So cool to see those "Operation Retrieve" pages up close! I love all these little background details. 
Starfleet Marine Corps in TUC
- Thread starter Shamrock Holmes
- Start date
True.
However to use an American example:
Average patrolman < SWAT < FBI HRT
Starfleet Security would be 'average patrolman' whereas Starfleet Marines would be 'SWAT' to 'FBI HRT' (or DoD equivalents, still 'small unit tactics'-centric though, as IMO the value of massed infantry tactics are pointless in the setting (arguablely they are becoming depreciated even in the 21st C, IFAIK combat mostly takes place at company-level and below nowadays?
Despite what we've seen on-screen, in a practical Starfleet, Starfleet security should be top-notch. The reason is because, aboard ship, and especially aboard something like a "heavy cruiser" far out on the frontier, they are a scarce resource charged with protecting an extremely valuable Federation asset. They should be among the best soldiers in the Federation.
Last edited:
Or it's his nickname, like "Ike" or "Monty", or "Bomber" Harris. He's the admiral responsible for Starfleet's war planning, for want of a better term. He's widely derided by his colleagues in the exploratory and scientific fields, and earned himself the somewhat derogatory nickname "Colonel" for his perceived eagerness for military matters. Maybe his grandfather was a well-known MACO colonel in the Romulan War, and he inherited the moniker with his constant bragging of Pop's Rommie-slaughter in his Academy days?
His mother's maiden name was "Styles".
Potemkin was a Constitution as seen in "The Ultimate Computer" (TOS). So if anything, the smaller icons would represent ships smaller than that. However, I'm not sure we should assume they are in fact to scale, because on the preceding page Emden is shown with an icon the same size as Potemkin. The different sizes might indicate different roles in the mission or something, like maybe Excelsior and Potemkin are to take the lead with Eagle in support of them, and Endeavour standing by to take the lead with Emden and Ahwahnee in support if something should go wrong. But there's certainly plenty of room for speculation in interpreting the chart.
Yes indeed, and I'm sure that was the intention. Oberth is probably the prototype of that class as well, although being not as new has gone from NX to NCC, as Excelsior did between STIII and STVI. Lantree was later (in-universe) seen still in use as a supply ship in "Unnatural Selection" (TNG).
Last edited:
USS Whorfin NCC-1024 must be a sister ship of USS Discovery!
It's going to Planet 10.
Wasn't the Potemkin destroyed (or at least severely disabled) by M-5? Perhaps a new one had to be commissioned, which was larger. Anyway, I also like the idea that the scale refers to mission importance, although that takes the way the idea that we have a variety of scales of ships.
Last edited:
Potemkin was hit and suffered casualties in "The Ultimate Computer" but was not destroyed. She was later mentioned again in "Turnabout Intruder" (TOS) and "The Pirates of Orion" (TAS). And in the remastered version of "Computer" the ship was given this same registry, NCC-1657. If we take the chart's silhouettes as representative of the actual ship design, as the Excelsior's does seem to be, it would seem she was later refitted as the Enterprise was.
As regards the various feints and workarounds on "Colonel West", it might be remembered that neither of the scenes where those words were spoken need have involved the use of the man's rank. At the President's office, formality ranged from the use of titles ("Admiral"; "Ambassador") to first names ("Bill"). Underlings got treated less formally than peers. "Bill" calling his underling by his surname Cornell West would fit the, well, bill pretty well there. And when the assassin is demasked, there's little point in his colleagues uttering his rank rather than his name in disbelief.
It's frankly pretty amazing that the only place where army-style ranks have definitely been applied in Trek is ENT and its MACO force including Corporals and Sergeants. OTOH, we got a pretty explicit navy-style command structure in DS9 "The Siege of AR-558", with a Captain and then a Commander succeeded in command by a Lieutenant as casualties mounted. No real evidence against a Starfleet Marine Corps or, say, the Federation Space Army or the United Planetary Dragoons there - but a good reason to think they use navy-style ranks!
Timo Saloniemi
It's frankly pretty amazing that the only place where army-style ranks have definitely been applied in Trek is ENT and its MACO force including Corporals and Sergeants. OTOH, we got a pretty explicit navy-style command structure in DS9 "The Siege of AR-558", with a Captain and then a Commander succeeded in command by a Lieutenant as casualties mounted. No real evidence against a Starfleet Marine Corps or, say, the Federation Space Army or the United Planetary Dragoons there - but a good reason to think they use navy-style ranks!
