Think about this. You and your family are getting ready to board a plane. You ask the pilot, “What are your qualifications?” He responds, “I have flown planes for 2000 hours, attended all FAA approved training and courses. {Note he did not specify the type of plane} I have also been approved by a FAA Qualified Assessor.” You then ask, “Who was the assessor?”
He responds," This guy I worked with. We went to school together, he’s knows me"
The problem seems to be everyone agrees the USCG doesn’t have the funds, desire or the wherewithal to assess mariners on the same scale as the FAA. That will remain the case unless until some moron kills a bunch of civilians. Mariners don’t count as civilians as we all know
Since bus drivers, truck drivers, train engineers & light rail conductors aren’t assessed on the same scale as those with FAA licenses I don’t think it’s ever going to happen for mariners either since all those professions have more interactions & accidents with the public compared to mariners.
That’s fine with me. If a Master works +2.5 years as Master in a 5 year period, completes all of his STCW/USCG refresher/renewal requirements, has no recordable issues with class society/USCG/Port States I don’t see why he would need additional hoops to jump through like FAA pilots have. Our system is working. If you have an idiot on your team train him to be better, write him if he doesn’t get better & give him an honest evaluation to try to get him transferred or fired. Engineers bringing Alfa-Laval centrifuges with them to the REC to show the CG they know how to troubleshoot isn’t the answer. We should use the tools we have to ensure those around us are competent. From my experiences the best tools isn’t a disciplinary form but posted standing orders, detailed night orders/work instructions, patience & lots of hours giving training. I guess I’m lucky because I haven’t worked around enough idiots lately to see the need for all the changes at the USCG described on this thread.
I agree but train engineers aren’t on LNG ships which could cause catastrophic damage. I also don’t believe in disciplinary forms, just accountability. While auditing ships I would often ask the 3AE to show me the emergency bilge valve, open it for inspection so I could look with a mirror. You’d be surprised how often they would call the 2AE and ask about the location. Then I’d ask the 1AE who signed them off on their qualification to be AE? Many times the emergency bilge valve could not be opened without some serious help even though it was supposed to operated once a month. I never reported such things unless it happened on next visit. It’s a culture thing. What we used to call professionalism. Sorely lacking on many drill ships and OSVs; much better on ROROs, bulkers, survey and the like but perhaps times have changed.
did you ever meet a doctor that was ever checked after they left their hospital training?
You’re forgetting cheap. The ones who are interested and wanted me to fly my own dime to go teach it to them. Nobody wants to spend the money required. Except when they do have money, like in building carnival’s CSMART Academy, And the curriculum all revolves around something linear concept a c-suite executive learned while getting his mba.
It is funny. But it is also the way you reduce bias during interviews and competitions.
HAHA, seatime requirements. Why do (did) universities use entry exams like the SAT to rate applications? All the students had time requirements of 12 years of schooling?
If somebody is supposed to have specific skills, they need to be tested. An arbitrary time requirement is a horrible way to assume somebody has mastered the required skills.
Every bus/truck driver I’ve ever seen had to get in a truck and drive it during some sort of on-the-road test. I can’t speak for train engineers.
You essentially say, “we don’t have a problem, because the way other organizations address this won’t work for us…because muh traditions”.
Cheating on the exams, while morally reprehensible, is not an issue at all…because the exams are mostly worthless at evaluating competency anyway.
Imagine if nuke plant operators were qualified solely on a multiple choice test and how many days they “worked” in the plant.
Gotta six-smegma KPI it!
And while everybody always says it’s a money issue, I disagree. Companies and government spend and waste tons of money. I see major shipping lines “too cheap” to buy proper tools and replacement parts, but gladly spend 10x on overtime costs. The worst primary schools in america have the largest budgets.
It’s not always about money, but it usually involves lack of leadership and a culture that won’t look in the mirror and admit there is a problem. The airline industry had a problem in the 70’s with pilot error in the cockpit causing too many accidents…CRM (crew resource management) was the result.
On the equipment side of aviation, continuous improvement in design and maintenance practices, new technology, rigorous certification processes, and meticulous statistical analysis have nearly eliminated the risk of equipment failure. And when equipment does fail, there is usually redundancy designed in.
But see, continuous improvment first means admitting there is room to improve. And in shipping, getting anybody to admit anything…Hahahahhahah
You could always just take a Liberian License online now, Im sure the oversight procedures are quite comprehensive. 
