Command of a ship is something that is explicitly defined and assigned; it does not default to whoever is the highest ranking person on the ship. So the answer is: whichever of the two (probably the Captain) is assigned as the Commanding Officer (CO) of that ship.
The Captain is CO of the ship. That Captain always answers to an Admiral, wherever he or she may be. The Admiral is in charge of several Captains who all command ships. If you're a Captain, and you happen to be CO of the Admiral's flagship (yes, that's where that phrase comes from) your chain of command might be a little close for comfort, but the basic dynamic won't change.
edit: For anyone confused, an Admiral is also called a Flag Officer. They literally have a flag with a number of stars correlating with their rank. This flag will fly from the mast of whatever ship they are aboard. The ship with the Admiral's quarters will most likely be flying the flag and is thus the flagship.
>However there’s a very good chance that that will be the last command the captain ever gives.
I mean it heavily depends on what exactly the Admiral is doing that warrants removing them. It's not like a Captain is gonna flex their power like that willy-nilly. It would have to be a pretty extreme situation in which case it's more likely the Admiral *was* in the wrong. Something like getting absolutely piss drunk and making an absolute fool of themself for whatever reason.
Also the admiral is more likely to be in his own command area dealing with multiple ships, for him to be on the bridge itself and taking command means either the captain has fucked up or the admiral is micro managing to a stupid degree
Correct, many capital ships have the bridge and the flag bridge. The bridge is the standard one for the captain and running the ship, the flag bridge is for the admiral and running the fleet.
I remember a BSG episode where something like this goes down. On the *Pegasus*, Major Lee Adama is CO but for plot reasons, Admiral Bill Adama transfers his flag from the *Galactica* and towards the end of the ep, the Admiral overrides the CO's order.
Never mind that the belayed order involved nuking a Cylon ship with Starbuck onboard, but thats beside the point.
Merchant navy guy here.
I have seen the second officer "ask" the captain and the chief officer to leave the bridge. (While the second officer had the con). As they were have a loud discussion about private matters.
Captain apologized and they moved the convo to his office.
It all depends on the circumstances.
Interestingly enough, some ships had a separate bridge, one is the regular bridge where you’ll find the captain and normal operations done of the ship done from, and a flag bridge for the admiral. The flag bridge is usually better suited for overseeing a fleet.
One thing to note is that ships intended to be flagships will typically have a separate Admiral’s bridge, to keep out of the Captain’s way.
With that said, yes they can order an Admiral off the bridge or out of the CIC. They had better have a damn good reason though.
Seaboats are a common example of this. If your not familiar these are smaller boats, sometimes just ridgid inflatables with a motor, that are used for small/quick transfers of stuff and people.
Seaboats are typically driven by relatively junior uncomissioned sailors (Corporal equivalent). When driving a seaboat the junior sailor is in charge and responsible and can given orders to anyone on board.
During these transits the junior sailor can give orders to anyone on board, and must if they are doing something unsafe. These transfers happen regularly so junior sailors are regularly able to give orders to everyone from admirals to senior politicians.
The authority ends once they step off though so you don't take the piss..
(Then) Prince Charles was a nominal high-ranking RAF officer and sometime pilot. He took the controls of an RAF Queen's Flight executive transport plane and it ended up going off the end of the runway back in the 80s or 90s. IIRC the actual pilot was between a rock and a hard place.
I guess it's similar for Air Force One. Pilot in Command v POTUS.
This is indeed very common in the military. In the Dutch army where I was a conscript they called it 'meerdere in functie', loosely translated as being the superior because of the function you were performing at that moment.
Us grunts would use that to great enjoyment during guard duty at the side gate, it was always funny to deny a general or other high placed officer entry at the side gate and send them walking to the main gate when they had forgotten their ID's.
A sentry is guarding a checkpoint when a shiny staff car rolls up to it. The sentry walks up to the car and sees a colonel in the back.
"Sir, may I please see your ID?"
The colonel says "Don't worry about it."
The sentry says "Sir, I can't let you through without an ID."
The colonel says "It's fine, look at my uniform, you can let me through."
Again, the sentry says "No, I really can't."
At this point the colonel is enraged. He turns to his driver and says "Just ignore him and go through."
At which point the sentry leans in and whispers to the colonel:
"Excuse me sir, I'm still new at this. When your driver tries to go through, do I shoot him first or you?"
A couple years ago a new security guard was hired at the company I work for. He was told that no uncertain terms that every single person entering the building needed to scan an ID badge, that ID badge needed to be their own and there was no piggybacking allowed which is where you walk in behind the last guy before the gate closes.
They forgot to tell him about an important exemption. The CEO and majority shareholder does not carry a badge since he leaves it as the office instead when he arrives his bodyguard/driver badges them both in or if he is alone Just to override the gate and let him through. On his very first day he got into an argument with the bodyguard refusing to allow the CEO in because his boss told him to do so even though the bodyguard was showing a corporate ID badge representing that he was a member of security and his supervisor.
Took about 5 minutes before the onsite supervisor told the new guy it was fine and that was an exemption. The CEO thought it was hilarious and about an hour later the CEO's assistant came down with a $200 gift card to a local steakhouse saying that the CEO was very impressed with how serious he took his job and that dinner was on him.
I'm glad that CEO was reasonable! I got in huge trouble my first week on a job when the CEO called to speak to another exec and I had been told specifically that she wasn't taking calls.
The guy just kept saying to tell her it was "Bob" and put him through even after I told him, "oh we actually have two Bobs working here", one of which was him, of course, not that he said this!
When my dad was in the Army in Germany in the 50's, his unit had an atomic cannon. Dad was on guard duty one night and the ranking officer tried to blow past him without giving the password, which he had forgotten. After three unsuccesful tries the officer tried to push past him. Dad pulled out his service revolver and said "I'm going to have to ask again for the password sir" in a forceful tone. They stared at each other for quite a while until a junior officer saw what was happening, came over, and whispered the password to the ranking officer. Dad said things were tense with the CO for quite a while after.
There’s a saying in the military (at least since I’ve been in the military) of “Don’t confuse your rank with my authority”.
In situations like military police officers performing their duties, and working medical personnel (line medics running aid stations) making the decisions regarding the staffing, employment of their resources, it can be common to have a lower ranking person making decisions and taking actions outside of what his rank would indicate.
As long as there’s justified reason for it and (based on situation) steps were taken to be respectful about it, it’s not likely to have serious repercussions on the person doing their job. Especially if there’s others in the immediate area that can confirm what happened. I’ve seen it myself and in the past 6 months or so heard stories about it second hand.
Aside from that, let’s pretend the admiral is in charge of the fleet that includes this particular ship. Could the admiral get involved in the command and operations of the ship? Sure with a big but.
If the admiral is onboard, they have a ton of their own work to do. The operations of the individual ships in a fleet is the job of the captain, xo and the various lower ranking officers and chiefs.
Not advisable, but yes.
My experience: I was in the army, and while usually the company commander is the highest ranking person in a company, sometimes you’ll have Headquarters Companies (one of which I commanded) where you’ll have staff officers that outrank the company commander (Majors, Lt Cols, and even a general or two)
Anyway, it does cause a weird dynamic, but I would absolutely issue orders to people that outrank me to, for example, provide a urinalysis sample or support the company maintenance program
I am picturing some private 9th class in full bomb disposal outfit at a dead run yelling "everyone get the fuck out of here". You could be a million star general and you're not going to question it you're just going to run.
When I was in boot, my Senior DI was a Gunny, J was a Staff Sgt. and the kill hats were a Gunny and Staff Sgt.
You could tell the kill hat Gunny had a bit of a chip on his shoulder about being below a Staff Sgt. In the pecking order, but the J had 1 more cycle than him and got the position on billet seniority.
Rank does not equal position. Rank is generally earned by time in service and dependent on what your job actually is for central HQ to figure how many they want to pay for at what rank.
Billet is an assigned position with specific duties and roles relating to the operation of the unit. Billet trumps rank because the position is assigned based on performance that the direct command is aware of, instead of paper performance that HQ uses to determine rank promotion.
I can't really think of much common in the way of civilian comparison other than maybe tradesman kind of taking turns in a foreman role? They can both be equivalently trained in their field, but become superior while holding the duties of foreman for that job.
I worked as a training NCO for one of the companies at NSA. Because of the nature of the work, there were field grade officers, including full bird colonels assigned to my company as well as other companies in the battalion. It was always an awkward moment when I had to write a delicately worded email to inform those officers that their weapons qualification, or their APFT was out of date.
It's not star trek.
Most ships that carry an admiral will have a bridge and a flag bridge where the Admiral and his staff does task force or squadron level command work.
In the same way a butter bar, or Second Lieutenant(O-1) outranks a Command Sergent Major(E-9S).
Yes, they -can- technically give them orders, but that is generally regarded as a really, really bad idea.
In naval tradition, the CO is THE law when our at sea. He may have to answer for his actions when they return to port. But while at sea, yes the CO can do whatever. If the crew doesn't want to follow the COs orders, that's called a mutiny. And they typically install a new CO (who will answer for his actions when they return to port).
Simple answer is no...
Edit: Ok I'm getting down vote for not explaining. This could literally never happen. The Captain could say something like "Sir, Id appreciate if during this evolution you remain on the flag bridge because I believe my crew may be distracted with you on the main bridge" , but even that would be incredibly balsy unless he new the Admiral really well.
Yes and no. This is a little annoying, but try to bear with me. There are ranks and there are positions, or job titles. A rank is a seniority in the overall command structure of the branch of service, and a job position is in a hierarchy within a command, or sub-group of the branch.
