Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant cla

[The Wormhole]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

We have never seen a mere Lt. in command of a ship full time. Lt. Cmdr's Dax and worf were both given command of the Defiant for extended periods in DS9 however.

There was that second season DS9 episode where the commanding officer of a Nebula class ship was a Lt. J.G. Always seemed kind of odd to me. They should have either have made the ship an Oberth class or have made the guy a Lt. Commander.

 

[Delta1]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

Starships are, by definition, weapons of mass destruction. I don't want some twenty-five year old tooling around with the ability to obliterate the surface of a planet on a whim.

Agreed. Any starship with a warp drive and a gas tank full of antimatter is potentially an FTL weapon capable of wreaking planetary catastrophe and wiping out entire ecosystems. (I think Sisko might have done this once on a bad day.) Command of any starship is therefore a position of great responsibility, not a ticket punch for junior officers.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

There was that second season DS9 episode where the commanding officer of a Nebula class ship was a Lt. J.G. Always seemed kind of odd to me. They should have either have made the ship an Oberth class or have made the guy a Lt. Commander.

I always figured that was just been the duty officer in charge of the bridge during that particular shift. The CO and XO may have been otherwise occupied elsewhere on the ship.

To me, Starfleet's command structure is just a case of how different Starfleet is in comparison to the way today's navies work. Yes, some things are the same, but there are also notable differences. Some of that may be borne out of an idea that Starfleet is only loosely based off today's navies but really has its own way of doing things. It may very well be a case that in Starfleet, only officers with the rank of captain can command a frontline vessel on a ongoing basis regardless of its size. Officers below the rank of captain may only command a ship on a temporary basis or for a specific short-term mission.

 

[trekkerguy]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

I've always figured that was how it worked, command of a Starship
was given to a Captain and anything else was the exception.

For instance Sisko can't leave DS9 at the moment but the Defiant is
required to protect Earth. Even then it's only a satalite mission,
the Defiant does not become Worf's command, he is simply in command
for a specific mission.

 

[Anwar]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

Although we never saw it, I always figured that Picard was a Lt.Cmdr or a Commander when he was in command of the Stargazer. I mean when he took command he wasn't even the XO or 3rd Officer, so they wouldn't have promoted him directly to Captain from that.

 

[trekkerguy]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

Although we never saw it, I always figured that Picard was a Lt.Cmdr or a Commander when he was in command of the Stargazer. I mean when he took command he wasn't even the XO or 3rd Officer, so they wouldn't have promoted him directly to Captain from that.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Stargazer

 

[Dayton3]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

IIRC, the commanding officers of U.S. nuclear submarines are routinely just ranked as Commanders often in their 30s age wise.

 

[jamestyler]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

I just see it as something thats easy for the audience to digest. They didn't explain the difference between the rank and title until Nog questioned why Worf was referred to as 'Captain' in DS9's season 5(?). To my recollection they never mentioned it again.

The TOS movies were the only example I can think of where Captains (Sposk and Scotty) weren't in charge. In later years non-CO's didn't advance past that rank.

Saying that... I always assumed the Lt. Commander in the TNG episode with Data in command of the Sutherland was the CO before Data stepped in as he was the ranking officer on that ship.

 

[Anwar]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

Although we never saw it, I always figured that Picard was a Lt.Cmdr or a Commander when he was in command of the Stargazer. I mean when he took command he wasn't even the XO or 3rd Officer, so they wouldn't have promoted him directly to Captain from that.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Stargazer

Sorry, I meant we didn't see the actual flashbacks to when he captained the ship AT FIRST. He couldn't have been a captain that early in his career.

 

[trekkerguy]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

Although we never saw it, I always figured that Picard was a Lt.Cmdr or a Commander when he was in command of the Stargazer. I mean when he took command he wasn't even the XO or 3rd Officer, so they wouldn't have promoted him directly to Captain from that.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Stargazer

Sorry, I meant we didn't see the actual flashbacks to when he captained the ship AT FIRST. He couldn't have been a captain that early in his career.

He was Captain at 28, the youngest so far.

 

[captcalhoun]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

I just see it as something thats easy for the audience to digest. They didn't explain the difference between the rank and title until Nog questioned why Worf was referred to as 'Captain' in DS9's season 5(?). To my recollection they never mentioned it again.

it was Dax and it was in S6...

