[QUOTE=rshrew;51975]I’m a bit confused with all of this…if I have 3rd Mate ticket and want to go to 1600T master I still have to test?[/QUOTE]
Yes. As already noted, this is for 3rd Mate/Mate 500/1600, and Mate OSV. You have to test because there are subjects required to be tested for Master 1600 that aren’t required for 3rd Mate/2nd Mate. Look at 46 CFR Table 11.910. Everything checked for Master 1600 that is not checked for 3rd Mate or 2nd Mate is what you have to test on.
[QUOTE=anchorman;51959]That is not enough information to determine the answer you need. The question is if you took an OICNW test to get to 1600ton Master, and when did you take it? For the people that went Master, Master, Master - bypassed the OICNW tests all together - chances are, you will have to take a test for 3rd.[/QUOTE]
Anchorman,
OK. I got all the assessments signed off and took the test after 1 February 2002. I am going to keep studying. Maybe I will only have to take a couple of tests.
[QUOTE=Diesel;51948]lapware.org
If you were a Navy Surface Warfare Officer you are overqualified. You just have to learn to do without the JOOD, the QM, the nav evaluator, four lookouts, the helmsman, the lee helmsman etc. LOL[/QUOTE]
I was doing without them when I had them, usually I had 4 break-ins with them. My biggest problem was keeping their hands off things so I could do my job…
Thanks all that replied, I have had some friends who have had to re-test all 7 sections for their 1600 masters and some who got away with the “crossover” exam so it seems like a grey area.
Well I’m excited to see that its finally a fact that I waisted 4 years of college and huge sums of student loans for nothing, plus all of the lost wages. At least this way drilling companies shouldn’t have a problem finding 3/M DPOs anymore.
Sukker,
I wish I had 4 years of college behind me as a back-up.
Your MT degree is still a trump card over us hawsepipers. In the long run you will promote faster, have more opportunities ashore, and you always have a degree.
I don’t feel sorry for you at all. 
The ones to feel sorry for are the hawsepipers who finished up AB to Mate programs two weeks ago.
[QUOTE=DeckApe;52007]Your MT degree is still a trump card over us hawsepipers. In the long run you will promote faster, have more opportunities ashore, and you always have a degree.
I don’t feel sorry for you at all. 
The ones to feel sorry for are the hawsepipers who finished up AB to Mate programs two weeks ago.[/QUOTE]
I quit sailing as a deckhand in 2002 due to the training requirements I had to complete for my OICNW and went the Academy route. The AB to Mate Program was developed towards the end of my time at School and if I had to do it all over again I would have probably chosen the AB to Mate Program because of the large amount of actual at sea experience and the classroom based training. I do have to agree with you 100% it has to be a swift kick to the groin for the guys that are about to or just about to complete all of the previous required training. I’m about half way through the C/M Training Requirements and now fear that they too may be huge waste of time and money.
[QUOTE=Sukker;52012]I quit sailing as a deckhand in 2002 due to the training requirements I had to complete for my OICNW and went the Academy route. The AB to Mate Program was developed towards the end of my time at School and if I had to do it all over again I would have probably chosen the AB to Mate Program because of the large amount of actual at sea experience and the classroom based training. I do have to agree with you 100% it has to be a swift kick to the groin for the guys that are about to or just about to complete all of the previous required training. I’m about half way through the C/M Training Requirements and now fear that they too may be huge waste of time and money.[/QUOTE]
I believe there will be some people that think the same way as you. Besides that fact, the point is demonstrating standards of competency and required KUPs in compliance with STCW. This can be done in many ways (testing at an REC is one), but the absolute worse is having a mariner spend thousands of dollars for remedial courses that serve no purpose outside of the coffers of various schools. That is not the purpose of STCW. The greatest benefit of this policy letter is giving mariners flexibility to meet requirements. Everyone is different. Aptitude levels are different. Pocket books are different. Experience is different. If a guy comes to my bridge and wants to be assessed, I have no problem provided they can do what’s required in the spirit of STCW. If they cannot demonstrate a certain level, then off to school they need to go, or try harder to learn. There are options now. The next guy might come up and knock it out of the park and potentially shoot me out of the saddle one day. What is the value in bringing the second guy down to the level of the 1st guy if the minimum standard is the same, which it is? I doubt an “everyone passes” course certificate will trump the natural checks and balances that occur right on the ship in reference to the level you must perform in your position or future positions.
