So considering the large numbers of 1600 Masters looking to fill this requirement to get there 3rd Mate when can we expect to see a crossover exam for US 1600 Masters???
So with the large number of 1600 Masters looking for 3rd Mate endorsement when can we expect to see this crossover exam. After all hasnât the USCG made enough suffer the expense of time and money to take the classes and assessments? It should be a simple effort to produce the test that details the short comings of the 1600 Master exam and the 3rd Mates exam right?
[QUOTE=captvisa;52674]So with the large number of 1600 Masters looking for 3rd Mate endorsement when can we expect to see this crossover exam. After all hasnât the USCG made enough suffer the expense of time and money to take the classes and assessments? It should be a simple effort to produce the test that details the short comings of the 1600 Master exam and the 3rd Mates exam right?[/QUOTE]
Never. If there was a change, it would be 1600ton Master to Chief Mate. 1600 ton Master to 3rd or 2nd is not an upgrade. Why would the Coast Guard change the 3rd Mate test to incorporate Masters and the management perspective for the AB trying to get a 3rd Mate? You have to look at it both ways, not just what is easy for you personally. And, it would certainly be easier for you to pass a 3rd Mate exam then an AB trying to get a 3rd Mate with a lot of Master information, for no other reason but the accommodation of people like you. Just take the test if you choose. Simple as that. You have (2) choices. Study, or post on gCaptain of why you shouldnât have to.
[QUOTE=captvisa;52674]So with the large number of 1600 Masters looking for 3rd Mate endorsement when can we expect to see this crossover exam.[/QUOTE]
Really? Iâm curious, where are you getting the numbers (or idea) that there are a large number of 1600 Ton Masters looking to get their 3rd Mate license? How many hawsepipers are at the top of their game, making anywhere from 4 to 7 bills a day, looking to start over at the bottom of another ladder with a pay cut? Hell, I have my 3rd Mate license with a tonnage restriction. All I would need is 180 days as an AB on an vessel over 10,000 to get that tonnage restriction removed. Am I going to do that? For a $150 a day pay cut, minimum, not unless Iâm desperate for a job.
Unless there is a purpose behind getting the 3rd Mate license, aside from merely having it, whatâs the point? Why should there be no effort expended in getting it? Because one thinks they deserve it? I got mine because you always go for the most you can get. In my personal set of circumstances thatâs what I qualified for. It changed some of the parameters of my test, but didnât really change the content.
If you want the 3rd Mate license, for whatever reason, then go get it. Quit complaining that they should just give it to you based on you holding a 1600 Ton Master. For the same reason that giving a 2nd Mate a 1600 Ton Master with a 70 question test is a stupid idea, so is giving a 1600 Ton Master a 3rd Mate, itâs even more egregious without requiring any exam.
[QUOTE=anchorman;52596]Went to the Wheeler in GuamâŚthe Coast Guard allowed that timeâŚIndustrial Vessel with 1 Captain and 3 Mate and 3 watch system.[/QUOTE]
Is that a Chouest owned boat? I tried to google it but the results were inconclusive.
[QUOTE=Capt. Schmitt;52679]Is that a Chouest owned boat? I tried to google it but the results were inconclusive.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=anchorman;52680]Yes. http://www.msc.navy.mil/inventory/ships.asp?ship=187[/QUOTE]
Thank you.
[QUOTE=anchorman;52469]The test that needs to be taken for 3rd Mate says âOICNWâ in the corner.[/QUOTE]
Thatâs hilarious!!! An OICNW can be a Mate or Master. If that was the case, then a 1600GRT Master could not stand his own watch if he hasnât completed the assessments. (Master, Master, Master route) AgainâŚthe NMC has it all screwed up. There has never been a policy letter creating one Mates test or if you want to call it an âOICNW testââŚassessments, yesâŚbut not 1 single test for all grades, even though the NMC is giving one test for all grades of Mates. The ESS (Exam Sheet Scheme) clearly states that a person should only test for the âGRADEâ in which they âQUALIFYâ for. OICNW applies to the STCW CodeâŚnot licensingâŚ(hence, Mate or Master)⌠The part that says âno further exams, testing, or assessmentsâ(in PL 01-02 and now in PL 11-07) should be referring to the STCW side onlyâŚnot the license side. When the NMC reads that there is no further âtestingâ requiredâŚthey are taking that out of a policy letter about STCW and applying it to licensing. The problem is that the NMC is saying that a Mate is an OICNW, which they are, but they are not acknowledging that a Master is also an OICNW ( I havenât seen a license that says "Master (Officer in Charge of a Navigational Watch). Basically, in my opinion, OICNW should be a standard that âall licensed officersâ, requiring STCW, should meet to qualify for the âendorsementâ of OICNW (which determines whether or not âfor domestic voyages onlyâ is placed on a NC license. All Ocean licenses require the OICNW endorsement because that person can work outside domestic waters. (you will never see an Ocean license that says âfor domestic voyages onlyâ on it). The testing should be reverted back to the way the system is designed for. ExampleâŚa person qualifying for an original 1600GRT Mate license should have to do the âOICNWâ assessments and take a 1600 GRT Mate test. This person may choose to stay in that âgradeâ for the rest of his/her career. Once he/she gets the required time and tonnage, and chooses to upgrade, then he/she should have to take the upgrade test accordingly, (refer to ESS), and not have to do any âfurther tests, exams or assessmentsâ to maintain his/her OICNW endorsement, (refer to PL 11-07).
