Topic: Science Personnel and Ranks on Fed ships

[Scottish Andy]

I need to talk to you about a starship's science department. I've been trying to staff my Hermes-class scout ship Aeolus and come up against something I need input on: How do you see the departmental makeup? My deck plans for the 1701-A has the Enterprise with 12 science officers, 10 researchers, 60 assistants. For my scout, with her crew of 230, I'm shifting the crew ratios around to emphasise the communications and science departments. Security has a whole 2 squads (12 people) with the other 30+ (from the original 70s Saladin/Hermes deck plans) going to Communications and Ship Operations. Ops thus has around 40, (weapons staff replaced by special sensor staff, plus shuttle/deck crew). Engineering will be reduced too, or rather split, with people taken from there and put into the Special Services department (Commissary, Quartermaster, Maintenance).

With the scientists, I need your input badly. I may have to bump up the Science complement from 12 science officers, 12 researchers, and 24 assistants, but I may just be misunderstanding the internal structure of the science department.

Previously I was seeing the Officers as the actual scientists in their separate disciplines with the Researchers being Chief Petty Officers trained in scientific method and just a pool to be used by any scientist/discipline, and the Assistants being basic lab techs, knowing how to operate the equipment and run basic experiments/simulations to get all the jobs done, again as just a pool to be used by any scientist/science project.

After looking at this page, however:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_of_science
I'm thinking with this model my officer complement was going to be pretty heavy and the researchers/assistants would have to be dramatically reduced.

So, I've come up with an alternative model, where:
1) the Science Officers are scientists in their own field but mostly they are the Life Sciences, Planetary Sciences, Astrosciences, Social Sciences, etc sub-division heads/project administrators,
2) the Lab Researchers/NCOs are the actual science specialists in their particular field or discipline, IE Anthrolpology and Arechaeology scientist under Social Sciences subdivision, and
3) the Lab Technicians/Crewmen are technicians running the equipment and trained in basic scientific method.
This is partially backed up by these Memory Alpha pages:
http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Astronomical_sciences
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Geological_technician
It is, however refuted by several eps with junior science officers present with speaking roles and officer ranks.

Adopting this second model would lower my officer count, but also my Lab Assistant/Technician count. Anyone into the science aspects more than me, can you give me your opinions and input?

I was thinking also of the disciplines I should stuff aboard a long-range scout vessel. Bearing in mind my idea of a scout's mission is preliminary investigation for a more detailed follow-up later on by cruisers or science vessels, I wanted a broad range of specialists aboard. I've gone for the following roster, but some of these are subdivisions of primary departments like Life Sciences, Planetary Sciences, Physics, Chemistry, Social Sciences, Astrosciences, Computer Science, and Medical Science. On that, I'm saying the Applied Sciences are handled by their parent departments: Physics by Engineering, Medical by, well, Medical. The Doctors and Nurses are their own researchers.


Sciences
Computer Scientist O4 - 1 Department Head
Social Scientist O3 - 1 Assist. Dept. Head
Anthropologist
& Archaeologist O1 - 1
Astrogeologist O1 - 1
Astrophysicist O1 - 1
Biologist O1 - 1
Botanist O1 - 1
Oceanographer O1 - 1
Chemist O1 - 1
Sensor Officer O2 - 1
Sensor Chiefs E7 - 3
Lab Researchers E4 - 12
Lab Assistants E1 - 20
Officers 13
Enlisted 35
Total 48

But have you ever tried to actually break down that complement into actual jobs? Also remembering that a starship is a 24-7 entity, and runs on three 8-hour or four 6-hour shifts (or, if you want to be all Submariner about it, 2 shifts of 12 hours, however unlikely that may be)? For every post aboard a ship, there has to be at minimum 2 people to staff it, and for essential posts there has to be one per shift. Factor into that crew pool the reliefs for the essential posts when they go for lunch or a break. Every time I split the rather large crews into shifts, the officers disappear so damn fast... Plus, all the different positions available mean a big skill set involved. Some of them could probably be amalgamated a la Helm/Navigation and Tactical/Communications, but still leaves a lot of specialisations. How do you stop from becoming over-specialised?
Maybe the following will give you all an idea of what I mean. Check out the Xs in each shift column:
http://www.starbase23.net/Databanks-IllustriousCrew.html
http://www.starbase23.net/Databanks-KestrelCrew.html
http://www.starbase23.net/Databanks-KusanagiCrew.html

It really does get ridiculous the number of science disciplines you can specialise in (see the Wiki Fields of Science page), and picking who you're going to want or need on an exploratory mission is... difficult. I'm kinda thinking that, regardless of how what model I go for, the actual scientists would be, in American parlance, Majoring in one specialisation during their Academy courses, and Minoring in a broad range of related fields to cover some more bases.

