Unlicensed engineer to DDE 4000?

Hi my names chase i am currently a unlicensed engineer i also hold a AB. I want to advance and get my DDE 4000 but my question is do i need to get my qmed first ? Or does my unlicensed engineer time count as a equivalent supervisory position?

http://www.uscg.mil/nmc/checklists/pdfs/MCP-FM-NMC5-33_DDE.pdf?list3=%2Fnmc%2Fchecklists%2Fpdfs%2FMCP-FM-NMC5-33_DDE.pdf&B5=GO!

I hope that link works.

[QUOTE=hebert90;113307]Hi my names chase i am currently a unlicensed engineer i also hold a AB. I want to advance and get my DDE 4000 but my question is do i need to get my qmed first ? Or does my unlicensed engineer time count as a equivalent supervisory position?[/QUOTE]

DDE requires that half your qualifying time be as QMED “or equivalent supervisory position.” You won’t get very far arguing that your service was equivalent to QMED if you didn’t hold QMED when you obtained the service.

Depending on how your sea service letter is written up depends if the NMC laughs at your application. In order to complete the RFPEW you have 2 choices, either a 2nd or chief limited oceans signs the asessments, or you throw down 1k plus and head to a class. Theres lots of good info on here about what to study, and the books and info are readily avaliable.

[QUOTE=jdcavo;113352]DDE requires that half your qualifying time be as QMED “or equivalent supervisory position.” You won’t get very far arguing that your service was equivalent to QMED if you didn’t hold QMED when you obtained the service.[/QUOTE]

Wow, given your email address it certainly seems like you are answering from an official position. If the law meant to say that you have to have your QMED to qualify for the DDE licenses, it would have said so. Instead it says QMED or Equivalent supervisory position.

If you are giving an official opinion, I’d sure like to know because I know several who have qualified to take the DDE’s without becoming QMED’s first. Yours doesn’t seem to be the position held by those who are making the actual decisions in this. Theirs is the only opinion that really matters.

[QUOTE=“Seasherm;113410”]

Wow, given your email address it certainly seems like you are answering from an official position. If the law meant to say that you have to have your QMED to qualify for the DDE licenses, it would have said so. Instead it says QMED or Equivalent supervisory position.

If you are giving an official opinion, I’d sure like to know because I know several who have qualified to take the DDE’s without becoming QMED’s first. Yours doesn’t seem to be the position held by those who are making the actual decisions in this. Theirs is the only opinion that really matters.[/QUOTE]

He’s in a very official position and has helped out many people on here. You should remove your head from your rear…

Yup. I’m one of them. I’ve read a bunch of threads by JD and I have to say that most if not all were pretty accurate.

Regardless of who and how many people have been helped, the clause “or equivalent surpervisory position” begs for a definition.

Such interpretations should not be left up to the day to day moods of a contractor who may or may not have ever even been onboard an operating vessel long enough to have lunch. I believe a mariner should have access to a specific definition or at least well defined guidelines of what constitutes an equivalency.

I have never held a QMED. skipped it and went straight to a DDE. now I hold a Chief Limited oceans. Its All in the wording. I trained an AB and told the office he was qualified. which he has since made an excellent chief engineer. They wrote the letter to include standing an engine room watch. He was in charge while I was asleep so that qualifies as supervisory position. I got my original sailing as an unlicensed assistant engineer but I was in charge of an engineering watch. Again its all in the wording.

[QUOTE=Steamer;113419]Regardless of who and how many people have been helped, the clause “or equivalent surpervisory position” begs for a definition.

Such interpretations should not be left up to the day to day moods of a contractor who may or may not have ever even been onboard an operating vessel long enough to have lunch. I believe a mariner should have access to a specific definition or at least well defined guidelines of what constitutes an equivalency.[/QUOTE]

The following is from an appeal decision by the Coast Guard’s Director of Prevention Policy concerning the requirement for exepreience in a equivalent supervisory position to Mate:

[I]To qualify for an officer endorsement as master not more than 1,600 GRT, the experience needs to include more than supervising other mariners, it must include duties that are equivalent to that of a master or mate. Your current endorsement as mate on Great Lakes and inland vessels of not more than 1,600 GRT does not convey authority to serve in this capacity on near coastal and oceans voyages. I note that bosun is an unlicensed rating and as such would not include duties comparable to those of a mate or master in such areas as navigating, collision avoidance, and compliance with applicable international conventions, law, and regulations.[/I]

Typically, equivalent supervisory position is found for experience on mmilitary vessels where a merchant mariner credential is not required. In the case of QMED, if the vessel is not required to carry QMEDs, it is potentially evidennce that there is not need to require a crew-member to perform perform the duties of a QMED, i.e. no one on board performs the duties of a QMED. This is not by itself dispositive, but it supports a conclusion that the service was not qequivalent that can be rebutted with more compelling evidence of equivalence.

By the way, in the current proposed regulation change to implement the 29010 STCW, we have proposed to change all instances of the term “equivalent supervisory position” in 46 CFR Parts 11 and 12 to “equivalent position.”

[QUOTE=jdcavo;113437] This is not by itself dispositive, but it supports a conclusion that the service was not qequivalent that can be rebutted with more compelling evidence of equivalence."[/QUOTE]

Could an argument not be made that a mariner employed onboard a vessel as the sole operator and maintainer of the propulsion system is in a supervisory position? Additionally, the fact that the role of a QMED requires the presence of a licensed supervisor to function adds to the argument that the sole manager of propulsion machinery is a supervisor rather than an engine room helper.

Speaking of military vessels where a merchant mariner credential is not required, perhaps we could look at the Navy’s own definition of supervision as in http://esrdc.mit.edu/library/ESRDC_library/Scherer-Evolution-ASNE-2011.pdf wherein “On U.S. Navy ships, the MCS provides supervisory control and monitoring of machinery systems, including: the propulsion plant, electric power plant, auxiliary systems, and damage control systems.”

A civilian mariner with documented evidence of seatime manually performing the task of “supervising” the propulsion and power generation plant of a vessel should at least be allowed to claim the same duties as a black box in a gray hull.

I would suggest having your Company write a Letter of Service with your Position listed as Un-Licensed Chief Engineer. That is if you were sailing on a vessel that does not need a Licensed Engineer and you were actually in that position.

1 Like

[QUOTE=tugboat95;113434]I have never held a QMED. skipped it and went straight to a DDE. now I hold a Chief Limited oceans. Its All in the wording. I trained an AB and told the office he was qualified. which he has since made an excellent chief engineer. They wrote the letter to include standing an engine room watch. He was in charge while I was asleep so that qualifies as supervisory position. I got my original sailing as an unlicensed assistant engineer but I was in charge of an engineering watch. Again its all in the wording.[/QUOTE]

I, also hold a Chief Engineer, Ltd Ocns. I have never held a QMED. I was in basically the same scenario. My first license was DDE 4000.

I currently hold a QMED since 8/24/2011. Im wanting to upgrade to Chief engineer DDE 4000 HP. But im being told i can only get DDE 4000 hp. Can someone help me…thanks