I have just finished reading all the posts on Noble in one of the other threads.
I have been offered a position (2nd engineer) overseas with Noble.
I would like all the information good and bad or just info about Noble that I can get. I have not taken the job yet, which made the man at Noble get wide eyed when I told him I had other offers and would like to sleep on Noble’s. To old to just jump with out looking at the whole picture.
I do not know what to think, some of Noble’s offer is good but then other stuff that I would expect them to pick up is not there. Any way any help will be great, let me have it.
We all have to look out for each other that is for sure.
Thanks ahead of time for anyone taking the time to give it to me straight about Noble.
Stay out of the bight!
I would also be very interested to hear what people have to say. I have been considering trying to find work with a drilling company but I would like to hear more about what the different companies are like and what they are offering. I have chief mate and DPO unlimited.
Where was the other thread about Noble??? I searched but no thread came up, I would like to read that
[QUOTE=JP;41143]I would also be very interested to hear what people have to say. I have been considering trying to find work with a drilling company but I would like to hear more about what the different companies are like and what they are offering. I have chief mate and DPO unlimited.
Where was the other thread about Noble??? I searched but no thread came up, I would like to read that[/QUOTE]
Depends where they send you (Chief Mate with DPO). I heard that a Chief Mate with Noble in the Gulf is about $106-$110k a year. But I am sure someone who is there at Noble can comment on this.
[QUOTE=RWSIII;41115] I would like all the information good and bad or just info about Noble that I can get. [/QUOTE]
Anything specific you want to know? I’ve only been with them two weeks. I like what I see for safety (much less paperwork than others), less silly training in Houston, and four new ships coming out. Downside obviously is financial. Jury is still out on how they will treat engineers and mates. It’s a company run by drillers, from what I’ve seen so far.
[QUOTE=Orniphobe;41435]Anything specific you want to know? I’ve only been with them two weeks. I like what I see for safety (much less paperwork than others), less silly training in Houston, and four new ships coming out. Downside obviously is financial. Jury is still out on how they will treat engineers and mates. It’s a company run by drillers, from what I’ve seen so far.[/QUOTE]
The marine crew working on any offshore rig is behind the eight ball to begin with. Simple fact. I do like the comment that Noble is a company run by drillers. Well, most drilling companies are.
[QUOTE=Orniphobe;41435]Anything specific you want to know? I’ve only been with them two weeks. I like what I see for safety (much less paperwork than others), less silly training in Houston, and four new ships coming out. Downside obviously is financial. Jury is still out on how they will treat engineers and mates. It’s a company run by drillers, from what I’ve seen so far.[/QUOTE]
All drilling companies are run by drillers. If Noble and the rest of them had their way there would be no licensed mariners on any rig. Licensed mariners are considered a necessary evil by most companies. Look at it this way; these are companies that began as contractors for oil companies on land and eventually shallow water. For years they got by with no mariners but as things moved on to deepwater the various flag states decided it would be a good idea to have some people on board that understood stability, among other things. Hence the ballast control operators and as time moved on the drillship and DP came about so the flag states decided that if it looked like a duck, quacked like a duck, etc. it must be one therefore they applied shipping standards to the manning requirement much to the drilling companies chagrin. Ever since that day the drilling companies have been trying to get rid of the licensed mariner requirement. Many companies are now replacing the licensed engineers with “rig mechanics” whose duties extend from the engine room to the drill floor. Some also only have a master on board to move the rig from point a to b. The rest of the time the OIM is in charge. Mariners are considered by most drilling companies as pure overhead because they have no drilling experience and most lack the desire to learn therefore they get not a lot of respect. There are exceptions!
Personally from an engineering standpoint I like the idea of having licensed mariners on board because they can be held accountable for their actions. Not so with a company anointed chief mechanic.
