StarDestroyer.Net BBS

In ST:TMP, Decker is furious because Admiral Kirk comes onto his ship and takes command. Apparently, the act of taking command of the Enterprise requires that Admiral Kirk become the acting Captain, thus displacing Decker from his position. Throughout the rest of the movie, we see a petty soap-opera style squabble between these two, often played out in public.

In ST2, Kirk is onboard the Enterprise at the time of a possible crisis and Spock wastes no time in stating unambiguously that, as the highest ranking officer on the ship, he is obviously in command of the mission. This was also the case in TOS, ironically enough in "Doomsday Machine" where the highest ranking officer happened to be Decker's father, Commodore Matt Decker.

Now, we know the real-life reason for this inconsistency (ST:TMP was badly written), but in context, how do we reconcile it? If the highest-ranking officer on the ship is in command of the mission as one would naturally expect, then why did Decker have to be displaced from his rank in order for Kirk to take command of the Enterprise in ST:TMP?

he could just mean captian as in the traditional title for the commander of a ship. I mean in the same way u call the commanding officer of a ship captain regardless of their real rank

Crazedwraith wrote:he could just mean captian as in the traditional title for the commander of a ship. I mean in the same way u call the commanding officer of a ship captain regardless of their real rank

Then why did Decker have to be temporarily demoted in order for him to take command?

Decker was still a captain, but was refered to as commander, because as Crazedwraith said, it was a traditional title.

Darth Wong wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote:he could just mean captian as in the traditional title for the commander of a ship. I mean in the same way u call the commanding officer of a ship captain regardless of their real rank

Then why did Decker have to be temporarily demoted in order for him to take command?

Ugh, God. That WAS painful to watch after awhile. I got tired of him whining. (I also felt like his character was just a cheap device to wrap up the bald woman/V'Ger thing at the end of the film. I probably would've left him out altogether.)

As for the rationalization, I'll be of no help, but I would add that this inconsistency runs through TNG also. Picard often seemed to be bickering w/ visiting admirals over who should be in charge of the ship, indicating that the rule of highest ranking = insta-command wasn't in effect.

"Pegasus" is the only example I can think of right now. Adm. Pressman didn't even consider taking command of the E-D until well after the ship was inside the asteroid. After Picard gets mad and preaches about the Algeron Treaty, Pressman barks, "I'm taking command of this vessel!"

Earlier, Picard had flatly stated that he wouldn't endanger "his ship," as if Pressman was just a visitor who could shut up and smile about it.

It was pretty clear to me that Spock's reaction in ST II was an exception rather than the rule. He is friends with Kirk and used a logical explanation for giving Kirk command but in most instances its more like TMP (However I do believe that it is not the case in modern naval command structures where an Admiral comes aboard, the flag goes with him but the Capatain is still the Captain of his vessel.)

Almost every other instance has a tension betwene Admirals and Captains, such as in Doomsday machine, where Commodore Decker seizers command but Kirk seizes it back by invoking "His personal authority as Captain of the Enterprise." and in various TNG episodes.

In "The Deadly Years", Commodore Stocker took command of the Enterprise, even though he had no starship captain training whatsoever!

Regarding Decker, WAS he demoted? WAS his rank insignia changed from Captain to Commander? In ST2, Kirk was already on board, when the training mission turned into a full-fledged starship mission. In TMP, Kirk wasn't even supposed to be on board, other than seeing Decker off on his maiden voyage as Captain.

Later, Kirk told Decker he'd have to double as second in command AND science officer after Sonak was fried in the transporter.

Lord Poe wrote:In "The Deadly Years", Commodore Stocker took command of the Enterprise, even though he had no starship captain training whatsoever!

Regarding Decker, WAS he demoted? WAS his rank insignia changed from Captain to Commander? In ST2, Kirk was already on board, when the training mission turned into a full-fledged starship mission. In TMP, Kirk wasn't even supposed to be on board, other than seeing Decker off on his maiden voyage as Captain.

Later, Kirk told Decker he'd have to double as second in command AND science officer after Sonak was fried in the transporter.

Traditionally, the commanding officer and executive officer are always addressed as "Captain" and "Commander", respectively. If Captain Decker were simply reassigned as Executive Officer, he would continue to wear his captain's insignia and would be addressed as "Commander" (similarly, a captain commanding a squadron wears captain's stripes but is addressed and referred to as "Commodore").

However, this is not actually the case.

"I'm taking the center seat," Kirk said. "I'm sorry, Will."

