And will end for “ALL” ?? So, whats going to happen now to those 1600T Captains manning those over 3000 GT up to 10000 GT OSV boats after March 24, 2019?? Are they gonna be grandfathered? Or will just have to enjoy the money before March 2019???
[QUOTE=miami;147702]And will end for “ALL” ?? So, whats going to happen now to those 1600T Captains manning those over 3000 GT up to 10000 GT OSV boats after March 24, 2019?? Are they gonna be grandfathered? Or will just have to enjoy the money before March 2019???[/QUOTE]
No one will lose anything they already have. Anyone already licensed for OSVs not more than 6,000 GT will keep it, with only an infinitesimally small reduction in authority - it will be for “less than” 6,000 T instead of “not more than.”
Anyone not eligible for grandfathering who does not hold the license will need to meet the new requirements in 46 CFR 11.493(b).
Anyone with less than 6,000 GT can increase the tonnage to up to 10,000 GT following46 CFR 11.493©. If you have at least a year on vessels over 3,000 GT you should be able to get the tonnage limit (to 6,000 GT) removed.
Thank you Mr. cavo… Just curious in case I decided to get it on my endorsement, but I think ill just go for the unlimited path…
[QUOTE=capnfab;147562]Nothing on topic to say really.
Got lost among the old Warner Brothers cartoons. Mel Blanc on Lettermen from 1981 is worth the 10 minutes to watch.[/QUOTE]
there’s nothing, but NOTHING that can’t either be made better or lampooned more effectively than with classic Looney Toons…especially Foghorn Leghorn! There’s southern bird I can laugh “with” and not “at” for once…
can you imagine that these are all at least 60 years old now?..almost as old as me!
[QUOTE=jdcavo;147576]The program approval also requires prior experience as Master on an OSV of less than 3,000 GT.[/QUOTE]
Does the prior experience have to be as master or can it be as mate when going for a Master OSV 6000?
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;147936]Does the prior experience have to be as master or can it be as mate when going for a Master OSV 6000?[/QUOTE]
Under the old Large OSV program progression it has to be as Master. Under new 46 CFR 11.493(b) some of the time can be as Mate with the rest as “Chief Mate.” In order for the time to be considered as Chief Mate, you would first need to get the endorsement as Chief Mate OSV for 3,000 GT or more (46 CFR 11.495). See also the definition of “chief mate” in 46 CFR 10.107.
[QUOTE=jdcavo;147955]Under the old Large OSV program progression it has to be as Master.[/QUOTE]
So someone that served as a mate then upgrades to master cannot immediately serve 56 days as “training captain”, do their assessments, and get their Master OSV 6000?
I only get one thing out of this thread
Why the hell are you doing this so sophisticated? Can not you just follow the same system as the rest of the countries that signed the STCW?
The sad truth is that most American mariners would be a lot better off if the US did follow the same STCW scheme as most other countries. Instead we have this ridiculous patchwork of restricted licenses.
We have no idea why they make it so complicated!
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;147996]So someone that served as a mate then upgrades to master cannot immediately serve 56 days as “training captain”, do their assessments, and get their Master OSV 6000?[/QUOTE]
If they could, I would not have said (twice) that prior experience as Master is required.
[QUOTE=Kraken;147997]Can not you just follow the same system as the rest of the countries that signed the STCW?[/QUOTE]
It is because here in the US, the shipowners rule the regulators and have told the USCG that they want these special licenses for all the many reasons I have previously elaborated at length here and which I refrain from listing again now. Being typically American, the USCG acts with hubris to decide which STCW regulations to adopt and enforce and which to ignore because there is no one in the world to tell them they can’t.
It is called regulatory capture. The USCG is ruled by the industry they are supposed to regulate just like most third world countries.
[QUOTE=jdcavo;148027]If they could, I would not have said (twice) that prior experience as Master is required.[/QUOTE]
Sorry about the repetition, I’m a little confused because the checklist for Master OSV > 3000 ITC seems to very clearly say otherwise.
“Note: Must do Large OSV Training Program for OSV ‘s > 3000 ITC *Complete 180 days of service as master [B]or mate[/B] of an OSV >1,000 GT (ITC)”
So is the Master OSV 6000 checklist wrong? You need time specifically as master, not just generally as an officer?
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;148407]So is the Master OSV 6000 checklist wrong? You need time specifically as master, not just generally as an officer?[/QUOTE]
Enough with this Large POS sea time circus. This thread is about as infuriating as which dipshit scumbag is running for AMO President, whether or not KP should be closed (no, it should be razed), or another winner that just won’t die.
just go get a C/M license, sail C/M on a ship, then get your Masters.
Done. No scheming. No questions. No horse shit traing programs . No "qualified assesors."
Just actual sea time.
Revolutionary, ain’t it…
10 years ago I may have agreed with you, at this point not so much. The problem is not the mariner trying to scheme anything, the problem is that the rules make no sense; a 320’ 4000T subsea vessel is a ship. period. In every country in the world. Except ours… A master that has come up through the workboat world running progressively larger and more complicated vessels does not need to go correct charts on a container ship to be qualified to run a vessel incrementally larger. Today’s workboats have all the same paperwork as any ship, plus enough client driven paperwork and audits to make your average ship Captain’s head explode. There should be a simple path from Master 3000 to master AGT as there is in other countries. The only argument that makes some sense is the potential lack of foreign experience (or any place other than Fourchon) One would hope that someone who had made it that far could approach a new port/country the same as any prudent master entering a new port for the first time. Plus, if they had survived getting in and out of Fourchon in the same boat, they probably have ship handling under control.
[QUOTE=Johnny Canal;148490]Enough with this Large POS sea time circus. This thread is about as infuriating as which dipshit scumbag is running for AMO President, whether or not KP should be closed (no, it should be razed), or another winner that just won’t die.
just go get a C/M license, sail C/M on a ship, then get your Masters.
Done. No scheming. No questions. No horse shit traing programs . No "qualified assesors."
Just actual sea time.
Revolutionary, ain’t it…[/QUOTE]
Johnny has a valid point. And no a 320 foot OSV is not much of a ship when compared to 1100 feet of single screw ship with one bow thruster. Or 500-600 foot of tug and barge ATB or wire make up with only a limited amount of horsepower and 20-30 feet of draft. The SOLAS certification changed these old work boats into today’s new so called ships. They are even easier to handle and now with only a primary port like Fourchon the OSV mariner has created a limited spectrum license and very limited knowledge when it comes to geography. It’s truly a shame to see people forget sailing on an actual working ship because our companies can’t accommodate equal time schedules and advancement opportunities for mates coming in like the oilfield does. The new navigators will gain that much needed wheel time they desire due to supply and demand and they’ll learn more small boat politics because no matter how hard you try an OSV is not a ship and its not a union ship at all. With the help of a few salty crews the old can help the new and transition from OSV to tug or to large ship or whatever the job calls for can be made with pride knowing its a common goal we all aim for. United States Shipping with United States Merchant Marine
[QUOTE=Johnny Canal;148490]No “qualified assesors.”[/QUOTE]
You actually need a “qualified assessor” to sign your Chief Mate / Master assessments now…
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;148497]You actually need a “qualified assessor” to sign your Chief Mate / Master assessments now…[/QUOTE]
Look up reqd parameters for qualified assessor for 6000 OSV and tell me if you think these 2 assessments are comparable. The OSV one is ridiculously restrictive.
If u think supply boat paperwork is the same as ships paperwork in type or volume, you haven’t got a clue. And yeah, all we do on container ships is correct charts and fuck off on union coffee time.
You’re about as useless as poopie flavored lollipop.