Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
John Harriman: Competant Commander or Bumbling Idiot?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Middy Seafort: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Nim: [qb] "There are some backstories that place Kirk in command of the Saladin." Does anyone else appreciate the irony in this? :) [/qb][/QUOTE]Saladin was the sultan of Egypt and Syria who opposed the Crusaders. I postulate, MinutiaeMan, that the irony is that a red-blooded farm boy with a Christian surname once commanded a vessel named after a Middle Eastern leader. Correct me if I'm wrong, Nim. [QUOTE][b]Originally posted by Phoenix[/b] Galaxy, Nebula, Sovereign etc: Captain Excelsior, Akira, Prometheus, Intrepid etc: Commander Defiant, Norway, Saber etc: Lieutenant Commander [/QUOTE]Interesting breakdown, Phoenix. I am inclined to agree with your assessment in regards to a starship being a Captain's Rank command. I never cared for Roddenberry's dictum that only Captains can command a ship. Perhaps, during TOS those of the Starship Classification, Connies and such, were commanded by Captains while smaller vessels were commanded by Commanders and down the line. Also, the [i]Enterprise[/i] by Naval tradition, as you point out Phoenix, is not a flagship. That term has been misused a lot in all of Trek. I always thought that TNG should've had Picard as an Admiral and Riker as a Captain. Thus, making the [i]Enterprise-D[/i] a true flagship. Then again, I thought it would've been more interesting to have Picard in command of an exploration fleet with the Big-E as his flagship, while Riker was responsible for the daily operation of the ship. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3