New Scheme vs. Old Scheme_I'm pissed off!

[QUOTE=Kraken;159216]Nice way to making yourself worthless on the international market. Are you going to hand over Brazil and West Africa to us squareheads? :)[/QUOTE]

Even squarehead PSC accepts American STCW certificates, West Africa will accept anything with a gratuity attached, and Brazil could care less where the ticket was issued. If DP is supposed to be “international” certificate in an international industry an American certificate can find a nice cozy place in the IMO scheme of “substantial equivalency.”

If the UK MCA can play that sort of game, so can the US … if we have anyone at MARAD or the CG who even knows there is a world outside the beltway.

      • Updated - - -

[QUOTE=powerabout;159218]The CG only found out vessels had DP about 5 years ago.[/QUOTE]

I believe that, even now they probably still think it is some sort of porno flick thing.

The NI has substantial contacts in the U.S. because it has U.S. members and U.S. branches. The NI solicits and accepts funds from US citizens for a service, thus they “do business” in the US, so the NI probably is subject to the jurisdiction of US courts. The NI has harmed U.S. citizens by failing to properly provided the services that it agreed to provide, and by unilaterally changing the terms of the agreement in midstream. Moreover, the NI has sought and accepted the role of being the primary arbiter of who is qualified to perform DP work within the U.S. The UK is bound by international treaty to enforce US judgments, just at the US must enforce UK court judgments. The NI can certainly be sued in US courts. Undoubtedly, the NI would attempt to have the case dismissed and claim that suit should instead be brought in the UK. My bet is that US courts would allow the case to proceed in the US. I think that a court (and especially a jury), in Louisiana or Texas, would treat U.S. mariners fairly.

Another thought. If the U.S. abandoned the NI DP scheme, or if the NI were forced out of the US, the entire NI DP certification scheme (outside of the UK) would collapse in a matter of months.

[QUOTE=tugsailor;159225]Another thought. If the U.S. abandoned the NI DP scheme, or if the NI were forced out of the US, the entire NI DP certification scheme (outside of the UK) would collapse in a matter of months.[/QUOTE]

Are you trying to write the definition of inflated ego? :stuck_out_tongue:

I do not think the NI, as a worldwide DP certification scheme can survive the loss of any major DP vessel operating market, or competition from any effective alternative.

As soon as the NMD announced its competing “better” DP certification scheme the “writing was on the wall” that the NI scheme is in big trouble. The NI would not survive the competition from both the NMD DP scheme and a bonafide new DP scheme in the US. That’s just my honest opinion.

[QUOTE=tugsailor;159232]I do not think the NI, as a worldwide DP certification scheme can survive the loss of any major DP vessel operating market, or competition from any effective alternative.

As soon as the NMD announced its competing “better” DP certification scheme the “writing was on the wall” that the NI scheme is in big trouble. The NI would not survive the competition from both the NMD DP scheme and a bonafide new DP scheme in the US. That’s just my honest opinion.[/QUOTE]

Are you thinking about this scheme http://www.smsc.no/dnv-dpo? It’s DNV-GL and not NMD who is behind it. I have hard very little about it. They mentioned on the DP advanced course I was on that a Canadian dude had paid 200000 NOK for a certificate (all on simulators) (when the exchange rate was 1 usd = 6.3 nok and not 1 usd = 8.1 nok like it is today :frowning: ) and that is more then I’m willing to pay.

[QUOTE=Kraken;159237]Are you thinking about this scheme http://www.smsc.no/dnv-dpo? It’s certainly a move from Norwegian interest to wrestled some control from the British. We have almost a monopoly on the world market of DP system, all we lack is the legislative side of things, then we are going to rule the world :D[/QUOTE]

Yes. Excuse me. Its been awhile since I spoke with the folks in Trondheim — the price backed me off too. I meant to say the DNV (now DNV-GL) DP certification scheme.

“Rule the World” ? Now you are starting to sound like Kjell Inge. My head is only square on one side, but I look forward to watching the Vikings pillage and burn the NI’s DP castle.

[QUOTE=tugsailor;159241]Yes. Excuse me. Its been awhile since I spoke with the folks in Trondheim — the price backed me off too. I meant to say the DNV (now DNV-GL) DP certification scheme.

“Rule the World” ? Now you are starting to sound like Kjell Inge. My head is only square on one side, but I look forward to watching the Vikings pillage and burn the NI’s DP castle.[/QUOTE]

Yes I’m been working for some time on the vessels of the “møringan” the egomania is rubbing off on me.

[QUOTE=Kraken;159174]How hard could it be? You use one page for each master. So if the first master is from 12.03.15 - 22.03.15 and the next from 22.03.1 - 30.03.15 you start one page from 12.03.15 - 22.03.15 and a new page from 23.03.15 - 30.03.15 and get each master to sign the period he is on board. Didn’t they explain it on the basic course?[/QUOTE]

Clearly your a genius;

  1. The instructor that taught my class wasn’t fully comfortable answering that question. He asked me to get with NI directly and get their answer back to him in writing.

