Tuvok's Rank in "Resolutions"

[Dimension11]

Originally, the someone holding the rank of Commander was to command a ship in battle. A Captain would oversee a small fleet of ships, often commanding the main ship in the fleet as well. A Lt. Commander simply is the equivalent of the XO aboard those ships. The name Lieutenant comes from latin, which means "in lieu of" or "in place of".

As for a Lt. Cmdr commanding a carrier, it's entirely possible during off seasons or night shifts. However, at war I'd doubt that anyone less senior than a Captain or a Commodore (Vice Adm. Lower) would be in charge.

 

[Squiggy]

Dimension11 said:
As for a Lt. Cmdr commanding a carrier, it's entirely possible during off seasons or night shifts. However, at war I'd doubt that anyone less senior than a Captain or a Commodore (Vice Adm. Lower) would be in charge.

Oh yeah. I can see that, but not in command.

 

[DanCPA]

It's one thing to be the "Officer of the Watch"... it's another thing to actually be in command. Most carriers in the USN have both a CO and XO who carry the rank of Captain

 

[Quist]

Dimension11 said:
Originally, the someone holding the rank of Commander was to command a ship in battle. A Captain would oversee a small fleet of ships, often commanding the main ship in the fleet as well. A Lt. Commander simply is the equivalent of the XO aboard those ships. The name Lieutenant comes from latin, which means "in lieu of" or "in place of".

Sorry, no. The word "lieutenant" is derived from French not Latin. Also, the Royal Navy (UK) and most Commonwealth countries pronounce the rank as "left-tenant" due to the word ("lieutenant") being derived from the original French spelling of the word: "lieuf".

Regarding the relationship of this word with the rank: a Lieutenant Commander is not and never has been a junior Commander (in lieu of). The rank of Lieutenant Commander is a senior Lieutenant - formally known as "Lieutenant Commanding" when it was created in the 18th Century.

As for a Lt. Cmdr commanding a carrier, it's entirely possible during off seasons or night shifts. However, at war I'd doubt that anyone less senior than a Captain or a Commodore (Vice Adm. Lower) would be in charge.

The US equivalent of a Commodore is a Rear Admiral (lower half). There is only one grade of Vice Admiral (Senior to Rear Admiral). You are quite correct, however, that the established rank for commanding an aircraft carrier is Captain.

 

[Red Ranger]

People,

I also thought it was kind of goofy that at the very least, Tuvok didn't wear command red once Janeway put him in charge of Voyager. As others have pointed out, he didn't need to be promoted to lt. cmdr. in order to be referrred to as captain, but I do agree it would have made sense for Janeway to do so since as far as she knew, she and Chakotay were stuck on that planet indefinitely.

As for Tuvok's "faith" that they would find a way to cure Janeway and Chakotay and retrieve them, doesn't seem logical, does it? So it's an interesting insight into Tuvok that even full Vulcans have hope despite the facts available to him.

However, a few of you have said that Janeway didn't have the authority to promote Tuvok to captain, that only an admiral can do that. What's your all's source? I never heard that.

One other thing: It's true that any officer in command of a ship, regardless of his/her rank, is called "captain" by naval tradition. But he/she cannot be called that in official messages or correspondence. In the old British Royal Navy, an officer with the full rank of captain was called a "post captain," I believe.

Red Ranger

 

[Dimension11]

Quist said:
Sorry, no. The word "lieutenant" is derived from French not Latin. Also, the Royal Navy (UK) and most Commonwealth countries pronounce the rank as "left-tenant" due to the word ("lieutenant") being derived from the original French spelling of the word: "lieuf".

Sorry about that. The word is from french, but what I said about it's meaning still stands.
http://www.answers.com/topic/lieutenant

Ever wondered how come a Lt. Gen is higher than rank than a Maj. Gen or Brig. Gen, when the rank of Maj (or Brig, in the case of UK) is higher than Lt?
A Lt. Commander, originally concieved, was simply a deputy Commander, essentially the XO of the ship. S/He would be the Commander, in lieu of the tenant (actual commander) If you look at the list of COs / XOs of us navy ships, especially during WWII, you'd the rank of Cmdr / Lt. Cmdr appearing often.

And yes, thanks for the correction, Rear Adm is the one with 2 halves, not Vice Adm. So much for trying to reply late at night...

 

[Quist]

Dimension11 said:

Quist said:
Sorry, no. The word "lieutenant" is derived from French not Latin. Also, the Royal Navy (UK) and most Commonwealth countries pronounce the rank as "left-tenant" due to the word ("lieutenant") being derived from the original French spelling of the word: "lieuf".

Sorry about that. The word is from french, but what I said about it's meaning still stands.
http://www.answers.com/topic/lieutenant

Ever wondered how come a Lt. Gen is higher than rank than a Maj. Gen or Brig. Gen, when the rank of Maj (or Brig, in the case of UK) is higher than Lt?
A Lt. Commander, originally concieved, was simply a deputy Commander, essentially the XO of the ship. S/He would be the Commander, in lieu of the tenant (actual commander) If you look at the list of COs / XOs of us navy ships, especially during WWII, you'd the rank of Cmdr / Lt. Cmdr appearing often.

And yes, thanks for the correction, Rear Adm is the one with 2 halves, not Vice Adm. So much for trying to reply late at night...

Sorry to be a pedant but what you said about the meaning of Lieutenant Commander is certainly not correct at all. I don't believe that your source (an internet entry) compares with my years in the forces and study of military history - not to mention my familiarity with Defence Force manuals as part of my (then) job.

