[QUOTE=c.captain;75843] To drive a 6000ton vessel we need to go through a lot to get the UL license so why shouldn’t a large OSV master not have to go though say half of what we do?
[/QUOTE]
That question is based on a very false assumption.
Since there must be more guys that did the 6,000 ton assessments and progressed to unlimited master (that can speak accurately)…I’ll wait for someone else to chime in, but I can tell you one thing for certain c.captain. There ain’t much difference between the two, and I would argue that the 6,000 ton assessment is even more demanding in some of its aspects.
Is there a checklist that has to be signed off by an UL Master in addition to the sea time to move up from CM? The 6000 upgrade is kinda like the towing endorsement its has to be done by a CG approved assessor. No just any master or chief holding the 6000 can sign off someone’s packet. These assessors are approved by the CG as part of the company’s program. Is there something similar in the UL license progression? Are there CG approved designated UL chiefs and masters that must sign off CM’s and 1st A/E’s? Just wondering.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;75890]Is there a checklist that has to be signed off by an UL Master in addition to the sea time to move up from CM? The 6000 upgrade is kinda like the towing endorsement its has to be done by a CG approved assessor. No just any master or chief holding the 6000 can sign off someone’s packet. These assessors are approved by the CG as part of the company’s program. Is there something similar in the UL license progression? Are there CG approved designated UL chiefs and masters that must sign off CM’s and 1st A/E’s? Just wondering.[/QUOTE]
I can’t answer for the bridge side but for the engine room no. The only hard part about moving up on the engineers side is you have to sail one year on each license, before moving up to the next. The hard part is finding a boat that requires a 1st A/E, because you have to have a year on that license to move up to chief, there is no sign off that I ever went through. Alot of the boats that require a unlimited chief, do require unlimited assistants but the COI will not desiginate having to have a 1st A/E. In most cases like the DMT Emerald any assistant could fill the spot, I hear alot of the big ATB’s are the same way.
Well it sounds to me like the hardest part of the unlimited upgrade is finding the job. All you have to do is find a 1st A/E or CM job and hold it down for a year or so. I’m sure finding those spots is not easy. It seems like there is an extra set of hurdles to the 6000 endorsement. Just like a towing endorsement won’t be given away neither will a large OSV endorsement. Having a CG approved assessor as the gate keeper seems like a good idea. It appears the 6000 has to be earned by a practical skills demonstration. Is this not similar to a CM having to prove he is worthy to be in his position and basically a Master in training? If the CM is not capably performing his duties would he not be demoted and therefore cockblocked from attaining his sea time for his upgrade?
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;75890]Is there a checklist that has to be signed off by an UL Master in addition to the sea time to move up from CM? The 6000 upgrade is kinda like the towing endorsement its has to be done by a CG approved assessor. No just any master or chief holding the 6000 can sign off someone’s packet. These assessors are approved by the CG as part of the company’s program. Is there something similar in the UL license progression? Are there CG approved designated UL chiefs and masters that must sign off CM’s and 1st A/E’s? Just wondering.[/QUOTE]
Yes. You have another regime of assessments and will need to have more in-depth knowledge of stability, regulations, and celestial. The jump is marginal and just builds off what you already should know. The assessments themselves are more of a generic nature, but you have to prove yourself nontheless. It’s not a rubber stamp by any means, but generally takes one act and one observation to prove completion. Now the CG approved assessor for 6,000 ton OSV is pretty much a rubber stamp, just to make sure you are being assessed by someone that has the 6,000 ton license. If you have it, then approval to assess is automatic, ie. rubber stamp. The crux is an unlimited master cannot assess unless approved by the Coast Guard as well.
On the opposite side with the large OSV, you are getting assessed doing your job, your specific job, doing specific tasks that can only be proven in that environment, the real life one - the real make or break…putting vessels in slips, loading products, DP procedures…etc…You never get signed off the first time you do any of them.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;75896]Having a CG approved assessor as the gate keeper seems like a good idea.QUOTE]
ANYONE that did the 6,000 ton can be approved…and most of the time the company gets that approval without your knowledge as soon as you get the endorsement.
So could this not be the case for an UL master or Chief as well? As a holder of the license would they not just be “rubber stamped” too? Is there a special test or class required to be an UL assessor.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;75907]So could this not be the case for an UL master or Chief as well? As a holder of the license would they not just be “rubber stamped” too? Is there a special test or class required to be an UL assessor.[/QUOTE]
Once again I cannot speak for the bridge crew, but at another company I worked for, someone in HR wrote a letter to the coast guard, and they sent me the assessors cert just like anchorman said without me even knowing about it. an unlimited master may be different. The lettter I got said I was grand fathered in because of the time I had had my licnese. I knew nothing about it until it showed up in the mail. but that was to sign people off on the 6000 ITC though.
I’m an assessor but they informed all of us when it was being put through to the CG. I’m just wondering is there a special requirement for UL guys to be CG approved assessors to sign off CM’s and 1st A/E’s.
No, any unlimited master can sign off on the cm assessments. But your idea of an “approved assessor” is a joke if everyone gets it automatically. Has anyone every been denied the coast guards “approval”?
