Where was the Enterprise during the Dominion War?
- Thread starter Destructor
- Start date
Quite so!
I can only go off my life experience, but in the military (and please, I am not trying to restart the is Starfleet the military thing again! LOL) a command team is not just thrown together. A ship captain or a Division commander can bring the officers and enlisted they know and trust, to build a solid command team. To take Data, Georidi or others and spread them around, the E works as a solid team and to disrupt that teamwork and inject them into another ship, and new people into the critical spots on the E at the very moment where teamwork is the most critical thing for a commander and ship, would be counterproductive.
Look at the friction when Jellico took command of the E, now, ramp up the stakes, emotions and even smaller margin for error in a war like the Dominion War, and it is a recipe for failure, or even worse.
NOW, having said that, the E could have been used as a the lead ship for a fleet, and not placed on the FEOB unless it was something like the invasion of Cardassia.
Just my .02
^Thanks. Good insights. I had been under the impression that it was unusual for a crew to stay together that long, at least on the same ship. Didn't the WWII-era carrier Enterprise have something like half a dozen captains in the course of the war? Maybe they took their command crews with them? In that case, maybe it would've made more sense for Picard and his command crew to go on diplomatic missions on another ship while the Enterprise was sent to the front lines under a different command crew.
You are right that in the real world a person would NEVER be captain for 20 years (if I remember that is how long he was in command of the Stargazer? I may be wrong), then 8, 9, 10 years of another ship. That always bothered me. But I was referring to the context of why not break up the command crew of the E during the Dominion War to "spread the knowledge wealth" discussed here.
But you do raise a great point. There are other officers worthy of command, even the beloved Enterprise. Seems unfair in terms of career progression to leave Picard or Riker (I am just talking command here) for so long on the bridge of the E. Ripple effects for progression, because if they do it for the Enterprise, they must for all the other ships.I would also add, Will Riker is my favorite TNG character, and refusal to take an offerend command should have been grounds not only for never getting another offer, but being told, "you won't accept? Drop the retirement papers please."
But to my original intent, when my Division went to Iraq, even down to Company level, commanders are in command for the duration of the tour, and it had to be a pretty big reason to pull them and install a new command team in the middle of the fight. Commanders command different. I keep thinking back to the Picard/Jellico transition.
(And for the record, I always thought Riker was too "but this is the way we've always done it!" with Jellico. I got what Jellico was doing, and if you are in a military structure, you go with the commander's style, like it or not. My ex wife and I [she was also a paratrooper in the Division with me] actually had good debates about the Picard v Jellico style and if Riker was right in his pushback. But I have digressed off course by about 130 degrees here, haven't I? LOL)
It's never mentioned in the books or anything, but perhaps the reason Riker is not given a Captaincy is because they don't have the Captaincies to spare? In the Aubrey/Maturin novels (set in the British fleet in the Napoleonic wars), they're constantly going on about how if you want to make Captain (or any other rank above that, for that matter), you basically have to wait until one of the other Captains either dies, retires, or is promoted, so that a new Captaincy 'slot' opens up. Obviously during the Dominion war there were Captains getting killed by the score, but the general number of ships would have gone down also, so it might have been possible that there simply weren't the captaincies available to just start promoting everyone.
Star Trek 2, 3 and 4 was the only realistic possibility to see all cast members together. The last minutes of 4, and then 5 and 6 were the ones that jumped the shark on this (yeah, Sulu did get his ship (like 10 years or so after the events of TWOK), but it's still ridiculous that the rest of the crew stayed together).
In TWOK, Kirk was Admiral, Spock was an Academy teacher, the Enterprise was turned into a training ship. Sulu was about to get the command of the Excelsior, Chekov was on another ship. I would have welcomed that trend to continue. But every drastic change got reverted again. Spock died: awesome. Spock returned: yeah well, but they destroyed the Enterprise and turned the crew into enemies of the state: awesome. Oh, all charges are dropped, and they get back their ship, and it looks exactly like the old one: YAWN.
And unfortunately, this "keep the status quo" thing put to the extreme is what also made the TNG movies boring. There was absolutely no progress.
well, to be fair, Starfleet is an environment where ships and crews can (at least in theory) end up completely isolated for five year missions (or longer, if Tuvok is aboard). They also include beings like Vulcans, for whom a 20-year posting would be considered "brief."
I'd guess that they'd adopt an "as long as you want and can do the job" schedule. Only way to be fair.
