No, I have a good idea. I gave you an actual answer.
The reason I couldn’t wait is because I knew exactly how this would play out on the forum.
As stated above, even if you get your company to write your seatime as CM, you will still end up testing. I work with several people who took the same road.
Well, your initial post did reek of self entitlement.
You need to realize in the grand scheme of things that ‘the way you see it’ doesn’t matter much. How your evaluator will see it and what the cfrs say is what matters.
Identifying service as Chief Mate might invite it being initially rejected if the mariner doesn’t hold an endorsement titled Chief Mate and/or if the vessel’s COI doesn’t specifically provide that a “chief mate” must be carried. Also, if the mariner were the Master, identifying the service as chief mate would be false and could be considered to be potentially fraudulent. A better option for someone serving as “the” mate on a vessel that only carries one mate is to correctly and accurately identify the service as “mate” and include a statement like “As the sole mate on the vessel, Mr. Reilly was the deck officer upon whom the command of the vessel will fall in the event of incapacity of the master.”
You’re right about testing. Anyone who doesn’t hold Chief Mate Unlimited has to test for Master Unlimited.
I’m not sitting on a couch. I’m in a chair. It has arms…
Sorry, I didn’t mean fraudulently going about it. Where I work, many times the “3rd captain” gets a seatime letter that stated they were a captain. More recently, this has been switched to be CM which i believe is the appropriate way to go.
Ah, I see. So some other “self-entitled” co-workers had a similar thought process as I did. Gotcha. I figured I was the only one to EVER think about this.
I continue to be confused by this “Xth Captain” thing. I assume the Master is the “1st Captain” and if the Chief Mate is the “3rd Captain” who is the “2nd Captain?” And what’s the point?
My fraud comment was directed to the original subject of using time as Master on a “large” OSV to meet a requirement for time as a Chief Mate.
the 2nd Captain is the night captain…he drives the boat when the 1st Captain is asleep.
a 3rd Captain is nothing but an extra watchkeeper…he is not in charge of cargo, safety or managing the unlicensed deck personnel
there is NO Chief Mate on an OSV unless the COI mandates one with the appropriate license. even large OSVs are not manned nor operated as a ship would be
the only point to any of this is that men without “ship” experience are being given qualifying seatime to obtain a “ship” license and then compete against men like me with ship experience for jobs requiring ship licenses. I BLAME YOUR EMPLOYER FOR THIS PAINFUL JOKE!
Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.
That’s zero for three today…
In a 2 for 1 rotation you have three people in rotation covering those two jobs. The “lead captain” is master for his whole hitch, the “relief captain” is chief mate half his hitch and master the other half. The “third captain” is chief mate his whole hitch.
That was never the question. He said he was an OICNW but since he was the only person onboard besides the master with a master’s license then he should be considered chief mate.
I highly doubt that’s the case as these boats usually run with at least four officers onboard, two per 12 hour watch. (Even though only one of these people per watch is actually the OICNW they all get sea time letters written as “mate/OICNW”.)
I thought the NMC has changed their policy and finally admitted that OSVs and other small boats carry chief mates too.
BAH! nobody made you the scorekeeper
he’s one for you to answer…why is no person on an OSV referred to as “the master”?
All the ones I was on the person that was the master at that time was “the master”.
OK, so the “2nd Captain” is only a captain when the “lead captain” isn’t the captain, and the “3rd Captain” is never a captain. Makes sense now.
only if you are a GoM coonass mariner
to the rest of the civilized maritime world it is an EFFING STOOPID way to run a ship just like a boat
Yeah, my company has dropped (for the most part) the 2nd Captain, 3rd Captain, 4th Captan …ad nauseum BS. There’s a bit more clarity with the terms “Lead Captain,” “Relief Captain,” and “Mates.” There always is only one Master obviously, but the old terminology tripped up people whenever the question of “can I speak to the Captain” was asked. Lotta dipshits thinking just because they had the license, then they were the “Captain” the person was looking for.
If you want to hear a perfect example of this idiocy still going on, just listen to the VHF off Louisiana and hear everyone calling each other “Cap’n.”
And yes, even after as many years as I’ve been down here, it still irks the crap out of me when I see or hear that BS.
We have Master (always referred to by that title), relief master, chief mate, 2nd mate, 3rd mate. The third matenusually has the unofficial designation as cargo mate. Sea time letters state the title of the position you worked onboard.
I have a feeling it was mostly an ego stroke by the companies but I’ve heard of similar terminology in other sectors, like on Weeks tugs. Apparently both operators are “captains”, maybe because the mate fully stands his own watch and the captain never works during his 12 hours off, unlike on ships.
That depends on who’s asking. A lot of people just mean the “captain” on watch at the moment. If they actually wanted the master for some reason I would usually tell them no, they can deal with me unless I think it deserves calling the captain.
We had Master, Chief Mate, and the rest were listed as just Mate. The relief master was listed as the capacity he was sailing as at the time.