Cal- Have you ever considered Zoloft?
Capt Lee, while I could be wrong, I don’t think you post here for the sole purpose of stroking your ego. I think you post here as a means of sharing knowledge gained through experience with the intent of helping others. I think that’s why most people with the knowledge and experience post here in response to questions asked.
For sharing your knowledge and experience, thank you.
For the inaccurate information you provide because of changes in our industry, no thank you.
If you feel the need to insult me because I have the nerve to challenge your inaccurate information, then so be it. I can guarantee you that you are not the first and I’m fairly certain you won’t be the last. If you wish to waste your time in that manner, that is, by all means, your prerogative.
I find the most accurate way to solve distance abeam, distance off, and set and drift problems is to use either the Law of Sines or Law of Cosines.
So many of the exam questions have little to no margin for error, sometimes it’s the only way to come up with an exact answer that puts you close enough to the correct answer that the Coast Guard is looking for.
[quote=Cal;23024]I find the most accurate way to solve distance abeam, distance off, and set and drift problems is to use either the Law of Sines or Law of Cosines.
[/quote]
That has got to be the worst way possible to do that problem. The absolute best way is to use the different rules such as 7 tenths rule or others like it. The next best way is to use the distance abeam or 2nd bearing tables and get the factor to multiply the distance run between the first and second bearing. If you can not do either of those then use the maneuvering board. The law of sines or cosines is a ridiculous way to solve that problem and I have never met anyone that does them that way.
Also for your information there are still cases for individuals to upgrade an existing 1600 ton Masters license to a 3rd mate with out having to attend a BS terrestrial course. So in essence you are wrong with the statement you have to attend terrestrial. I didn’t and I know a lot of others that didn’t. They have to take the terrestrial test, but not the course.
The original poster did not ask if he needed to attend a particular class. He asked if anyone knew of a home study course for terrestrial. I fail to see how any of your posts in this thread came anywhere near to answering his question. Mostly just tooting your own horn and complaining about how stupid the guys that are going to show you how to drive a boat are. I don’t know why you even ask them anything since you know it all anyway.
I applaud you taking the initiative by going to school. The zoloft comment is because of your aggressive overtones in your posts. You obviously have some anger issues that will give you some problems in the future if you don’t get them under control. Some people need medication and some people can work it out with therapy. :D:D
[QUOTE=Cal;23024]I find the most accurate way to solve distance abeam, distance off, and set and drift problems is to use either the Law of Sines or Law of Cosines.
So many of the exam questions have little to no margin for error, sometimes it’s the only way to come up with an [U]exact[/U] answer that puts you close enough to the [U]correct[/U] answer that the Coast Guard is looking for.[/QUOTE]
Capt.Lee took the Chief Mate Exam in one day, I think he has the “exact” part covered. You might want to try on learn something since he takes the time to post here, and while you study, you will learn that there are several ways to work a problem and be exact. I use polar>rectangular functions, that is one of the most accurate ways to work some trig/bearing/DR problems, but that is my personal preference, and I’m sure you have yours, but I doubt you have learned that method, since you seem to only know one. Formulea for the Mariner by Richard Plant has several methods if you’re interested, and will serve good in the real world outside of the testing room.
Your biggest mistake started when the original poster asked a question, then you provided you own question, instead of an answer like several other people did…and then you started talking about yourself. Capt.Lee was right with the Zoloft comment.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Also for your information there are still cases for individuals to upgrade an existing 1600 ton Masters license to a 3rd mate with out having to attend a BS terrestrial course.
Agreed. One keyword in your example, UPGRADE
If you would take the time to acknowledge the information being shared with you, you might be able to compare apples to apples and see that some things are different.
So in essence you are wrong with the statement you have to attend terrestrial.
Again, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I am more inclined to believe information I can verify and information from the Coast Guard directly contradicts your statement.