.
I hope that the Liberian licensing tests have been upgraded now. On one ship 45 years ago there was an exam paper for 1AE. Most mates passed it with ease.
A run through the bridge simulator is now standard ever 5 years and the examiners have no connection with the school.
Yes, but again, the buses & trucks were likely provided by the person taking the driving tests & it lasted 10-20 minutes. Skilled mariners in the steward department shouldn’t have to go into a regional examination center with a tray full of dirty dishes & some flour to demonstrate they know how to wash dishes & bake to get & keep their documents. A skilled 3rd mate can’t go into the REC with 79 fire extinguishers to demonstrate they mastered the skill of the monthly fire extinguisher inspection. Good log keeping, running drills, ship handling, proper crew management, ordering supplies & staying near budget, navigation, customer relations etc are all important skills of Master. How would the USCG judge a Chief Mate on all of that using practices used by the FAA & DMV to test pilots & drivers? If I understand you correctly you would like USCG examiners to come live with us on board so we can demonstrate all the skills that our professions encompass? Maybe the USCG should operate a fleet of different vessels that we all have to go work on to show to them we know what we are doing?
To get into any Maritime Academy a person has to pass an entrance exam as well. About the nuclear power plant workers. No one is given the keys to a nuclear power plant upon graduation. They start at the bottom & work their way up just like in our industry. Our USCG mariner credentialing system can always use improvements but does okay IMO.
I don’t think the FAA tests pilots on how they handle their expense reports…
The entry exam to some maritime academies must not be very hard…from what I’ve seen of some of the students.
Nuke guy start at the bottom and work their way up…with extensive training, recurrent training, simulator training, and practical testing at each step.
The credentialing system does OK? Here’s a thought. The two main pathways to get a 3rd unlimited mate/eng are: 1) 4yr maritime university or 2) 3 years of sea time hawespiping with various classes along the way.
To legally be able to sit left seat (captain) in a wide body jet (747,777, a380, etc) in the USA requires an ATP license (1500 hours flying time) and a type rating (about a month of training). That’s it. One could theoretically get the 1500 hours in a year or two. At each step, one must pass various check rides and tests.
So, it takes twice a long to get a 3rd unlimited license than it does to legally be able to captain a 777. Hmmmmmm
What is the normal progression path from unlicensed to captain of a 777?
dont ask that question in Asia as you will get scared…even scarier if you look at who gets the right seat.
I was on a twin prop plane in SE Asia where I had flown before… Looked out the window as they were making approach. I stepped thru the curtain into the cockpit and asked why we were approaching a military base. They aborted that approach, thanked me and we landed at our proper destination. 
mate of mine on a 747 freighter ask the very nervous FO about his experience he said 157hrs, my buddy says ok ( thinking he means on type) how about total time, yes 157!!
Problem with airlines is its their country that makes the rules and if its a national carrier then we know what happens in asia…
STCW95 should have aligned all countries training, but it didnt.
WTF? How is that possible? You sure about this or is this BS? What country issued the license?
small one in asia …
Ex chief pilot, who I know, from this small country left as he said too much pressure to put people who cant fly into the right seat.
Got plenty of stories, I have a buddy doing boeing and another doing airbus sim work.
You wont believe the stories.
Asia versus the west…having a beer with Qantas, UPS and SIA captains, chatting about some recent news, QF guys says the old guys taught us to fly with autopilot off ( at high level ) as its a skill you need and its not easy, UPS guys says we need to pass that test to get a job, SQ guy says never allowed to learn even in the sim…
Which basically explains why modern crew crash perfectly good planes.
Korean ex fghter pilot trying to get 737 endorsement, my buddy spends days and days but the guy could never do a single engine landing or takeoff.
Pressure from Boeing as they are selling planes to his cousins new airline, get another instructor to pass him…
Famous case in OZ was when a guruda 747 tried to land at the old Melbourne airport that 747’s cant fit, when the tower at the new airport lost them on the radar they asked where they were, its about 20 miles away.
I have heard similar. Scary shit
I have one great story of a Chinese pilot that could fly a 737 800 better than Boeing thinks it can fly. My buddy recorded the sim session so he could try to do the same…
Cross wind landings well above max for that type, perfectly every time…
This guy cant speak English, flys for the the CCP gov on some internal airline
( yes had interpreter in the sim )