If you look at the CM/Master courses, most are tailored for the unions ships in which the schools serve. Does STCW require this? No, but it makes sense for the union schools to take STCW standards and apply their course curriculum specifically to their industry while meeting STCW requirements at the same time. If it was me, I would do the exact same thing. I was not pleased with some of the course work I had to take because of this reason. I never wanted to work in shipping, but needed an unlimited master license for my current position and this was the only route. I can think of many ways to “demonstrate standards of competency and required KUPs in compliance with STCW” besides being tailored like a suit for a prom I will never attend - only If there was a system in place that offers that flexibility to the professional mariners and operators.
There is obviously going to be people that think otherwise. The schools want people in school. Some mariners will want the people behind them to do the exact type of schooling they did. Not for the practicality of the learning, but just the comparable sacrifice of time and money they endured - that’s simple human nature bread from animosity. Then you will have the worse ones of them all. Those that think more is always better, but never did one lick of school themselves and were grandfathered under the old system. The ultimate hypocrites of them all. I just had a conversation with one last Friday when the new policy letter came out. Oh my god, the total disagreement that this person had with this new policy. Then, 20 minutes into the conversation, I learned that he did none of the OICNW courses himself. What the hell is that crap?
Having a college degree trumps all. You cannot in any way shape or form take away the value of an Academy degree. But, you will have to prove yourself all the same as the next guy with any employer - you’re just ahead of the curve as far as getting that employer to begin with.
[QUOTE=anchorman;52028]Then you will have the worse ones of them all. Those that think more is always better, but never did one lick of school themselves and were grandfathered under the old system. The ultimate hypocrites of them all. I just had a conversation with one last Friday when the new policy letter came out. Oh my god, the total disagreement that this person had with this new policy. Then, 20 minutes into the conversation, I learned that he did none of the OICNW courses himself. What the hell is that crap?[/QUOTE]
This must have been harelip.
[QUOTE=Sukker;52029]This must have been harelip.[/QUOTE]
No. Not him, but you can bet on him sitting next to you on the flight down eating jello desert and waking up everyone on the plane.
Looks like the thread is back up and running again. Thanks
DUMB question !!! If a Master 500 or 1600 GRT can sign the OICNW assessments, then why must said Master have to do the assessments to upgrade? A Master (who has not done the assessments) signs the assessments for an AB that is going for 3rd Mate, that is OK right? But the master would need someone to sign his assessments for him to upgrade to a 3rd Mate, yes? Hell is there anything in the rules that say an Assessor (Master 500 or 1600 GRT who can sign the OICNW assessments) can’t sign his own assessments?
Candidate’s Name: ME
Assessor’s Name: Myself
This is what I was told. Sounds absurd, as most of the rules do. Holly Chetta told me that you cannot sign your own. Yes, you can sign them off for another 1600 ton Master or and AB upgrading to 3rd Mate. Again, sounds absurd. She also said that she had a couple of 1600 Masters she was helping get their 3rd Mates Approval Letters this week get a letter from the NMC stating they had to take all of the classes. She said she asked them did they have the new instruction on these classes. The NMC said they did recieve the instruction but it was not retroactive and because they already had their apps turned in prior to the policy change that it did not help them at all and they would have to take all of the OINCW classes. Has anyone else heard of this crazy shit.
Submit a new app and let the old app die. Its an extra $140 or so but who cares? Reuse the same physical and drug test.
[QUOTE=chemcarrier;52098]…The NMC said they did recieve the instruction but it was not retroactive and because they already had their apps turned in prior to the policy change that it did not help them at all and they would have to take all of the OINCW classes. Has anyone else heard of this crazy shit.[/QUOTE]
It is retroactive. It doesn’'t matter when or if you put in an application.