And therein lies the problem, our system wasnât designed for this. Our licensing structure was established and we subsequently agreed to international standards that they have been trying to implement. You are looking for a loophole to avoid a test, and I donât mean to criticize you for it, because we, as marinerâs, are always looking for a short cut.
Iâm not going to laugh at anchormanâs comment because I understand what he was trying to say. Bottom line is you wonât see anything on a licensing exam that has anything to do with STCW. STCW requirements are fulfilled by coursework or assessments. While there is most definitely an overlap of the subject material, one establishes a standard of proficiency with the subject material where the other proves oneâs ability to answer a multiple guess test.
Basically, in my opinion, OICNW should be a standard that âall licensed officersâ, requiring STCW, should meet to qualify for the âendorsementâ of OICNW.
Which is what the USCG was attempting to do, as evidenced by the NPRM. They tried to sugar coat the bitter pill. Implement STCW requirements on initial, limited licenses (Mates) but overlook a majority of the working sector, 200 GRT licenses. Give it some time and then implement the same on the Master. Upper level licenses were relatively easy to address, simply coordinate changes in the curriculum, if necessary, at the academies. This way all of your newly minted Mates meet STCW requirments. Given time, due to retirement and other factors, all of your licensed marinerâs would hold the applicable STCW endorsements.
While I would agree that a 1600 Master would be more capable, based on experience, of adapting to a 3rd Mate position than a 2nd Mate to a 1600 Master. We are still dealing with a limited license. Allowing 1600 Masters to progress to 3rd Mate would circumvent their STCW implementation plan. Letâs not pretend that either is a pretty transition. Most of your 1600 licenses are used on âsmallerâ vessels (in quotes because Iâve seen many tug and barge units that are larger than some ships). While the concept of navigation and operation may be the same, the functional knowledge and experience are not. A person with a 1600 Ton license would be just as lost on an unlimited tonnage ship as a 2nd Mate thatâs been working ships would be on a 200 Ton tug.
[QUOTE=RazorbackNut;52703]Thatâs hilarious!!! An OICNW can be a Mate or Master. If that was the case, then a 1600GRT Master could not stand his own watch if he hasnât completed the assessments. (Master, Master, Master route) AgainâŚthe NMC has it all screwed up. There has never been a policy letter creating one Mates test or if you want to call it an âOICNW testââŚassessments, yesâŚbut not 1 single test for all grades, even though the NMC is giving one test for all grades of Mates. The ESS (Exam Sheet Scheme) clearly states that a person should only test for the âGRADEâ in which they âQUALIFYâ for. OICNW applies to the STCW CodeâŚnot licensingâŚ(hence, Mate or Master)⌠The part that says âno further exams, testing, or assessmentsâ(in PL 01-02 and now in PL 11-07) should be referring to the STCW side onlyâŚnot the license side. When the NMC reads that there is no further âtestingâ requiredâŚthey are taking that out of a policy letter about STCW and applying it to licensing. The problem is that the NMC is saying that a Mate is an OICNW, which they are, but they are not acknowledging that a Master is also an OICNW ( I havenât seen a license that says "Master (Officer in Charge of a Navigational Watch). Basically, in my opinion, OICNW should be a standard that âall licensed officersâ, requiring STCW, should meet to qualify for the âendorsementâ of OICNW (which determines whether or not âfor domestic voyages onlyâ is placed on a NC license. All Ocean licenses require the OICNW endorsement because that person can work outside domestic waters. (you will never see an Ocean license that says âfor domestic voyages onlyâ on it). The testing should be reverted back to the way the system is designed for. ExampleâŚa person qualifying for an original 1600GRT Mate license should have to do the âOICNWâ assessments and take a 1600 GRT Mate test. This person may choose to stay in that âgradeâ for the rest of his/her career. Once he/she gets the required time and tonnage, and chooses to upgrade, then he/she should have to take the upgrade test accordingly, (refer to ESS), and not have to do any âfurther tests, exams or assessmentsâ to maintain his/her OICNW endorsement, (refer to PL 11-07).[/QUOTE]
Really, I can actually be an OICNW with my unlimited master license? Holy Crap, Yay! Now I know.
