Star Trek (ENT): First Flight

[MaxWylde]

I remember seeing this episode when I was a pilot in the US Army. It made us all cringe, the same way Top Gun, Fire Birds (especially Fire Birds) and other movies makes all military pilots cringe when we see them. The way Hollywood seems to like depicting pilots is that we're all a bunch of unprofessional slobs. True, we are a bunch of flakes, but there's one thing in the world we love to do more than anything else, and that's flying (except maybe sex). Military pilots are indoctrinated in the rules of the skies, and we do nothing without permission from commanders, ground control and air traffic control, and people on the ground guiding our actions (pad chiefs and such), and if we violate them, we could lose our flight privileges permanently, or worse. Maverick buzzing the tower like he does in Top Gun would've gotten his wings yanked, a general court-martial, and likely he'd do six months to a year in Leavenworth. This is because we take safety very freaking seriously. If the pattern is full, that means there are aircraft in the air and the ground doing all kinds of things, and even if there isn't, you don't dare ever risk losing your career let alone flight status on such a stunt.

Astronauts, especially, are no different, and indeed they are the pinnacle of professionalism you'll ever see. They're some of the finest pilots you'll ever meet.

So when you see Duchess and that other guy, played by Keith Carradine, go off on their own with a spacecraft that isn't even theirs to prove a point against the orders of their commanding officer, it's not only wrong, it's as diametrically wrong as wrong can be. Starfleet may not be a military, according to Jean-Luc Picard (and he said it with a straight face), but if you're conducting flight tests on an experimental aircraft or spacecraft, for one, you never, ever do it without permission because what happens if anything goes wrong? Even if everything worked out right, which apparently it does in this episode, how is anyone to really know? One of the reasons there is a Mission Control in the first place is to document everything that's happening to the craft and crew as much as humanly, physically possible (excellent observation on Chuck noting how laughingly sparse and small Starfleet's "mission control" was). They're monitoring not only the vehicle, but the crew as well, as well as other things just to see if they actually achieve certain objectives such as speeds, certain power output and fuel consumption. Most importantly, they're there to render aid and assistance in case of anything, whether it's an emergency or not. If anything happened to those two clowns, Starfleet might not have been in any position to render assistance if only to save their lives and the spacecraft.

By rights, Duchess and the other guy should've been court-martialed for a laundry list of charges, ranging from Insubordination (the biggest killer of any officer's career - every officer in the military dreads the day they may have to actually disobey an order, even an unlawful one - especially if it's a General officer's orders they're violating), to operating a spacecraft without a flight plan, Dereliction of Duty, and Conduct Unbecoming an Officer. It's one of the reasons I can never take Starfleet seriously, especially TNG onward. One might say that Kirk behaved similarly when he stole the Enterprise out of Spacedock to save Spock, and I would agree, but at least he was called on the carpet for it and was slapped on the wrist. If he wasn't the living legend in Starfleet by then that he was, and didn't save Earth from the Whale Probe, he'd likely have done a lot of years in prison. Duchess wasn't a living legend and he didn't save the Earth. All he did was run off with a ship that wasn't his all to prove a point, and even if he was entirely successful, that doesn't mean he should've retained his rank and privilege, let alone stay in Starfleet in good standing.

[SlackerinDeNile]

Thank you so much for taking the time to right this, I love it when professionals tear apart works that feature people in their line of work showing a complete disregard for the proper protocols or somehow accomplishing their difficult jobs with sheer luck, unless it's been written that way to put forward an important point or act as some sort of ironic propaganda like the Starship Troopers movie (which I like, although I have mixed feelings towards).

In terms of this episode and Enterprise in general, you and SFDebris are correct in criticising Captain Archer at almost every turn, he is supposed to be a capable and experienced naval officer, astronaut, starship engineer and a bunch of other good qualities for a pioneering space explorer and leader that I can't remember off the top of my head. Instead the writers gave us some incompetent, inconsistent headcase who would have been better off serving as an example for Starfleet of what any of their officers should definitely not be.

[MaxWylde]

Thank you so much for taking the time to right this, I love it when professionals tear apart works that feature people in their line of work showing a complete disregard for the proper protocols or somehow accomplishing their difficult jobs with sheer luck, unless it's been written that way to put forward an important point or act as some sort of ironic propaganda like the Starship Troopers movie (which I like, although I have mixed feelings towards).

In terms of this episode and Enterprise in general, you and SFDebris are correct in criticising Captain Archer at almost every turn, he is supposed to be a capable and experienced naval officer, astronaut, starship engineer and a bunch of other good qualities for a pioneering space explorer and leader that I can't remember off the top of my head. Instead the writers gave us some incompetent, inconsistent headcase who would have been better off serving as an example for Starfleet of what any of their officers should definitely not be.

