I will not be out-geeked on the original Star Trek, so STFB, Gouri.
No. The cadets are at Starfleet Academy, not Starfleet Command. Just like in real life, no matter what is going on there will be ships at dock. Pearl Habor is a great example of a place that is always bustling with personnel regardless of the situation. Also, it's preposterous to think that there isn't a enough experienced officers on the entirety of both Earth and Mars to put together a bridge crew even though the Academy and Command is filled with them.
You're inventing a backstory that wasn't provided and them criticizing them for not following the mandates of the backstory you invented.
For one, you are placing the template of the modern U.S. Navy over Starfleet, when that may not be appropriate. To the extent there are other personnel, they could be on leave or scattered anywhere. They may not have trained together, may not be familiar with specifics regarding the ship in question, etc., and may not be able to be recalled as quickly. Many of them may not even be line officers. To point to what our Navy and naval personnel can do now as proof what Starfleet can and might do 200+ years in the future is kind of absurd.
Nah.. Spock was an instructor at the academy.
He was also a commissioned Starfleet Officer.
The hole in the plot is that they took him out of the Academy but no one else; and no one from Starfleet Command?? Nobody is available??? Just these new recruits... Running an entire starship and being tasked with such an immense responsibility?? C'mon.
First, perhaps they took Spock
precisely because he was an instructor who had very likely trained with many of those midshipmen. We don't know who else was available with recent starship experience, and it is entirely possible that even experienced line officers may be less familiar with some of the newer gizmos. I can recall getting to my first unit, and finding that all of us who had just completed our MOS school were actually more adept with the newest computerized gunnery system than much more experienced officers. There are just too many possible variables to say that they'd definitely have been better off with a scratched together crew pulled from all over the place.
Second, they are
not "new recruits". They're not even
recruits at all. They are, presumably, some of the absolute best and brightest in the entire Federation, being trained to become officers for Starfleet. Given the advancement of technology, I'd guess that simulators may be so advanced that they are almost indistinguishable from an actual ship in terms of performance of duties. That is something that isn't as true with the current Navy. When I was a mid, we learned a ton of systems and stuff, but they didn't have fully operating LM2500 turbine, M or D class boilers, and nuke reactors on Academy grounds. But with the degree of computerization in Starfleet, and the amount of money they likely had to fund a multi-planetary level Academy, my guess is that those midshipmen/cadets were doing a lot of shit indistinguishable from what they'd be doing on ship.
Just as one example, the Kobayashi Meru scenario itself was pretty much indistinguishable from a real bridge. And these young men/women had been training on that stuff for
years. And again, I don't have to prove all that
was the case. But you're the guy saying that it couldn't have happened that way, so you'd have to prove that what I'm describing couldn't possibly be true. And you can't do that because it is a
fictional show with a backstory that is not fully shown.
Plus, it is likely, or certainly at least
possible, that they've all served some extended time on actual Starfleet ships as part of their training. For one of my summers, I was on these training ships that were crewed by about 24 mids, with no enlisted or other personnel. There were also 2 officers who were there for nothing but supervision. We stood all the watches in all departments including officer of the deck, helm, engineering, navigation, etc. etc. etc. The supervising officer on duty at the time would usually be up on the bridge, which wasn't even on the same deck as the helm. Which meant that he'd have to trust that our navigation calculations, engine room, helm commands, etc. all were being executed properly. He'd check up on different departments every few hours but essentially, we ran these boats. Now, extrapolating that to a fictional TV show with exponentially more advanced technology and simulation capability, with students who were likely subject to tighter selection criteria than even we were -- and it seems perfectly plausible to me that a ship crewed by those cadets/midshipment, who has all trained together, might be the best option for an emergency crew. Certainly, they were the most readily available.
One of my best friends is an officer in the Navy today (at Pearl Harbor); when I talked to him about this movie he said the entire concept of cadets running a ship was absolutely absurd. Take that for what it's worth, everyone has their own opinions, but I tend to agree conceptually -- it seems preposterous.
I graduated from the Naval Academy, and while expecting midshipmen today to hop on and fully crew a modern combat ship with no other assistance other than a Captain and XO
is preposterous, I can tell you that the simulations alone on Star Trek were more advanced than anything we could even dream of, and the Enterprise (NCC-1701) is far more automated than any combat ship we've got out there today. Starfleet is not the U.S. Navy. We're talking a setting more than 200 years in the future. The difference in training between now and 200 years ago -- before we even had a Naval Academy -- are massively different. Presumably, training philosophies and methods would see more qualitative improvements over the
next 200 years, so just because crewing an entire ship isn't something modern midshipmen are trained to do does not mean that will hold true over the next 200 years.
Regarding automation.. I guess you could try to make that argument, but I don't think it holds much water. Again, it assumes there is literally no one to run this ship and again, I find that preposterous.
It doesn't remotely assume that absolutely
zero people are required to run the ship. What it means is that you don't have a lot of physically-demanding jobs, akin to skilled labor, that are analogous to what boiler techs, firemen, boatswain's mates, machinist's mates, etc.. all due on modern ships. It's the lack of
those people that is really the biggest impediment to expecting modern midshipmen to be the sole crew of a Navy ship. That kind of stuff is all automated, but you still need human beings to make decisions, monitor and adjust systems, etc..