I have no scientific training, and only my own Uni experiences from my Computer Science degree to go on. So any input you have could be useful.

What do you think?

[Governor Ronjar]

I could see any of the 3, but #1 recieved my vote.

We saw plenty of junior officers as science guys in Trek. I see enlisted personnel doing very specific analytical and experimental work to clear time for the officers. The smaller the ship, of course, the smaller the staff, so in some cases, these figures might go right out the window.

--thu guv

[Hstaphath_XC]

Number 1 received my vote.  In my experience, #2 would result in far to much in-fighting over support staff between researchers convinced that their work has the higher priority... come to think of it, that will always happen no matter what.   

Number 3 is workable given the setting.

[kadh2000]

I voted #1 but I'll see if I can find something helpful.

[Commander La'ra]

I voted for #3.  Chances are your officers, while likely qualified in some scientific field, are going to be kept busy with managing the department and what it does rather than actually doing the research.

I'm actually iffy on stocking smaller ships with actual scientists, though.  Is the Science department on a scout really geared for on-board research, or would you actually be looking at a bunch of guys who record and index sensor data and other such for the guys back at Starfleet Research to go over?

[Scottish Andy]

Thanks for the responses so far guys.

I could see any of the 3, but #1 recieved my vote.

We saw plenty of junior officers as science guys in Trek. I see enlisted personnel doing very specific analytical and experimental work to clear time for the officers.

Guv, this actually sounds if you support option 2, not 1. Care to clarify?

In my experience, #2 would result in far to much in-fighting over support staff between researchers convinced that their work has the higher priority

That's a good point, Hsta. I am kinda hoping that this being the enlightened 23rd century pseudo-military (military plus? Combined Services?) that kind of infighting is not tolerated or not thought of, but if I'm saying they still want recognition in the form of Rank, I kinda have \to accept other foibles to some degree.

I voted #1 but I'll see if I can find something helpful.

Thanks for your future input, Kadh.

Is the Science department on a scout really geared for on-board research, or would you actually be looking at a bunch of guys who record and index sensor data and other such for the guys back at Starfleet Research to go over?

This is a really excellent point I hadn't considered at all. I am still feeling my way about this concept and trying on stuff to see what feels right. This point gives me something new to look at.


The third option is what is giving me headaches. In all the deck plans I have, there are usually around 12 science officers, but scores of enlisted science personnel. What do al these enlisted people do? Cleaning beakers, calibrating equipment, maintaining sensors, collating data for the actual scientists for sure, but just how much of that work is actually available?

Edit:
After a "banal" IM conversation with Larry, I think I've decided on a suitable means of compromise.

I personally lean towards lots of actual scientists and a few lab assistants to do the beaker cleaning as above. But if I have all these scientists, are they officers, NCOs, or enlisted? This is my problem, as we then have far too many generals and not enough soldiers. We have either 30 science officers and 10 enlisted technicians, or 5 science officer department administrators, 25 actual science specialist NCOs and 10 enlisted technicians. This bucks the "lower the rank, the greater the numbers" pyramidal scheme that everyone loves using for hierarchies.

So, I think I'll take those 5 officer sub-department administrators, 25 NCO science specialists, and 10 technicians as my science department. This kinda fits in with my experiences in trying to become a Signals Officer in the Canadian Army, as well as tech support for a large company.

Further discussion and comments are of course welcome. I still have that "too many mid-level employees" issue that hasn't been completely put to rest...

[Governor Ronjar]

Care to clarify?

No.

Wrapped my head around that question all I'm gonna.

--thu guv

[KOTH-KieranXC, Ret.]

The idea of the science department being heavy on enlisted doesn't make much sense to me. I agree with your general line of thought, Andy, but I'd replace 10-15 of those NCOs with ensigns/LTJGs who work under the senior science officers as junior scientists, doing all the scientific 'scut work' as it were. (Not the menial type jobs, those would go to the junior enlisted; I mean things like analyses, supporting research, etc.)

[kadh2000]

After hitting the US Navy website, a typical research ship in the navy has approximately 35-40 crew depending on the mission and 20 civilians on board.  The civilians are the scientists and their support.  You could have then a reasonable size without the military pyramid being messed up.  Searching the different classes of vessel, the scientific team averages 20-25 and the mission crew (regular crew) varies widely depending on the size and mission of the ship.