Let me say for the record that the naval rank of Lieutenant Commander was never created as a "deputy commander"; it was always that of a senior Lieutenant - as I elucidated in my earlier post.

Some Lt. Cmdrs may occupy the position of Executive Officer but not all Lt. Cmdrs are XOs (or "deputy commanders") - no matter how much you'd like it to be true.

In fact, even the rank of Commander (originally "Master and Commander") is a relatively new (again, 1700s) addition to naval officer rankings.

As a further example: in the RNZN all inshore patrol vessels are commanded by a Lieutenant. Does that also make them Commanders ("deputy" or otherwise)? Rank has nothing to do with position and Naval ranks often have little direct comparison with Army ranks.

 

[Dimension11]

Your years of military study should tell you the following facts:

1. Lieutenant <some rank> is an assistant to that rank. Hence the rank Lt. Col, or why Lt. Gen is higher than Maj. or Brig. Gen. Hence, Lt. Commander is an assistant to the commander.

2. During WWII (the last major war that US was involved in requiring large scale deployment, loss and replacement of navy ships), the CO was often of a Cmdr rank, and the XO was a Lt. Cmdr rank. In peacetime however, where there are more officers, Captains are the CO and Commanders are the XO. This btw, has no relation to the above post, I just brought it up in passing.

3. The rank of Commander was *originally* intended to be given to the person commanding that particular ship in the fleet.

 

[Timo]

1. Lieutenant <some rank> is an assistant to that rank. Hence the rank Lt. Col, or why Lt. Gen is higher than Maj. or Brig. Gen. Hence, Lt. Commander is an assistant to the commander.

Aren't you applying logic to matters military and traditional here? A common fallacy...

The history of ranks is not one of a "system". It is one of necessity and vanity combined to turn a simplistic original setup into a massively byzantine one as armies grew in size and import. And it's only relatively recently that the ranks of armies and navies would have been commonalized, even on a conceptual level let alone so that certain grades would match each other.

FWIW, the omniscient and unerring Wikipedia supports the view that "Lieutenant Commander" was never intended to be "Lieutenant to the Commander", but rather "a Lieutenant who Commands". But you can get the same results from a more disreputable source such as a local library, too.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dimension11]

Timo said:
Aren't you applying logic to matters military and traditional here? A common fallacy...

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt All i'm saying is that it's the exact same reason why a Lt. Gen is 3 stars compared to other general ranks..

 

[Enrage]

Dimension11 said:

Timo said:
Aren't you applying logic to matters military and traditional here? A common fallacy...

Actually Lt Gen is higher than Major Gen because a long time ago, it use to be Seargent Major General, and since a Lt is higher than a Sergeant Major, LTG was higher than MG.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt All i'm saying is that it's the exact same reason why a Lt. Gen is 3 stars compared to other general ranks..

 

[Charlie Kelly]

Tuvok would have been the Captain of Voyager even if he was still a Lieutenant, why would he need a promotion? Voyager was a single ship in the Delta Quadrant and not part of any fleet, giving him the rank of Captain would have made no difference to anything. Plus it might not even be recognised if Voyager returned to Federation Space.

As to why he didn't wear a red uniform, I have no idea. Maybe he didn't want to waste resources on changing his uniform?

Did they refer to him as Captain though? I can't remember. They should have done to refer to his Position. When Kirk became Captain of the Enterprise in TMP the crew call him Captain even though he is still an Admiral.

Charlie

Charlie

 

[Dimension11]

Enrage said:
Actually Lt Gen is higher than Major Gen because a long time ago, it use to be Seargent Major General, and since a Lt is higher than a Sergeant Major, LTG was higher than MG.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt All i'm saying is that it's the exact same reason why a Lt. Gen is 3 stars compared to other general ranks..

Yea, and Originally, the 2nd Gen rank conceived was a Lt. Gen, to assist the Gen. Then the Sargent Major (later Sargent Maj. General) was added.

The exact thing with Lt. Col. The Col was the original head of a unit, and his deputy was the Lt. Col.

 

[Quist]

Would you like a shovel to help dig yourself out of that a"Lt. Cmdr" hole? Your logic is flawed, your experience/knowledge base evidently lacking. Please accept this and listen to what Timo and myself have been trying to tell you.

And, please, don't attempt to lecture me on matters pertaining to my (admittedly, former) career... You'll only end up looking like a prat.

 

[Akiraprise]

Guys, chill. Seriously.
In fact if you all want to continue to discuss real world ranks and their origin take it to Misc.
I've let this thread get far enough off topic.

 

[Dimension11]

Quist said:
Would you like a shovel to help dig yourself out of that a"Lt. Cmdr" hole? Your logic is flawed, your experience/knowledge base evidently lacking. Please accept this and listen to what Timo and myself have been trying to tell you.

And, please, don't attempt to lecture me on matters pertaining to my (admittedly, former) career... You'll only end up looking like a prat.

Akiraprise is right, we shouldn't be highjacking this guy's thread like this.

I won't lecture you on your aparent wealth of knowledge about the US Military System, but I strongly urge you not to assume that you're the only one with such knowledge (despite your "former" career, whatever it may be).

I've always believed in civilized discussion, so calling someone "buttocks" isn't going to help, perhaps you need a shovel too?

 

[Quist]

Exactly right. I don't mind someone else having another opinion to me. I do, however, mind very much when misinformation (however well-intentioned) is touted as fact. I believe I have the right of rebuttal as much as anyone else and saw this as an opportunity to correct (in a civil manner) what I saw as an erroroneous statement. I did not expect to be patronised...

I will close with this: The US Military is not the only one on the planet and was not necessarily the one I was referring to. Also, I am not a US citizen - were you assuming I was?