To read what your trying to say, try this: http://gcaptain.com/forum/maritime-training-licensing/2535-national-maritime-center-policy-letter-needed.html
The fact remains regardless of your perception. The first part is having a goal, then knowing the path to that goal. The path has been put at your feet. Go for it. Itâs been made easier for you by having a clear policy letter for guidance - that most didnât have past last week. Agree or disagree, both take away energy from the application process and the path of the ultimate goal.
Or, you can continue to remind me of my maltese trying to pull my sock off while Iâm watching TV. Your choiceâŚ
I can tell you what the hilarious part is - some of my deck officers fearing that there will be an influx of 3rd Mates coming up the ranks - because of this new policy. I donât see that ever happening, it wasnât like that before STCW and it will not be like that now because most will spend their energy on why something should be given to them.
Couldnât have said it better myself!
Or, you can continue to remind me of my maltese trying to pull my sock off while Iâm watching TV. Your choiceâŚ
Oh no, you have a yippy dog?
[QUOTE=anchorman;52716]Really, I can actually be an OICNW with my unlimited master license? Holy Crap, Yay! Now I know.
To read what your trying to say, try this: http://gcaptain.com/forum/maritime-training-licensing/2535-national-maritime-center-policy-letter-needed.html
The fact remains regardless of your perception. The first part is having a goal, then knowing the path to that goal. The path has been put at your feet. Go for it. Itâs been made easier for you by having a clear policy letter for guidance - that most didnât have past last week. Agree or disagree, both take away energy from the application process and the path of the ultimate goal.
Or, you can continue to remind me of my maltese trying to pull my sock off while Iâm watching TV. Your choiceâŚ
I can tell you what the hilarious part is - some of my deck officers fearing that there will be an influx of 3rd Mates coming up the ranks - because of this new policy. I donât see that ever happening, it wasnât like that before STCW and it will not be like that now because most will spend their energy on why something should be given to them.[/QUOTE]
The thing that I found funny was not so much as the comment that you made, but (if what you were saying is true) if the NMC is labeling any mates exam an âOICNWâ exam, then they are wrong for doing so, thus, adding to the confusion for some people. As for my situation, I hold a Master NC 1600GRT license. If I choose to âupgradeâ to 3rd Mate Unlimited, I understand, because I came up the hawsepipe as Master NC 100GRT, Master NC 500GRT, then Master NC 1600GRT, I have to complete the OICNW assessments and take the 3rd Mate Unlim. exam. No problem. I get it. The point that I am trying to make is that the NMC is adding to the problem. When I tested for Master NC 1600GRT, the cover sheet said Master 1600GRT NC / 3rd Mate Unlim., which gave me the impression that I would not have to test again for 3rd Mate Unlim. If the cover sheet was erroneous, great, but it just added to my confusion at that time. FurthermoreâŚI have been insulted by you twice before this, for no apparent reason. This comment âthat I found hilariousâ was not directed towards you per ce, as it was about another NMC screw up. If I have offended anyone on this site, I apologize!!! As far as your âNew NMC policy letter neededâ forumâŚI just read it and it was very well laid out for the NMC, but keep in mind, donât think that otherâs havenât written letters to the NMC requesting a new policy letter just because itâs not posted on gCaptain.
