test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Ensign BOFFs Now Called 'Cadets"?
orangeitis
Member Posts: 5,222 Arc User
I know the Fed tutorial introduced "Cadet" as a rank, but did you really have to get rid of the Ensign rank entirely?
It... it just feels weird to have "cadets" on your ship. And outranking DOFF ranks like Chief Petty Officer etc etc etc.
It... it just feels weird to have "cadets" on your ship. And outranking DOFF ranks like Chief Petty Officer etc etc etc.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Meaning
Your link mentions the US Coast Guard having a Cadet program.
Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
Aside from the fact that Starfleet is not the US Navy and it's ranks and organization may differ significantly from present day militaries, some countries also use the term for Emergency Service trainees (see your link). And Starfleet, being a paramilitary organization under civil command is more akin to those services than a military.
Aside from ALL of that: I cannot verify it at the moment, but having cadet BOFFs doesn't make the least bit of sense...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
As far as I remember Harry Kim was a BOFF on the Voyager and his rank was Ensign.
That's why this change makes no sense.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
Except that Gene Rodenberry DID model Starfleet off the US Navy. Don't delude yourself by trying to rationalize other explanations. You only hurt yourself if you do. Accept the facts, and get over the cognitive dissonance you have created by refusing to acknowledge reality.
They're ensigns. Only their tooltip before equipping says "cadet".
My character Tsin'xing
Also, there are ranks below ensign... just not BOFF ranks.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
My character Tsin'xing
Doesn't the fact that there are cadets in Starfleet deconstruct your argument in the first place? :P
It is no delusion. The officer rank structure Starfleet uses is the same the Coast Guard uses, including cadets (whch might be the same that the US Navy uses, I don't know about that). Aside from that, there is a ton of production notes and crew commentaries that emphasize that Roddenberry did not want Starfleet to portray a military organization (i.e. the US Navy). It's all in the MA article about Starfleet
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Actually, all of the branches of US military call officers in training cadets.
My character Tsin'xing
So do police and other emergency services, but I assumed that its different in the Navy since the OP claimed that "cadets" are no naval term and I couldn't argue from that point of view
I just wanted to point out that not everything we have today does match what a fictious Starfleet would have or use in the 23rd-25th century. Because every time people discuss starships they bring up present day military tech to support their arguments
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
You might want to go back and watch the special features and interviews from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. They specifically modeled it after the Teutonic/Napoleonic era Navies. Particularly, they used the stories of Horatio Hornblower as inspiration.
On a side note, I think the A&E Hornblower series was pretty decent until the last two "Loyalty" and "Duty" where he gets married. Also, it is hazardous to your health to be friends with Mr. Hornblower, as Mr. Clayton and Mr. Kennedy paid for his friendship with their lives.
Also, if memory serves, most of the crew on the Enterprise were cadets on training during WoK...
And he stayed an Ensign for 7 YEARS. I made vice admiral in a week in contrast. What does an Asian have to do to get promoted around here?
Naval officers-in-training, at least at Annapolis, are called midshipmen. It's functionally the same as cadet, just a branch-specific variation for the Navy.
When? Where? Considering it is the best Star Trek Movie and has retained that title of the fan's favorite thought the years, and all of the emphasis placed on the uniforms from that movie (which WERE used in several TNG episodes), I think your complaints carry very little value.
The problem is that the staff had this flawed belief that someone had to be the ensign that everyone else bossed around. Garrett Wang had often complained about how they stifled his character's development. And I agree with him. It would have been great storytelling to play of the tension of Paris having been superior in rank then being junior to him.
In real life, Lt JG Everett Alvarez was held in a North Vietnamese POW camp and was the second longest held POW in American history. It was quite an unusual situation when several officers with MUCH less time in service but senior in rank because they were promoted before their capture (but after his). By law and tradition, he had to report to them. Fortunately, after his release and repatriation, he was quickly promoted with the promotions back dated as a result of his honorable performance while in captivity.