^That's right. The original idea behind Picard's tour on the Stargazer was that the ship spent most of those 22 years in deep space, far from home. However, later episodes established things about Picard's backstory that required him to be closer to home for at least some of that time. (Or maybe not just later episodes. I'm not sure how that idea about the Stargazer was meant to mesh with the intended Picard-Beverly-Jack backstory. It was never established whether the show's developers intended for Beverly to have served aboard the Stargazer.)
We also have to remember that 300 years from now, human lifespans are approximately double what they are now and so people are going to have longer working lives. Starfleet appears to be a pseudomilitary (I am not getting into the argument of whether it is or is not a military) meritocracy. If you're a good captain, then you stay captain.
Take Picard as an excellent captain. How many former Stargazer and Enterprise alumni have gone on to command their own ships? We know that Asmund commanded her own ship post-Nemesis and Ben Zoma and Morgen commanded their own ships by the time of the Reunion novel. Riker now has his own ship, former helmswoman Lian T'Su commanded her own ship (CoE: Wildfire) and Worf was the de facto commander of the Defiant. Those are just the ones we know about, (I'm sure I have forgotten a few).
He probably commanded a good number of people who then went on to command their own ships. I would say leaving him in a command position means that you'll get more good captains in the long term. No, it doesn't make sense during a war to have them all together, but we don't know if the Enterprise senior officers were separated at times to take temporary command of ships for black ops missions or whatever, but a pseudomilitary organization comprised of members from 150+ worlds and their colonies is not going to work the same as a national military organization from one world. A lot has changed in 300 years and better/different working practices is likely to be one of them.
Take Picard as an excellent captain. How many former Stargazer and Enterprise alumni have gone on to command their own ships? We know that Asmund commanded her own ship post-Nemesis and Ben Zoma and Morgen commanded their own ships by the time of the Reunion novel. Riker now has his own ship, former helmswoman Lian T'Su commanded her own ship (CoE: Wildfire) and Worf was the de facto commander of the Defiant. Those are just the ones we know about, (I'm sure I have forgotten a few).
He probably commanded a good number of people who then went on to command their own ships. I would say leaving him in a command position means that you'll get more good captains in the long term. No, it doesn't make sense during a war to have them all together, but we don't know if the Enterprise senior officers were separated at times to take temporary command of ships for black ops missions or whatever, but a pseudomilitary organization comprised of members from 150+ worlds and their colonies is not going to work the same as a national military organization from one world. A lot has changed in 300 years and better/different working practices is likely to be one of them.
kkozoriz1
Fleet Captain
You can include TFF in that since it happens just after TVH. The gap really exists between TFF & TUC which gives more time for
things to get to the status seen in TUD.
I'm a little late to this thread and I have only read the last page of posts, so I hope I am not reiterating what has already been said.
I am of the understanding the the current real-life U.S. military has an "up-or-out" system for their officers. If you don't get promoted to the next rank within a certain period of time, or accept certain postings or duties as they are rotated your way, then you are forced out at some point (or, at least, not given the opportunity to re-up for another term). There are probably rare examples to this rule, but it's a general rule of thumb.
Clearly, at some point Starfleet probably did away with the "up-or-out" system (if indeed they ever had it). In TNG's "Tapestry", an alternate history exists in which Picard is a lowly lieutenant with all of those years of service, but little rank to show for it, perfectly content to do what he did and not stretch or take risks. And I would imagine that if there were gifted people serving in certain areas or postings or specialties, then it would be for the greater good to leave them there if they were happy in what they were doing and very capable at it. If you had a good posting and you were happy where you were and didn't mind not taking that next step up the rank ladder, wouldn't you stay put? And if you were serving on the Federation flagship with an awesome captain and great friends, you might be tempted to stay put as well.
It was probably put to Picard early on after assuming captaincy of Enterprise that if he wanted to make that jump to Admiral, he would have to leave the Enterprise, probably taking a senior staff position in Starfleet Command for awhile, then being promoted to Admiral and sent to some cholera-ridden hellhole way out in the boondocks; depending on how well he did in that command, he might get a better posting and continue the march up the ladder.
Conversely, there were the young and ambitious people like LCDR Shelby in TNG's "The Best of Both Worlds", who (initially) desired rank above comradeship, and those fast-trackers would eventually plateau out until higher positions became available. I wonder if Picard was like that earlier in his career, then came to cherish the stability of his position on Stargazer.