NMC Policy Letter 01-02 states as follows:
Page 1-1, Paragraph 1
APPLICABILITY.
a. These requirements apply to applicants for the licenses listed below who began the service or training for the license on or after 1 August 1988 and after 1 Feburary 2002, it will apply to all applicants for these licenses:
[ol]
[li]Mate ocean or near coastal waters on vessels of not more than 500 GRT. Note that the license is for GRT, in accordance with the domestic licensing scheme;[/li][li]Mate ocean or near coastal waters on vessels of not more than 1,600 GRT (3,000 GT); and[/li][li]Third mate ocean or near coastal waters on vessels of any GRT.[/li][/ol]
b. These instructions apply to license applicants who are NOT participating in a formal training program of instruction such as presented at a maritime academy. These instructions apply to mariners who are “coming up through the hawsepipe.”
Well, let’s see here. I entered the industry on 12/24/2003 and I’m pursuing, amongst other things, a Mate Near Coastal 1,600 GRT. So unless I’m reading something here incorrectly, this applies to me.
Jump to page 1-2
- TRAINING AND ASSESSMENTS OF SKILLS
The STCW requires that all training and assessment of seafarers for certification under the Convention be structured in accordance with written programs and conducted, monitored, and evaluated by qualified persons. Accordingly, every applicant for a license and STCW certificate must participate in structured, approved or accepted training. The training must be in the subjects listed in the following table. The approval or acceptance letter for this training will state that completion of the training meets the STCW’s requirements for training as an OICNW in the subject of:
Celestial Navigation
Terrestrial Navigation
Coastal Navigation
Electronic Navigation
Compass - Magnetic and Gyro
Steering Control Systems
Meteorology
Watchkeeping (includes BRM)
Emergency Procedures
Search and Rescue
Basic Ship Maneuvering and Handling
Cargo Handling, Stowage, and Securing
Prevention of Pollution of the Marine Environment
Basic Ship Stability
Ship Construction
Life-Saving
Again, unless I’m reading the quoted sections incorrectly, this applies to me.
So, unless you can share something from the Coast Guard or a CFR contradicting the above information, it would appear that for the type and character of license I am attempting to obtain I do, in fact, have to attend a formal approved course on Terrestrial Navigation.
Mostly just tooting your own horn and complaining about how stupid the guys that are going to show you how to drive a boat are.
There is a significant difference between being ignorant and being stupid. Although, I think one could justifiably say that choosing to be ignorant is stupid.
The zoloft comment is because of your aggressive overtones in your posts.
Nothing aggressive in my posts until after some chose to insult me.
Definition of Stress: The mind overriding the body’s inherent desire to choke the living **** out of some ******* in desperate need of it. 
I can sum this up with one word “MORON”
[B]I want you to point out where I said an AB getting his mates license does not have to take terrestrial. [/B]Show me that so I can issue you an apology.
I know the knowledge you are trying to share with me probably better than you do. You have some serious issues. I don’t know if you are even worth my time, because your argument makes no sense at all.
[QUOTE=Capt. Lee;23028]I can sum this up with one word “MORON”
[B]I want you to point out where I said an AB getting his mates license does not have to take terrestrial. [/B]Show me that so I can issue you an apology.
I know the knowledge you are trying to share with me probably better than you do. You have some serious issues. I don’t know if you are even worth my time, because your argument makes no sense at all.[/QUOTE]
Junior there is trying to tell water how to be wet (funny)…Maybe he didn’t get to sit on Santa Clause’s lap.
Not familiar with polar rectangular functions but it sounds interesting, is it in Formulae for the Mariner? I must confess, I haven’t been able to go through all of the information presented in the book.
Mathematically, sines/cosines are as exact as may be needed for the exam and I mentioned them as another method that can be used, my personal preference. Wasn’t meant to contradict Capt Lee, it was intended to provide another method. For the bearing problems, particularly on the chart plot, I’m too sloppy and had a lot of difficulty getting the correct answer. Solving for a mathematical equation gets me where I need to be.