[QUOTE=tengineer;41639]All drilling companies are run by drillers. If Noble and the rest of them had their way there would be no licensed mariners on any rig. Licensed mariners are considered a necessary evil by most companies. [/QUOTE]
At ENSCO they somehow managed to get everyone of their DP semis classed as non self propelled MODUs and as a result have manning certificates that do not require a single certified mariner. Only an OIM, a barge supervisor and a couple of BCOs even though they were not an anchored rig. They have absolutely no desire to have a single mariner on their rigs and have learned how to get away with that! Only after Katrina when the ENSCO7500 was abandoned and found 85miles from where it had been left, did the underwriters require them to carry a master but only during hurricane season.
No question that at many rig companies marine crews are not respected as professionals because they don’t make the bit turn.
[QUOTE=tengineer;41639]All drilling companies are run by drillers. If Noble and the rest of them had their way there would be no licensed mariners on any rig. Licensed mariners are considered a necessary evil by most companies. Look at it this way; these are companies that began as contractors for oil companies on land and eventually shallow water. For years they got by with no mariners but as things moved on to deepwater the various flag states decided it would be a good idea to have some people on board that understood stability, among other things. Hence the ballast control operators and as time moved on the drillship and DP came about so the flag states decided that if it looked like a duck, quacked like a duck, etc. it must be one therefore they applied shipping standards to the manning requirement much to the drilling companies chagrin. Ever since that day the drilling companies have been trying to get rid of the licensed mariner requirement. Many companies are now replacing the licensed engineers with “rig mechanics” whose duties extend from the engine room to the drill floor. Some also only have a master on board to move the rig from point a to b. The rest of the time the OIM is in charge. Mariners are considered by most drilling companies as pure overhead because they have no drilling experience and most lack the desire to learn therefore they get not a lot of respect. There are exceptions!
Personally from an engineering standpoint I like the idea of having licensed mariners on board because they can be held accountable for their actions. Not so with a company anointed chief mechanic.[/QUOTE]
A DP Rig MUST have a different manning, STCW is required:
Yes, STCW is required but whose STCW? The above blog mentions the Marshall Islands being more strict than Panama as if that’s something to brag about/
The Marshall Islands history as a flag of convenience is interesting. They now join Liberia and Panama as the most popular FOC in the business. That a FOC is the choice of many drillship and MODU owners tells anyone what these companies think of regulations and accountability. That being said I have seen many FOC vessels run in a first rate manner, it just depends on the current management’s philosophy but I’ve also management change within a company and the former excellent rig/vessel become a hazard to life. It makes no difference to the FOC country as long as they get paid or paid-off.
[QUOTE=tengineer;41669]Yes, STCW is required but whose STCW? The above blog mentions the Marshall Islands being more strict than Panama as if that’s something to brag about/
The Marshall Islands history as a flag of convenience is interesting. They now join Liberia and Panama as the most popular FOC in the business. That a FOC is the choice of many drillship and MODU owners tells anyone what these companies think of regulations and accountability. That being said I have seen many FOC vessels run in a first rate manner, it just depends on the current management’s philosophy but I’ve also management change within a company and the former excellent rig/vessel become a hazard to life. It makes no difference to the FOC country as long as they get paid or paid-off.[/QUOTE]
Panama Minimum Manning Requirement:
[B]Moored on Location [/B]
1-OIM
1-Barge Supervisor
2-Ballast Control Operators
2-Lifeboatmen
[B]Underway 72 hours or less [/B]
1-Master
1-Deck Officer
1-Chief Engineer
1-Engineer Officer
2-AB’s
1-OS
2-Survival craftsmen
[B]Underway more than 72 hours[/B]
1-Master
2-Deck Officers
1-Chief Engineer
2-Engineer Officers
1-Radio Officer
3-AB’s
1-OS
2-Survival craftsmen
Master must hold an unlimited license, but all other licensed officers may hold special industrial or trade-restricted licenses…i.e.Chief MODU
Precisely. Only the master requires a license that is internationally recognized. Everyone else can get their license in 30 days at MODU tech or out of the industry cereal box.
The scary thing is all MODUs in the GOM are operating under flags of convenience, I don’t think there is a US flagged MODU or drillship out there. Thank goodness for the part of the Jones Act that requires US employees aboard these rigs.