[QUOTE=RazorbackNut;52720]The thing that I found funny was not so much as the comment that you made, but (if what you were saying is true) if the NMC is labeling any mates exam an âOICNWâ exam, then they are wrong for doing so, thus, adding to the confusion for some people. As for my situation, I hold a Master NC 1600GRT license. If I choose to âupgradeâ to 3rd Mate Unlimited, I understand, because I came up the hawsepipe as Master NC 100GRT, Master NC 500GRT, then Master NC 1600GRT, I have to complete the OICNW assessments and take the 3rd Mate Unlim. exam. No problem. I get it. The point that I am trying to make is that the NMC is adding to the problem. When I tested for Master NC 1600GRT, the cover sheet said Master 1600GRT NC / 3rd Mate Unlim., which gave me the impression that I would not have to test again for 3rd Mate Unlim. If the cover sheet was erroneous, great, but it just added to my confusion at that time. FurthermoreâŚI have been insulted by you twice before this, for no apparent reason. This comment âthat I found hilariousâ was not directed towards you per ce, as it was about another NMC screw up. If I have offended anyone on this site, I apologize!!! As far as your âNew NMC policy letter neededâ forumâŚI just read it and it was very well laid out for the NMC, but keep in mind, donât think that otherâs havenât written letters to the NMC requesting a new policy letter just because itâs not posted on gCaptain.[/QUOTE]
There has never been a 1600ton Master/3rd Mate combo test, and it doesnât make sense to have one either. Because you chose the Master route and bypassed OICNW requirements, you now have to pay the piper for what you didnât have to do, to go to 3rd. I donât know why you tested for 1600 ton Master to begin with. 500 ton Master to 1600 ton Master is a free upgrade, no test at all. You must have taken the 500 ton Master before Feb 1 2002 for that to be possible. Meaning that you took 1 test in the last decade and want a free pass all the way to second mate because you think NMC is messed up? It would take about 1% of that same decade to pass this test. Pull your panties up (no offense this time) and get r done. Then, you can bitch about the Chief Mate / Master requirements in a few yearsâŚIâll still be here for additional support when the time comes.
Isnât there small print that says an applicant may be tested on blah blah blah âor anything else needed to assess an applicants fitness,â (obviously not in those exact words). A catch-all phrase that validates anything that shows up on any test. The 500 mates test that also includes 1600, 3/M and 2/M questions would still be within the rules.
I remember reading that line some time ago and having a chuckle.
[QUOTE=anchorman;52723]I donât know why you tested for 1600 ton Master to begin with. 500 ton Master to 1600 ton Master is a free upgrade, no test at all.[/QUOTE]
I was given the 1600GRT Master exam when I meet the requirements for 500GRT Master because there is not a 500GRT Master exam and 1600GRT Master is still in the same grade (raise in grade). Itâs the same format as someone doing a raise in grade from CM Unlim. to Master UnlimâŚ
Iâm glade to see that my theory is being proven. Youâll would rather sit here and complain about having to take a test then just going and getting it over with. An opportunity has been provided and instead of taking advantage of it you just want the NMC to give you a license. Iâm not using the term âyouâllâ to mean everyone, just the few that spend more time complaining then getting things done. I do not enjoy spending money and time away from family taking my C/M Classes but that is the path that I have to take to obtain the license.
[QUOTE=RazorbackNut;52757]I was given the 1600GRT Master exam when I meet the requirements for 500GRT Master because there is not a 500GRT Master exam and 1600GRT Master is still in the same grade (raise in grade). Itâs the same format as someone doing a raise in grade from CM Unlim. to Master UnlimâŚ[/QUOTE]
Correct. There is one test that is the same for 500ton / 1600ton Master. That is what you took if after 1 February 2002. 3rd Mate is a separate test to that one, which is also a combo test, and only covers OICNW, which by policy, is 500/1600/3rd/2nd/ OSV âMatesâ only.
[QUOTE=chemcarrier;51951]I have only had my 1600 Master for a year. Am I correct in thinking that I will still have to test for my 3rd mate? If so [I]guess I will just continue studying.[/I][/QUOTE]
You better continue studying! If the REC counted getting your name right on the answer sheet you would have failed.
Let me see if I read above thread correctly,I only need the above classes to upgrade from a 200 ton master to a 1600 ton mate with the correct sea service??
[QUOTE=tightlinesportfishing;52828]Let me see if I read above thread correctly,I only need the above classes to upgrade from a 200 ton master to a 1600 ton mate with the correct sea service??[/QUOTE]
Itâs the same requirements for 500 ton Master. You need BRM, AFF, Radar, and Medical Care Provider. You also need all of your Basic STCW courses if you do not already have them, 180 days with an AB, sailing as an AB or higher, as well as at least the RFPNW assessment done, which also can be done in a class. I heard somewhere Medical Care is no longer required, but I have not verified thisâŚItâs been this way for a while, but will be changing soon I would get on it if you are qualified.