[QUOTE=MaJoX;52096]DUMB question !!! If a Master 500 or 1600 GRT can sign the OICNW assessments, then why must said Master have to do the assessments to upgrade? A Master (who has not done the assessments) signs the assessments for an AB that is going for 3rd Mate, that is OK right? But the master would need someone to sign his assessments for him to upgrade to a 3rd Mate, yes? Hell is there anything in the rules that say an Assessor (Master 500 or 1600 GRT who can sign the OICNW assessments) can’t sign his own assessments?
Candidate’s Name: ME
Assessor’s Name: Myself[/QUOTE]
Not a dumb question, but the only thing that would disregard that situation would be to eliminate the possibility of becoming Master before being a Mate OICNW. That would mean no Master to Master career path. The alternative would be to complete assessments that should be fairly easy for you, with limited school (that should have been done to become Master anyway). That’s a no-brainer as far as picking the lesser of two evils…do the assessments by someone that is allowed to do them, regardless if you assessed someone yourself.
[QUOTE=anchorman;52110]Not a dumb question, but the only thing that would disregard that situation would be to eliminate the possibility of becoming Master before being a Mate OICNW. That would mean no Master to Master career path. The alternative would be to complete assessments that should be fairly easy for you, with limited school (that should have been done to become Master anyway). That’s a no-brainer as far as picking the lesser of two evils…do the assessments by someone that is allowed to do them, regardless if you assessed someone yourself.[/QUOTE]
That is what Regulation II/2 of STCW calls for: “[e]very candidate for certification [as chief mate/master] shall… meet the requirements of for certification as officer in charge of a navigational watch on ships of 500 gross tonnage or more.”
This new OICNW policy letter got me so riled up I’ve come out of retirement.
I think that those folks who have spent their $20k, lost wages, lost seatime, time away from home and hearth, paid room and board, and sat through some of the most irrelevant classes known to man should band together and sue the USCG under a class action for:
While you’re at it, file a FOIA request to determine how many people appealed 01-02, and of those how many prevailed and were given OICNW without having to complete the requirements of 01-02. I think the USCG was getting worried that the secret path to OICNW wasn’t so secret anymore and 07-11 is their response, anticipating litigation.
Sneaky bastards, releasing this horseshit on a holiday weekend. Arrogant bastards, legislating via policy letter instead of going through a process of codifying the policy. How nice not to have to give anyone any notice. How nice not to have to collect and collate public comments that they ignore anyhow. How nice to type up a letter and turn every American mariner’s life upside down. How unfair to those who worked and toiled and even watched their marriages dissolve over the time and expenses required to get something that OVERNIGHT just got a whole fucking lot easier and less expensive.
Perhaps some of the resident gCaptain attorneys might have some ideas.
Bottom line, the USCG has failed in their mission to Honor The Mariner. They’ve hosed us over and over again, and this is just the latest slap in the face to those of us who played the 01-02 game in good faith.
[QUOTE=Capt_Anonymous;52185]This new OICNW policy letter got me so riled up I’ve come out of retirement.
I think that those folks who have spent their $20k, lost wages, lost seatime, time away from home and hearth, paid room and board, and sat through some of the most irrelevant classes known to man should band together and sue the USCG under a class action for:
While you’re at it, file a FOIA request to determine how many people appealed 01-02, and of those how many prevailed and were given OICNW without having to complete the requirements of 01-02. I think the USCG was getting worried that the secret path to OICNW wasn’t so secret anymore and 07-11 is their response, anticipating litigation.
Sneaky bastards, releasing this horseshit on a holiday weekend. Arrogant bastards, legislating via policy letter instead of going through a process of codifying the policy. How nice not to have to give anyone any notice. How nice not to have to collect and collate public comments that they ignore anyhow. How nice to type up a letter and turn every American mariner’s life upside down. How unfair to those who worked and toiled and even watched their marriages dissolve over the time and expenses required to get something that OVERNIGHT just got a whole fucking lot easier and less expensive.
Perhaps some of the resident gCaptain attorneys might have some ideas.
Bottom line, the USCG has failed in their mission to Honor The Mariner. They’ve hosed us over and over again, and this is just the latest slap in the face to those of us who played the 01-02 game in good faith.[/QUOTE]
Well (my jaw hit the space bar here) , that about summed it up. Anyone else after that one?
Hello Captain_A…long time.