Ok guys, I’m confused. I’m getting near my seatime and I’ll have my last class done soon (advanced fire fighting). I want to get my 1600 ton inland mate. So, when it’s time to upgrade to master, do you test again, or is it just a seatime thing? Is the 500 ton and 1600 ton inland mate or master the same test? I may, due to where I work, (the “equivalent position” thing) go from 100 ton master to 1600 master. How long are the test master or mate, good for?
Mate to master requires testing again. If you can go straight from 100 ton master to 1600 ton master do that and save yourself taking the mate exam.
The only problem is it will take just about as much time as going the mate route first. Is it possible to do the mate and master test at the same time, or is that too much at once? This is for an inland license, so no terrestrial, or celestial stuff…may make a difference. if so, how long is the master test good for?
A buddy of mine is currently going round and round with the NMC about doing just that. While Mr. Cavo has said it is possible, and recommended with impending deadlines, really don’t know if that applies to inland, the NMC isn’t allowing it. They will eventually, after he appeals and what not, but be prepared to meet some resistance.
Pretty sure you could get approved to test for both. However, nothing will get issued till you pass everything. I was going to test for both 500t master and 1600t mate, but when I found out it would be 11 modules I said screw this, just went the master route. If inland has less modules it may be good for you to go for both.
I have a friend fighting this same fight and I would say be prepared for shenanigans of a high level.
[QUOTE=Ctony;159841]Pretty sure you could get approved to test for both.[/QUOTE]
I thought it was only possible to get approved to test for something you qualified for. Thus, if you don’t have the time to get master you cannot take the exam for it.
I highly believe that to be the same friend.
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;159850]I thought it was only possible to get approved to test for something you qualified for. Thus, if you don’t have the time to get master you cannot take the exam for it.[/QUOTE]
In my own case, I was approved to test for 500t master and 1600t mate. …I did this because at the time I was short of the required tonnage for a 1600t master due to me utilizing some deck time towards an engine ticket. I guess the original posters scenario is a little unclear.
This was covered a few months back…
http://www.gcaptain.com/forum/500-ton-master-upgrade/16351-testing-master-mate-500-grt-oceans-time.html
I don’t know if this helps, but if you can test for 500 master (assuming you are approved to do so) you SHOULD be able to upgrade to 1,600 master with just sea-time. If that option is there you don’t have a time limit per-se unless the rules change??? Assuming it’s inland and there’s no STCW involved; AND assuming there are no changes new vs old scheme in this case. Look at the exam guide and see if it’s the same exam for 500/1600.
Anecdotal evidence is that I tested for 500-ton master and then upgraded a few months later when I had the days I was missing for 1,600. It makes no sense to test for mate and master unless you’re dealing with oceans and a 3rd mate license is in the works.
Can you do it as 2 separate transactions? Apply for master and mate separate and drop an application if it’s a pain in the ass? That way one won’t get bogged down by the other?
[QUOTE=Rain Wizard;159853]I highly believe that to be the same friend.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. And the other thread referenced above also is on the same topic. In that thread, I posted that I was going to submit a request for reconsideration. I did, the next day, and as of Wed. last week still did not have an answer. It got kicked over to the “Technical Resources Branch” from PQEB after six weeks, and the nice fella I spoke with offered to let me change my application to Mate 500 and also could not wrap his head around why I would want to test for mate 500 when I was already approved for master 500. <sigh>
I told him flat out that I was not willing to wait another two months (four, really, since I submitted my original application in Dec. 2014) for an answer, and could I just go ahead and send in an appeal? Uh … no. It had to go to the technical support branch first. Whatever that is. But hey, call me back next week and I’ll give you an update on the status! Okay … so I did, and again, and again … for eight consecutive (business) days and got his voicemail, which did not indicate he had left NMC or was on vacation. After another week of no response I finally said “screw it,” and contacted my congressman. I always knew that was a potential avenue, but had reserved it until my patience truly wore thin, which was last week.
Having worked for a couple of federal agencies in a past life, I understand 1.) congressional inquiries are a pain-in-the-butt for federal worker bees and they don’t much like them, 2.) they do tend to move things along at least as fast as they should have been moving to begin with, and 3.) if a particular agency receives a large volume of congressional inquiries, the ones from representatives who actually have some oversight of that agency typically rise to the top.
By a stroke of luck, my congressman coincidentally is the chairman of the House Appropriatons Subcomittee for the Department of Homeland Security. I’m pretty sure the Coast Guard knows who he is.
Anyway, his constituent liaison said his inquiry was submitted to the Coast Guard Friday. I have repeatedly requested that if, as I expect, the final answer is “yes,” that the NMC notify its evaluators, as I do know several other folks who have recently submitted or plan to submit similar applications. I’ll post an update whenever this is finally resolved.
z-drive’s suggestion of two seperate transactions may have worked, or they may have cancelled one letter to issue the other. and in my case, yes, I’m dealing with oceans and potentially 3rd Mate AGT down the line.
[QUOTE=txh2oman;159870]Indeed. And the other thread referenced above also is on the same topic.[/QUOTE]
Actually it isn’t exactly the same. You are requesting to take the Mate exam at the same time as your Master exam, which it seems like they should have no problem doing.