 

[USS KG5]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

We have never seen a mere Lt. in command of a ship full time. Lt. Cmdr's Dax and worf were both given command of the Defiant for extended periods in DS9 however.

There was that second season DS9 episode where the commanding officer of a Nebula class ship was a Lt. J.G. Always seemed kind of odd to me. They should have either have made the ship an Oberth class or have made the guy a Lt. Commander.

That was because the "Captain" was supposed to be the nutjob scientist. I have to admit that was a bit of a moment for me, as even if the Captain was reassigned while a top of the line starship was sent on a science mission, it still should have had a few more senior officers on board.

Possible rationalisation - they needed a very fast ship. as for SOME reason Warp 1 was not fast enough to get away from the star on this occasion (an FTL shockwave?). Therefore they took a Nebby straight off the slips, or after a moderate shakedown, and stuck a skeleton crew on in the nominal command of the scientist.

Not DS9's best episode in any sense.

 

[Timo]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

A couple of nitpicks:

1) In "11001001", Commander Quinteros wasn't said to be in charge of the gigantic floating city of SB74. He was merely in charge of repairing the computers of Picard's ship. In all likelihood, that vast installation had at least a Commodore in charge, and perhaps an Admiral of higher rank.

The tiny outpost DS9 would thus be our first prominent instance of a non-flag officer being in charge of a space station. Although we did see an even smaller station under the command of a Lieutenant in "Aquiel", and a Commander was also in charge of the Epsilon Nine comm station in ST:TMP.

2) The Antares of "Charlie X" was commanded by a person who wore the same blouse that Kirk had worn in "Where No Man". Those two braid in the TOS style of uniforms denoted Commander - and it seems quite implausible that Starfleet would allow them to denote anything else in any other uniform style in parallel use. So Captain Ramart was probably a Commander, thus our first CO of lower than O-6 rank. Unless, of course, Captain Kirk had also been a Commander in "Where No Man", a distinct possibility. The next case would be Commander Markel from TAS "Eye of the Beholder"...

3) The backstory for Picard and Stargazer is quite fuzzy, and most of the claims about Picard's early exploits and career developments are false. This holds for at least the following canonically unsupported ideas:

-Picard was a Lieutenant Commander when performing the heroic action that later gained him the command of the Stargazer
-This happened in 2333 sharp
-This resulted in Picard being captain to the vessel for the next 22 years
-This resulted in Picard holding Captain rank for the next 22 years
-Picard was thus the youngest Starfleet captain ever

None of these claims find support from "The Battle", "Conspiracy", "Tapestry" or a combination thereof.

That was because the "Captain" was supposed to be the nutjob scientist. I have to admit that was a bit of a moment for me, as even if the Captain was reassigned while a top of the line starship was sent on a science mission, it still should have had a few more senior officers on board.

I kind of like the idea that Dr. Seyetlik was sitting on two stools on the Prometheus. For all we know, he held full Captain rank in Starfleet, and just preferred civilian garb to the unstylish uniform.

I want to agree that the junior Lieutenant in charge of the bridge was on a relatively low rung of the ship's rank ladder. The First Officer might have been on any one of three basic side tracks during the events:

-Sulking in his or her cabin because Seyetlik had alienated him just as he had made enemies of everybody else he ever ran into.

-On the lower decks, making sure nobody interfered with Seyetlik's flight because the terraformer had earned his or her undying devotion just as he had enthralled everybody else he ever ran into.

-On the floor of Shuttlebay One, down for the count because Seytlik had to stun him or her in order to gain access to the starfuze pod.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Anwar]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Stargazer

Sorry, I meant we didn't see the actual flashbacks to when he captained the ship AT FIRST. He couldn't have been a captain that early in his career.

He was Captain at 28, the youngest so far.

Did he actually have that rank, or was it just said that he "captained" the ship when he was that young? If it's the latter then it probably was a case of letting a rank lower than Captain command a ship (standard naval practice) especially since said ship was hardly a top-of-the-line vessel.

