posted
Also considering that Tom Paris at the time was waxing poetic about books about the sea and sailing ships, I think it is doubtful that the Federation Naval Patrol is anything BUT a maritime service. Probably doing Coast Guard-style duty on the various Federation worlds that have oceans.
-------------------- I slit the sheet, the sheet I slit, and on the slitted sheet I sit.
Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Harry: Never has the word navy been used to describe Starfleet or any other space service.
Untrue. When arranging quarters on the station for a bunch of officers, Worf tells Kira that the captain of a ship's quarters must be of the same quality as an admiral's because it is "naval tradition", thus including Starfleet under the catagory of naval. At least, that's what it implies to me.
And I too was under the impression that Tom was referring to a maritime organization when speaking of the FNP. Though, given that it's a fairly dumb idea, and that it was spoken of as crappy way to get Tom emotionally involved in the story, and that it was on Voyager... I choose ignore it.
posted
Well, the only real quirk, at least that occurs to me, is having it be the "Federation" Naval Patrol, as opposed to, say, Earth's, or Betazed's, or what have you. It doesn't seem like something that requires federal attention.
Also, that little shuttle is weird.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Earth naval traditions bleeding across into Starfleet is one thing (of this there are numerous examples, from the rank structure to those funny whistles), pretending that Starfleet is a maritime organisation is something else.
This is part of the reason why I abhor the term "Starfleet Marines". I get a similar shudder whenever I hear yanks mispronounce sub-mariners as "submarine-ers". Grr.
Personally I'd rather think that any future space organisation will have more in common with a modern air force than a modern navy. Which is one thing I really liked about the B5 universe.
As to why Starfleet has such a strong link to Earth's western Navies of the 19th, 20th & 21st centuries...I've often postulated that since the early deep space ships (should have) resembled modern submarines, at least from the crew's point of view, allot of the terminology, traditions and possibly some personnel might have been 'borrowed' out of convenience and it simply stuck.
As for Harry's fixation on the number 12, I almost always used the number 42 in my drawings...but only because I could never get the hang of Thursdays.
posted
Starships in space have FAR more in common with ships at sea (and submarines beneath it) than with aircraft. The Air Force doesn't deal at all with large crews aboard large vessels that float (not fly) through a vast expanse of unexplored territory with little reliable contact with their operating authority. That is the role of mariners. Also, combat in space would be much more akin to naval combat, I should think.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Starfleet has so much in common with modern-day navies because ocean-going military vessels are the closest things we have to ships that operate in space, which would presumably be run in much the same way. Air Forces, on the other hand, do things differently because their hardware is different and doesn't easily lend itself to naval operating structures. Now maybe a future space force would, due to the nature of its environment, differ enough from either to have its own unique structure, but I think navies form a better basis for extrapolation than any other present military branch.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Starfleet Galaxy Class vessels: Naval Starfleet Attack fighters: Air Force
At least that's what my brain is telling me.
-------------------- "It speaks to some basic human needs: that there is a tomorrow, it's not all going to be over with a big splash and a bomb, that the human race is improving, that we have things to be proud of as humans." -Gene Roddenberry about Star Trek
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Plus there's already so much history and tradition in the Navy. The USN has been around since 1776, the Air Force only 60 years. I don't know how long the Royal Navy has been around, but I'm sure it has more history than the RAF.
Besides, large ships that go out for extended periods of time. What does that sound like? The USN or USAF?
In the real world, I wouldn't be surprised if the USAF would be in charge considering the government gives them more money. Then again, they're not building billion dollar aircraft carriers, amphibs, cruisers, destroyers, subs, and on and on. The Navy does more than just sea, we take the air, subsurface, and land. And considering the Marines are a division more or less of the Department of the Navy we also take ground combat. What does the USAF do? Fly planes? Okay, I know they do more than that. But what can I say, I'm a sailor, so of course I think we're better than the other branches.
-------------------- I'm slightly annoyed at Hobbes' rather rude decision to be much more attractive than me though. That's just rude. - PsyLiam, Oct 27, 2005.
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
It seems to me that the Navy is the "jack of all trades" of the services, as it has aspects of every other service within it: it has an army (the Marines), an air force (Naval aviators), and it also has nuclear-deterent weapons (missile subs) in addition to a powerful fleet.
I like the Navy. It is my favorite of the three services.
And also, aside from, like JAG, the women go into the military because they're piefaces. When is the last time an attractive person was in the military? Not since Antietam when that hot guy got cannoned.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Starfleet Galaxy Class vessels: Naval Starfleet Attack fighters: Air Force
...
Starfleet Galaxy Class vessels: Naval Starfleet Attack fighters: Naval... akin to Naval Warplanes
Well, either one could be correct, depending on whether you're basing this on a view of the US Navy or the British Navy.
IIRC, on a British aircraft carrier, it is actually RAF aviators who fly the planes - not Naval aviators. Therefore, it isn't an out of hand possibility to contemplate that in the event the US decides to incorporate a Space Defense Force (or what-have-you) that ships would be crewed by former Navy blokes, while their fighter complement would be crewed by former Air Force pukes.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