"You are what...?" Decker was certain that Kirk must have said something else.

"I'm replacing you as captain of the Enterprise."

Decker found himself staring at Kirk blankly. He saw Kirk reach tentatively, as if to clasp a hand on his shoulder, fatherly, brotherly... but then Kirk's expression seemed to harden and he drew back. "You'll stay abaord as executive officer... a temporary grade reduction to commander."

According to Chapter Seven of The Motion Picture, Captain Decker was indeed demoted when Admiral Kirk personally assumed command of the Enterprise. Chapter Nine emphasizes this:

Ilia was looking puzzled over Decker's sleeve stripes. She knew him to be a captain, posted to starship command. "Commander Decker?" she asked.

The Commanding Admiral of Starfleet effectually gave Admiral Kirk carte blanche after their argument at Starfleet Headquarters. It may be that Admiral Kirk decided that demoting Captain Decker was necessary so as to eliminate any confusion among the crew as to who was the Commanding Officer; the crew would, after all, know him to be Chief of Starfleet Operations, and might otherwise conclude that he had transferred his flag to the Enterprise instead of actually assuming command (the two are of course not the same thing).

Publius

IIRC, the commanding officer of a vessel is always in command of that vessel, even in the presence of higher ranked officers. A lieutenant in charge of a PT boat could, in theory, bark orders to an admiral, though it's not good for the career. An admiral does not become the commanding officer of a ship by virture of his presence. However, an admiral could relieve a captain of command and personally assume it on his own. That would be incredibly rude unless the captain was disobeying the admiral's orders, though.

I recall hearing about a rear admiral voluntarily accepting a demotion to captain to command a battleship. I think he returned to rear admiral after his tour of duty on the battleship. I don't remember the admiral's name but he did consider the battleship command the high light of his career. So, it looks like ST wasn't too far off of reality.

Darth Wong wrote:This was also the case in TOS, ironically enough in "Doomsday Machine" where the highest ranking officer happened to be Decker's father, Commodore Matt Decker.

Actually, Kirk left Spock in command of the Enterprise, and Decker had to relieve Spock and assume command. Even then, Spock immediately took command back from Decker once Kirk ordered him to do so under his "personal authority as Captain of the Enterprise".

While Kirk was incommunicado, Spock could find no legal reason to dispute Decker's takeover, but he didn't hesitate for a moment once Kirk made his wishes clear. In effect, Captain Kirk outranked Commodore Decker with regard to the Enterprise, even when he wasn't on the ship.

Ted C wrote:Actually, Kirk left Spock in command of the Enterprise, and Decker had to relieve Spock and assume command. Even then, Spock immediately took command back from Decker once Kirk ordered him to do so under his "personal authority as Captain of the Enterprise".

While Kirk was incommunicado, Spock could find no legal reason to dispute Decker's takeover, but he didn't hesitate for a moment once Kirk made his wishes clear. In effect, Captain Kirk outranked Commodore Decker with regard to the Enterprise, even when he wasn't on the ship.

Actually, Kirk didn't outrank Decker in this instance. Basically, he said fuck the regs, and ordered Spock to take over. Decker even ignored it at first, telling Spock he had no authority over him. But Decker realized that security was loyal to Spock and Kirk on the Enterprise, despite his higher rank.

Ted C wrote:Actually, Kirk left Spock in command of the Enterprise, and Decker had to relieve Spock and assume command. Even then, Spock immediately took command back from Decker once Kirk ordered him to do so under his "personal authority as Captain of the Enterprise".

While Kirk was incommunicado, Spock could find no legal reason to dispute Decker's takeover, but he didn't hesitate for a moment once Kirk made his wishes clear. In effect, Captain Kirk outranked Commodore Decker with regard to the Enterprise, even when he wasn't on the ship.

It was McCoy who relieved Decker of command on grounds of Pchycological instability. The tension between Captian Decker and Kirk may have stemmed from how his dad died. It would be a easy assumtion that he may have blamed Kirk for his father's death.

Isolder74 wrote:It was McCoy who relieved Decker of command on grounds of Pchycological instability.

McCoy was unable to relieve Decker because he needed to perform a physical on him first, and Decker was able to claim that he couldn't submit to one while the ship was in the midst of a crisis. Kirk relieved Decker of command, either because he was still officially in charge of the ship, or just because everyone on board was personally loyal to him and willing to risk court martial on his behalf.

He was temporerily reduced in 'grade' not rank. He was still captain decker, but was not to be referred to as captain but as commander, as only one officer can captain the ship at any one time IIRC.