I make the observation that when Voyager returned to Earth, by tradition, Harold Kim should have been promoted at least to full LT.(O-3) if not Lt. Commander. And his date of rank for Lt. J.G. and to Lt. should have been 2 and 4 years respectively from his graduation from Starfleet Academy. If they promoted him to Lt. Commander, then that effective date of promotion should have been no sooner than 2 years from the effective date of promotion to full Lt. (O-3). That Janeway did not exercise her authority as Captain to make him acting Lt. J.G. or Lt.(O-3) pending a review board, is bad leadership on her part. If nothing else, she should have put in his promotion recommendation when they made contact with Headquarters via the Hirogen relay.
Apparently, Roddenberry's original story for the second Trek movie was one in which the Enterprise would have to go back in time to fix history after the Klingons used the Guardian of Forever to prevent the assassination of John F. Kennedy - in other words, a rehash of "The City on the Edge of Forever", as the Motionless Picture was a rehash of "Obsession" and "The Changeling".
I guess it just goes to show that just because you made it doesn't make you always right when it comes to what to do with it...but then again the last decade of George Lucas should have convinced every nerd alive about that fact.
Make no mistake, I love Gene and what he created, but Gene isn't god. There's a lot in modern Trek (STO included) that doesn't fit with the "original vision", but things change as they grow. That's half the fun of being a longtime fan of anything, seeing how the thing you loved has matured. Of course it's entirely possible that you don't like the way things grow, or what they grow into but that's also part of life~;)
Sorry mate, it was the first posting, not your opening. Sorry about that, I fused those two in my chatoic mind
Roddenberry was far from being a "saint", though I have to agree with him. Although I do like TOS, TNG and DS9 equal for different reasons and like the original movies, every isntallment of Star Trek did get worse, especially since Braga took over (who stated literally that he didn't want Voyager to have consistency because otherwise the audience would get confused when they miss an episode).
The militarism is an returning issue. But they never changed that Starfleet was not a military organization. Though that is not easily swallowed by most later fans since all they know and want to see are total war US Navy futures like almost every other sci-fi universe in existence does. You see that in every thread in this forum that insists that we all need new battlewarcarriers of doom with 14 tac consoles etc.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
My character Tsin'xing
You realize that is just a blog article with not references cited? If you don't cite your sources, it is TRIBBLE. While you did cite yours, the source you cited from did not and so that source must be discounted altogether. Unless you can fine the original time and date of that interview where Gene Rodenberry disavowed the Movies, it is just hearsay and speculation.
I agree. Sun Tzu has been quoted as saying, "A country without a military(sic [Army]) is ripe for conquest."
Perhaps a more careful reading is in order:
You realize this is just an attribution with no references cited? Unless you can provide the portion of The Art of War that actually contains this statement, it must be discounted altogether.
(See, I can play that game too...)
You do realize that you totally disqualify yourself by interpreting that quotation yourself? And the meaning of "a country without army" is something completely different than "a country without military"
Starfleet is an organization that serves as the Federations' armed forces, nobody denies that. They fought and prevailed through wars. Yet, Starfleet is simply no military. It has civil jurisdiction as well, and is eventually under civil command. There is no present day real life equivalent to what Starfleet is, the closest thing I could come up with was Germanies post WW2 federal border patrol. Essentially armed police forces that were given combatant status in case of a national defense situation but were commanded by the ministry of internal affairs, not the ministry of defense. That is Starfleets "military" status. It is a different term, a different function and a completely different mindset, as established in TNG.
Does this mean the Federation is weak and pathetic? No, why shoud they? They prevailed through countless wars, their heaviest ships are dubbed "Explorers" and not "Battleships", yet they command respect and are more advanced than many other space fearing species in the galaxy.
You don't need a military, at all. You need to defend yourself, and in the Federations case it's Starfleet's task to do so.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!