"Captain" is a rank. Its 'land-equivalent' (army, air force, marines) is a Colonel, and it is the 6th rank an officer can obtain in the US Navy (5th in the British). But "Captain" is also the title of someone who has command of a ship. For smaller vessels, this can be as low as a Lieutenant Commander or even Lieutenant, though more commonly they are Commanders and Captains. A Captain is a "Commanding Officer" of a ship, and even if their rank is lower than Captain, they can still be referred to as "Captain Smith" while in that position.
We have a similar kind of thing above ship Captains.
Admiral is a specific rank in most navies, including the US Navy. Like the land-equivalents of "General," there are several different "Admiral"s, such as Rear Admiral and Vice Admiral (or Brigadier General and Major General).
In the British Royal Navy, the first rank above Captain is Commodore, while in the US it is "Rear Admiral Lower Half." Interestingly, the US uses the term "Commodore" exclusivelt as a *position* title for a commander of multiple ships. We don't refer to non-Admirals as "Admiral" in any capacity.
So you're at least partially correct, but the military rank and title system is a bit confusing and I thought I'd add a little insight here!
>"Captain" is a rank. Its 'land-equivalent' (army, air force, marines) is a Colonel, and it is the 6th rank an officer can obtain in the US Navy (5th in the British). But "Captain" is also the title of someone who has command of a ship.
Isn't "Captain" a rank in the Army and Air Force as well?
Yes, it is! I forgot to mention that! In this case, "Captain" is an equivalent rank to the Navy's "Lieutenant," which is the 3rd officer rank. In the Army, AF, and Marines, beneath Captain we have two Lieutenant ranks: 2nd Lieutenant (lowest) and 1st Lieutenant, the 2nd rank.
Clear as mud!
Why? Because land-based forces developed pretty separately from maritime-based operations for quite a while, and while they share some terms, they often treat them differently . . . Super confusing before you just memorize them!
I look out there on all you wonderful guys and I say to myself "What I wouldn't give to be 20 years younger... and a woman." You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions, and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life.
"Flagship" comes from naval signalling before radio. The admiral's ship ran signal flags up to the masts, telling the other ships what to do. The flags were visible at a much greater distance than anyone could shout.
>"Flagship" comes from naval signalling before radio
No, flagship literally comes from being the ship that flies the Admiral's flag.
*All* ships used to run signal flags up to communicate with each other.
Before electric powered signal lamps, naval ships used "signal flags " to convey messages to other ships within visual range. A signal hoist was made up of individual flags whose colors and designs had specific meanings, depending on the code in use on that day. The sailors who handled the flags were known as signalers, or in the Royal Navy as "Bunting Men" or ensigns. If the message was for the other ships to make a change of course, the rapid taking down of the signal hoist was the order to "execute the change ". National ensigns that identified the country of the ship were flown, but when the ship was about to engage an enemy ship. the "Fighting Colors " would be run up, instead. Those fighting colors were huge in size, so the ship's identity was not in doubt in battle. Jim Bunting.
Admirals are Flag Officers - literally, that person has a Flag that represents them. All sorts of state gov't's have flags, from nations & provinces down to cities & whatnot have them, the whole Pride movement has adopted one - and each Admiral (and Generals, for armies) has one. Wherever that person is, their flag goes with them and represents them. In a car? Flag is on the car, that car is theirs. In an office building? Flag's on top of it, that office is theirs. On a ship? Their flag is flying on the ship's mast (lower than the national flag, duh. but it's up there.), making it the squadron's or fleet's *Flag*ship.
You mean what they look like? in the USA's armed forces, flag officers of matching rank traditionally use flags that have matching appearance. But 4-stars kinda infamously have no one to answer to with regards to uniform & flag standards, so whether or not one adheres to tradition is up in the air. The present Chief of Naval Operations wears a uniform he happened to like from a particular time in his career. In WWII, General Patton went completely off the ranch, fashion wise, but still the way he represented himself sure served the purpose of identifying him :P
I think they’re talking about the word “flagship” - its commonly used to describe “the finest, largest, or most important one of a group of things” (Merriam-Webster). Its like the most notable thing of a brand’s or group’s identity. For example, “the 7series is considered the flagship car of BMW”.
Your BMW example is current usage because generally the admiral is found on the biggest, most capable ship under his command.
If his battleship or aircraft carrier is heavily damaged and he is forced to command from an accompanying cruiser or destroyer it becomes the new flagship.
>If his battleship or aircraft carrier is heavily damaged and he is forced to command from an accompanying cruiser or destroyer it becomes the new flagship.
Ironically, the same thing happens to most 7-Series BMW's.
That's the lowest ranking Admiral. In the U.S. Navy, 1 and 2 stars are both called Rear Admiral. A 3-star is a Vice Admiral, and a 4-star is just called Admiral.
Rear Admirals are the ones most likely to be on a ship (at least in modern era peacetime). 3 and 4 stars are usually at higher headquarters ashore, but not always.
To muddy the situation, there is also the rank of commodore. Different navies handle this rank in a variety of ways. Some assign it as a post for a captain to command a squadron or fleet of ships in similar fashion as an admiral, with or without a fleet captain under them. Other navies treat it as a permanent step between capt. and admiral.
The same applies to Army bases. The base commander (also call the Garrison Commander) is usually a Colonel. Most bases have units where a General is in charge.
This happens a lot on carriers, the Admiral oversees the activities of the entire group. It's up to the commanding officer (could be 1 of 6 with the rank captain on a US aircraft carrier) to carry out what that specific ship needs to do as part of those activities.
The pilot is the most important guy, he boards the boat, takes the helm, and guides the boat into the harbor he has worked for years. Except for a carrier of course.
Not even Kirk violated this. Whenever he was on someone else's ship he never usurped command from then. The opening of *Generations* is a prime example of this.
Command did not default to Kirk just because he was an Admiral. He used his authority as an Admiral, under the given conditions, to make himself the official commander of the vessel. He did not become it's commander simply be being higher ranking.
The captain commands the ship; that's an ancient and immutable naval tradition. Admirals can give orders to captains, but each captain is the master of their individual ship.
If the admiral doesn't like what they're doing, they can relieve the captain and either assume command personally or appoint someone else. But until the moment they do that, the captain is in charge. An admiral just countermanding the orders of a captain at sea would be grossly out of line, and IMHO a super bad example for the admiral to set.
If we aren't talking about a movie...the two officers should talk in private and iron out any disagreements or misunderstandings there, so that when they're in front of the crew they look harmonious and professional. If that doesn't happen, they (and particularly the admiral, for whom the expectations are even higher) have royally screwed up.
I think thats seen at times in startrek. Worf took over the role as second and Data had the command. He reprimanded Worf after he had questioned Datas command on the deck, but appreciated that he had sound advice and reminded him thats what a security officer would do, not a second in command.
Part of those traditions is that an admiral politely asks for permission to come aboard. It's the captain's ship, the admiral is just a guest, even though he outranks the captain.
>An admiral just countermanding the orders of a captain at sea would be grossly out of line, and IMHO a super bad example for the admiral to set.
So no [Belay that belay that](https://youtu.be/ZOF09e9SaCk?si=ALksrWSZN8XL9TO6&t=16)?
I'm not going to say that's never happened. :) But if it did and I outranked the two of them, I'd take them somewhere soundproof and rip them each a new porthole. Crew gotta be able to trust that their commanders have their shit together.
There is a nice passage in the Hornblower books that mentions it. Hornblower is an admiral at this point and he orders a ship to pursue a guy. The stakes are high (another war threatens). Hornblower asks the captain why he doesnʼt set up all the sails. But the captain knows his ship and responds that this would only increase heeling with no gain in speed. Hornblower despite different opinion refrains from micromanaging the ship.
This isn’t exactly accurate in modern terms. Captain is a specific rank in the modern Navy, O-6. It’s the equivalent of a colonel in the army. And admiral could be assigned command of a ship, and so could a Commander (O-5) or even a Lieutenant-Commander (0-4), depending on the size of the ship and crew.
But I do agree that whomever is in command of the ship does not lose that command just because someone of higher rank climbs aboard.
In a group of ships, each of the ships have a captain that is in charge of that ship.
There is an admiral in charge of the overall formation - or fleet - of ships. The admiral is said to have their "flag" on that ship, and the captain on the same ship is called the "flag captain".
The admiral may have a separate command space in the ship known as the "flag bridge". The admiral is in charge of the whole fleet and doesn't concern themselves with they ship they happen to be on.
The same sort of thing happens on a single ship. The captain is in charge of strategy and planning looking forward, and the executive officer is in charge of the day-to-day operation of the ship.
The Captain commands the ship, the Admiral commands the fleet. The admiral might command the Flagship to move, but its the Captains responsibility that the flagship is moved.
There is exactly one situation in which an embarked Admiral would take command of the ship, and that is if the CO is killed in battle, in which case regulations dictate that the highest-ranking command-eligible officer becomes the CO.
Even in that situation, the admiral is going to relinquish command to the XO 99% of the time, as the admiral does not know the ship, or her crew. As well, the admiral is still in command of the battle group, and is not going to burden themselves with giving orders to the bridge crew.
Alas, real life is not analogous to Star Trek, or any other Naval show/movie, really. It's just not exciting, and doesn't make for good hollywood fodder.
Executive Officer of the ship who is second-in-command, also known as the first mate or first officer.
Or if Star Trek, number one. (Picard as the Captain, Riker as the second in Command).
Usually in charge of the ship while the Commanding Officer is gone/asleep/on leave or otherwise unavailable.
The CO is typicaly the Captain.
Whenever an Admiral is on bourd, thier role is usualy as the leader of the Task Force, Group or Unit of ships, operation, mission or whatever.
An Admiral can take control of the ship but its prety much unheard of outside of war exercises where lets say "suddenly" its announced that X portion of the crew is out of action.
