I know a guy that knows a guy at USCG HQ and they don’t know the genesis of these dates (1 October 1986 and 30 September 1991), either. Any prior seatime experience underway as a navigation watch should always count, not just if it happened to occur during the afore mentioned mystery dates, but that’s just me…
[QUOTE=Jeffrox;35959]I know a guy that knows a guy at USCG HQ and they don’t know the genesis of these dates (1 October 1986 and 30 September 1991), either. Any prior seatime experience underway as a navigation watch should always count, not just if it happened to occur during the afore mentioned mystery dates, but that’s just me…[/QUOTE]
See jeffrox, that night you spent reading 14-02 did come in handy and wasn’t wasted after all…
[QUOTE=jdcavo;35988]It definitely had significance, at least to the guy who wrote the policy letter. But he has retired and no one else seems to know what the meaning of those dates is.[/QUOTE]
Looks like it’s time to revisit and revise! Requiring one that served up to and including QM3 to have to go through the assesments for RFPNW, is absurd.
A revision would be welcomed at this point in time…I also would agree with the QM rate as well as extending it to BM and SM rates…That particular training, in my opinion, exceeds anything that STCW requires…
The assessments,again, in my opinion are a good thing…No matter what background a mariner has they help standardize everyone no matter what or where you sail…That after all, is the goal of STCW,isn’t it?
The problem I have with the endosement is the amount required watches…The question really is how long does it take to train someone in the proficiency of standing a proper look out or helm watch…? The answer of course, is based on the individual and the person instructing them…
But shouldn’t the amount of time be left up to the qualified Master.? After all, he/she is the same person that is signing off the assessments…Who better to attest to the competency of a mariner…? If the concern is pencil whipping or gun decking, then the system in place now, is just as flawed…
[QUOTE=Shellback;36074]
The problem I have with the endosement is the amount required watches…The question really is how long does it take to train someone in the proficiency of standing a proper look out or helm watch…? The answer of course, is based on the individual and the person instructing them…
But shouldn’t the amount of time be left up to the qualified Master.? After all, he/she is the same person that is signing off the assessments…Who better to attest to the competency of a mariner…? If the concern is pencil whipping or gun decking, then the system in place now, is just as flawed…[/QUOTE]
What do you do when the master does not want to sign you off because of a personality conflict??? If no date is given a person could be signed off in 1 day but another person might take 1 year or longer to get them done. Not that that has ever happened before. Do not get me wrong, I do think that 6 months is to long,
[QUOTE=Jeffrox;36068]Looks like it’s time to revisit and revise! Requiring one that served up to and including QM3 to have to go through the assesments for RFPNW, is absurd.[/QUOTE]
They don’t. We have accepted the Navy Helmsman and Lookout PQS as meeting RFPNW assessments.
Quick question I have an STCW and a un ab, master and mates ticket and your telling me if I want to go near coastal to upgrade my license I have to go sail as a cook or for free for a year to be able to us the ticket I currently have and sail on as mate your joking right
I know know if I under stand your question? Are you trying to get your RFPNW? 1/2 the time has to be on 200gt vessel
I guess my question is is I have a license do I have to have rfpnw or what ever
[QUOTE=Mr 100-ton;36090]What do you do when the master does not want to sign you off because of a personality conflict??? If no date is given a person could be signed off in 1 day but another person might take 1 year or longer to get them done. Not that that has ever happened before. Do not get me wrong, I do think that 6 months is to long,[/QUOTE]
That is where these companies need to take an active role by encouraging their professional mariners to become designated examiners…Hopefully a professional can overcome the personal conflicts, but we are all just people and it’s going to happen…
[QUOTE=bullyjohn;36175]I guess my question is is I have a license do I have to have rfpnw or what ever[/QUOTE] What is your tonnage? You can stand watch on a ship of what ever your tonnage is, but you need your RFPNW if you stand watch on a bigger vessel that your masters or mates license is. So if you have a 200 ton masters and mates license and you sail on a 200gt boat you are good. If you sail on a 500gt boat you are going to need your rfpnw. cause I have a dinky little 100ton license but since I am sailing on an unlimited tonnage boat I need my Ratings. I think I am right?? But I have been wrong many times
[QUOTE=bullyjohn;36175]I guess my question is is I have a license do I have to have rfpnw or what ever[/QUOTE]
If you have a valid license then it should be fine for what ever it specifies…If you increase scope, Inl to NC / Oceans or upgrade, it’s possible that this might be a problem for you…What license do you hold now…?
[QUOTE=jdcavo;36109]They don’t. We have accepted the Navy Helmsman and Lookout PQS as meeting RFPNW assessments.[/QUOTE]http://www.uscg.mil/nmc/checklists/MCP-FM-NMC5-62%20RFPNW.pdf?list1=checklists/MCP-FM-NMC5-62+RFPNW.pdf&B1=GO!
Yes, they do…As long as you retain the PQS book or can properly document it on the required forms ,which for some reason never existed in my file…There is also a footnote about having sailed one year in every five on the RFPNW checklist link above…A few of us here, who have struggled with this hurtle had too much time between military seperation and commercial sailing…
I would like to see this training treated just like sea time…This is the point I was trying to make…With this training and experience even though it’s older, combined with the assessments alone would serve as a great refresher…These mariners who find themselves in this position are not new to sailing and in my opinion shouldn’t be treated as such…
In addition to shellbacks comment. I sailed signalman, discharged as SM2. We didn’t do PQS for lookout, as that was our job. If you look at the SM3&2 manuals, lookout is part of the test, including maintaining a plotting board (knowing where everyone is in the formation, even during maneuvers). Don’t want to signal the wrong ship when the skipper is looking for a quick reply. The first time I actually steered a ship was playing Texas chicken in the Port of Houston. As in a previous post in another thread, I don’t see how I can spend 5 days getting BST and I am good on fighting a fire, first aid, etc. 4 days and I’m good on a lifeboat, where real knowledge is life and death. Yet it takes 6 months to learn how to steer, play lookout and turn over a watch!?!?!? Still fail to see the logic. Fortunately, I fall into the grandfather. As if 6 years navy and 8 yrs sailing AB isn’t enough. Just saying.
when i got my RFPNW it was part of the STCW