  2. I can figure out several solutions on my own, thanks. If it’s not been approved in writing from NI you could be settin yourself up for a trainwreck, walkin down the dock collecting signatures in the new book that idiotic organization may require you to get. I prefer that not be me walkin down the dock…

[QUOTE=Hawespiper5;159248]Clearly your a genius;

  1. The instructor that taught my class wasn’t fully comfortable answering that question. He asked me to get with NI directly and get their answer back to him in writing.

  2. I can figure out several solutions on my own, thanks. If it’s not been approved in writing from NI you could be settin yourself up for a trainwreck, walkin down the dock collecting signatures in the new book that idiotic organization may require you to get. I prefer that not be me walkin down the dock…[/QUOTE]

Well good luck.

I have a hard time seeing the problem. But maybe I just took a better basic course, or the book I got from NI is different then yours.

[QUOTE=Kraken;159174]How hard could it be? You use one page for each master. So if the first master is from 12.03.15 - 22.03.15 and the next from 22.03.1 - 30.03.15 you start one page from 12.03.15 - 22.03.15 and a new page from 23.03.15 - 30.03.15 and get each master to sign the period he is on board. Didn’t they explain it on the basic course?[/QUOTE]

The old scheme black logbook requires you to fill in date joined vessel / date left vessel at the top of each page. So if you do what you propose at the top it would be completely in-accurate. What NI instructed me to do during my phone conversation is to put the dates of the entire hitch at the top of two separate pages. I realize that you may have been told to do that in basic and I also realize doing that may be working for many people. It’s just NI is so friggin screwed up I don’t trust them a bit. Personally, I want specific clarification in writing (which I’ll probably never get…)

[QUOTE=Hawespiper5;159251]The old scheme black logbook requires you to fill in date joined vessel / date left vessel at the top of each page. So if you do what you propose at the top it would be completely in-accurate. What NI instructed me to do during my phone conversation is to put the dates of the entire hitch at the top of two separate pages. I realize that you may have been told to do that in basic and I also realize doing that may be working for many people. It’s just NI is so friggin screwed up I don’t trust them a bit. Personally, I want specific clarification in writing (which I’ll probably never get…)[/QUOTE]

Ok, But as I understand it, it is the signature of the master that’s important. As long as you can document your time NI can go fuck themselves.

The USCG will not accept training certs from a non-US school [B]OR[/B] STCW assessments signed off by a mariner not holding/sailing on a USCG MMC. When asked why, it comes down to control. If a non-US school or non-US mariner pencil whips a cert or assessment, the USCG can’t do anything to them, i.e. suspend credential or school approval. They also can’t afford to visit/audit/approve the many schools outside the US either.

[QUOTE=Steamer;159114]Yeah, right … then please tell us why the CG will not accept STCW courses taken outside the US? STCW is an international set of rules for an international industry and it is not too much of a stretch to imagine that there are schools outside the USA that deliver training equal or better than some CG approved schools.

I would love to hear the CG rationale for going along with the NI as the sole source of DP certification. I would also love to hear why that explanation does not apply to STCW training providers. If the CG demands a certificate then it is incumbent on the USCG to make sure training for that certificate is available and approved just like any other required course leading to a certificate.

If the NI can grab that kind of authority for training and the CG blesses the club, why shouldn’t that mariner’s association that popped up here not long ago looking for members be able to do the same thing? At least they are US based and the CG can actually see who and what they are.

I said it when they came up with the NI DP thing, it is a scam, a fraud, and a travesty that the CG even recognizes them and their certificates.[/QUOTE]

The USCG will not accept training certs from a non-US school [B]OR[/B] STCW assessments signed off by a mariner not holding/sailing on a USCG MMC. When asked why, it comes down to control. If a non-US school or non-US mariner pencil whips a cert or assessment, the USCG can’t do anything to them, i.e. suspend credential or school approval. They also can’t afford to visit/audit/approve the many schools outside the US either.

      • Updated - - -

[QUOTE=tugsailor;159232]I do not think the NI, as a worldwide DP certification scheme can survive the loss of any major DP vessel operating market, or competition from any effective alternative.

As soon as the NMD announced its competing “better” DP certification scheme the “writing was on the wall” that the NI scheme is in big trouble. The NI would not survive the competition from both the NMD DP scheme and a bonafide new DP scheme in the US. That’s just my honest opinion.[/QUOTE]

Be careful what you wish for. If 3 or 12 organizations are created to do DP certs the price is likely to [I]increase[/I] as the number of customers for each organization [I]decreases[/I]. But given current DPO pay rates, it may be worth paying more to actually get good customer service. Hope we see a US DP certification organization very soon!