Larger classes of ships have a slightly larger military crew but a scientific crew seems to run up to about 60 civilians, 35 technicians, and mission crew.  These ships tend to bear the USNS designation. 

Hope this helps.

[Scottish Andy]

Kieran, as I said I originally favoured Option#2 in my poll, with senior officers (Commanders, Lt. Commanders, senior Lieutenants) being the Department Admins and scientists in their own right, junior officers (Ensigns, Lt. JGs, Lieutenants) being the scientists doing the majority of the scientific investigative and collating work, only a comparatively few enlisted NCO personnel being sensor operators and maintainers, and some more but still small number of crewmen being drudge workers, like Geological Technician Fisher running tricorder surveys and such like.

This does lead to at best equal numbers of science officers and and science enlisted crew, which flies in the face of the beloved pyramidal structure but which is actually backed up by my own experiences in tech support. We have 4 Service Desk Agents, (Scut Workers) 4 Onsite Technicians (Equipment Specialists) and easily 20 Tier 3 Application/Infrastructure Support peeps (Scientists). There are a lot of different areas to support, like network infrastructure, email, databases, specific applications, etc.
So, in my organisation, the largest number of support people are the Tier 3 specialists covering as many areas as possible. This is how I am likening the humongous areas of specialisation in science, but it does lead the science department to be 85% officer or 75% NCO, depending on the model you pick.

The compromise Larry and I "agreed" on in last night's IMs was that there would be a few officers as admins, the largest division by far of personnel would be science specialist NCOs, and again, a few crewmen for the menial "scut work". This too flies in the face of pyramidal scheme, but is backed up by what I looked into for the Signal Corps: a junior officer trained in the discipline as an admin charge of a bunch of older, more experienced senior NCO specialists in the discipline.
My only problem with this is that Signals Corps is a technical discipline and these guys operate their own equipment so there is no 'scut work' per say - or rather, there is no 'officer work' as it's all about the tech side, so junior enlisted can be thin on the ground.
 
Kadh, that was exactly the kind of input I was looking for and as such is very helpful. Thanks muchly!
This was the kind of scenario I was arguing with Larry. On a military vessel, scientists are "extra" personnel. For a starship to act as a warship, you can just get rid of the science personnel and your crew drops by 50 or 100, and you could use the quarters for marines or extra boarding parties, or leave them empty.

Having them as regular crew and in the chain of command (if not line personnel) offers unique issues. Can you really have the science personnel, trained as science and sensor specialists, doubling as engineers, aux helmsmen, medical orderlies? Larry was saying they wouldn't be hanging around during their duty shift and ships always have something that needs done aboard her so having a quarter of your on-duty crew goofing off cause there's no science mission is dumb. The same could be said of the weapons crews too. You're not in a battle all the time. I'm sure they have other, scientific things they can do with their time even though he convinced me that they'll not all be doing research projects.

Dragging myself kicking and screaming back to the main issue: we are mostly agreed on lots of scientists and only a few scut workers. We also agree that the admin positions will be officers. But what will the majority of those scientists be? Officer, or senior NCO? We saw plenty of junior science officers on Kirk's Enterprise, but that boosts the officer complement through the roof. Does it make good organisational sense to have a science department of 5 officer-admins, 20 officer-scientists, 5 NCO-equipment specialists, and 10 crewman-scut workers? 5 officer-admins, 25 NCO-scientists, and 10 crewmen-beaker cleaners?

I'm going to hurt myself on this, or Larry's gonna kill me.    Either way, the prognosis is worrying...

[TAnimaL]

I voted #3, thinking of the scientist/astronauts currently in orbit, with multiple degrees and training. Kinda reflects my favorite kind of ST fiction, the novels of Diane Duane, where the crew were multitalented and diverse, and would know the difference tween a cosmic string and a quatnum filament

[kadh2000]

Further addendum for my commentary, derived after talking to a couple of navy buddies and a NASA scientist friend.

The scientific crew are civilians under contract to the navy.  They have a command structure based on seniority and pay rank, so they would have a pyramid setup of their own that would be entirely civilian.  Since they're working for the government, they have gs ranks for their pay which makes a very convenient (and thus used) structure for their relative position in the pyramid.

[Lieutenant_Q]

Also note that the science labs do not have to be fully staffed 24/7.  More than likely the science labs will be fully staffed on "Day" shift only.  A slightly smaller staff would be on hand for the "Night" shift, while only a skeleton crew would be on hand for the "Graveyard" shift.