The writers of Star Trek, from TNG onward, really don't have any idea of what an officer is. Ron Moore maybe knows a bit better, because I think rather highly of Captain Sisko even though he's got some issues that ought to have had him lose his career (the thing with Eddington was very close to court-martial offense, but I forgive it because it was awesome). Heck, I don't really know if even Gene Roddenberry knew for certain, and he served in the US military. I think Gene Coon did, however.

My favorite officer during the entire Star Trek franchise might surprise you, but it's Lt. Uhura (the one played by Nichelle Nichols, not the one played by Zoe Saldana). Up until Star Trek V, where she does that infamous fan-dance, during the TV series she behaves with calm, professional poise. Sure, she likes to mess with Spock, but she's probably the only one who could do that and get away with it. When Kirk is yelling at her, rather than yell at him back, she responds as an officer should, with what is known as Tact and Bearing. I would love to work with a Lt. Uhura, because I know I'm getting a professional officer that earned her position through merit, and I would have a lot of confidence in her leadership. That is how officers behave.

Jonathan Archer, among others in the franchise, does not behave with Tact and Bearing. Further, Archer jeopardizes his father's own work and achievements by flying off as he does, and worse, he doesn't care about things such as safety or proper procedures if even to validate what he's trying to do by reaching Warp 2. Imagine if Col. Chuck Yeager and his friend just up and stole the Bell X-1, strapped it underneath the B-29 mothership carrying it, all so they can break Mach 1? Well, great; the problem is without informing everyone about it to document the achievement, there's no proof it was achieved at all. Indeed, there are many who claim that they broke the sound barrier years prior, nominally people who were either in the Me163 Komet (basically a manned surface-to-air missile; poor bastards) or were in a very fast dive in a prop-driven plane, and lived to tell the tale, but there was no proof whatsoever they did it. Impulsiveness is not a good officer trait, and in this case it should've landed Archer in prison.

Real officers don't do things like this, because we'd be smart enough to know not to do so. There's a Murphy's Law of War that says, "If you take a position, be sure to tell the enemy." Meaning, that if you up and do something without letting everyone else know you're doing it, like take a position without orders and support from your own people, you could end up in a lot of trouble and cost your side victory as the enemy counter-attacks and you have nobody to help you out.

[StrangeDevice]

It's one of the reasons I can never take Starfleet seriously, especially TNG onward. One might say that Kirk behaved similarly when he stole the Enterprise out of Spacedock to save Spock, and I would agree, but at least he was called on the carpet for it and was slapped on the wrist. If he wasn't the living legend in Starfleet by then that he was, and didn't save Earth from the Whale Probe, he'd likely have done a lot of years in prison.

It's interesting you bring that up because the DC Comic run for those later films has Kirk still held accountable after his actions in The Search for Spock, even after ST5 and the events on Nimbus III. It's put a hell of a dent in his service record and events eventually lead to him being remanded by the Federation Council. He gets assigned a Protocol Officer and is driven back to Earth by a bounty hunter of all things -- dispatched by his own people -- where he submits to a hearing before the council for his actions.

[MaxWylde]

It's one of the reasons I can never take Starfleet seriously, especially TNG onward. One might say that Kirk behaved similarly when he stole the Enterprise out of Spacedock to save Spock, and I would agree, but at least he was called on the carpet for it and was slapped on the wrist. If he wasn't the living legend in Starfleet by then that he was, and didn't save Earth from the Whale Probe, he'd likely have done a lot of years in prison.

It's interesting you bring that up because the DC Comic run for those later films has Kirk still held accountable after his actions in The Search for Spock, even after ST5 and the events on Nimbus III. It's put a hell of a dent in his service record and events eventually lead to him being remanded by the Federation Council. He gets assigned a Protocol Officer and is driven back to Earth by a bounty hunter of all things -- dispatched by his own people -- where he submits to a hearing before the council for his actions.

Well, according to the powers-that-be at Star Trek, if it ain't on screen, it ain't canon. That's a bit of a shame because there are a lot of good off-screen stuff made by a lot of talented people, and it's a real disservice to a lot of them that what they made, licenced by the franchise itself, is not canon material.

In this case, though, it would make sense that the producers of Trek didn't hamstring Kirk by giving him a Political Officer (which also would've cast the wrong aspersions on the United Federation of Planets, making it analogous to a Communist dictatorship if they have to resort to Political Officers). Kirk has to be seen as an adventurer and a maverick. Picard could be seen as a diplomat on a leash.

[Mickey_Rat15]

Duchess wasn't a living legend and he didn't save the Earth. All he did was run off with a ship that wasn't his all to prove a point, and even if he was entirely successful, that doesn't mean he should've retained his rank and privilege, let alone stay in Starfleet in good standing.

Not only are they retained in good standing, they are given the commands of the first two of Starfleet's leading edge technology starship class, when they should have been lucky to command a runabout ferry between Earth and Mars. It is a bit annoying.

