I have a 350’ diesel electric OSV. It has 4 MDG’s, 2 BT’s, 2 z drives, 2 mud transfer pumps, 4 mud circ pumps, 2 ballast pumps, 2 fire pumps, 2 bilge pumps and on and on. Now I have 250’ OSV with the identical equipment. The only difference between the two is in the 350 the BT’s and z drives are a hundred feet further apart. Tell me what adding 3 more mates, 3 more engineers and running a three watch system is gonna do to enhance that situation? What does a first assistant and a couple of seconds and thirds bring to the table. Regardless of wether they went to an academy or barely graduated from Cut Off high. An 8 man crew would be sufficient 2 deck officers, 2 engine officers, 2 ab’s, 2 QMED’s. It would definitely be hectic but it would work. We used to run 180-280 boats with a five an six man crew. It’s amazing how we managed to take care of the boat an deliver all the product just fine. Prior to deep sea drying up a “blue water sailor” wouldn’t be caught dead down here. Now y’all come down here and make it seem like not only do we need you but we need twice the amount of ya. If unlimited license and a ships watch structure is so awesome and so efficient we should need less people to do it.
I have a 350’ diesel electric OSV. It has 4 MDG’s, 2 BT’s, 2 z drives, 2 mud transfer pumps, 4 mud circ pumps, 2 ballast pumps, 2 fire pumps, 2 bilge pumps and on and on. Now I have 250’ OSV with the identical equipment. The only difference between the two is in the 350 the BT’s and z drives are a hundred feet further apart. Tell me what adding 3 more mates, 3 more engineers and running a three watch system is gonna do to enhance that situation? What does a first assistant and a couple of seconds and thirds bring to the table. Regardless of wether they went to an academy or barely graduated from Cut Off high. An 8 man crew would be sufficient 2 deck officers, 2 engine officers, 2 ab’s, 2 QMED’s. It would definitely be hectic but it would work. We used to run 180-280 boats with a five an six man crew. It’s amazing how we managed to take care of the boat an deliver all the product just fine. Prior to deep sea drying up a “blue water sailor” wouldn’t be caught dead down here. Now y’all come down here and make it seem like not only do we need you but we need twice the amount of ya. If unlimited license and a ships watch structure is so awesome and so efficient we should need less people to do it.[/QUOTE]
but why wouldn’t you want to be a dayworker chief with three engineers standing watch 4 on and 8 off? You fear the boat will be too crowded?
I have a 350’ diesel electric OSV. It has 4 MDG’s, 2 BT’s, 2 z drives, 2 mud transfer pumps, 4 mud circ pumps, 2 ballast pumps, 2 fire pumps, 2 bilge pumps and on and on. Now I have 250’ OSV with the identical equipment. The only difference between the two is in the 350 the BT’s and z drives are a hundred feet further apart. Tell me what adding 3 more mates, 3 more engineers and running a three watch system is gonna do to enhance that situation? What does a first assistant and a couple of seconds and thirds bring to the table. Regardless of wether they went to an academy or barely graduated from Cut Off high. An 8 man crew would be sufficient 2 deck officers, 2 engine officers, 2 ab’s, 2 QMED’s. It would definitely be hectic but it would work. We used to run 180-280 boats with a five an six man crew. It’s amazing how we managed to take care of the boat an deliver all the product just fine. Prior to deep sea drying up a “blue water sailor” wouldn’t be caught dead down here. Now y’all come down here and make it seem like not only do we need you but we need twice the amount of ya. If unlimited license and a ships watch structure is so awesome and so efficient we should need less people to do it.[/QUOTE]
You left out the most important member of the crew — the cook.
What the boats really need are engine room and deck clerks, working days. So the other two guys can actually concentrate on running and maintaining increasing complex vessels.
You forget that the boats have growen bigger, yet Fourchon has not. It’s easy to zip around on a 180’ or 220’ bUt not so much on a 340. The extra eyes are very useful and the extra hands are useful when it comes to the paperwork that we now have. Yea, you could run with an 8 man crew, but the accident rate would sky rocket…
[QUOTE=tugsailor;135696]You left out the most important member of the crew — the cook.[/QUOTE]
The new ships will have fully licensed and inspected vending machines
For a >3000 <6000 mud boat at least a 10 man crew, 1 Master, 1 Ch. Officer, 2 Mates, 2 engine officers, 2 ab’s, 2 QMED’s… Two in the bridge at all times, two in the E/R department at all times. Two on the DP screen that change out ever hour at all times.
I hate 4 on 8 off watch id do 8 on 16 off though. I don’t care about the crowd when the boat sleeps 50+. I just don’t understand why it always comes down to unlimited license and ship manning structure with you. As I stated before a U/L license guy wouldn’t be caught dead down here 10 years ago when all these big boats started being built. Now all the sudden they’re the only people qualified to man them and for whatever reason they can’t stay awake more than 4 hours at a time.
[QUOTE=JW-Oceans;135720]Every person, regardless of position, wether it be rigger or CEO should have Basic Safety Training… Period, and a TWIX[/QUOTE]
That would be like requiring every HR manager, Recruiter, Vessel Mgr, Port Captain, etc. to actually have a license and used it for at least 5 years in order for them to understand at least on a rudimentary level what life on ships, OSVs etc, is like and how the organization of personnel aboard them is structured…
That company is called Utopian Marine, and I’ve never seen them advertise openings and never met anyone who works there.
