supply installation is about the limit of his command authority- if he was visiting a carrier at sea and something wiped out every O-6 on board except him, he would still not be allowed to take command because he is not in the unrestricted line of command.
You wouldn't let Ensign Raeder head down to sickbay and start doing surgery instead of nurse Ogawa if Crusher was dead, so why would you let Crusher run up to the bridge and assume command over Ensign Raeder, who actually knows what the hell she is doing on the bridge?
As an addendum to my post above this one, it IS possible in the Navy for restricted line officers to command shore installations. A buddy of mine (an O-6 supply officer) just came back from being the commanding officer of naval supply activities in Yokosuka, Japan. But commanding a shore-based supply installation is about the limit of his command authority- if he was visiting a carrier at sea and something wiped out every O-6 on board except him, he would still not be allowed to take command because he is not in the unrestricted line of command.
One more clarification for anyone who cares- again, US Navy 'real world.' There was some confusion several posts back about the flag ranks and what a 'commodore' was and so forth. Here's the real deal:
In antiquity, 'commodore' was 1-star flag rank that is now 'rear admiral lower half.'
Present day, 'commodore' is a title attributed to an officer (usually an O-6) commanding either a cruiser or destroyer squadron, riverine or small craft boat group, or a shore-based aviation wing. (An example of the latter being a P-8 wing or a training wing like in Corpus Christi or Pensacola).
Carrier-based air wings are commanded by an O-6, but by tradition his title is 'CAG' (old school for 'commander air group') rather than 'commodore.'
In antiquity, 'commodore' was 1-star flag rank that is now 'rear admiral lower half.'
Present day, 'commodore' is a title attributed to an officer (usually an O-6) commanding either a cruiser or destroyer squadron, riverine or small craft boat group, or a shore-based aviation wing. (An example of the latter being a P-8 wing or a training wing like in Corpus Christi or Pensacola).
Carrier-based air wings are commanded by an O-6, but by tradition his title is 'CAG' (old school for 'commander air group') rather than 'commodore.'
Last edited:
