Yes, I’d expect “turning for 12.5 kts” to mean RPM is adjusted for 12.5 kts through the water.
2 Likes
The programs are approved by different methods, and thus different requirements. The 3rd Mate / 3rd AE program qualifies because they are an academy under 46 CFR Part 310 (MARAD) regs, and 46 CFR 11.407(a)(2)(iv) and 11.516(a)(3)(iv) specifically note completing that program qualifies for 3rd Mate or 3rd AE. STCW approval is from the Coast Guard. For this method, the service must be in a training capacity, i.e. as a cadet.
There is no similar provisions for the limited programs. For those, the training at the academy is approved by the Coast Guard to substitute for two-thirds of the required sea service, and the mariner/student has to obtain the remaining one-third. The academy can assist in finding the remaining sea time, but is not required to. (Sea service for the 3rd Mate / 3rd AE is specified in the MARAD regulations, and also part of the USCG program approval for STCW). For this method, the service can be in any capacity allowed for a hawsepipe progression.
There’s some conundrum based on just the statement turning for 12.5 knots. I have never sailed on a ship that had a speed through the water indicator so everything is either off the chart for what prop RPM to do for whatever speed you want to start with and then adjusted for speed over the ground when it has had time to settle out. On the Great Lakes considering some of the places we slither into any instruments that extend even slightly below the hull do not live long. So given that is an absent scenario from an actual situation the question needs to specify what that 12.5 knots represents, engine (prop) turns, SOG or STW. That would not be in question on a bridge underway.
You’re overthinking this. Question says speed is 12.5 knots, use 12.5 knots.
2 Likes
Wonder what the hawsepipe 3rd mate pass rate is?
A linked stability exam is exactly what we got from Captain Stephen Ford at Texas Maritime as the final exam for Naval Architecture II. Funny thing was, he screwed up the answer key about question 6 and had to regrade all the exams. Everybody’s score went up!
1 Like
12.5 STW or SOG? If someone says “turning for 12.5 kts, making 13” I’d assume that 12.5 was STW and 13 was SOG. Some ambiguity in the exam question but that’s how I’ve heard it used.
Or the other possibility is that the STW is unknown (or has to be derived by other means), could be slip from current and/or weather, could be a distractor.
2 Likes
Could be a distractor, typically the speed “turning for” would be taken from a table which uses an approximation or assumption about slip.
Like this one:
In practice (or in the exam) the actual amount of slip could differ.
1 Like
Presumably the vessel we are on doesnt have a GPS, so other than plotting there is no reliable way to know your SOG, so if STW is known, i think they want you to use that. I think its dumb but for practicing for 3rd mate and C/M I learned to always use the given speed.
I put it in the same category of “who is sailing around with 2°-3° of Gyro error” but “it just be like that sometimes”
Doesn’t matter. If it’s the only number listed in the problem, then that’s the number they want you to use.
"Turning for " refers to STW but it’s not necessarily the correct STW in the problem. Don’t think the CG multiple choice exams require any assumptions.
And yet 12.5 knots is the speed that gets you the correct answer.
Here’s the test. Which question are you talking about?
It was problem 7, but you first need to solve 6. Have at it.
Edit: Went back and found my mistake. USCG answer was correct and it was based on turning 12.5 knots through water.
1 Like
It’s unfortunate that this article points only to the USCG exam for the lower passing rates for the new 3rd mate chart plots. These results are merely a symptom of a shortcoming that has plagued U.S. preparation for merchant mariner credentialing exams for all licensing endorsements for decades. Preparation for these exams is more an exercise in familiarization and memorization of questions rather than a comprehensive understanding of topic fundamentals. The chart plots not only emphasize chart navigation and plotting skills but also the 3rd mate’s ability to correctly locate and interpret information necessary for prudent navigation. Don’t Masters still value these abilities in inexperienced 3rd mates?
The article states “historically, cadets have passed the Chart Plot module at an acceptable rate…” but also consider that, historically, cadets have had full access to the EXACT chart plot(and all deck and engine modules) questions that will appear on their credentialing exams. Since new chart plot questions are not available to test takers beforehand, it’s obvious that passing rates will decline if license preparation techniques heavily rely on “historical” preparation. But, USCG are assessors not educators, and the academies and training providers are responsible for training to an appropriate standard of competence for any deck or engine subject. If a 3rd mate cannot reason basic chart plotting and piloting navigation concepts, how can he or she fully understand and interpret the abundance of information that an ECDIS is displaying?
These lower passing rates are a symptom of a perfect storm for credentialing exams and all standardized and vocational examinations administered in the U.S. ACT scores have declined five years in row and SAT scores have also been falling. According to AICPA/CIMA, historical CPA passing rates are about 50% and rise or fall based on preparation. Janet Godwin(ACT) has stated that “seniors leaving high school are not meeting college benchmarks in any of the subjects we measure.” National standardized scores dropping; college admission standards downgraded; pandemic remote teaching shortcomings; first introduction of “sight unseen”, though extensively vetted and verified, chart plots; and questionable license preparation techniques all have contributed to this issue. I’m confident that USCG and educators will rise to the occasion and find common ground to ensure that our future mariners are competent, prepared and successful.
3 Likes
People just be getting dumber…especially window lickers, I mean looker-outers.
2 Likes
The problem with linked questions is that they don’t test on the topic you are trying to assess. For example, if you want to assess a candidate’s ability to calculate set and drift, you need to provide the starting and ending positions, elapsed time, and ordered course and speed. If the starting position isn’t given, but, instead, is determined in the previous question and if the student gets that question wrong, he/she will miss the set and drift question, too, no matter his/her knowledge of set and drift. So, you didn’t assess anything about set and drift. Instead, in essence, the student simply missed the previous question twice. Not good test design.
2 Likes
This perception is common across many skill-required industries. But it usually isn’t because the FNGs are worse, it’s because you have gotten better. We are quick to forget how inexperienced we were when starting.
2 Likes
Yes but a lot of that stuff is covered in the Near Coastal module. The chart plot should be the evaluation of the students ability to tie it all together in a realistic scenario.
3 Likes
Isn’t the term “turning for” more common in the military? In my experience it means adjust the RPMs using a table to match the speed ordered.
Either way it is more ambiguous than just saying “speed through the water is 12.5 kts”.