Conjecture: StarFIREs

[Crazy Eddie]

^ Because there's a limit to how generalist their training can be before they begin to suck at everything. Limit it to a twofold task, combat as a secondary role and their primary role--resource extraction--being the thing they spend MOST of their time doing. This way, their dual-use training covers two tasks that are performed more or less the same way using similar equipment in the same environment (they say the difference between a coal miner and a sapper is that coal miners kill slightly fewer people).

I don't think they'd be a sub-organization either. I think they'd be an entirely distinct organization with a completely different historical background. Starfleet, for example, apparently hails back to the old Earth space exploration agencies (NASA and Roskosmos, judging by the logo and its 22nd century incarnation) so Starfires would probably hail back to the old Andorian ice drillers who tunneled through the frozen wastes of their planet to get at those hard to reach iron vanes needed to build ships and aircraft and later starships and space stations (which is the OTHER reason I figured it would be dominated by Andorians. Not only do they love to fight, but they come from what appears to be a really shitty planet that'd be hard to survive on, let alone thrive technologically).

And I also agree "starfires" is sort of a crappy name; the acronym thing is cute, but it doesn't fit well since 1) the Federation isn't really into acronyms like that and 2) it isn't catchy like "Starfleet" or "MACOs"

Might I humbly suggest either "Federation Rangers" or "Mariners." Either of which is consistent with their dual role without being too specific to exactly what they do, and is ambiguous enough to include all kinds of other things like, say, political bodyguards and intelligence.

 

[Wingsley]

I suppose all of this goes back to whatever impressions you walk away from TOS with. Of course, to be fair, TOS was a great big experiment from start to finish. It was always "a work in progress", starting from a blank sheet of paper and slowly (sometimes clumsily) evolving. "Balance of Terror" referred to "Earth poutposts" and a "command base", but never to the Federation or Starfleet. Even as late as "Whom Gods Destroy", it wasn't really clear which came first, the United Federation of Planets or the Starfleet organization. (Setting aside the whole ENT "Earth Starlfeet" issue, of course.)

Taking TOS in the broader context of the TREK legacy, we can assume that Earth and Earth Starfleet were central to forming the Federation, but the Federation is the Federation, not just Earth. And the Federation Starfleet may have been based, at least in part, on Earth's Starfleet. But which came first, the Federation or Starfleet? Even ENT didn't make it clear. Seems there was a Coalition of Planets first, which evolved into the Federation. Where does that leave Starfleet?

And what about other organizations, like StarFIRES / FedRangers? Is there room in the TOS Universe for something like this? I think it would depend on how it would fit in. I still like the idea of a distinctive organization, but Starfleet would have to be the superior organization, like a parent. Maybe the highest-ranking officers would be brigadiers; above that, Starfleet admirals would administer the operations. I like the idea of small, "rapid deployment force" units being stationed aboard transport pods being carried by warptugs. (See the warptug thread I started in this forum some time ago.) Remember, the Seabees were Navy construction battalions, and command of the Pacific operations would pass back and forth between a general (MacArthur?) and an admiral (Nimitz) during the Pacific war.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

And what about other organizations, like StarFIRES / FedRangers? Is there room in the TOS Universe for something like this?

Why wouldn't there be? Space is vast, and Starfleet operates primarily in space. But people--even the various species that make up the Federation--don't live in space. For the most part, they live on and around planets and moons and asteroids, in some cases by the billions. If an entire organization exists whose purpose is to operate in the vastness between those planets, than even larger organization must exist that operates ON those planets.

It's doubtful they would see very much of each other, except occasionally when Starfleet has to move a Ranger battalion from one planet to another, or when a starship crashes on a planet where the Rangers have a dilithium cracking station. Even in the plain context of TOS, it's possible that some Federation outposts--Delta Vega, for example, and that planet I forget the name where the Horta was found--may have been outposts originally developed by the StarFIRES/Federation Rangers and handed over to civilian control (or just plain abandoned) later on.

I think it would depend on how it would fit in. I still like the idea of a distinctive organization, but Starfleet would have to be the superior organization, like a parent.

Why? For all we know it was the incorporation of the Rangers that finally allowed the Federation to pull together. Starfleet formed the basis of the Coalition of Planets (as seen in "Babel One" et al) but the Rangers would have formed the foundation of a more unified organization like the Federation, where planets actually pool their resources and economies--not just their starships--in the sharing of natural resources between them. All of which, conveniently, doubles as the largest land army the galaxy has ever seen...

I like the idea of small, "rapid deployment force" units being stationed aboard transport pods being carried by warptugs.

Or maybe a StarFIRES/Rangers version of the Danube class runabout and the various scout ships we've seen in DS9 and Insurrection? Starfleet doesn't seem to have much use for scouts, but for a dozen roughnecks with an industrial replicator, that'd be more than enough to setup a mining station on the dark side of LV-426.