[MaxWylde]

Duchess wasn't a living legend and he didn't save the Earth. All he did was run off with a ship that wasn't his all to prove a point, and even if he was entirely successful, that doesn't mean he should've retained his rank and privilege, let alone stay in Starfleet in good standing.

Not only are they retained in good standing, they are given the commands of the first two of Starfleet's leading edge technology starship class, when they should have been lucky to command a runabout ferry between Earth and Mars. It is a bit annoying.

I debate with myself if the Abramsverse is any better. They promote James T. Kirk from Cadet to Captain at the end of Star Trek '09. Now, the only person I can think of with anything remotely similar happening to them is either George Armstrong Custer (who goes from Lieutenant to Brevet General, which is more of an honorary rank for conspicuous service, back down to Major to Colonel then to Major General in time for the Little Big Horn) or Napoleon Bonaparte, who ended up as commander of the French Army because the French government had executed too many people to do the job, or so I can recall from history. Now, maybe Starfleet was desperate. They had a whole fleet wiped out over Vulcan, but it strains credulity that they didn't have anyone on Earth who could fill the role of Captain of the Enterprise. You don't just up and give it to a cadet, no matter how gallant he was or even if he saved the Earth, because there's so much he has to learn, which is played out in Into Darkness rather lightly.

But with Archer, there is no excuse here. Indeed, Starfleet itself seems to flaunt everything mankind has learned in the last 10,000 years of history, with good lessons learned from blood, toil, tears and sweat. I love how Chuck likes to describe him as some sort of wino they found in a dumpster somewhere, but to me, if I had to peg him, he reminds me more of the wayward son of the company's president, who was given his job not because of merit, but due to nepotism. He's put in an executive position, and he's been told all his life he can do the job, without any proof of any sound judgment. Then again, I rarely ever see Starfleet officials make sound judgments.

One episode that comes to my mind immediately is (I forget the name) where Phlox has this guy in Sick Bay who refuses to have him operate on him because he's a Denobulan (I'd have refused to have him operate on me because he's a quack). Phlox goes along with it because of his weird medical ethics, and Archer holds off on making it an order until the last minute when the patient, upon hearing a nice little speech, decides to go along with Phlox operating on him. But, Archer should've not only given Phlox an order, but after this event, he should've returned to Earth to replace Phlox because here was an incident where Phlox demonstrated he might disobey his order due to medical ethics. That is not Phlox's Sick Bay. That's Archer's Sick Bay, and more importantly, that's Starfleet's Sick Bay and Earth's Sick Bay. Not that Phlox can't disobey an unlawful order to harm or kill a patient, but if a patient dies in that Sick Bay when he easily could've been saved, Starfleet ought to rightly conduct an investigation as to why, and in a sane universe that would mean the end of Archer's command if not his career. It would be a scandal, maybe not a big one, but not the kind of thing Starfleet needs at all, especially in that period.

[Durandal_1707]

^ Counterpoint: Babylon 5, "Believers."

[Independent George]

Here's the other problem - the Vulcans are there because warp technology (like, say, nuclear fission) comes with an enormous set of risks in addition to the benefits. Once you start exploring space with the warp drive, and encountering alien species, your behavior has tremendous potential for destabilizing politics on a galactic scale. Once you're out there, it's not enough to have the capability of travelling to the far reaches of space; you also need to be able to do so responsibly, and not accidentally start a civil war, or spread space spyhillis to a distant world.

So what matters here is not only whether Earth has the technical capabilities of building a warp 2 drive, but also the institutional and moral strength to ensure that it is used responsibly. The Vulcans already have advanced warp capabilities - they no doubt knew the engineering reasons for the failure ahead of time. They were not there to see if we can get the engine to work. They are there to see how we can get it to work.

So instead of examining the telemetry data from the downed ship, formulating a hypothesis, running simulations, followed by more small-scale tests, and then another large-scale test, we had three nitwits steal an extremely expensive and valuable prototype and take it for what amounts to joyride.

That'll show em!

[Independent George]

Military pilots are indoctrinated in the rules of the skies, and we do nothing without permission from commanders, ground control and air traffic control, and people on the ground guiding our actions (pad chiefs and such), and if we violate them, we could lose our flight privileges permanently, or worse. Maverick buzzing the tower like he does in Top Gun would've gotten his wings yanked, a general court-martial, and likely he'd do six months to a year in Leavenworth.

To be fair, much of the movie was about Maverick being completely reckless and unprofessional, and how it made him a liability rather than an asset. It helps if you stop thinking about it as a Navy movie, but instead as a sports movie - a gifted freshman with Daddy issues butts heads against his disciplinarian coach and star player, but eventually buys in and utilizes his talents to help the team instead of just himself.