The OP wants to take the Master exam before he qualifies for a master’s license.
[QUOTE=bell47;159771]…So, when it’s time to upgrade to master, do you test again, or is it just a seatime thing? [/QUOTE]
Master and Mate are different tests, you have to test for each. The only “sea time thing” is going from Master 500 to Master 1600 for the same route.
[QUOTE=bell47;159790]…how long is the master test good for?[/QUOTE]
Good for what? You can only use it for the endorsement it’s for. You can’t take it before you are qualified for it.
[QUOTE=Rain Wizard;159838]A buddy of mine is currently going round and round with the NMC about doing just that. While Mr. Cavo has said it is possible, and recommended with impending deadlines, really don’t know if that applies to inland, the NMC isn’t allowing it. They will eventually, after he appeals and what not, but be prepared to meet some resistance.[/QUOTE]
I said what is possible? Testing for Mate and Master for the same route at the same time? I am positive I didn’t say that. It’s a question/scenario I have never heard of and I have no idea what the answer is I never give opinions on things I don’t know, and I also don’t give opinions on specific issues when the person asking has an application pending at NMC, or has indicated thay are planning to submit one.
Pulled from another thread…
[QUOTE=jdcavo;159952]Master and Mate are different tests, you have to test for each. The only “sea time thing” is going from Master 500 to Master 1600 for the same route.
Good for what? You can only use it for the endorsement it’s for. You can’t take it before you are qualified for it.
I said what is possible? Testing for Mate and Master for the same route at the same time? I am positive I didn’t say that. It’s a question/scenario I have never heard of and I have no idea what the answer is I never give opinions on things I don’t know, and I also don’t give opinions on specific issues when the person asking has an application pending at NMC, or has indicated thay are planning to submit one.[/QUOTE]
May 10, 2014 … this thread: http://www.gcaptain.com/forum/professional-mariner-forum/14764-master-mate-500-questions.html
If you have the sea time for Master 500 GRT Inland put that on your application as well as 1600 GRT Mate…
You should be able to test for both…and yes it is only a matter of showing sea time to upgrade the 500 to 1600. It’s the same exam.
The original question’s not worded or explained that well to begin with. notwithstanding how long exams are good for or any of that nonsense, whats the real question now? That may have led to some confusion in the explanation.
[QUOTE=txh2oman;159957]May 10, 2014 … this thread: http://www.gcaptain.com/forum/professional-mariner-forum/14764-master-mate-500-questions.html[/QUOTE]
What’s they typical response when someone in Washington says or does something stupid on the internet? Oh yeah, “my account was hacked…” That’s it.
That’s embarrassing. I looked into it a little more as I am still not sure whay I said that, and realized that I posted an edited version of a private message I received with a similar question. I had edited out some info specific to the guy who asked, and apparently a bit more that changed the way what I said could be interpreted. The gist of what I was trying to say was as I noted yesterday, I don’t know the answer but there is nothing to lose by applying for both, and a bit to gain if you succeed. Rather than saying you should be “insistent” with NMC, I should have said you may need to go to the reconsideration and appeal process. My intent was cleared in the original PM response, much less so in the edited version I posted.
-
-
- Updated - - -
-
[QUOTE=z-drive;159970]The original question’s not worded or explained that well to begin with. notwithstanding how long exams are good for or any of that nonsense, whats the real question now? That may have led to some confusion in the explanation.[/QUOTE]
The original question was written with an underlying assumption that you can be allowed to test for Master before you have the sea time for Master. It might have been clearer if it was written as two questions, i.e. 1) Can I test for Master before I have enough sea time? and ). If I can test, how long is the result good for?
[QUOTE=jdcavo;160065]What’s they typical response when someone in Washington says or does something stupid on the internet? Oh yeah, “my account was hacked…” That’s it.
That’s embarrassing. I looked into it a little more as I am still not sure whay I said that, and realized that I posted an edited version of a private message I received with a similar question. I had edited out some info specific to the guy who asked, and apparently a bit more that changed the way what I said could be interpreted. The gist of what I was trying to say was as I noted yesterday, I don’t know the answer but there is nothing to lose by applying for both, and a bit to gain if you succeed. Rather than saying you should be “insistent” with NMC, I should have said you may need to go to the reconsideration and appeal process. My intent was cleared in the original PM response, much less so in the edited version I posted.
[/QUOTE]
LOL. Thanks for popping back up. I figured you must have in fact completely forgotten about it as when you and I PM’d, many months after you posted that, you said that since I had an application pending you couldn’t address the specifics.
I don’t know how long a request for reconsideration typically takes, but I figured two months (nine weeks, actually) was long enough, and the last guy I talked to at NMC was unwilling to tell me how to appeal the decision while Technical Support was still reviewing it. That kind of chapped me.
If there’s nothing in the CFRs that prohibits testing for both and I qualify for both and I applied for both (and by “I,” really mean “anyone”, I can’t really see what the big deal is. I got the feeling that my evaluator thought I was the idiot, with her “higher” and “lower” license talk. At this point I’m starting to agree …