NecronLord wrote:He was temporerily reduced in 'grade' not rank. He was still captain decker, but was not to be referred to as captain but as commander, as only one officer can captain the ship at any one time IIRC.

Lieutenant (jg) Ilia remarked on the fact that Commander Decker's shoulderboards showed him to be in fact a commander, not a captain. Were he only reassigned as Executive Officer, he would retain his status as captain and be addressed as "Commander"; however, he was in fact demoted temporarily to commander, and wore that grade's insignia of rank.

You must understand, "rank" refers to degree of precedence and seniority, both within and without a specific grade. Any officer commissioned in grade of admiral, for example, ipso facto outranks an officer commissioned in grade of captain. Between or among two or more officers commissioned in the same grade, the highest-ranking is the officer commissioned in that grade first.

To wit, if person A is commissioned captain on 1 January, and person B is commissioned captain on 2 January, both persons have the same grade, but person A has higher rank (10 U.S.C. 741).

The difference between rank and grade is fairly simple. General Richard B. Myers, USAF, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has the same grade as General James L. Jones, USMC, Commander of the United States European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe. Nevertheless, despite having the same grade, General Myers outranks General Jones, per 10 U.S.C. 152.

As a result, a reduction in grade ipso facto constitutes a reduction in rank, as rank derives from grade. A general automatically outranks a major because of his grade (O-10 > O-4). An ensign automatically outranks a command master chief (O-1 > E-9). If a captain is reduced in grade to commander, he is automatically reduced in rank, as well.

Captain Decker was temporarily demoted in grade, which necessarily means he was temporarily reduced in rank. He ceased to be a captain, both in terms of grade and position. He ceased to be authorised to wear a captain's insignia. This is made clear both by Admiral Kirk and by Lieutenant (jg) Ilia; the former informs him of his reduction in grade to commander, and the latter remarked on the fact that he was wearing commander's stripes.

Simply put, he was not still Captain Decker addressed as "Commander", he was really and truly Commander Decker. He had the pay, rank, title, and uniform of a commander.

Publius

It seemed that Kirk took some sort of temporary, requested grade-reduction to the rank of captain to assume command and informed Decker that he was also being temporarily demoted. But this makes no sense either; even if Decker hadn't been demoted and Kirk was then functioning in the rank of captain, he would still automatically outrank Decker by virtue of being senior in grade according to commission-date.

The only explanation that I can formulate is that Starfleet had become so bureaucratically entangled in its own policies or was plagued by officers experimenting with "new-style" policies that it must have been made impossible for a flag-officer to directly assume a ship command without necessitating the sort of mad ant-dance around rank procedure that we witness in TMP. After the disruption in the command arrangements which endangered the V-ger Mission, there might have been a purge of Starfleet's upper eschelons in which Heihachiro Nogura was ousted as COMSTAR and replaced by Harold Morrow, who subsequently rewrote and streamlimed the regs and initiated other, more military-oriented changes in service policy.

LOL, "Harold"? Is that in the novel?

I remember reading somewhere (maybe the TMP novel?) that Kirk had become too valuable for Starfleet to risk putting back in space after his 5-year mission, so they promoted him to Admiral in order to keep him behind a desk. Now, if an Admiral could simply walk onto a ship and assume command, there would be little point in promoting Kirk to Admiral to keep him behind a desk, so I imagine they either instituted a regulation then and there to ensure Kirk stayed put, or the regulation had already been in place to ensure that senior flag officers did not freely take command of starships (i.e. as the good Commodore did in "Deadly Years") and endanger them with their lack of command experience.

Patrick Degan wrote:The only explanation that I can formulate is that Starfleet had become so bureaucratically entangled in its own policies or was plagued by officers experimenting with "new-style" policies that it must have been made impossible for a flag-officer to directly assume a ship command without necessitating the sort of mad ant-dance around rank procedure that we witness in TMP. After the disruption in the command arrangements which endangered the V-ger Mission, there might have been a purge of Starfleet's upper eschelons in which Heihachiro Nogura was ousted as COMSTAR and replaced by Harold Morrow, who subsequently rewrote and streamlimed the regs and initiated other, more military-oriented changes in service policy.

Commander Scott reflects in the novelisation (p. 49) that "[f]lag officers did not normally return to single-vessel command". The fact that Admiral Kirk was Chief of Starfleet Operations probably complicated matters further (consider it from the Commanding Admiral's perspective: Did Admiral Kirk vacate that billet? Was he on leave of absence?).

Publius