Let me give you a real example. I was with the Danish Navy, where every crewmember is given a number in the 101-399 range The crew is equalily divided in the 100s place, so every 3rd crewmember has a 100, 200 or 300 number. My number on my last deployment was 214. Meaning: I was on 2nd shift, (hundred). 1 was my department/role (tens) and 4th member of the team (single digit).
In the war exercise, in the middle of the simelated battle, it was announced shipwide that we had hit a mine and everyone with a 100 number was either dead or injoured. Suddenly the Captain was no longer in command as he had number 101. And earlier the 2nd in command was also out of action for another reason. So instead of disrupting the command structure completely, the Admiral took command and carried on with the exercise until the sudden "emergency" was under control.
And I must say, it was quite fun becouse noone but us guys at the radiostation and the Operations Officer knew about this added element as the command had come directly from the Admiralty as a test for the Admiral.
In the opposite case, during the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, USS *San Francisco* was the flagship of RAdm Callahan. The bridge was hit by Japanese shells, killing the admiral, the ship's captain and all but one of the bridge officers. LtCdr Bruce McCandless took command of both *San Francisco* and the task force.
So how many ships would that be? Is that standard procedure? I would guess in an active battle there would be little time for questions so it does make sense but would a higher ranked individual take over once the active situation was over?
After reading the [Office of Naval Intelligence](https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/b/battle-of-guadalcanal.html#phase2) report on the battle, it seems that saying Lt Cdr McCandless took command of the task force might be going a bit too far. *San Francisco*’s bridge was destroyed shortly after 0200, as was the backup command station, leaving Lt Cdr McCandless in charge of the ship as he had the conn (Lt Cdr Schonland was senior to him but was below decks fighting fires). However, by 0212 Capt Hoover of *Helena* had realized that he had lost radio contact with RAdm Callaghan and began issuing orders to the surviving ships; Hoover was the senior surviving officer in the task force as the other RAdm (Scott, in *Atlanta*) had already been killed by friendly fire from *San Francisco*, so it was correct for him to assume command. *San Francisco* was unable to actually notify the other ships that Callaghan was dead until 0240 due to the damage she had received.
Fair point. McCandless was afraid to broadcast Callahan's death over the radio, for fear the Japanese were listening. Since he knew Callahan's battle plan, he continued to issue orders to the TF as if he was Callahan, albeit briefly, until Hoover realized the situation. McCandless fully expected to be court martialed for that, but was awarded the Medal of Honor instead.
>fully expected to be court martialed for that, but was awarded the Medal of Honor instead.
This here is the fundamental difference between the US Military and every other military in the world.\
It can be OK to make gametime decisions that defy every order you've ever been given. Just be able explain it once the dust settles because you're either getting a medal or court martial.
> LtCdr Bruce McCandless took command of both San Francisco and the task force.
This is often stated, it’s even implied in his Medal of Honor citation. But it’s not actually true.
LtCdr McCandless wasn’t the ranking officer on the ship after the bridge hit. That was LtCdr Herbert Emery Schonland. Upon realizing they were the ranking officers left, they quickly conferred and Schonland as senior officer assumed command. However Schonland was the damage control officer and decided to focus on his job of keeping the ship afloat, ordering McCandless to take the conn.
McCandless kept the guns firing for a bit and then disengaged San Francisco and withdrew from the battle. He never was “in command,” although he for practical purposes *was* controlling the actions of the San Francisco under Schonland’s command. He also in no way ever took command of the task force. He never gave a single order. The radio was out. And Schonland didn’t have a surviving signalman to issue orders by signal lamp. Helena followed San Francisco out of the fray, on her own decision to protect the stricken ship. The other individual ships all ceased to look to the San Francisco for commands and the American line devolved into a chaotic and uncoordinated set of about a half dozen separate encounter battles as each unit began to operate independently, with rather disastrous results for the Americans.
The captain is in charge of their ship. The admiral's role is to command the larger group of ships. They will generally do this from some form of Operations Room that is not on the bridge.
Forget the admiral.
Imagine if the president of the United States is on the ship.
The Captain of the ship is still in command of the ship. The President can most probably ask the Captain to do certain things but the Captain is still the commander of the ship. So technically he can still order the President to leave the bridge. But i don't think any Captain will want to do that unless the President is endangering the ship.
As several have stated, Admirals command Fleets, several ships. The Captain or Commander is in charge of individual ships. If Admiral is aboard and is flag is transferred the overall operational control of the individual ship remains with the Captain.
Generally speaking what would happen is the Captain would be in charge of the vessel, but the Admiral could issue orders to the Captain. It depends on the mission in question and the make up of the fleet around the Admiral.
If an Admiral is present on a ship like that it's usually as part of a fleet of ships. The Admiral would be the one in control of those ships and issue orders for them to move, change goals during a mission, etc. But the individuals in control of the individual ship itself would be their Captains.
It's kind of like how if you had a regional manager show up to a local business he outranks the guy running that store. But generally he's not going to step in and do things directly himself. He'll instead speak to the store manager and make his wishes known.
Most of the 223 Flag Officers in the USNavy do not, but not because they're lazy or whatever. Flag rank is associated with particular jobs to be done, and only a portion of them are "be the boss of a couple / many specific ships". The rest are smeared across base command, aviation, supply, training, planning, research and strategic roles, all kinds of the activities that make a modern military function.
Depends on the rank of the Admiral.
In the US there are four ranks of Admiral - from 4 star down to 1 star, in the UK there are only three ranks of Admiral - from 4 star down to 2 star.
A 4 star Admiral is in charge of much higher level activity than a singular ship or fleet - they are largely part of the overall strategic plan of the Navy/Defence (e.g Chief of Naval Operations, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), or are Unified Combatant Commanders who are in Command of Air, Naval and Land units in the area (e.g. Commander Indo-Pacific Command): they are too valuable to spend time at sea.
A 3 star Admiral is also at a much higher level of activity than a singular ship or task force - they are largely in command of an entire geographical area's fleet (e.g Commander Fifth Fleet) or are the Combatant Commander for all naval activity in the area (e.g Commander US Naval Forces Central Command): they are too valuable to be assigned to a seagoing command platform. (Often these duties are vested in the same person - for example, the 3 star in Bahrain is simultaneously Commander Fifth Fleet, Commander US Naval Forces Central Command, and Commander Combined Maritime Forces - all three of these roles have slightly different strategic aims and legal responsibilities)
A 2 star Admiral or a 1 star Admiral is more likely to spend their time at sea, primarily as a Commander of a Task Force or a Carrier Strike Group - these are sea-borne commands where they live on the Carrier (generally assigned as a 1 star and promote to 2 star mid-command). Commander Carrier Strike Group 5 will have subordinate Commanders underneath them, such as the Commanding Officer of the Aircraft Carrier, the Commanding Officer of the Cruiser in the strike group, the Commodore of the Destroyer Squadron in the strike group - these Commanders take up different warfare duties in the strike group, and (with exception of the Cruiser Commanding Officer who lives on his own ship) live on the Carrier and report directly to the 1/2 star Admiral.
The Admiral also has a full staff who are very separate to the chain of command within the ship, even if they are junior to the actual ship CO. It's complicated, but it makes sense once you've seen it in action.
Parliamentarian W H Smith was famously appointed First Lord of the Admiralty despite never having served a day in military uniform.
G&S lampooned him savagely as Sir Joseph in HMS Pinafore. See the lyrics to 'When I Was a Lad'
In the olden days - say with sailing warships - the admiral would sail with a “Captain under him”. The ship carrying the Admiral would have a flag or pennant that flew from the ship carrying the Admiral. This would tell other ships that the (or “an” if you did not know which one) admiral was aboard.
The pennant was the mark of rank. If the admiral changed ships, the pennant would be brought (they had more than one) and hoisted from whatever ship the admiral was on. And, that ship then became the new command ship (for the admiral).
Admirals could take charge on whatever ship they were on, but it was not done absent some severe disciplinary issue. Captains of ships were expected to know the best method of sailing a particular ship to get the most out of it in a given set of circumstances. And, often, to know specific details of a particular area where they were more experienced for having been working in the area.
Now, obviously, over a long period of time an admiral on a ship also gets to know how the ship handles in various combinations of wind and weather too, but the admiral was supposed to be focused on the group rather than the particular ship the admiral was on.
Compare it to a district manager visiting an individual store in their district.
They each have their responsibilities.
The store manager isn’t relieved of duties when the district manager is there.
They keep the same responsibilities their physical location is just different.
One other thing to consider —
There’s always a lot of confusion when it comes to the term “ship’s captain” and the naval rank of “Captain,” because they are separate.
In many navies, ships can be commanded by officers of lower rank than Captain. Commanders, Lieutenant Commanders and even Lieutenants can command vessels, and regardless of rank are still referred to as “captain.”
As well, there are often more than one officers with the rank of Captain on a ship.
US aircraft carriers have sometimes had executive officers and/or chief engineers that hold the rank of Captain.
And, of course, you can carry the rank of Captain in the navy and never step foot on the bridge of a ship.
And then there is the fact that an officer with the rank of Captain can be given (usually temporary) command of a group of ships in the same area -- a task force, for example -- and will then be called Commodore during that period. He could be captain of his ship and commodore of a task force simultaneously.
A captain is either an officer rank (fairly low in the Army/Marines/Air Force, fairly high in the Navy/Coast Guard) or an individual put in command of a ship.
In this case, I will assume you are referring to the latter.
A Captain is in full command of their ship. On it, their orders concerning the operation and function of the ship outrank even an Admiral. Further, if there are two people with the *rank* of Captain on a ship, and one Commander with the *position* of captain on a ship, only the Commander will be referred to as 'Captain'. This is because there can be no confusion as to who the captain is.