Updated - - -
[QUOTE=Traitor Yankee;135704]What the boats really need are engine room and deck clerks, working days. So the other two guys can actually concentrate on running and maintaining increasing complex vessels.[/QUOTE]
Yes!
Bring back the Pusers and the REOs! Now we can have 2 certifiable nuts on board at all times. If anyone thought coon asses were crazy, you’ve never met a guy who had to listen random bits of SSB and morse code 8 hrs a day in a high voltage shack by himself.
No but basic fire fighting, personal safety, basic first aid, social responsibilities, and water survival seems like a necessary BASIC SAFETY TRAINING for anyone who is to step foot on any vessel outside the demarcation line should possess. Not just book work, here’s the answers, “Safegulf”, real hands on training.
In fact, one would think people who actually realize that you are up sXXt creek without a paddle when at sea would want to add more to this set of basic skills training… How about how to read a compass? Basic radio usage? Red right return?.. Marine Debris ( LOL)
Bring back the Pusers and the REOs! Now we can have 2 certifiable nuts on board at all times. If anyone thought coon asses were crazy, you’ve never met a guy who had to listen random bits of SSB and morse code 8 hrs a day in a high voltage shack by himself.[/QUOTE]
I’d like to replace the watch standing ABs on my bridge them with some kind of Jr. watch standing mate. That way one watchstander could be near by doing the paperwork and be readily available if the other watch stander required a bit more assistance or advice.
That would get the clerical work done by people who understood the work and provide the ability to quickly upgrade the bridge team a notch if needed unexpectedly.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;135730]I just don’t understand why it always comes down to unlimited license and ship manning structure with you.[/QUOTE]
Because I believe that for a ship sized vessel there should be a chief mate and a first assistant engineer for chain of command purposes and that larger crew sizes provide for more personnel to deal with an emergency if one should arrive. This is my proposed manning for a >6000grt OSV/MOU
one master
one chief mate
two mates
one chief engineer
one first assistant engineer
two assistant engineers
three ABs
three QMEDs
total manning equals 14 men…what on earth would be wrong with that? why wouldn’t anyone want such a manning scale on such a large vessel?
I would allow for 12 hours per day for add one extra mate/DPO to meet DP2 and presto…15men! Right in keeping with what the operators want anyway.
Again I ask why does it have to be an unlimited license? I’ll raise you two more from the original 8 discussed and add a cook and an ETO for 10 total. More than enough people to respond to an emergency. 250 or 350 feet it’s just a big mud boat. The only thing you need extra guys for is to paint the extra 100 ft of deck and cargo room. Does that require an unlimited tonnage license now? Why a chief mate or first? What’s wrong with a second captain and an assistant chief?
It seems like the oil companies have already over regulated the boats. Extra watch officers and DPOs. SafeGulf, PEC, Bosiet, Rigging, HUET, Incipient Fire, OSHA, DP certificates, etc. etc. etc. I’ve heard that there is a movement afoot toward replacing the standard US training like SafeGulf and HUET with mandatory OPITO approved training.
Why does the USCG need to do anything more? Would anything that the USCG might be able to do politically, be as stringent as what the oil companies are already doing?
Here is another question. Why do the oil companies prefer to use so many expensive foreign flag vessels in the Gulf?
Could it be that the oil companies want boats that are unlimted tonnage and crewed like unlimited tonnage with unlimited tonnage officers, the same as they use most other places in the world? Could it be that the oil companies do not trust what appears to be a peculiar and substandard American system with lower training standards, special limited licenses, and undersized crews.
It appears to me that some of the oil companies want to have the same standards in the Gulf as what they are accustomed to in the North Sea.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;135752]Again I ask why does it have to be an unlimited license? I’ll raise you two more from the original 8 discussed and add a cook and an ETO for 10 total. More than enough people to respond to an emergency. 250 or 350 feet it’s just a big mud boat. The only thing you need extra guys for is to paint the extra 100 ft of deck and cargo room. Does that require an unlimited tonnage license now? Why a chief mate or first? What’s wrong with a second captain and an assistant chief?[/QUOTE]
I already told you that the Congress authorized the USCG to create higher tonnage OSV licenses…that is a given but this ANPRM is regarding the training standards for those licenses. I say they should be tougher than the joke that is the large OSV endorsement training in place now. WHY SHOULDN’T IT BE?
Also, there need to be a LEGAL second in command and engineering. Not just designated.
I think all the other training is great but rubbish when we get down to what this is, protecting our way of life, every worker or visitor to any installation outside the demarcation lines but inside our EEZ should meet at least STCW and be vetted with TWIC and why not a MMC. That way we know what is going on in our own back yard, not just making money for oil majors and sending foreign ABs??? To do a job that can be done by someone from the US. … A veteran perhaps?
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;135752]Again I ask why does it have to be an unlimited license? I’ll raise you two more from the original 8 discussed and add a cook and an ETO for 10 total. More than enough people to respond to an emergency. 250 or 350 feet it’s just a big mud boat. The only thing you need extra guys for is to paint the extra 100 ft of deck and cargo room. Does that require an unlimited tonnage license now? Why a chief mate or first? What’s wrong with a second captain and an assistant chief?[/QUOTE]
I’m rooting for you Fraqrat, but then I was rooting for Tom Cruise in “The Last Samurai” in the scene where he attacked those Gatling Guns.