Hatchery

[WarpGirl]

You all miss the important part of "Hatchery".
When Archer threatens T'Pol and Trip with confinement, her reaction has always led me to believe that there was perhaps more going on between TnT than the writers chose to be obvious about.

True shippers should notice these things, or perhaps i am merely delusional....

Oh darn I guess I'm not a true shipper. You're not the first person to say this, but I hate the idea that they were 'friends with benifits' after the mess that was Harbinger, the idea cheapens Season 4 for me. That said, another reason I liked Hatchery is because it was one of the few episodes where TnT acted like mature adults with each other. And I've always loved their working relationship A LOT!

[Cogito]

I'm curious as to why you feel this way, Cogito. In my mind, the reason the episode is somewhat related to believable is because I think the MACO would have fired had Phlox and Trip attempted to press the issue. In other words, I saw the back-down as a strategic retreat (and they certainly didn't give up, after all).

Regulations are only as effective as their enforcement mechanisms.

I don't remember whether we saw Archer give the orders, but we saw MACOs guarding the hatchery, and later on they were also guarding key areas of the ship. I assume Archer ordered them to do that. That would have been within his authority as captain and the MACOs were right to follow his orders. I don't think they had any other option, in fact.

I don't know whether any of the senior staff had the authority to relieve the captain of his command. Since none of them did, I think it's fair to assume they didn't have the authority. But we know that Phlox did have the authority. Here's what he said in the shuttle bay:

Captain, if you won't come with me then I'll be required under Starfleet order 104 section C to relieve you of command.

So, according to Starfleet regulations as I have guessed at them based on the clues we were shown, the proper action if the captain became unfit for command was for Phlox to carry out a medical assessment and declare him unfit. I suppose that the second in command would them assume command. The only way that regulation could make any sense would be for Phlox to have the authority to demand the captain undergoes an assessment regardless of the captain's objections. If the captain could legally refuse his CMO's order, then in effect the CMO actually can't remove the captain and the regulation giving him authority to do that would be pointless.

So, when Phlox and Trip were in the shuttle bay I believe that Phlox had the authority to override the captain's objection. In fact I think he had a duty to override it, because it was the only way for him to remove the captain legally. He even said as much. "I'll be required...". He had a duty to carry out the assessment and the captain did not have the right to refuse.

If Phlox had insisted, then it would have been against regulations for the MACOs to prevent him from carrying out his duty. In fact I believe they would have been obliged to support him, using force if necessary. But since Phlox backed down and did not assert his authority, the MACOs continued to obey Archer's orders.

With Phlox failing to take the legal route to remove Archer from command, the only other option was an illegal one: mutiny by the senior staff. The MACOs were duty bound to oppose that, even if they may privately had doubts about the captain's sanity.

So, Phlox's cowardice left the fate of the Enterprise and its mission hanging on that mutiny, which could easily have failed. As the only person with the authority to remove the captain from command, it was a clear breach of his responsibility that he failed to act.

The moment this incident was reported to Starfleet, I imagine the first question was "Why didn't the CMO relieve him of his command under Starfleet order 104 section C?"

No, actually I suspect that first question would be "Why was that idiot wandering around in an alien environment without an isolation suit on in the first place?" And the second question would be why the CMO failed to do anything about it when the captain was suborned by aliens.

"I can't believe you were actually going to let me dump a third of the antimatter reserves. What the hell were you thinking, Trip? You know damned well how hard it is to replace that stuff. It could have cost us the mission right there."

"Well, to be fair Cap'n, we tried to stop you. In the shuttle bay, if you remember? And you locked T'Pol up when she tried."

"So, why the hell didn't you stop me then? You were there, Phlox. Why didn't you invoke section C?"

"To be honest, Captain, I rather thought you might shoot me."

"That isn't good enough, Phlox. If you thought I'd been suborned, you had a responsibility to do something about it. You're the only one who can do it, and we're all counting on you. Next time you think I'm unfit for command, do your damned duty!"

"Very well, Captain. If you'd come with me please, hmmm?"

[WarpGirl]

[Silverbullet]

Phlox failed in his duty,Why? Archer's threat was easily overturned. It would seem that Phlox is more pacific than a CMO should be.

It is nteresting that T'Pol lifts an Eyebrow and walks out. Then Trip follows her without question as if he knows where they are going. I think that they were intimate at the time and she wanted to have a tleast a hug and akiss from him.

SB

[panyasan]

When I was reading this thread, one thing became clear: Phlox should have taken his responsibility.

That aside, one question jumped up. We all assume that Starfleet and Earth use the same command structure and millitairy system than the ones we have now.

However, I was reading a piece of history the other day about a pionier nation and one thing that struck me is that in pionier situation certain people in command are entitled to do things a person in a civilised society wouldn't.

Now Earth just had been through WWIII and all the infrastructure and old systems have been destroyed (see First Contact). All militairy systems and commands structure have to be installed again. A true pionier state! The same applies to Starfleet.

So maybe in Starfleet a Captain has more power and can get away with more things than let me say the average Captain nowadays.

Just a thought.

[Silverbullet]

Panysann, probably not. in the series Starfleet seemed to be rooted rock solid. Think Acher would be bound by regulations. The Admirals seemed to have things well in hand.

So, no I doubt if Enterprise would equal a pioneer state.