They don't. These cadets have spent the last 4 years at Starfleet Academy. Prior to that, most of them would be coming straight out of high school.
How do we know that? How do we even know they still have high school, or if they do, exactly what is taught or how long you stay in? Where was it ever stated that part of their training
didn't include deployment with actual ships? And according to the actor who played Kirk in the reboot, Kirk was 25 at the time. Same age as Decatur when he became a captain. :chuckles:
Good guess but not accurate.
Completely accurate. How often did the Enterprise operate in multiple-ship fleets or formations? I've seen each of the original ST episodes at least, I don't know, 6-7 times, and the vast majority of the time, it was operating alone. The inspiration for the show was Horatio Hornblower having mostly independent adventures, not a modern U.S. Navy carrier surrounded by a task force, nor some destroyer or cruiser hanging around that carrier as protection.
I know because as I said before I follow Star Trek to an almost ridiculous degree. I know that people will say "well then, fuck your opinion" but if just to point your idea that ships are automated; they are not.
First,
do even ATTEMPT to go all Star Trek geek on my or I will go Bela Oxmyx all over your ass.
They are automated to a
much larger degree than any modern ships. Shit, in
The Search for Spock, Kirk and a few officers stole the Enterprise and ran it themselves via automated system. Less than 10 people. It wasn't ideal, but there isn't even a remotely analogous capability on our modern ships.
Again, since we're not really talking about the movie at this point I'll go ahead and give you some greater detail. Star Trek's crew size is not comparable to the sailing seafaring era. The Constitution class ship requires a minimum compliment of 200 people, and generally operates optimally with 450 crew members. So this is actually substantially more crew and necessary personnel for a starship than for a modern American cruiser, frigate or destroyer. If you want to know how I know, just ask.. :chuckles:
Of course it is. NCC-1701
Enterprise -- a Constitution class Starship -- had a crew of about
430. The sailing vessel USS
Constitution had a complement of about
450 (knew those naval history classes would come in handy someday). That's almost perfectly analogous.
In contrast, a modern aircraft carrier has a crew (not including air wing personnel) of over 3000. And using the complement of an aircraft carrier as the point of comparison is perfectly fair given that you chose a carrier to frame the entire discussion:
Imagine an aircraft carrier operated by a bunch of young teenagers and twenty-somethings, from the top-down. It's simply not believable.
* * *
Not only is it absurd, but they explore this possibility in 5 different Star Trek episodes over different series (
ST:TNG, 2x ST:VOY, 2x ST
S9). In each episode it is demonstrated that cadets cannot effectively run a ship and that Starfleet would not ever deliberately put them in a situation to do so (except for 1 exception).
Well, see this is the entire problem. Your source material is for shit. :chuckles:
The Next Generation? That show was doomed as soon as they didn't kill off Wil Weaton's character in the first episode. Though Worf was cool.
Voyager? (you should be ashamed of yourself) and
DS9?? None of those even involve the same ship as in the
original Star Trek, or the rebooted
Star Trek based upon the original Star Trek.
But again, he's a cadet and Uhura would be the next in command, not Kirk...
She was a cadet as well. And what's that with Spock banging a cadet anyway? Dude should have been court-martialed for that.
Damn Vulcans just can't keep it in their pants.
The "established this?" When?? As far as I know, this never happened at all.
Again, IIRC there are only two engagements in the movie at this time. The first is when the Kelvin encounters the Narada and then, 25+ years later, when Vulcan issued a distress signal and the Enterprise is dispatched (which makes no sense). But Starfleet is doing just fine at this time... there is absolutely NO REASON AT ALL that the Enterprise would be called into service. Also remember that the cadets aren't even needed as there were other ships there. The USS Faragut and another startship where at dock as well and had no reason to load up on cadets before going out to Vulcan, especially considering there was a distress call made.[/quote]
Most of the fleet was in a different system when the distress call came through, which is why they had to dispatch an unready Enterprise along with those other ships -- including the Farragut -- to Vulcan. The Farragut was
also crewed by cadets. The other ships got there before the Enterprise, and all were destroyed.
My problem is that the film has so many clear plot holes and scientifically preposterous notions (again, like an exploding star threatening all life in the galaxy). Surely they (Abrams) knew the basis of the film didn't make sense. I think Abrams is a master of making flashy summer blockbuster movies that people generally like, but at the same time, his movies are vapid and devoid of anything worth mentioning. It's a roller-coaster ride; but when you get off, that's it. For most, that's good enough, but for me, I expect a bit more I guess.
I took the movie as it was presented -- a reboot of the
original Star Trek. None of the subsequent TV shows are relevant to me, and therefore, inconsistencies in tone, background, or whatever really don't matter. And as I said earlier, there are a great many episodes in the original series where the holes were bigger than the plot. I thought this movie was a very good reboot of the original show, with no more stretches of believability than we got the first time around. Actually, much fewer.
