posted
In the episode "Field of Fire", the USS Grissom is said to have 1250 crew. This has perplexed me. Why? The Excelsior Class starship has half that number of crew. I have heard it argued that the Grissom may have been carrying passengers, specifically troops, and that they may been added into the normal crew to get 1250. I believe this to be wrong. Here's my reasoning.
In the episode "Field of Fire", the insane Vulcan is said to have survived the destruction of the Grissom. He is said to have been aboard the ship 10 years and had developed friendships with other crew members. These statements alone don't support the existence of troops aboard the ship, rather they support the idea that the crew had numbered 1250 in 2365.
Further, in Star Trek, when a ship is identified as having a mixed complement, there is always mention of a mixed compliment. Good examples are "The Schizoid Man" and "Ethics". And in DS9, the episode "Siege of AR-558" with the USS Veracruz.
So, I think that the USS Grissom is not an Excelsior; rather, she may be a Galaxy or an Istanbul or a large starship of an unidentified class.
posted
Yes, that number is quite high for the crew complement of an Excelsior class ship. Perhaps the Excelsior Grissom from TNG had been decommissioned and a newer ship had taken its place. Either that or the troops were packed in like sardines.
------------------ Lisa: "Don't you remember the story of Oedipus?" Homer: "Maybe five dollars will refresh my memory." Lisa (angrily): "Oedipus was the story of a man who kills his father and marries his mother!" Homer: "Uggh! Who pays for that wedding?"
posted
Well, we never knew exactly how many people crewed a standard Excelsior... For all we know, it *did* take that many to operate one in wartime, to cover combat and operational losses, etc. My prefered explanation is that the Grissom had been designated a troop carrier or somethng, and thus was carrying hundreds of soldiers around as part of its complement.
Mark
------------------ "Why build one, when you can have two at twice the price?"
posted
Well, if the Vulcan was aboard the ship for ten years, then it definitely *HAS* to be the same ship from "The Most Toys."
So, the ship is either an Excelsior-class, or it's not. I think it's still an Excelsior because a ship's wartime crew would naturally include ground troops and extra crew for damage control, engineering, security, etc. Back in the TNG days, they always said that the Enterprise-D had a complement of 1,012 or thereabouts. But that includes the civilians, families, and researchers, not just the actual crew which runs the ship.
Therefore, I take it at face value that the Grissom is an Excelsior-class ship.
------------------ Star Trek Gamma Quadrant Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted) *** "Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" -Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001 *** "I think this reason why girls don't do well on multiple choice tests goes all the way back to the Bible, all the way back to Genesis, Adam and Eve. God said, 'All right, Eve, multiple choice or multiple orgasms, what's it going to be?' We all know what was chosen" - Rush Limbaugh, Feb. 23, 1994.
------------------ Homer: I'm gonna miss Springfield. This town's been awfully good to us. Bart: No, it hasn't, Dad. That's why we're leaving. Homer: Oh, yeah. [pokes his head out the window] So long, Stinktown!
posted
That same book also lists the Miranda class as having a complement of 220 or something, whereas TNG examples have demonstrated less than that (Lantree - 26; Br!ttain - 34). While 220 may have been a good number for ships like the Reliant and the first Saratoga, in TNG I believe smaller compliments are the rule for the older ships, even in combat.
I once put forth the notion that the Excelsior *had* 750 people back in the day, but nowadays their compliment was reduced to a healthy 500 or so (using the comparison of 700 for Ambassadors, and 1000 for Galaxies - the Ambassador number comes from the trading cards of the early 90s). Upgrades to computers, life support and maintenance would allow for a reduction in crew and probably a corresponding increase in the size of their accomadations. This would still leave lots of space left over for other stuff, like troop barracks. So it wouldn't surprise me if the Grissom had 500 crew supporting 750 or so troops...
Mark
------------------ "Why build one, when you can have two at twice the price?"
posted
I'm all for 220-crewed Mirandas, actually. You simply can't go to battle with a crew that cannot even man all the bridge stations, much less perform major repairs under fire. The discrepancy in crew size between today's warships and equal-sized merchant vessels is just as pronounced as the 220 vs. 26 crew difference between DS9 TM and "Unnatural Selection".
And the average crew of a TNG starship at Wolf 359 was already set at 280 or so by the casualty figures given in "Drumhead" - and the ships seen (especially the Miarecki kitbashes) weren't all that much bigger than a Miranda on the average.
As for the Grissom's crew, I think 500 is a good running-crew size; the more modern Nebula class Hera was run by that number of Vulcans, wasn't she? (Or was it just 300?) A human crew, on an older ship, would have to be a bit larger even if the Excelsior is slightly less voluminous than a Nebula. And I wouldn't want an Excelsior to have a smaller crew than the 430-person Constitution in any circumstances, modernization or no modernization.
Having 750 of the 1250 crew be short-term visitors doesn't IMHO run against the remarks made in "Field of Fire". Sure, the insane killer had grieved the loss of close friends (such as a Vulcan can), but it wasn't stated that all the 1250 people belonged to that category.
------------------ At that point, McDonald fired his gun three times in the air to emphasize his point. The crowd, estimated at 350,000, loudly cheered the new candidate.
"Let me make this clear: I am the law! I am your ruler! And you will have fries with that, motherf*cker!"
posted
Interesting. I don't think such a ratio exists. For one, we have no mass measurements for any starships. How would you measure it? And wsecond, the number of crew staffing a starship fluctuates within the class.
It pains me to think of 36 people running a Miranda-class starship. To staff the bridge, engineering and sickbay alone would take about 36 people. Obviously, none of them got any sleep.
But with automation ... I mean, c'mon, ain't ya'll ever heard of skeleton crews?
------------------ Star Trek Gamma Quadrant Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted) *** "Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" -Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001 *** "I think this reason why girls don't do well on multiple choice tests goes all the way back to the Bible, all the way back to Genesis, Adam and Eve. God said, 'All right, Eve, multiple choice or multiple orgasms, what's it going to be?' We all know what was chosen" - Rush Limbaugh, Feb. 23, 1994.
posted
Mmm, well the Defiant had a crew of 40, so seeing as how the Miranda is slightly bigger, 220 seems about right (not including any short-term crew). But, to support the Lantree and Brittain crew sizes, the Lantree was acting as a cargo vessel and would therefore require less crew than normal. The Brittain . . . was on a deep-space survey mission - might not have needed everyone so they shipped them off for some R&R!
Ambassadors have a crew of 700? I'd read in a novel that it was 800 . . . oh well, yet another fact to deliberate about!
Hehe!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