SB

[WarpGirl]

Actually I think it would be more akin to the Navy's of the 17-1800's. The captain's authority is absolute at sea. There IS canon evidence to support this. One thing is sure, Starfleet is definitely NOT based on our modern 21st century military.

[putaro]

Actually I think it would be more akin to the Navy's of the 17-1800's. The captain's authority is absolute at sea. There IS canon evidence to support this. One thing is sure, Starfleet is definitely NOT based on our modern 21st century military.

Captains were absolute rulers because they couldn't communicate with headquarters. Again, the show runners blew this possibility for giving the crew more leeway and also raising the stakes and the responsibility for Archer. It would have been very simple to just not have them be able to contact HQ most of the time.

[WarpGirl]

Well, I did say that it was a starting point not an exact copy.

[Silverbullet]

In the series they laid things to enable them to stay in contact with Starfleet. Archer was not like a Sea Captain of the 1700's. He was never out of contact with headquarters. If he was never in contact it would be different.

Reference Janeway. she wsa completely out of contact and had to rely on Regulations laid down by Starfleet Command and makes such changes as she saw fit. Archer could not do that.

Fact is Archer failed to contact Starfleet although he was able to when he did certain things that he should have reoprted such as installing T'Pol as first Officer. Starfleet would have robably told him if he did he would lose his command. that is why he did not.

While he was able to communicate many times Archer chose not to because he knew he was defying regulations in his actions.

SB

[WarpGirl]

First of all, they did have problems staying in contact with Starfleet. But even if they didn't for the sake of arguement, you're disregarding the fact that military organizations are fluid entities: growing, evolving, and changing to suit the needs of the times and the progress of their societies.

For example, in the past 60 years, women can now serve in combat, gays are now able to serve openly, and segregation has ended. Now Starfleet is 200 years in the future and canonically at the time of ENT NOT an offical military organization until the Xindi conflict.

So why are people so resistent to the idea that things changed in the future.

[Rigil Kent]

I thought they were pretty obvious in establishing that the captain was more akin to an Age of Sail captain, which would automatically grant the skipper a lot more leeway and power than a modern ship commander. And it's patently obvious that Starfleet isn't the United States Navy - it has evolved in some cases, devolved in others - so I don't see what the issue is.

In the series they laid things to enable them to stay in contact with Starfleet. Archer was not like a Sea Captain of the 1700's. He was never out of contact with headquarters.

Season 3. They rarely had contact with Starfleet Command. And space is big. It'll take some time for communication to be made.

Fact is Archer failed to contact Starfleet although he was able to when he did certain things that he should have reoprted such as installing T'Pol as first Officer. Starfleet would have robably told him if he did he would lose his command. that is why he did not.

Or more likely, he was exercising his own initiative and utilizing the "it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission" thing that lots of officers do. He was clearly given a great deal of leeway in his command as do all Starfleet commanders based on other shows. Seriously, it seems like nothing Archer does is adequate - if he excretes ice cream, there will be complaints about the flavor!

I find it rather interesting that the one officer who seems to be escaping blame entirely is Hayes. To be honest, the fact that they had the marine (because that's what he was supposed to be, no matter what they named him) to be blindly loyal even in the face of pretty clear evidence that something's wrong was the sole problem I really had with "Hatchery." I mean really, you'd think that Hayes would be like: "Oh, hey. Every member of his command staff (who have been with him going on 3 years) is looking at the captain funny and questioning orders that truthfully make no sense. Maybe I should reconsider following these ridiculous orders." But instead, we got the brain-dead marine trope.

[Cogito]

Clutching at straws for ways to rationalise this episode, I suppose that 'Starfleet Order 104 section C' might be a generic regulation giving the CMO the authority to relieve a crewmember of duty, or something like that - the sort of thing he threatened Trip with at one point when he tried working himself to exhaustion. In that case it might be ambiguous whether that could be applied to the captain. It would be daft for a crew organised on military lines not to have clear regulations defining how a command change could be effected, but there's nothing to say that Starfleet aren't daft. Perhaps Phlox didn't really believe that he had the authority to relieve the captain, if push came to shove.

That alone should have been a huge wake-up call for everyone involved, once the dust had settled. If the entire senior staff believed that the captain had been compromised and none of them felt able to do anything about that short of mutiny, there's something very wrong.

[Rigil Kent]

It would be daft for a crew organised on military lines not to have clear regulations defining how a command change could be effected, but there's nothing to say that Starfleet aren't daft.

I'd go so far as to say that there is five shows worth of evidence to prove they are daft.

[Silverbullet]

Far as I know Star Trek tried to keep roddenbery's original idea that Starfeet would be based on the U.s. Navy. He had Unforms, ranks, regulatons. the lot.

Enterprise was a militay ship because Stafleet was a military organization. Witness Hoshi being ccourt martialed and given a Bad conduct Discharge before the advent of the Enterprise. that is military.

In the series ARcher met with the admirals and they did not allow him free rein. inn Home he was pulled up sharply when he started to yell at Soval. also later he was ordered to take a vacation. Archer was a Captain and he obeyed the admirals.

I believe that Ennterprise was in contact with Starfleet headquarters and they used deep space communications which seemed to be much fast than you say.

Archer was NOT like a sea captain of sail. He had to sta in contact and he had to obey regulations.

SB