Yeah, I figured as much. I am interested if they will change the domestic requirements any, and if so, in what way.
I am trying to find that. I have over a year sea time on the authority of my 1600 ton master and short 6 weeks sea time as unlimited chief mate. I would like to apply asap for my unlimited masters ticket. I did not see anything that says now I only need to have 6 months as 1600 ton master, if it is there, I need to know where so I can go ahead and apply.
This is only a proposed rule change. It could take years to go into effect.
[QUOTE=JP;53784]I am trying to find that. I have over a year sea time on the authority of my 1600 ton master and short 6 weeks sea time as unlimited chief mate. I would like to apply asap for my unlimited masters ticket. I did not see anything that says now I only need to have 6 months as 1600 ton master, if it is there, I need to know where so I can go ahead and apply.[/QUOTE]
Apply under the existing system. Nothing has changed yet.
I was reading this in the proposed changes in the federal register.
§ 11.211© … Expands sea service credit on Articulated Tug
Barges (ATBs).
The Coast Guard would allow the service on
ATBs to qualify for unlimited tonnage officer
endorsements.
This will reduce the burden on the mariner
seeking to qualify for these endorsements.
Hopefully this will pass as it will make it much easier to go the unlimited route with service on ATB’s:o
This is an old thread but I was wondering if anyone out there knows whether these changes will apply to the us domestic license as well as the stcw or not?
[QUOTE=Capt. Schmitt;56536]This is an old thread but I was wondering if anyone out there knows whether these changes will apply to the us domestic license as well as the stcw or not?[/QUOTE]
That is what everyone is waiting to see,
Does anyone know if this may be implemented anytime soon? Nothing new on the NMC website since the new year…
Actually there is something on the web site, but it is not under announcements as you would expect but under links, to the left of the announcements.
This is discussed under another thread titled End of the year MSIB on the Professional Mariner Forum.
The long and the short of it is that there is not a date released yet for the implimentation of the SNPRM changes and the STCW 2010 amendments.
I guess this shouldn’t come as a surprise since we are still under the interim rules and have never completely implimented the STCW 1995 17 years later !
why isn’t their an provision to cross over from 1600 master to 2nd mate unl? just like you can cross over from 2nd mate to 1600 ton master.
Because the academy graduates that write the rules think an academy grad with 360 days of real sea time can be a master on a limited tonnage vessel (how hard can it be anyway) but that a dirty, uneducated limited tonnage operator can not navigate a ship.
[QUOTE=tony tony tone;60422]why isn’t their an provision to cross over from 1600 master to 2nd mate unl? just like you can cross over from 2nd mate to 1600 ton master.[/QUOTE]
first off, it is a rule and there is nothing to say that the rules need to make rational sense. Why on earth the Coast Guard is willing to give a limited tonnage master’s license to a 24 year old is beyond me! You should be at least 30 to get the license just based on maturity and ability to command that only comes with experience in life. The one year of seatime to go from snotty nosed punk third mate to a 3000ton master is foolish. I have also said here on gCaptain that no man younger than 40 be issued an unlimited tonnage master’s license. Look at how many young punks are commanding drillships/rigs for Christ’s sake. We’re talking $600M (just for the ship), 200 lives and environmental disaster in one man’s hands! How did age contribute as a part of Curt Kuchta’s loosing it on the DWH? The USCG certainly didn’t give him any praise for his actions in their first report on the disaster. Maybe he didn’t cause the disaster but he didn’t do anything to mitigate the consequences.
second, why on earth are people still using 1600tons for describing the license? It may read 1600/3000 but shouldn’t the higher of the two tonnages be the one that people use and not the lower? I sure as hell would if that was the license I held.
.
[I]"… why on earth are people still using 1600tons for describing the license?"[/I]
Maybe because until the CG started wading into the STCW swamp all it ever had to deal with was GRT. Now the “Confused Group” really is confused and rather than just change everything to match the rest of the world prefers to make sure it confuses as many of its “customers” and “stakeholders” as possible. I mean, why add clarity to anything when they don’t have to?
http://www.uscg.mil/nmc/marpers/pag/CG-543_Policy_Letters_11-12.pdf