Timo Saloniemi
For what it's worth, the Pocket's novel continuity says West is an Admiral who just goes by the nickname "Colonel." Meanwhile, the Autobiography of James T Kirk (which is not published by Pocket Books nor part of its continuity) describes West as belonging to "Starfleet's small infantry division."
Starfleet security officers would be roughly the equivalent to security personnel in modern military. And the average Wal-Mart door greeter probably wouldn't last among them.
I'd further argue that "Starship Security" comes in several tiers. This is the force with which Picard has to wage his ground campaigns, so there are top professionals there - but the force also gets bolstered by LaForge's engineers in times of need, so there are rank amateurs there as well. Just as in any army today, really: the cannon fodder is barely trained, perhaps even freshly conscripted, but not just the top officers but also some of the actual "line fighters" (in special operations forces) are extremely well-trained warriors.
Whenever we see Kirk's redshirts fumble and bleed, we can say "Ah, one of the reinforcements!". Whenever one puts up a competent fight, such as against Decker in "Doomsday Machine", we can say "Heh, one of 'em Starfleet Rangers!". It would only be in massed ground action that we could readily distinguish between the two (or more) types, though, and see them used in roles best befitting their training levels.
Timo Saloniemi
Whenever we see Kirk's redshirts fumble and bleed, we can say "Ah, one of the reinforcements!". Whenever one puts up a competent fight, such as against Decker in "Doomsday Machine", we can say "Heh, one of 'em Starfleet Rangers!". It would only be in massed ground action that we could readily distinguish between the two (or more) types, though, and see them used in roles best befitting their training levels.
Timo Saloniemi
I see the structure as being something similar to:
Security Patrolman (rookie just completed "A School", roughly a kin to a civilian policeman)
Security Specialist ("C School" trained as Instructor, Pilot, Investigator, or Protection Specialist. Equivalent to a Detective)
Security Rescueman/Supervisor (Trained in CSAR, Field Medicine, EOD and small unit combat tactics for combat 'in the field'. Equivalent to SWAT when assigned to Security Division. Also minimum standard for Special Operations or dedicated infantry units.)
Larger combat (rather than security) centric units might also include Combat Engineers, Armory Technicans for heavy weapons and dedicated Flight Specialists/Officers for operation of shuttlecraft.
Starfleet is based off of UK and US naval traditions as well as many other nationalities naval traditions. It would be fitting that Marine based units would come from the same Naval traditions as well where the Marines, although a separate branch of service, would still be part of the Department of the Navy.
That's likely true to an extent. I suggested up thread that the specific role that they were carrying out is more the type of thing I'd associate with SEALs or DEVGRU (or it's Army opposite number Delta Force), a full integrated unit, rather than a separate command (with different ranks and protocols) mostly used in the light infantry/recon role like the Marines (esp US, the RM are more 'specops' orientated than the USMC, but not quite at SEALs level (SBS is essentially a larger DEVGRU)). Another difference with the US & UK arrangement is that while the US Army, USN, USAF, USMC 'equals' as the Joint Chiefs, in the British Forces, only the Army, Navy and Air Force explicitely and automatically get a seat at the "chiefs of staff" table, although RM officers can be appointed to the "Commander, JFC" (which includes spec ops) or the Chair or Vice Chair positions if nominated (this, or command of joint field ops, is the only way for a RM officer to be promoted above Major General (OF-7), whereas the other forces top out at OF-8 (operations) or OF-9 (chiefs of staff)).
Although I think that other forces exist outside the Starfleet chain-of-command (which appears to report directly to the UFP President, but I'd suspect day-to-day runs through the "Secretary of the Exterior" (equiv of UK FCO or US State Department) like the Diplomatic Corps. Other forces, especially infantry, are likely to be Reserve Forces used for mainly domestic assistance operations on member planets as needed (similar to USNG).
Although I think that other forces exist outside the Starfleet chain-of-command (which appears to report directly to the UFP President, but I'd suspect day-to-day runs through the "Secretary of the Exterior" (equiv of UK FCO or US State Department) like the Diplomatic Corps. Other forces, especially infantry, are likely to be Reserve Forces used for mainly domestic assistance operations on member planets as needed (similar to USNG).
Laugh while you can....