That's partly why I think it would be better to drop the Seabees analogy and just go for an all out "Army of Sappers" concept. Starfleet already has the canonical "starfleet corps of engineers," so any other organization would have to be distinct anyway.

 

[Timo]

Starfleet, for example, apparently hails back to the old Earth space exploration agencies (NASA and Roskosmos, judging by the logo and its 22nd century incarnation)

Here I'd prefer to disagree. Starfleet in ENT looks like a thoroughly military organization, for which space exploration is a new and exotic field of work - naturally so, as there'd be little to explore before the introduction of the "faster-than-Vulcan" engine. That they place a military novice in command of their explorer is sort of natural, too. But all other UESF personnel and hardware seems quite warlike in nature, and even Archer considers USN aircraft carriers as part of his heritage.

Doesn't mean there wouldn't be a separate organization maintaining Army traditions if UESF maintains Navy and/or Air Force ones. The Military Assault Command seems to be a rival of Starfleet Command; perhaps both brances of Earth Defense Forces (or whatever) have their direct successors in the Federation?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Starfleet, for example, apparently hails back to the old Earth space exploration agencies (NASA and Roskosmos, judging by the logo and its 22nd century incarnation)

Here I'd prefer to disagree. Starfleet in ENT looks like a thoroughly military organization, for which space exploration is a new and exotic field of work

Hardly. Actually, as far as ENT, Starfleet actually bears a closer resemblance to a multi-national corporation than any conventional military. That would certainly tally with the whole "Vulcans are holding us back" thing; military organizations don't usually give foreigners veto power over their operations, but the Vulcans might have a major financial stake in Starfleet that gives them alot of clout (which makes plenty of sense, considering human currency would be all but worthless outside of Earth and they'd be in desperate need of someone to bankroll their operations using a form they can spend abroad). In that sense, Archer's whole speech in "Stormfront" approximately boils down to "C'mon, we're new at this! Please don't pull our funding!"

Even here, though, their "military" roll is secondary at best.

Doesn't mean there wouldn't be a separate organization maintaining Army traditions if UESF maintains Navy and/or Air Force ones. The Military Assault Command seems to be a rival of Starfleet Command; perhaps both brances of Earth Defense Forces (or whatever) have their direct successors in the Federation?

That Starfleet apparently evolves from an Earth organization is suspicious enough. TWO such organizations in the Federation would be really, really weird.

 

[Wingsley]

Bringing up the Vulcans raises another question: how much of the legacy of the Federation Starfleet can be traced back to Earth Starfleet, and how much of it can be traced to the Vulcans, Andorians and Tellarites? Maybe the Federation Starfleet didn't evolve directly from Earth Starfleet, but rather Earth was central to forming to Coalition of Planets so that's how Earth Starfleet came to play a role.

As for the MACOs: it's unclear to me what their organization is supposed to be, or how they came to be. Are they some pseudo-UN organization, made up of elite military units from around the world? I never understood. I also don't know how much clout they had, since Malcolm Reed was NX-01's security chief (a lieutenant), while the MACOs all under Major Hayes reported to Reed.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Bringing up the Vulcans raises another question: how much of the legacy of the Federation Starfleet can be traced back to Earth Starfleet, and how much of it can be traced to the Vulcans, Andorians and Tellarites? Maybe the Federation Starfleet didn't evolve directly from Earth Starfleet, but rather Earth was central to forming to Coalition of Planets so that's how Earth Starfleet came to play a role.

Well, I took away from ENT that Starfleet's meddling in galactic politics was what allowed the Coalition to pull together. They emerged basically as the naive young upstart who hadn't been around long enough to make enemies and therefore was in a position to arbitrate disputes with the other coalition worlds. As in the Babel One episode arc: tracking the Romulan drone ship would have required more ships than any one of them could feasibly mobilize, but all of them combined were able to get the job done, and Starfleet acted as a vital facilitator in making it work.

Come 23rd and 24th centuries, I expect the same arrangement would be in play. Starfleet is the main facilitator of interstellar defense and exploration whether those other races still maintain their native space forces or not. More than likely it's the only one that operates under direct FEDERATION control, which is part of their rule as an interplanetary defender and facilitator.

In the end, there doesn't seem to be much Vulcan/Andorian/Tellarite influence in Starfleet designs. On the other hand, if one assumes that design aesthetics is a little less dynamic than we think they are, it's possible that the proliferation of the older Miranda/Excelsior/Constellation class ships is due to nothing more than their being highly favored Earth designs, with the larger Galaxies and Nebulas originally being Andorian designs that were modified and sold to Starfleet. That same explanation might work for some oddly-shaped designs like Voyager and Sovereign, which between the two of them might actually be derived from natively Tellarite or Vulcan design that were never previously used by Starfleet. A few system and engine modifications would bring them up (or down) to fleet standards and make them more friendly to human crews.