Also not all of the labs will be staffed all the time, which is why I think there will tend to be a few more officers (with multiple fields of expertise) than NCOs.  You don't need a planetary science lab staffed when your not in a solar system.

[Starforce2]

I'm sorry to say I really don't have much to say about rank structure, even after reading your post I am more confused than anything. Sorry I couldn't help ya more, but I tried.

[Scottish Andy]

Lol! I do have that effect on people... Thanks for the effort though.

[Governor Ronjar]

Lol! I do have that effect on people...

INDEED.

--guv

[Czar Mohab]

Didn't vote, skimmed the rest.

If you want a decent % of officers to enlisted just look up any US military command. Most of the websites that are around usually say something like X officers, Y enlisted, Z civilians (if any, or even if it is listed).

An excellent example taken from the best ship in the fleet (currently... there's been and probably will be others that are the 'best') here.

There's also this crappy ship here, but its much of the same. (intra-fleet rivalry, I guess, but they do call her O-hydro for a reason...)

I'll let you do your own research and draw your own conclusions.

Unfortunately for Star Trek, they didn't do a good job of separating officer and enlisted. Ever. You were either an officer, allowed to be in the show, or a crewman, a future casualty. They tried with Chief O'Brien, but that's not sufficient in my eyes... IIRC, he was an officer first, and I'm pretty sure no one has been officer, then enlisted. TOS, I suppose, tried too, but again, not quite good enough for me. The Guv tries to include enlisted types, and a good job he does, too.

Czar "Better to work down on the deckplates, than to be an officer and never do work" Mohab 

[Commander La'ra]

TOS, I suppose, tried too, but again, not quite good enough for me.

While you see evidence of enlisted types on TOS (Technician Fisher, Rands 'Yeoman First class' quarters sign, etc), Gene Roddenberry was actually against the idea of Starfleet having enlisted ranks.  He thought having all officers was more 'astronaut-like' or something.  Hence, they never emphasized it.

[Scottish Andy]

If you want a decent % of officers to enlisted just look up any US military command.

This is the problem though, Czar. Modern military gives a good starting point for crew details, but no modern military ship has a complement of dozens of military scientists aboard. The military contracts this out to the civvies, as Kadh's sources state. Starfleet has serving scientists who are full members with career paths. Mentioning for a moment Picard's ridiculous assertion that "Starfleet is not a military organisation" (from 'TNG: The Neutral Zone', I think), Starfleet is a "more-than-military" organisation whose military role is their secondary role, subordinate to exploration (except, obviously, in times of war).

I am attempting to factor in a traditionally civilian role to an at-least paramilitary* organisation. I'm creating HR policy for an exploratory and defensive navy of the 23rd century. There is no or little precedence in our current navy structure, and anyway, new rules have to be made to suit the new organisation. Sticking dogmatically to centuries-old traditional true-military navy policy is dumb for a half-and-half organisation like Starfleet. It is based on those navies, but has to have evolved from them.

*

paramilitary: of, relating to, being, or characteristic of a force formed on a military pattern especially as a potential auxiliary military force

I've just decided: screw it. My science Departments are going to have a bunch of science OFFICERS as the scientists and administrators, several CHIEFS as complex equipment operators, and several TECHNICIANS as scut-workers. It's the model that makes most sense to me, and sod traditional and outdated manpower models.

Nyah. So there.    Thanks to all for your input, it was definitely valuable and I appreciate the time you took to debate me. I look forward to doing this with you more often.

[Czar Mohab]

   Delaware wasn’t the small science vessel of the Oberth line; Starfleet had sent along more researchers and scientists than would fit in that class’ small but capable hull. No, Starfleet had sent along one of its finer ships-of-the-line, a Miranda hull modified with enough lab space and sensor suites to make any starbase’s chief science officer envious.

You don't have to give a direct number. You can just say more than X but less than Y. You don't even have to say that much. A shipload of scientists. Fine by me. Especially in our non-military Federation.

AND:

You know me, you write it I'll read it. You want to say, "Fire the Futon Torpedoes and make the ship go that way!", then I'll buy it.

Said it to the Roginator. I'll say it to you. Put it in text. I'll read it. I think you are pining over this too much. You could have been in the US Navy. Attention to detail, and all.


'nuff said. Now get to writing!


Czar "Me too" Mohab, who apologizes for his own delays.

P.S. Andy, I don't know if you've seen this, but I had to "use" it today, and you came to mind. This is just for fun, OK?[/color]