 

[Timo]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

It was neither: no episode suggests that Picard would have held O-6 rank or CO position at that early an age. However, "Tapestry" has this to say about the issue:

Q:"That Picard [the one that lived his life the way the older Picard thought he preferred] never had a brush with death, never came face to face with his own mortality, never realised how fragile life is or how important each moment must be. So his life never came into focus. He drifted for much of his career, with no plan or agenda, going from one assignment to the next, never seizing the opportunities that presented themselves. he never led the away team on Milika III to save the ambassador, or take charge of the Stargazer's bridge when its captain was killed. And no one ever offered him a command."

The connection between (apparently very temporarily) taking charge of the bridge and being offered command is tenuous here at very best. The way DeLancie punctuates it, the "nobody offered" bit refers to all of the preceding tirade, not to the act of taking charge of the bridge.

There is no onscreen reference to Picard serving as Stargazer CO or at Captain rank for 22 years. That comes only from unaired backstage material, a suggestion in the writers' guide regarding this character. For all we know, Picard only spent something like five years as the CO of that ship. He may have already been a mature man of advanced rank when taking charge of the bridge from the fallen captain - or then a raw Ensign back in the mists of time. Onscreen, we don't know.

"Conspiracy" in turn states this:

Picard: "Tryla Scott. It's said you made captain faster than anyone in Starfleet history, present company included. Are you that good?"

Some think that "present company" means Picard, but there's no evidence it wouldn't refer to the also present Captains Keel or Rixx instead. Also, it's not clear whether "captain" here refers to O-6 rank or starship CO position - Scott holds both, as do all the people present.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[USS KG5]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

Did he actually have that rank, or was it just said that he "captained" the ship when he was that young? If it's the latter then it probably was a case of letting a rank lower than Captain command a ship (standard naval practice) especially since said ship was hardly a top-of-the-line vessel.

I always assumed Picard held the rank of at most Commander when he first commanded the Stargazer, probably Lt. Cmdr.

After all it would seem Starfleet has a very odd policy with ships. We see hundreds of Miranda and Oberth class ships shuttling around, and the Excelsior seems to be the backbone of the fleet. Where are all the dozens of new ships Starfleet presumably builds every year?

I guess the answer would have to be Starfleet is very, very big. Within this huge structure (think WW2 US Navy perhaps) there is plenty of room to give an old, worn ship to a plucky young two-and-a-half to see how he does with it, as long as he can be trusted not to start a war and to protect the crew.

 

[Chaos Descending]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

IIRC, the commanding officers of U.S. nuclear submarines are routinely just ranked as Commanders often in their 30s age wise.

Correct. SSNs, SSBNs, FFGs, and DDGs are all commanded by O-5 Commanders. Previously, SSNs might be commanded by O-4 Lieutenant Commanders and SSBNs were commanded by O-6 Captains.

These days, pretty much only CVNs have full O-6 Captains in Command anymore.

 

[HRHTheKING]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

Take Riker for example. He turned down a few crap ships like the Drake and the Aries.

If Paul Rice was so talented, how come he commanded the crappy Drake?

A Lieutenant should have commanded that ship, got some experience, then moved onto better things eventually.

 

[captcalhoun]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

Although we did see an even smaller station under the command of a Lieutenant in "Aquiel"

but that was a 2-man relay station, the equivalent of a radar dish in Alaska...

 

[Red Ranger]

Re: Why do i see full captain for small ships like oberths and defiant

People,

The problem is most people don't know about the distinction between the rank of Navy Captain (O-6) and the position of Captain (any officer in command of a ship, from Captain rank on down). Hell, a lot of folks have difficulty understanding that an Army Captain is an O-3 and isn't equivalent to a Navy Captain. And forget about not understanding how a police precinct Captain is different!

So I don't think it's a matter of the writing staff being ignorant. From a storytelling viewpoint, it's just easier to put a full Captain in charge of even smaller ships than have to explain why a Starfleet officer with three pips in charge of a ship is called "Captain," the same as Captain Picard, who has four pips.

It's a storytelling shortcut, and I guess TPTB made the determination that they can't explain that every time an officer of Commander rank or lower is sometimes addressed by his actual rank, like Commander Riker, and at other times called Captain.

Certainly, it would've made more sense if Janeway were a full Commander in charge of Voyager, as the crew complement of an Intrepid-class ship is small. And as mentioned, oftentimes, Dax or Worf, as Lieutenant Commanders, were able to command the Defiant, an even smaller escort-type vessel, despite its formidable firepower.

Red Ranger