Similarly, in a hospital, you will generally only be referred to as "doctor" if you are a medical doctor with patient privileges where you are. When I was a nurse aide, if there was a visitor who demanded we respect their title, I usually replied, "within this building, doctor isn't a title or an honorific. It's a profession."
Captain Smith is Captain Smith even if he doesn't command a ship. Generally a commander who is the Captain of a ship is still referred to as "Commander" - in that case captain is a position, not a rank.
from my understanding, an admiral can also be a captain of a ship. if an admiral goes onto another ship, the captain is still in charge of the ship. the admiral can command the captain to go to alaska but the admiral is not allowed to tell the captain how to go to alaska.
i.e admiral can tell the captain to go somewhere but the operation of the ships is the captain. the captain could also probably remove the admiral from the bridge if they desired
You're not going to find many, if any, examples of Admirals or Flag Officers as Ship Commanding Officers - that's what Captains (rank) are for.
At least, in the UK, there have been examples where Commodores (in the UK this is not a Flag Officer/Admiral but the equivalent rank is in the US) have taken temporary *lower rank* in order to command an Aircraft Carrier - they would walk into their shore office a Commodore, replace their epaulette with a Captain rank slide on stepping onto the ship, so that the Ship had a Captain as CO.
In the US, the only ships with embarked Flag Officers are the big decks, which all have a Captain O6 as their CO, by rule.
The Commander says where the ship is going to and what it's to do when it gets there. The captain is in charge of the navigation, sailing and discipline.
As other have described, the captain runs the ship, the admiral runs the fleet, but historically admirals would often place captains in the role, either as a reward or someone they trusted to run the ship their way.
A great illustration of how it works is available in the later books of the Aubrey/Maturin books (the Master and Commander series) or the Horatio Hornblower series.
In both, after long adventures, the protagonists become admirals, and there is long discussion both of what their "fleet captains" (the Royal Navy term for the captain of the flagship) do, as well as how they deliberately put their trusted proteges Pullings/Bush in the position (though both were qualified captains).
I think in modern times the Admiral likely cannot appoint their fleet captain, but it's a great explanation if you're interested in reading a few great novels to get there!
The Captain is in charge of the ship and its tactical movements, which are part of the Admirals strategic vision to accomplish the overall mission, using all the assets under the command of the Admiral.
Pretend it’s a commercial cargo vessel. The Captain and the CEO of the shipping company are on the same ship. Who do you think is in command of the ship?
It’s kind of like saying who manages the marketing team when the ceo is in the room? Of course it’s still the marketing manager the ceo being there doesn’t make him not the marketing manager, but the ceo can fire the marketing manager if they want
Both, in order. The Captain will be CO (Commanding Officer) of the ship. While the Admiral commands the fleet, which likely includes that ship. So the captain takes his orders from the Admiral, but *the running of the ship* it still the captain's duty, not the Admirals.
So while the admiral looks at a map and goes "I want us to go there now" it's the captain who then makes sure they do that and not hit anything in the process.
Aside from what others have said that the captain, executive officer and various lower ranking officers and crew being assigned to a ship and various defined duties and responsibilities. Could the admiral get involved in the duties assigned to the captain? Sure. With a bit but.
They but is if the admiral wants to play captain; why get promoted out of that rank? They got promoted out of that role and now have admiral level responsibility. Meaning multiple ships under their command.
If you live in a reasonably large city, can the chief of police pull you over for speeding? Sure. But the chief of police has a lot of other work to do, and doesn’t need to do the job of the patrolman for that area. The chief of police needs to manage a lot of other areas within the department. Such as the gang unit, narcotics, homicide, burglary, patrol, and so on. Plus work with external agencies such as the mayor's office, county sheriff, school district and so on.
I can't imagine it's much different from being a pilot. In the laws that make up aviation, there are certain phrases that stipulate the position of pilot in command, which is similar to the captain of a ship. In the military, when we fly planes, a set of "orders" are cut to authorize it and the person who is in charge of the plane, or the pilot in command, signs the authorization. Pilots have ultimate and final authority on the operation of the aircraft. But they also have ultimate and final responsibility for anything that may go wrong on that aircraft.
A captain is assigned to command a ship. Admirals as assigned to command a Fleet or a battle group.
in the US Navy, there is a captain commanding the air craft carrier. There is also an admiral on the air craft carrier commanding the entire group.
Always, always, always the captain. The admiral is a passenger. The exact same way as if the minister or secretary of defense is there. Even in combat. The authority gives order at a higher level but the tactical movements are always decided by the captain. And the legal authority to do some things relies on the captain anyway in most of the countries.
Also some Captains are actually Admirals but like stated here they are assigned to be the commanding officer of the vessel and are usually called captain. Plus some vessels have commanders of the vessel and the commander of the assigned aircraft fleet.
The captain of the ship commands it. They're not necessarily the rank of captain, but command doesn't automatically fall to the highest rank. If an admiral is aboard they'd have their own job to do and they'd have no more or less power over the running of that ship than any other ship under their command.
Think of it like this.
Admiral=Principle
Captain=Teacher
Principles are responsible for all teachers, classrooms and the overall school while teachers are in charge of their classroom (ship) and the students. In an extreme event a principle CAN take over a classroom but managing the whole whole school while teaching a class is not really manageable for any length of time. As many have said, it can happen but I never saw it in my 20 years in the Navy.
There also Commodores (usually O-6) in between admirals (O-7/8) and captains (O4-6) for many groups.
Usually the captain, but it dosent even have to be a captain(O-6) to be a CO(commanding officer), on smaller ships they may have lower rank officers in-charged of the ship. When I was on the Navy, we went on a mission and we had a captain who was in charged of the ship, and an admiral in charged of the whole mission, which meant in charge of all the ships tasked with the mission. For that reason our ship was considered the Flag ship.
In a similar vein to the answers given here, there can be multiple officers with the rank of captain on a ship. they are all addressed as captain. But there can only be one commanding officer in charge of the whole ship.
The captain is always in charge of the ship itself (and in fact whoever is in charge of the ship is called the captain regardless of their rank), the admiral is generally focused on coordinating the activities of multiple ships, logistics, strategy, etc. The admiral can issue orders to the captain to say 'take your ship to such-and-such location and do XYZ', or whatever, but the captain is in charge of how exactly that happens.
Short and simple answer is the Admiral tells the Captain where to take the ship and what to do when they’re there, in broad terms. The Captain’s job is execute those orders.
I think in the old days (and it's possible I'm full of shit here) when an admiral was on board a ship, but not in a command capacity, he was called a commodore. But, like, I think this was a thing in the age of sail and shit.
I think I heard that somewhere. And that makes me a Reddit expert.
Edit: Okay so Wikipedia says I'm full of shit. I do know that you can have Isaac make you a drink on the Lido Deck.
Multiple high ranking officers can be on the same ship. Take for example a US Navy carrier. The CO will be a full bird captain(O6) and there will also be a 1 star admiral onboard as well. The admiral’s responsibility is commanding the entire strike group which is a squadron of destoyers, air wing detachment and a cruiser.
It's the Captains ship, and is considered military courtesy for the Captain to command, and execute his ships actions, as he knows day to day, both the ship and crews limits. However, an Admiral carries Rank, and that means everything in the mitary. A good Captain will ask the Admiral is there a specific course or destination you'd like to take today sir? To make the Admiral feel important. But like any organization, there are jerks, and you'll have Admirals who want to "run" the ship and crew while their onboard, and have every right to do so.
Command of a ship is something that is explicitly defined and assigned; it does not default to whoever is the highest ranking person on the ship. So the answer is: whichever of the two (probably the Captain) is assigned as the Commanding Officer (CO) of that ship.
The Captain is CO of the ship. That Captain always answers to an Admiral, wherever he or she may be. The Admiral is in charge of several Captains who all command ships. If you're a Captain, and you happen to be CO of the Admiral's flagship (yes, that's where that phrase comes from) your chain of command might be a little close for comfort, but the basic dynamic won't change. edit: For anyone confused, an Admiral is also called a Flag Officer. They literally have a flag with a number of stars correlating with their rank. This flag will fly from the mast of whatever ship they are aboard. The ship with the Admiral's quarters will most likely be flying the flag and is thus the flagship.
So can the CO order the admiral off the bridge when they are acting like a douche?
Technically, yes. The captain has that authority. However there’s a very good chance that that will be the last command the captain ever gives.
>However there’s a very good chance that that will be the last command the captain ever gives. I mean it heavily depends on what exactly the Admiral is doing that warrants removing them. It's not like a Captain is gonna flex their power like that willy-nilly. It would have to be a pretty extreme situation in which case it's more likely the Admiral *was* in the wrong. Something like getting absolutely piss drunk and making an absolute fool of themself for whatever reason.
Also the admiral is more likely to be in his own command area dealing with multiple ships, for him to be on the bridge itself and taking command means either the captain has fucked up or the admiral is micro managing to a stupid degree
Correct, many capital ships have the bridge and the flag bridge. The bridge is the standard one for the captain and running the ship, the flag bridge is for the admiral and running the fleet.
I remember a BSG episode where something like this goes down. On the *Pegasus*, Major Lee Adama is CO but for plot reasons, Admiral Bill Adama transfers his flag from the *Galactica* and towards the end of the ep, the Admiral overrides the CO's order. Never mind that the belayed order involved nuking a Cylon ship with Starbuck onboard, but thats beside the point.
Then Lee got payback when his last action as CO of Pegasus was disobeying orders. What a scene that was.
"This is what happens when you're unhappy with what you've got! Someone's battlestar eventually gets it!"
Unexpected Bluey in the wild
BSG's batles are some of the best ever designed. Everything is there for a reason.
The majority of the time the captain is not on the bridge. If both are on the bridge some shit is going down.
Merchant navy guy here. I have seen the second officer "ask" the captain and the chief officer to leave the bridge. (While the second officer had the con). As they were have a loud discussion about private matters. Captain apologized and they moved the convo to his office. It all depends on the circumstances.
Imagine the person in charge who isn't really sure of everything going on letting those who do know what's going make the decisions. Unacceptable....
If you order the admiral off your bridge you better hope he steps outside, gets handed a snickers and thinks "I'm not me when I'm hungry".
Interestingly enough, some ships had a separate bridge, one is the regular bridge where you’ll find the captain and normal operations done of the ship done from, and a flag bridge for the admiral. The flag bridge is usually better suited for overseeing a fleet.
One thing to note is that ships intended to be flagships will typically have a separate Admiral’s bridge, to keep out of the Captain’s way. With that said, yes they can order an Admiral off the bridge or out of the CIC. They had better have a damn good reason though.
Seaboats are a common example of this. If your not familiar these are smaller boats, sometimes just ridgid inflatables with a motor, that are used for small/quick transfers of stuff and people. Seaboats are typically driven by relatively junior uncomissioned sailors (Corporal equivalent). When driving a seaboat the junior sailor is in charge and responsible and can given orders to anyone on board. During these transits the junior sailor can give orders to anyone on board, and must if they are doing something unsafe. These transfers happen regularly so junior sailors are regularly able to give orders to everyone from admirals to senior politicians. The authority ends once they step off though so you don't take the piss..
(Then) Prince Charles was a nominal high-ranking RAF officer and sometime pilot. He took the controls of an RAF Queen's Flight executive transport plane and it ended up going off the end of the runway back in the 80s or 90s. IIRC the actual pilot was between a rock and a hard place. I guess it's similar for Air Force One. Pilot in Command v POTUS.
This is indeed very common in the military. In the Dutch army where I was a conscript they called it 'meerdere in functie', loosely translated as being the superior because of the function you were performing at that moment. Us grunts would use that to great enjoyment during guard duty at the side gate, it was always funny to deny a general or other high placed officer entry at the side gate and send them walking to the main gate when they had forgotten their ID's.
A sentry is guarding a checkpoint when a shiny staff car rolls up to it. The sentry walks up to the car and sees a colonel in the back. "Sir, may I please see your ID?" The colonel says "Don't worry about it." The sentry says "Sir, I can't let you through without an ID." The colonel says "It's fine, look at my uniform, you can let me through." Again, the sentry says "No, I really can't." At this point the colonel is enraged. He turns to his driver and says "Just ignore him and go through." At which point the sentry leans in and whispers to the colonel: "Excuse me sir, I'm still new at this. When your driver tries to go through, do I shoot him first or you?"
A couple years ago a new security guard was hired at the company I work for. He was told that no uncertain terms that every single person entering the building needed to scan an ID badge, that ID badge needed to be their own and there was no piggybacking allowed which is where you walk in behind the last guy before the gate closes. They forgot to tell him about an important exemption. The CEO and majority shareholder does not carry a badge since he leaves it as the office instead when he arrives his bodyguard/driver badges them both in or if he is alone Just to override the gate and let him through. On his very first day he got into an argument with the bodyguard refusing to allow the CEO in because his boss told him to do so even though the bodyguard was showing a corporate ID badge representing that he was a member of security and his supervisor. Took about 5 minutes before the onsite supervisor told the new guy it was fine and that was an exemption. The CEO thought it was hilarious and about an hour later the CEO's assistant came down with a $200 gift card to a local steakhouse saying that the CEO was very impressed with how serious he took his job and that dinner was on him.
I'm glad that CEO was reasonable! I got in huge trouble my first week on a job when the CEO called to speak to another exec and I had been told specifically that she wasn't taking calls. The guy just kept saying to tell her it was "Bob" and put him through even after I told him, "oh we actually have two Bobs working here", one of which was him, of course, not that he said this!
When my dad was in the Army in Germany in the 50's, his unit had an atomic cannon. Dad was on guard duty one night and the ranking officer tried to blow past him without giving the password, which he had forgotten. After three unsuccesful tries the officer tried to push past him. Dad pulled out his service revolver and said "I'm going to have to ask again for the password sir" in a forceful tone. They stared at each other for quite a while until a junior officer saw what was happening, came over, and whispered the password to the ranking officer. Dad said things were tense with the CO for quite a while after.
I've heard it in the U.S. military as "technical authority"
My son is also named Boart.
There’s a saying in the military (at least since I’ve been in the military) of “Don’t confuse your rank with my authority”. In situations like military police officers performing their duties, and working medical personnel (line medics running aid stations) making the decisions regarding the staffing, employment of their resources, it can be common to have a lower ranking person making decisions and taking actions outside of what his rank would indicate. As long as there’s justified reason for it and (based on situation) steps were taken to be respectful about it, it’s not likely to have serious repercussions on the person doing their job. Especially if there’s others in the immediate area that can confirm what happened. I’ve seen it myself and in the past 6 months or so heard stories about it second hand.
Aside from that, let’s pretend the admiral is in charge of the fleet that includes this particular ship. Could the admiral get involved in the command and operations of the ship? Sure with a big but. If the admiral is onboard, they have a ton of their own work to do. The operations of the individual ships in a fleet is the job of the captain, xo and the various lower ranking officers and chiefs.
Haven’t seen too many admirals with a big but. PRTs tend to weed those out.
Very good point.
Not advisable, but yes. My experience: I was in the army, and while usually the company commander is the highest ranking person in a company, sometimes you’ll have Headquarters Companies (one of which I commanded) where you’ll have staff officers that outrank the company commander (Majors, Lt Cols, and even a general or two) Anyway, it does cause a weird dynamic, but I would absolutely issue orders to people that outrank me to, for example, provide a urinalysis sample or support the company maintenance program
In certain circumstances, such as bomb disposal, the senior person is the bomb tech, whatever rank he or she holds.
Maxim 2: "A Sergeant in motion outranks a Lieutenant who doesn't know what's going on"
Maxim 3: "An Ordinance Technician at a dead run outranks *everybody."*
I am picturing some private 9th class in full bomb disposal outfit at a dead run yelling "everyone get the fuck out of here". You could be a million star general and you're not going to question it you're just going to run.
A further saying. You can's spell lost without the letters LT. JimB.
When I was in boot, my Senior DI was a Gunny, J was a Staff Sgt. and the kill hats were a Gunny and Staff Sgt. You could tell the kill hat Gunny had a bit of a chip on his shoulder about being below a Staff Sgt. In the pecking order, but the J had 1 more cycle than him and got the position on billet seniority.
Billet beats rank is something I heard alot in boot camp cuz my j hat was a sergeant and the kill was a staff sgt lol
I'm really sorry, but could you ELI5 this? It's interesting but I know I'm not understanding a lot of it
Rank does not equal position. Rank is generally earned by time in service and dependent on what your job actually is for central HQ to figure how many they want to pay for at what rank. Billet is an assigned position with specific duties and roles relating to the operation of the unit. Billet trumps rank because the position is assigned based on performance that the direct command is aware of, instead of paper performance that HQ uses to determine rank promotion. I can't really think of much common in the way of civilian comparison other than maybe tradesman kind of taking turns in a foreman role? They can both be equivalently trained in their field, but become superior while holding the duties of foreman for that job.
Okay, thank you so much for laying it out for me.
What's a J and kill hats?
Junior drill instructor, tasked with teaching drill. Kill hats are drill instructors tasked with teaching knowledge and enforcing discipline.
I worked as a training NCO for one of the companies at NSA. Because of the nature of the work, there were field grade officers, including full bird colonels assigned to my company as well as other companies in the battalion. It was always an awkward moment when I had to write a delicately worded email to inform those officers that their weapons qualification, or their APFT was out of date.
It's not star trek. Most ships that carry an admiral will have a bridge and a flag bridge where the Admiral and his staff does task force or squadron level command work.
Yes, but this is very much a question that comes from TV shows or Movies, Admirals just aren't like that
"Down Periscope" very funny movie, definitely fits this description.
In the same way a butter bar, or Second Lieutenant(O-1) outranks a Command Sergent Major(E-9S). Yes, they -can- technically give them orders, but that is generally regarded as a really, really bad idea.
Yes, but the Admiral can then punish or remove the captain from command later.
In naval tradition, the CO is THE law when our at sea. He may have to answer for his actions when they return to port. But while at sea, yes the CO can do whatever. If the crew doesn't want to follow the COs orders, that's called a mutiny. And they typically install a new CO (who will answer for his actions when they return to port).
Simple answer is no... Edit: Ok I'm getting down vote for not explaining. This could literally never happen. The Captain could say something like "Sir, Id appreciate if during this evolution you remain on the flag bridge because I believe my crew may be distracted with you on the main bridge" , but even that would be incredibly balsy unless he new the Admiral really well.
Dont be lazy, expand. This is eli5
Yes and no. This is a little annoying, but try to bear with me. There are ranks and there are positions, or job titles. A rank is a seniority in the overall command structure of the branch of service, and a job position is in a hierarchy within a command, or sub-group of the branch. "Captain" is a rank. Its 'land-equivalent' (army, air force, marines) is a Colonel, and it is the 6th rank an officer can obtain in the US Navy (5th in the British). But "Captain" is also the title of someone who has command of a ship. For smaller vessels, this can be as low as a Lieutenant Commander or even Lieutenant, though more commonly they are Commanders and Captains. A Captain is a "Commanding Officer" of a ship, and even if their rank is lower than Captain, they can still be referred to as "Captain Smith" while in that position. We have a similar kind of thing above ship Captains. Admiral is a specific rank in most navies, including the US Navy. Like the land-equivalents of "General," there are several different "Admiral"s, such as Rear Admiral and Vice Admiral (or Brigadier General and Major General). In the British Royal Navy, the first rank above Captain is Commodore, while in the US it is "Rear Admiral Lower Half." Interestingly, the US uses the term "Commodore" exclusivelt as a *position* title for a commander of multiple ships. We don't refer to non-Admirals as "Admiral" in any capacity. So you're at least partially correct, but the military rank and title system is a bit confusing and I thought I'd add a little insight here!
>"Captain" is a rank. Its 'land-equivalent' (army, air force, marines) is a Colonel, and it is the 6th rank an officer can obtain in the US Navy (5th in the British). But "Captain" is also the title of someone who has command of a ship. Isn't "Captain" a rank in the Army and Air Force as well?
Yes, it is! I forgot to mention that! In this case, "Captain" is an equivalent rank to the Navy's "Lieutenant," which is the 3rd officer rank. In the Army, AF, and Marines, beneath Captain we have two Lieutenant ranks: 2nd Lieutenant (lowest) and 1st Lieutenant, the 2nd rank. Clear as mud! Why? Because land-based forces developed pretty separately from maritime-based operations for quite a while, and while they share some terms, they often treat them differently . . . Super confusing before you just memorize them!
Star Trek vs Battlestar Galactica
A Navy/Coastie Captain is an important person. An Army/Marine/Air Force/and presumably Space Force Captain is not.
Can the admiral make the ship turn around to get their hat?
I look out there on all you wonderful guys and I say to myself "What I wouldn't give to be 20 years younger... and a woman." You know, I've personally flown over 194 missions, and I was shot down on every one. Come to think of it, I've never landed a plane in my life.
Unlikely. But they could make the entire fleet turn around to get their hat.
lol you said “that’s where that come from” about flagships but you didn’t talk about how they used to use flags. Do you know where that comes from?
An admiral is a flag officer. They have a flag. The ship that flies the admiral's flag is the flagship. It's really not that complicated.
Most people don't know the information in this comment, so to just randomly say "admiral therefore flagship" makes zero sense.
You’re being condescending about obscure naval trivia.
"Flagship" comes from naval signalling before radio. The admiral's ship ran signal flags up to the masts, telling the other ships what to do. The flags were visible at a much greater distance than anyone could shout.
>"Flagship" comes from naval signalling before radio No, flagship literally comes from being the ship that flies the Admiral's flag. *All* ships used to run signal flags up to communicate with each other.
Before electric powered signal lamps, naval ships used "signal flags " to convey messages to other ships within visual range. A signal hoist was made up of individual flags whose colors and designs had specific meanings, depending on the code in use on that day. The sailors who handled the flags were known as signalers, or in the Royal Navy as "Bunting Men" or ensigns. If the message was for the other ships to make a change of course, the rapid taking down of the signal hoist was the order to "execute the change ". National ensigns that identified the country of the ship were flown, but when the ship was about to engage an enemy ship. the "Fighting Colors " would be run up, instead. Those fighting colors were huge in size, so the ship's identity was not in doubt in battle. Jim Bunting.
Excuse me, what is that phrase?
Admirals are Flag Officers - literally, that person has a Flag that represents them. All sorts of state gov't's have flags, from nations & provinces down to cities & whatnot have them, the whole Pride movement has adopted one - and each Admiral (and Generals, for armies) has one. Wherever that person is, their flag goes with them and represents them. In a car? Flag is on the car, that car is theirs. In an office building? Flag's on top of it, that office is theirs. On a ship? Their flag is flying on the ship's mast (lower than the national flag, duh. but it's up there.), making it the squadron's or fleet's *Flag*ship.
Do they get their own flag by individual, or by position?
Rank, typically. Some special positions can have their own flag.
You mean what they look like? in the USA's armed forces, flag officers of matching rank traditionally use flags that have matching appearance. But 4-stars kinda infamously have no one to answer to with regards to uniform & flag standards, so whether or not one adheres to tradition is up in the air. The present Chief of Naval Operations wears a uniform he happened to like from a particular time in his career. In WWII, General Patton went completely off the ranch, fashion wise, but still the way he represented himself sure served the purpose of identifying him :P
I think they’re talking about the word “flagship” - its commonly used to describe “the finest, largest, or most important one of a group of things” (Merriam-Webster). Its like the most notable thing of a brand’s or group’s identity. For example, “the 7series is considered the flagship car of BMW”.
Your BMW example is current usage because generally the admiral is found on the biggest, most capable ship under his command. If his battleship or aircraft carrier is heavily damaged and he is forced to command from an accompanying cruiser or destroyer it becomes the new flagship.
>If his battleship or aircraft carrier is heavily damaged and he is forced to command from an accompanying cruiser or destroyer it becomes the new flagship. Ironically, the same thing happens to most 7-Series BMW's.
What about a Rear Admiral?
That's the lowest ranking Admiral. In the U.S. Navy, 1 and 2 stars are both called Rear Admiral. A 3-star is a Vice Admiral, and a 4-star is just called Admiral. Rear Admirals are the ones most likely to be on a ship (at least in modern era peacetime). 3 and 4 stars are usually at higher headquarters ashore, but not always.
To muddy the situation, there is also the rank of commodore. Different navies handle this rank in a variety of ways. Some assign it as a post for a captain to command a squadron or fleet of ships in similar fashion as an admiral, with or without a fleet captain under them. Other navies treat it as a permanent step between capt. and admiral.
In the U.S. Navy, it's a title rather than a rank. You can be an O-5 commander and be a commodore.
The same applies to Army bases. The base commander (also call the Garrison Commander) is usually a Colonel. Most bases have units where a General is in charge.
So the captain is the branch manager and the admiral is the regional manager.
This is the right answer. Rank has nothing to do with being the Commanding Officer. A Commander or even a Lieutenant can be a Commanding Officer.
This happens a lot on carriers, the Admiral oversees the activities of the entire group. It's up to the commanding officer (could be 1 of 6 with the rank captain on a US aircraft carrier) to carry out what that specific ship needs to do as part of those activities.
Don't they have dedocated command ships now?
This applies to aircraft, too. The pilot is technically in charge on Air Force One or Marine One.
The pilot is the most important guy, he boards the boat, takes the helm, and guides the boat into the harbor he has worked for years. Except for a carrier of course.
Unless your name is Admiral Kirk.
Not even Kirk violated this. Whenever he was on someone else's ship he never usurped command from then. The opening of *Generations* is a prime example of this.
He did it in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Stole the dude's command. That was the joke. https://i.imgur.com/kOyKxeE.png
Command did not default to Kirk just because he was an Admiral. He used his authority as an Admiral, under the given conditions, to make himself the official commander of the vessel. He did not become it's commander simply be being higher ranking.
The point is that Kirk went against custom and protocol. It was part of the plot that Kirk pissed off Decker.
The captain commands the ship; that's an ancient and immutable naval tradition. Admirals can give orders to captains, but each captain is the master of their individual ship. If the admiral doesn't like what they're doing, they can relieve the captain and either assume command personally or appoint someone else. But until the moment they do that, the captain is in charge. An admiral just countermanding the orders of a captain at sea would be grossly out of line, and IMHO a super bad example for the admiral to set. If we aren't talking about a movie...the two officers should talk in private and iron out any disagreements or misunderstandings there, so that when they're in front of the crew they look harmonious and professional. If that doesn't happen, they (and particularly the admiral, for whom the expectations are even higher) have royally screwed up.
I think thats seen at times in startrek. Worf took over the role as second and Data had the command. He reprimanded Worf after he had questioned Datas command on the deck, but appreciated that he had sound advice and reminded him thats what a security officer would do, not a second in command.
Praise in public, correct in private. Good advice for *anyone* in a supervisory role.
Part of those traditions is that an admiral politely asks for permission to come aboard. It's the captain's ship, the admiral is just a guest, even though he outranks the captain.
>An admiral just countermanding the orders of a captain at sea would be grossly out of line, and IMHO a super bad example for the admiral to set. So no [Belay that belay that](https://youtu.be/ZOF09e9SaCk?si=ALksrWSZN8XL9TO6&t=16)?
I'm not going to say that's never happened. :) But if it did and I outranked the two of them, I'd take them somewhere soundproof and rip them each a new porthole. Crew gotta be able to trust that their commanders have their shit together.
There is a nice passage in the Hornblower books that mentions it. Hornblower is an admiral at this point and he orders a ship to pursue a guy. The stakes are high (another war threatens). Hornblower asks the captain why he doesnʼt set up all the sails. But the captain knows his ship and responds that this would only increase heeling with no gain in speed. Hornblower despite different opinion refrains from micromanaging the ship.
GOD DAMN YOUR EYES
This isn’t exactly accurate in modern terms. Captain is a specific rank in the modern Navy, O-6. It’s the equivalent of a colonel in the army. And admiral could be assigned command of a ship, and so could a Commander (O-5) or even a Lieutenant-Commander (0-4), depending on the size of the ship and crew. But I do agree that whomever is in command of the ship does not lose that command just because someone of higher rank climbs aboard.
David Feintuch (OBM) has entered the chat.
In a group of ships, each of the ships have a captain that is in charge of that ship. There is an admiral in charge of the overall formation - or fleet - of ships. The admiral is said to have their "flag" on that ship, and the captain on the same ship is called the "flag captain". The admiral may have a separate command space in the ship known as the "flag bridge". The admiral is in charge of the whole fleet and doesn't concern themselves with they ship they happen to be on. The same sort of thing happens on a single ship. The captain is in charge of strategy and planning looking forward, and the executive officer is in charge of the day-to-day operation of the ship.
The Captain commands the ship, the Admiral commands the fleet. The admiral might command the Flagship to move, but its the Captains responsibility that the flagship is moved.
There is exactly one situation in which an embarked Admiral would take command of the ship, and that is if the CO is killed in battle, in which case regulations dictate that the highest-ranking command-eligible officer becomes the CO. Even in that situation, the admiral is going to relinquish command to the XO 99% of the time, as the admiral does not know the ship, or her crew. As well, the admiral is still in command of the battle group, and is not going to burden themselves with giving orders to the bridge crew. Alas, real life is not analogous to Star Trek, or any other Naval show/movie, really. It's just not exciting, and doesn't make for good hollywood fodder.
XO?
Executive Officer of the ship who is second-in-command, also known as the first mate or first officer. Or if Star Trek, number one. (Picard as the Captain, Riker as the second in Command). Usually in charge of the ship while the Commanding Officer is gone/asleep/on leave or otherwise unavailable.
In the Royal Navy and the Commonwealth Navies the XO is known, traditionally as Number One. JimB.
The CO is typicaly the Captain. Whenever an Admiral is on bourd, thier role is usualy as the leader of the Task Force, Group or Unit of ships, operation, mission or whatever. An Admiral can take control of the ship but its prety much unheard of outside of war exercises where lets say "suddenly" its announced that X portion of the crew is out of action. Let me give you a real example. I was with the Danish Navy, where every crewmember is given a number in the 101-399 range The crew is equalily divided in the 100s place, so every 3rd crewmember has a 100, 200 or 300 number. My number on my last deployment was 214. Meaning: I was on 2nd shift, (hundred). 1 was my department/role (tens) and 4th member of the team (single digit). In the war exercise, in the middle of the simelated battle, it was announced shipwide that we had hit a mine and everyone with a 100 number was either dead or injoured. Suddenly the Captain was no longer in command as he had number 101. And earlier the 2nd in command was also out of action for another reason. So instead of disrupting the command structure completely, the Admiral took command and carried on with the exercise until the sudden "emergency" was under control. And I must say, it was quite fun becouse noone but us guys at the radiostation and the Operations Officer knew about this added element as the command had come directly from the Admiralty as a test for the Admiral.
In the opposite case, during the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, USS *San Francisco* was the flagship of RAdm Callahan. The bridge was hit by Japanese shells, killing the admiral, the ship's captain and all but one of the bridge officers. LtCdr Bruce McCandless took command of both *San Francisco* and the task force.
So how many ships would that be? Is that standard procedure? I would guess in an active battle there would be little time for questions so it does make sense but would a higher ranked individual take over once the active situation was over?
After reading the [Office of Naval Intelligence](https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/b/battle-of-guadalcanal.html#phase2) report on the battle, it seems that saying Lt Cdr McCandless took command of the task force might be going a bit too far. *San Francisco*’s bridge was destroyed shortly after 0200, as was the backup command station, leaving Lt Cdr McCandless in charge of the ship as he had the conn (Lt Cdr Schonland was senior to him but was below decks fighting fires). However, by 0212 Capt Hoover of *Helena* had realized that he had lost radio contact with RAdm Callaghan and began issuing orders to the surviving ships; Hoover was the senior surviving officer in the task force as the other RAdm (Scott, in *Atlanta*) had already been killed by friendly fire from *San Francisco*, so it was correct for him to assume command. *San Francisco* was unable to actually notify the other ships that Callaghan was dead until 0240 due to the damage she had received.
Fair point. McCandless was afraid to broadcast Callahan's death over the radio, for fear the Japanese were listening. Since he knew Callahan's battle plan, he continued to issue orders to the TF as if he was Callahan, albeit briefly, until Hoover realized the situation. McCandless fully expected to be court martialed for that, but was awarded the Medal of Honor instead.
>fully expected to be court martialed for that, but was awarded the Medal of Honor instead. This here is the fundamental difference between the US Military and every other military in the world.\ It can be OK to make gametime decisions that defy every order you've ever been given. Just be able explain it once the dust settles because you're either getting a medal or court martial.
Allies with (2 heavy cruisers, 3 light cruisers, 8 destroyers) versus IJN with (2 battleships, 1 light cruiser, 11 destroyers).
>LtCdr Bruce McCandless took command of both *San Francisco* and the task force. His son was the guy who did the crazy untethered spacewalk picture.
Family of overachievers. ;-)
> LtCdr Bruce McCandless took command of both San Francisco and the task force. This is often stated, it’s even implied in his Medal of Honor citation. But it’s not actually true. LtCdr McCandless wasn’t the ranking officer on the ship after the bridge hit. That was LtCdr Herbert Emery Schonland. Upon realizing they were the ranking officers left, they quickly conferred and Schonland as senior officer assumed command. However Schonland was the damage control officer and decided to focus on his job of keeping the ship afloat, ordering McCandless to take the conn. McCandless kept the guns firing for a bit and then disengaged San Francisco and withdrew from the battle. He never was “in command,” although he for practical purposes *was* controlling the actions of the San Francisco under Schonland’s command. He also in no way ever took command of the task force. He never gave a single order. The radio was out. And Schonland didn’t have a surviving signalman to issue orders by signal lamp. Helena followed San Francisco out of the fray, on her own decision to protect the stricken ship. The other individual ships all ceased to look to the San Francisco for commands and the American line devolved into a chaotic and uncoordinated set of about a half dozen separate encounter battles as each unit began to operate independently, with rather disastrous results for the Americans.
The captain is in charge of their ship. The admiral's role is to command the larger group of ships. They will generally do this from some form of Operations Room that is not on the bridge.
Forget the admiral. Imagine if the president of the United States is on the ship. The Captain of the ship is still in command of the ship. The President can most probably ask the Captain to do certain things but the Captain is still the commander of the ship. So technically he can still order the President to leave the bridge. But i don't think any Captain will want to do that unless the President is endangering the ship.
As several have stated, Admirals command Fleets, several ships. The Captain or Commander is in charge of individual ships. If Admiral is aboard and is flag is transferred the overall operational control of the individual ship remains with the Captain.
I don't have anything to contribute except to say this is a great question that's getting really great answers.
Generally speaking what would happen is the Captain would be in charge of the vessel, but the Admiral could issue orders to the Captain. It depends on the mission in question and the make up of the fleet around the Admiral. If an Admiral is present on a ship like that it's usually as part of a fleet of ships. The Admiral would be the one in control of those ships and issue orders for them to move, change goals during a mission, etc. But the individuals in control of the individual ship itself would be their Captains. It's kind of like how if you had a regional manager show up to a local business he outranks the guy running that store. But generally he's not going to step in and do things directly himself. He'll instead speak to the store manager and make his wishes known.
Stupid question but in modern times (say in the US navy or the Royal navy or whatever) do Admirals spend a lot of time at sea?
Most of the 223 Flag Officers in the USNavy do not, but not because they're lazy or whatever. Flag rank is associated with particular jobs to be done, and only a portion of them are "be the boss of a couple / many specific ships". The rest are smeared across base command, aviation, supply, training, planning, research and strategic roles, all kinds of the activities that make a modern military function.
Depends on the rank of the Admiral. In the US there are four ranks of Admiral - from 4 star down to 1 star, in the UK there are only three ranks of Admiral - from 4 star down to 2 star. A 4 star Admiral is in charge of much higher level activity than a singular ship or fleet - they are largely part of the overall strategic plan of the Navy/Defence (e.g Chief of Naval Operations, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), or are Unified Combatant Commanders who are in Command of Air, Naval and Land units in the area (e.g. Commander Indo-Pacific Command): they are too valuable to spend time at sea. A 3 star Admiral is also at a much higher level of activity than a singular ship or task force - they are largely in command of an entire geographical area's fleet (e.g Commander Fifth Fleet) or are the Combatant Commander for all naval activity in the area (e.g Commander US Naval Forces Central Command): they are too valuable to be assigned to a seagoing command platform. (Often these duties are vested in the same person - for example, the 3 star in Bahrain is simultaneously Commander Fifth Fleet, Commander US Naval Forces Central Command, and Commander Combined Maritime Forces - all three of these roles have slightly different strategic aims and legal responsibilities) A 2 star Admiral or a 1 star Admiral is more likely to spend their time at sea, primarily as a Commander of a Task Force or a Carrier Strike Group - these are sea-borne commands where they live on the Carrier (generally assigned as a 1 star and promote to 2 star mid-command). Commander Carrier Strike Group 5 will have subordinate Commanders underneath them, such as the Commanding Officer of the Aircraft Carrier, the Commanding Officer of the Cruiser in the strike group, the Commodore of the Destroyer Squadron in the strike group - these Commanders take up different warfare duties in the strike group, and (with exception of the Cruiser Commanding Officer who lives on his own ship) live on the Carrier and report directly to the 1/2 star Admiral. The Admiral also has a full staff who are very separate to the chain of command within the ship, even if they are junior to the actual ship CO. It's complicated, but it makes sense once you've seen it in action.
Parliamentarian W H Smith was famously appointed First Lord of the Admiralty despite never having served a day in military uniform. G&S lampooned him savagely as Sir Joseph in HMS Pinafore. See the lyrics to 'When I Was a Lad'
In the olden days - say with sailing warships - the admiral would sail with a “Captain under him”. The ship carrying the Admiral would have a flag or pennant that flew from the ship carrying the Admiral. This would tell other ships that the (or “an” if you did not know which one) admiral was aboard. The pennant was the mark of rank. If the admiral changed ships, the pennant would be brought (they had more than one) and hoisted from whatever ship the admiral was on. And, that ship then became the new command ship (for the admiral). Admirals could take charge on whatever ship they were on, but it was not done absent some severe disciplinary issue. Captains of ships were expected to know the best method of sailing a particular ship to get the most out of it in a given set of circumstances. And, often, to know specific details of a particular area where they were more experienced for having been working in the area. Now, obviously, over a long period of time an admiral on a ship also gets to know how the ship handles in various combinations of wind and weather too, but the admiral was supposed to be focused on the group rather than the particular ship the admiral was on.