The BEST way is the way that WORKS FOR YOU!
hey Sea2Sea: Terrestrial Navigation classes I have not heard of, sorry. But the subject matter is well covered in Bowditch; in fact it may even have some chapters of its own, but I’m not sure. I agree with Capt Fran & Capt Winn: Use Bowditch and self study, the material really isn’t that complicated once you break it down, in fact it’s all pretty interesting.
Fair winds,
[I]“particularly on the chart plot, I’m too sloppy and had a lot of difficulty getting the correct answer”[/I]
Sloppiness is something that needs to be tackled; it’s a big problem, while testing and certainly in real life.
Every exam room is supplied with all the allowed reference books. So you won’t have to lug your copy in with you.
[quote=Cal;22999]Sounds like you might be one of the “frustrated Captains & Mates”. With my response I’ll try and exercise more tact than you were able to muster. My exam for 1,600 GRT Mate Near Coastal is scheduled in January. Without the required training courses as specified in Policy Letter 01-02 I would be unable to qualify for the license, period.
http://uscg.mil/nmc/marpers/pag/1-02.pdf
So maybe you are referring to a lower level license, I don’t know. If it were 200 GRT or less, not a problem, no additional coursework. Not an Oceans or Near Coastal license? Also not a problem. Beginning with a 500 GRT Near Coastal License, the additional courses are REQUIRED. They are not a choice and they are not optional. Like I said before, they want our butts in a chair in a classroom, they don’t care if we can pass the exam without taking the course.
On a side note, it’s my level of motivation and discipline that enticed my employer to pay for the coursework and all expenses (travel, meals, lodging) associated with my participation, including wages during class.[/quote]
I can tell you that you are absolutely correct, I am now one of those frustrated Captains/Mates you speak of. Good day!
Cal, you should have coffee with Steamer someday.
rjbpilot: i disagree strongly with you, I always take my own copy of Bowditch I & II into USCG exams and recommend this to all. Since my days back in Castine (listening to that new band, U2) I have been highlighting and marking numerous parts of my books, I find that ease of use and familiarity helps a lot. It’s also like having Senor Bowditch in there with me, whispering the answers in my ear.
hmm… upon reflection that sounded completely gay, but you know what I mean.
[quote=richard8000milesaway;23052]rjbpilot: i disagree strongly with you, I always take my own copy of Bowditch I & II into USCG exams and recommend this to all. Since my days back in Castine (listening to that new band, U2) I have been highlighting and marking numerous parts of my books, I find that ease of use and familiarity helps a lot. It’s also like having Senor Bowditch in there with me, whispering the answers in my ear.
hmm… upon reflection that sounded completely gay, but you know what I mean.[/quote]
It was my understanding that no personal reference material was allowed, due to the obvious (crib notes, etc…). I guess one would have to be fairly stupid to risk getting caught cheating and losing the opportunity for advancement. But if you have taken your personal books, I guess it is allowed in certain REC’s.
Yeah, we know you like Nate… but just as friends.
[quote=Capt. Lee;23028]I can sum this up with one word “MORON”
[/quote]…[I][B]ahem[/B][/I]
[QUOTE=richard8000milesaway;23052]I always take my own copy of Bowditch I & II into USCG exams and recommend this to all.[/QUOTE]
I don’t profess to know it all, but I have tested 8 times at the Coast Guard for various upgrades. I’ve gone from a 6-Pack to Chief Mate, and have never seen or heard of anyone being allowed to bring their own Bowditch into the exam.
I’ll refer you to http://www.uscg.mil/nmc/training/deck_guide.pdf
This includes rules for the exam room.
Page xiii paragraph 2 says “Handbags, briefcases, papers, cellular phones, books, notes, etc. are not allowed in the exam room…”
Page xvii lists what may be provided by the applicant. These are starfinders, calculators, and plotting tools.
So I don’t know how you’ve managed to get away with your own pre-marked Bowditch. I would say sloppy proctoring. Going by paragraph 2 above, that counts as books AND notes. Any reasonable person might call that cheating.
Richard, where did they allow you to bring your own books in? 
Boston REC back in the 90’s.