As for the MACOs: it's unclear to me what their organization is supposed to be, or how they came to be. Are they some pseudo-UN organization, made up of elite military units from around the world? I never understood.

I just assumed they were a highly trained, overpaid death squad assigned by the United Earth Government to deal with those assholes who sliced a chunk out of Florida.

I also don't know how much clout they had, since Malcolm Reed was NX-01's security chief (a lieutenant), while the MACOs all under Major Hayes reported to Reed.

Only because Reed had the posting as a senior officer on the ship. An army Colonel can't overrule the captain of a naval vessel who has been given overriding authority in a particular operation, especially if the Colonel's just hitching a ride on that naval vessel. Most especially if the colonel belongs to a completely different organization than the vessel he's on, and DEFINITELY not if the vessel happens to be a civilian one.

 

[Timo]

military organizations don't usually give foreigners veto power over their operations

The closest thing to UESF in 2149 might be the Iraqi military in 2009: an organization that doesn't have enough power to veto the veto powers of foreigners yet. Some foreigners might be willing to sell advanced hardware, but the one foreign power that matters is now in a position to block all that.

That has happened a lot in history, on thresholds of technological-industrial advancement. Just prior to World War I, a typical telegraph sent from the shipyards of Europe would read "You ordered a battleship from us you paid for it we built it now we keep it because we feel that we need it more than you do stop feel free to contribute to our war effort and we might discuss reasonable reimbursement at some future date stop". No direct financial leverage needed, just the clout of a great power.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Crazy Eddie]

military organizations don't usually give foreigners veto power over their operations

The closest thing to UESF in 2149 might be the Iraqi military in 2009: an organization that doesn't have enough power to veto the veto powers of foreigners yet. Some foreigners might be willing to sell advanced hardware, but the one foreign power that matters is now in a position to block all that.

Interesting as that is, the Iraqi military got to be in that position only because they got rolled by said foreign power in a one-sided war.

There is a hint of imperialism in Vulcan policy of the 22nd century, and as we find out in Kir'Shira this is not accidental. But it's inconceivable that Earth Starfleet would go along with that sort of arrangement except through the use of force, in which case Earth's relationship with the Vulcans would not be anywhere near as semi-cordial as it was.

Really, the whole matter of the Vulcans having the power to force Starfleet to take one policy or another suggests that 1) Starfleet is not a military organization in any sense of the word, since the Vulcan government has more say over their actions than the Earth Government of that time and 2) as is probably obvious, "money" has not yet been abolished in 22nd century Earth, and Starfleet probably needs the Vulcans as a vital source of funding (in a form that has actual value outside of Sol). Whether this makes Starfleet a civilian or private organization is debatable, but the one thing it isn't is a legitimate military entity.

Although... well, it's still possible the Vulcans invaded Earth and were greeted as liberators

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Since we are all in agreement that "StarFIREs" is probably a bit clunky, another possible suggestion would be "Starcorps." A reference to Eurocorps, perhaps, though in this case if only by analogy.

 

[Wingsley]

^ I'm not 100% in love StarFIREs, but I do like it. It's a handy portmanteau that would describe the kind of operations I envisioned. If you want to think up alternative names, StarCorps and FedRangers are interesting. But don't stop there.

In coming up with StarFIREs (Star Fleet Itinerant Regiments and Expeditions) I wanted to accomplish a few things:

1: Have a name that has a phonetic link to the naval Federation Starfleet, which would be the parent organization. This would make it clear from the outset that Starfleet and these "ground pounders" are intertwined.

2: By including the "Star" in StarFIREs, I was underscoring that these "ground pounders" had the same mission as their naval Starfleet brothers and sisters: "to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go..."

3: The acronym aspect of the name is expendable, but was useful in describing the organization's nature. It helped me incorporate Starfleet's name directly into the ground organization's name. Unlike some comments I've read in this thread, I don't have a problem with acronyms being used in TREK, especially TOS, due to its Cold War roots. "Seabees" would be a similar real-life naming scheme.

If some other name can do these things, let's add it to the list.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Well, Starcorps probably fits the bill best if you can explain it as a shortening of "Starfleet Planetary Operations Corps."

Or you could be a cheaky bastard and create an organization called "StarBASE," as in Starfleet "Battalion Air and Space Expeditionary."

 

[USS Avenger]

As an alternate name, I like the idea of a SEAL team. But instead of standing for SEa, Air, Land it stands for Surface Engagement And Liason. Used as both a surface combat force and to interact with a planetary population in non-combat roles. Their tunic color would of course be olive drab.