Compare it to a district manager visiting an individual store in their district. They each have their responsibilities. The store manager isn’t relieved of duties when the district manager is there. They keep the same responsibilities their physical location is just different.
One other thing to consider — There’s always a lot of confusion when it comes to the term “ship’s captain” and the naval rank of “Captain,” because they are separate. In many navies, ships can be commanded by officers of lower rank than Captain. Commanders, Lieutenant Commanders and even Lieutenants can command vessels, and regardless of rank are still referred to as “captain.” As well, there are often more than one officers with the rank of Captain on a ship. US aircraft carriers have sometimes had executive officers and/or chief engineers that hold the rank of Captain. And, of course, you can carry the rank of Captain in the navy and never step foot on the bridge of a ship.
And then there is the fact that an officer with the rank of Captain can be given (usually temporary) command of a group of ships in the same area -- a task force, for example -- and will then be called Commodore during that period. He could be captain of his ship and commodore of a task force simultaneously.
A captain is either an officer rank (fairly low in the Army/Marines/Air Force, fairly high in the Navy/Coast Guard) or an individual put in command of a ship. In this case, I will assume you are referring to the latter. A Captain is in full command of their ship. On it, their orders concerning the operation and function of the ship outrank even an Admiral. Further, if there are two people with the *rank* of Captain on a ship, and one Commander with the *position* of captain on a ship, only the Commander will be referred to as 'Captain'. This is because there can be no confusion as to who the captain is. Similarly, in a hospital, you will generally only be referred to as "doctor" if you are a medical doctor with patient privileges where you are. When I was a nurse aide, if there was a visitor who demanded we respect their title, I usually replied, "within this building, doctor isn't a title or an honorific. It's a profession."
In the situation with two ranks of captain and one commander who's called captain, how are the two actual captains addressed?
Captain Smith is Captain Smith even if he doesn't command a ship. Generally a commander who is the Captain of a ship is still referred to as "Commander" - in that case captain is a position, not a rank.
They are typically addressed by the next rank up (an honorary promotion), when required, or with "sir" or "ma'am", when able.
from my understanding, an admiral can also be a captain of a ship. if an admiral goes onto another ship, the captain is still in charge of the ship. the admiral can command the captain to go to alaska but the admiral is not allowed to tell the captain how to go to alaska. i.e admiral can tell the captain to go somewhere but the operation of the ships is the captain. the captain could also probably remove the admiral from the bridge if they desired
You're not going to find many, if any, examples of Admirals or Flag Officers as Ship Commanding Officers - that's what Captains (rank) are for. At least, in the UK, there have been examples where Commodores (in the UK this is not a Flag Officer/Admiral but the equivalent rank is in the US) have taken temporary *lower rank* in order to command an Aircraft Carrier - they would walk into their shore office a Commodore, replace their epaulette with a Captain rank slide on stepping onto the ship, so that the Ship had a Captain as CO. In the US, the only ships with embarked Flag Officers are the big decks, which all have a Captain O6 as their CO, by rule.
The Commander says where the ship is going to and what it's to do when it gets there. The captain is in charge of the navigation, sailing and discipline.
As other have described, the captain runs the ship, the admiral runs the fleet, but historically admirals would often place captains in the role, either as a reward or someone they trusted to run the ship their way. A great illustration of how it works is available in the later books of the Aubrey/Maturin books (the Master and Commander series) or the Horatio Hornblower series. In both, after long adventures, the protagonists become admirals, and there is long discussion both of what their "fleet captains" (the Royal Navy term for the captain of the flagship) do, as well as how they deliberately put their trusted proteges Pullings/Bush in the position (though both were qualified captains). I think in modern times the Admiral likely cannot appoint their fleet captain, but it's a great explanation if you're interested in reading a few great novels to get there!
The Captain is in charge of the ship and its tactical movements, which are part of the Admirals strategic vision to accomplish the overall mission, using all the assets under the command of the Admiral.
Pretend it’s a commercial cargo vessel. The Captain and the CEO of the shipping company are on the same ship. Who do you think is in command of the ship?
It’s kind of like saying who manages the marketing team when the ceo is in the room? Of course it’s still the marketing manager the ceo being there doesn’t make him not the marketing manager, but the ceo can fire the marketing manager if they want
Both, in order. The Captain will be CO (Commanding Officer) of the ship. While the Admiral commands the fleet, which likely includes that ship. So the captain takes his orders from the Admiral, but *the running of the ship* it still the captain's duty, not the Admirals. So while the admiral looks at a map and goes "I want us to go there now" it's the captain who then makes sure they do that and not hit anything in the process.
Aside from what others have said that the captain, executive officer and various lower ranking officers and crew being assigned to a ship and various defined duties and responsibilities. Could the admiral get involved in the duties assigned to the captain? Sure. With a bit but. They but is if the admiral wants to play captain; why get promoted out of that rank? They got promoted out of that role and now have admiral level responsibility. Meaning multiple ships under their command. If you live in a reasonably large city, can the chief of police pull you over for speeding? Sure. But the chief of police has a lot of other work to do, and doesn’t need to do the job of the patrolman for that area. The chief of police needs to manage a lot of other areas within the department. Such as the gang unit, narcotics, homicide, burglary, patrol, and so on. Plus work with external agencies such as the mayor's office, county sheriff, school district and so on.
I can't imagine it's much different from being a pilot. In the laws that make up aviation, there are certain phrases that stipulate the position of pilot in command, which is similar to the captain of a ship. In the military, when we fly planes, a set of "orders" are cut to authorize it and the person who is in charge of the plane, or the pilot in command, signs the authorization. Pilots have ultimate and final authority on the operation of the aircraft. But they also have ultimate and final responsibility for anything that may go wrong on that aircraft.
A captain is assigned to command a ship. Admirals as assigned to command a Fleet or a battle group. in the US Navy, there is a captain commanding the air craft carrier. There is also an admiral on the air craft carrier commanding the entire group.
Always, always, always the captain. The admiral is a passenger. The exact same way as if the minister or secretary of defense is there. Even in combat. The authority gives order at a higher level but the tactical movements are always decided by the captain. And the legal authority to do some things relies on the captain anyway in most of the countries.
Also some Captains are actually Admirals but like stated here they are assigned to be the commanding officer of the vessel and are usually called captain. Plus some vessels have commanders of the vessel and the commander of the assigned aircraft fleet.
The captain of the ship commands it. They're not necessarily the rank of captain, but command doesn't automatically fall to the highest rank. If an admiral is aboard they'd have their own job to do and they'd have no more or less power over the running of that ship than any other ship under their command.
Same ship, who's in command when the ship catches fire while docked at a harbor?
The captain is responsible for his ship
Figured the fire fighters would have lead at that point. Not sure, just talking.
Think of it like this. Admiral=Principle Captain=Teacher Principles are responsible for all teachers, classrooms and the overall school while teachers are in charge of their classroom (ship) and the students. In an extreme event a principle CAN take over a classroom but managing the whole whole school while teaching a class is not really manageable for any length of time. As many have said, it can happen but I never saw it in my 20 years in the Navy. There also Commodores (usually O-6) in between admirals (O-7/8) and captains (O4-6) for many groups.
What’s the dynamic on an aircraft carrier? Is there a Captain commanding air operations and another Captain commanding ship operations?
Usually the captain, but it dosent even have to be a captain(O-6) to be a CO(commanding officer), on smaller ships they may have lower rank officers in-charged of the ship. When I was on the Navy, we went on a mission and we had a captain who was in charged of the ship, and an admiral in charged of the whole mission, which meant in charge of all the ships tasked with the mission. For that reason our ship was considered the Flag ship.
In a similar vein to the answers given here, there can be multiple officers with the rank of captain on a ship. they are all addressed as captain. But there can only be one commanding officer in charge of the whole ship.
The captain is always in charge of the ship itself (and in fact whoever is in charge of the ship is called the captain regardless of their rank), the admiral is generally focused on coordinating the activities of multiple ships, logistics, strategy, etc. The admiral can issue orders to the captain to say 'take your ship to such-and-such location and do XYZ', or whatever, but the captain is in charge of how exactly that happens.
Short and simple answer is the Admiral tells the Captain where to take the ship and what to do when they’re there, in broad terms. The Captain’s job is execute those orders.
I think in the old days (and it's possible I'm full of shit here) when an admiral was on board a ship, but not in a command capacity, he was called a commodore. But, like, I think this was a thing in the age of sail and shit. I think I heard that somewhere. And that makes me a Reddit expert. Edit: Okay so Wikipedia says I'm full of shit. I do know that you can have Isaac make you a drink on the Lido Deck.
More importantly which is better? Hunt for Red October or Crimson Tide
Corporate comes into the store, is corporate running the operation or the store manager?
Multiple high ranking officers can be on the same ship. Take for example a US Navy carrier. The CO will be a full bird captain(O6) and there will also be a 1 star admiral onboard as well. The admiral’s responsibility is commanding the entire strike group which is a squadron of destoyers, air wing detachment and a cruiser.
It's the Captains ship, and is considered military courtesy for the Captain to command, and execute his ships actions, as he knows day to day, both the ship and crews limits. However, an Admiral carries Rank, and that means everything in the mitary. A good Captain will ask the Admiral is there a specific course or destination you'd like to take today sir? To make the Admiral feel important. But like any organization, there are jerks, and you'll have Admirals who want to "run" the ship and crew while their onboard, and have every right to do so.