I am of the understanding the the current real-life U.S. military has an "up-or-out" system for their officers. If you don't get promoted to the next rank within a certain period of time, or accept certain postings or duties as they are rotated your way, then you are forced out at some point (or, at least, not given the opportunity to re-up for another term). There are probably rare examples to this rule, but it's a general rule of thumb.
Clearly, at some point Starfleet probably did away with the "up-or-out" system (if indeed they ever had it). In TNG's "Tapestry", an alternate history exists in which Picard is a lowly lieutenant with all of those years of service, but little rank to show for it, perfectly content to do what he did and not stretch or take risks. And I would imagine that if there were gifted people serving in certain areas or postings or specialties, then it would be for the greater good to leave them there if they were happy in what they were doing and very capable at it. If you had a good posting and you were happy where you were and didn't mind not taking that next step up the rank ladder, wouldn't you stay put? And if you were serving on the Federation flagship with an awesome captain and great friends, you might be tempted to stay put as well.
It was probably put to Picard early on after assuming captaincy of Enterprise that if he wanted to make that jump to Admiral, he would have to leave the Enterprise, probably taking a senior staff position in Starfleet Command for awhile, then being promoted to Admiral and sent to some cholera-ridden hellhole way out in the boondocks; depending on how well he did in that command, he might get a better posting and continue the march up the ladder.
Conversely, there were the young and ambitious people like LCDR Shelby in TNG's "The Best of Both Worlds", who (initially) desired rank above comradeship, and those fast-trackers would eventually plateau out until higher positions became available. I wonder if Picard was like that earlier in his career, then came to cherish the stability of his position on Stargazer.
and the books do mention that Riker wasn't offered another command for a long time after he turned down the Melbourne because he'd turned down command three times and if he hadn't taken Titan, he'd probably never get a command.
Starfleet has some odd rules as to command anyway. Kirk had to take a temporary reduction to captain in TMP? WTF? Decker could still have been captain, with Kirk senior officer on board as mission commander. Hell, in TWOK Kirk and Spock had that very discussion about Admiral Kirk taking command from Captain Spock. The whole reduction to captain in TMP was just silly.
my own personal view about riker was that after best of both worlds if he had wanted a command he would have gotten it.
but if he was content to stay for then on enterprise some within starfleet and the federation were probably grateful because wouldnt there be a little concer for awhile about picard?
so word quietly may have been sent to riker about let us know when you are ready to move on.
really to me riker should have moved on after first contact.
Unfortunately, that's a staple of spin-offs. Public expectation (and the core fanbase expectation) is that a spin-off novel, comic or even movie will closely resemble the parent TV show. Look at the complaints from people who read the novel relaunches and complain they're not enough like the parent show they are based upon.
TOS movies shoulda coulda had regulars such as Captain Decker, Navigator Ilia, Xon/Dr Savik, Lieutenant Saavik, science specialist David Marcus, Captain Sulu, etc, and we might have gotten something like that with ongoing, regular telemovies, but periodic spin-off motion pictures called "Star Trek" had to have most of "the big seven" in their familiar places, doing familiar things, to give Paramount something to keep licensing out. Thus it felt like they kept winding back on any innovations.
I thought ST IV was a huge risk: a whole adventure and no Enterprise until the very end. While it might have been sensible from a story point to give Kirk Excelsior (as the DC Comics had already done between ST III and IV), from a marketing standpoint, the attendees of that movie wanted to see the Enterprise in there somewhere.
They already turned FC, INS and NEM into action movies that felt entirely different from the TV show, yet they could not shake the cast up a bit like in the early TOS movies?
"It's public expectation" sometimes feels like an excuse for a lack of creativity.
The public "expects" a "good" and "entertaining" movie. But "good" and "entertaining" can be achieved in many, many, many, many ways.
And DS9 was still at the beginning of season 7 when Insurrection was released.
Which really doesn't mean too much, unfortunately, since Insurrection doesn't have a stardate. This may have been done deliberately to keep the movie's placement vague within DS9's seventh season to avoid either a continuity conflict or a spoiler. The movies prior to Insurrection didn't have to worry about that, IMO.
Generations was released relatively early in DS9's third season, but its stardate places it onscreen later in that season. Ditto with First Contact being released fairly early in DS9's fifth season, but featuring a late fifth season stardate...
But the movie does reference that the Dominion War is continuing, and Worf does (sort of) mention that's he's on assignment from DS9. Also there's a throwaway reference to So'na ketracel white production capacity being reduced in the series. So there's a lot of clues to indicate that INS takes place prior to the DS9 finale.
Similar threads
