Talk:StarBase 118 Station Operations Department: Difference between revisions

Talk:StarBase 118 Station Operations Department (view source)

Revision as of 00:15, 13 September 2008

3,081 bytes added , 13 September 2008

→‎Original Intention

FltAdml. Wolf

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

6,244

edits

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 [[User:RogueGypsy47|RogueGypsy47]] 18:39, 12 September 2008 (EDT)
+: I think your commentary clarifies much of the ambiguity, and indeed it seems like I was on-target with my assumption that the Node is simply the Operations Management Center, as it has been officially named :)  However, I disagree, as I mentioned in my own commentary above, that Operations has anything to do with the movement of vessels in and around the base. I would continue to assert that FLY-CON has sole purview of that duty, for this simple reason: with upwards of 100+ full-sized vessels in and around the base, and potentially hundreds of worker-bees, shuttles, runabouts, and fighter-craft, I can't see any way that Ops (which already has it's hands full with the other duties that have been mentioned) would have time for it, let-alone the motivation and desire for such a thing.
+: Similarly, I agree that the positioning of the OMC is more romantic than practical ;)  FLY-CON would have one of probably two major command centers within the docking bay, taking up at least a few decks of the central core within the bay. Their other office would likely be a command tower, where they would have full view of the upper part of the base. Perhaps a third, smaller sub-command area for FLY-CON might also be appropriate near the bottom of the base, if not in their own, small "satellite" of the base where they would have a unique and appropriate viewpoint to watch the movement of vessels. Nonetheless, taking this into consideration, I don't see a reason why the OMC would be anywhere within the bay.
+: To continue that line of logic, I don't think that anything OMC is doing would necessarily require line-of-site. Power and resource management, as well as transportation safety and regulation can all be taken care-of via monitor and so-forth, while the high security needs make it a perfect candidate for the "low-rent," interior areas of the administrative section. I imagine that the outward areas of the base, and all areas within the docking bay, are in extremely high demand for both workspace and living space, while the inward areas of the base are less desirable, but also the best places for StarFleet bureaucracy and "command," which don't need a "window office" to be happy :)
+: Which is ''not'' to say that you can't still have your cake and eat it too. You seem to enjoy the idea of FLY-CON, as much as OPS, and I don't know that we've ever really discussed this in the SB118 Ops Development threads, but why wouldn't FLY-CON and EXT-COM be under the oversight of SB-OPS? Meaning that while FLY-CON and EXT-COM have their own departments (with their own chief officers), and their own administrative areas, both FLY-CON and EXT-COM could (and perhaps should?) report to the Chief Ops officer, and be considered as part of the Operations department for command and budgetary purposes? If this is the case, then you would have the pleasure of developing any/all of these three areas, even though they are somewhat detached and separate. --[[User:FltAdml. Wolf|Wolf]] /<sup>[[User talk:FltAdml. Wolf|talk page]]</sup> 20:15, 12 September 2008 (EDT)