The biggest difference is the fact that the assessment is the only requirement for the 6000 ton. There is no additional test, unlike the nine module cm/m exam.
C.captain just wants it to be harder to get the license so that the people that have it get paid more. The same reason he wants more OSVs to require unlimited licenses, so he can demand a higher day rate.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;75911]I’m an assessor but they informed all of us when it was being put through to the CG. I’m just wondering is there a special requirement for UL guys to be CG approved assessors to sign off CM’s and 1st A/E’s.[/QUOTE]
Yes. You have to be a Master or Chief Mate first of all. And to assess you are attesting that you have read, understand, and will follow the PL guidelines. Being that you have not even heard of this requirement, you cannot assess anyone for anything unless specifically approved to do so. Now, of course you can anyway, just like you can run aground “if” you really want to. But, it doesn’t really matter. Having the level of competence to assess is the main focus. Those guidelines are clear…you have to have that regardless.
You do not need a special class to assess any unrestricted license, but the above holds true. You do not need a class for being a 6,000 ton approved assessor either, or pass any type of exam. It’s assessments only, and once done you can assess others by submitting your name to USCG…Provided you got the license of course. Simple as that.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;75924]Yes people have been turned down for assessor but I do not know the specific reasons.[/QUOTE]
More than likely, it was something tied to their license. I cannot see anyone getting turned down for assessor. You get approved by virtue of having a 6,000 ton endorsement, that is the only measuring stick not counting obvious requirements of having a license in general.
Find out the reason of “people” being turned down. I want to hear this. I know many and never heard of such.
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;75916]C.captain just wants it to be harder to get the license so that the people that have it get paid more. The same reason he wants more OSVs to require unlimited licenses, so he can demand a higher day rate.[/QUOTE]
Of course, but hey the same thing goes for all of us. Anything that limits the supply of a particular license makes the companies pay more if they have the demand. Making it so easy ended up playing into the companies not the mariners but both do benefit.
Hell, with money some of these large OSV’s get per day, why the masters of them aren’t making over $1k is not right considering the level of skill and responsibilities. That number is coming though and probably not too many months from now if not here already in some places.
SO, I wished it were harder but it’s not and won’t be so the only thing I wonder about is the super OSV’s that are coming. Will the same system be rubber stampted by the USCG for a 10000 master’s license? I really, truly hope not.
I certainly don’t know what the USCG will do, but if I had to guess, my best guess would be that the USCG will keep the same large OSV program and just substitute the number “10,000” everywhere that the number “6,000” appears now. That is simplest for the USCG, its probably what the companies want, and I do not think that creating a new “super OSV” program would make any meaningful difference to the quality of mariners, or the incident rate.
The USCG and the companies are not going to accept a situation where the companies are simply forced to hire unlimited masters without, because the companies and the USCG both know that the typical unlimited master does not have the necessary skill set to run any OSV, much less a super OSV.
The concept of TOAR was good because unlimited license mariners without towing experience are absolutely NOT qualified to runs tugs. However, the USCG’s implementation of TOAR is a a joke.
The USCG should probably come up with something similar to TOAR for OSVs to prevent unlimited license holders without OSV experience from becoming instant OSV masters, but the USCG needs to do a much better job of implementing it.
It’s not as easy to get the 6000 as you seem to believe, hell, just getting them to put you on a boat of proper size is an ordeal.
I’m still wondering what skill sets we are missing compared to the UL guys that would be a difference maker. I’m not calling you out but like I said, I’m not familiar with the requirements above 3rd mate UL.
[QUOTE=tugsailor;75946]I certainly don’t know what the USCG will do, but if I had to guess, my best guess would be that the USCG will keep the same large OSV program and just substitute the number “10,000” everywhere that the number “6,000” appears now. That is simplest for the USCG, its probably what the companies want, and I do not think that creating a new “super OSV” program would make any meaningful difference to the quality of mariners, or the incident rate.[/QUOTE]
It will be different program, with more requirements. 6,000 will remain as is.
Well I hope so anyway & btw, this is the super large OSV that I speak of…
Technip to charter advanced OCV
JULY 25, 2012 —Technip (Paris:TEC) has entered a long-term charter agreement for a newbuild Skipsteknisk ST-261 design offshore construction vessel ordered from Bergen Group last month by Norway’s North Sea Shipping. (See earlier story).
The charter will be for a period of five or seven years commitment plus a five-year extension option, with a further option to purchase the vessel.
The vessel is specially designed and equipped to suit the Norwegian installation market. It has a length of 142 meters and width of 27 meters, and is equipped with a 400-ton crane and a 2,000-ton carousel for storage of flexible pipe below deck.
The vessel is scheduled for delivery from the shipbuilder in 2014.
The new vessel’s design specification meets the highest requirements for subsea work and although it will work predominantly in the North Sea, it is also suitable for deepwater operations worldwide.
Technip says the vessel will be a valuable addition to its fleet and further demonstrates Technip’s commitment to continually improving its fleet of marine assets.
WOW…looks like a much enhanced and lengthened version of the AIVIQ. Let’s see some of these built in the US flying the US flag!
