[QUOTE=papermate;121183]THE 3rd MATE EXAM IS NOT THE SAME AS 500/1600 MATE EXAM. People who think they are the same are living in a fantasy world.[/QUOTE]
You’re deranged. A number of people knowledgeable about this topic have told you that you are incorrect, including someone who has first hand knowledge of the credentialing process…who actually works there…who actually dealt with administration of this issue himself but alas we are all wrong, and you are right.
Stop spreading incorrect information. You failed because you did not properly prepare for the exams; not due to some deception or misinformation.
For example, azimuth, on 500/1600 ton, they will only ask for the Sun. On 3rd mate it could be the sun, moon, stars and Polaris. If you only study for the 500/1600 ton and test 3rd mate then you will be surprised, that’s only one example. There are dozens more.
[QUOTE=papermate;121182]If you go from AB to 3rd mate, the exam is NOT the same as 500/1600 mate exam. That’s all I’m trying to say.[/QUOTE]
And what you’re trying to say is 100% false for all intent and purpose. I went from AB to Third Mate as a participant in a 500/1600 Ton training program. Study was for 500/1600 Ton exam, by exploring and studying the CFR’s combined with the characterization of my sea service I was able to test for my Third Mate. Been there done that AND HOLD A THIRD MATE LICENSE. I will acknowledge that there are probably some differences. But nothing significant enough to warrant your crusade and overly zealous mis-characterizations.
Updated - - -
[QUOTE=papermate;121188]For example, azimuth, on 500/1600 ton, they will only ask for the Sun. On 3rd mate it could be the sun, moon, stars and Polaris. If you only study for the 500/1600 ton and test 3rd mate then you will be surprised, that’s only one example. There are dozens more.[/QUOTE]
That’s a difference between an Oceans and Near Coastal exam, not limited license vs. unlimited license. You don’t even know the difference.
You just said there was a difference then said I was incorrect, I do hold a 3rd mate license and I will say again to be more specific, on the TNAV exam there is a difference. It is more detailed. The USCG will tell you that, Ken Bruce will tell you that, Holly Chatta will tell you that. I really don’t see how your theory holds water. Simply put there is a difference, and not EXACTLY the same!!! Jeeze!
I showed Captain Bruce JD Cavo’s post that the exams are identical. In his typical quiet, confident and humble way he dis-agreed. The one example he cited was the Azimuth question. Like some previous posters he feels the 3/M exam could and often does include the stars while the 500/1600 ton just relates to the sun. I’m studying for 3/M near coastal and now that I’ve read Cal’s post I will ask him if the stars will only be on the 3/M Oceans. That said, I don’t believe that question, while important, relates to the question at hand.
For instance if Captain Bruce was correct, then only the 3/M Oceans exams, Azimuth questions would query the stars while the 500/1600 ton Oceans would only ask about the sun. On the other hand if the exams were the same, Oceans or not they WOULD appear on the 500/1600 exam.
I’m Captain Bruce’s student and as such will study what he directs me to study I simply find the difference of opinion a curiosity.
For example, azimuth, on 500/1600 ton, they will only ask for the Sun. On 3rd mate it could be the sun, moon, stars and Polaris. If you only study for the 500/1600 ton and test 3rd mate then you will be surprised, that’s only one example. There are dozens more.[/QUOTE]
Where it’s this information coming from? The test subjects listed in the CFR are not current (which is obvious because they show a difference between test subjects for 3M and for 2M) so how does anyone know you won’t have star azimuths on a 500/1600 ton exam?
Read below for the answer from the only person on here who actually knows for a fact…
[QUOTE=papermate;121216]You just said there was a difference then said I was incorrect, I do hold a 3rd mate license and I will say again to be more specific, on the TNAV exam there is a difference. It is more detailed. The USCG will tell you that, [/QUOTE]
No, they won’t. They are the same.
Updated - - -
[QUOTE=Hawespiper5;121221]I’m studying for 3/M [B]near coastal [/B][/QUOTE]
There’s the problem. You’e comparing a near coastal exam to an oceans exam. Near coastal exams for 3rd Mate, Mate 500, and Mate 1600 have azimuth or amplitude of the sun, oceans exams for the same licenses have azimuth of any body.
[QUOTE=Hawespiper5;121221], then only the 3/M Oceans exams, Azimuth questions would query the stars while the 500/1600 ton Oceans would only ask about the sun. On the other hand if the exams were the same, Oceans or not they WOULD appear on the 500/1600 exam…[/QUOTE]
Big goddamn deal, you should be able to do a star sight just as easy as a sun question. It would take one additional hour if you’re already proficient in sun stuff. Maybe you’re being taught a close-minded way to do these problems rather than the thorough theory to work any celnav problem out which is the idea?
I’m another victim of reading the federal regulations, checking with NMC and having inaccurate info! If I read https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2010-title46-vol1/pdf/CFR-2010-title46-vol1-sec11-910.pdf ; pre final rule requirements do not include Cel Nav any body by the regs. I called to confirm that I was studying the appropriate info about 8 weeks ago. Confirmed by whoever fielded my call at NMC. Old CFR applies to testing under the old rules.
However today, I sat for the 500 Mate Oceans and was not prepared for about 80% questions regarding: ocean sailing routes (mercator sailing) & calcs/LOPs by stars. I was prepared to test for celestial by the sun only, ocean plotting not included.
I had about 3 questions on Sun based Cel Nav… the rest was beyond the scope of the CFR.