Welcome to the Dockwalk.com Forum

 

In order to post a comment in one of the forum topics, you must log in or sign up. Your display name will appear next to your posts unless you check the Post Anonymously box. When writing a post, please follow our forum guidelines. If you come across a post that you would like us to review, use the Report Post button. Please note the opinions shared in the forums do not necessarily reflect the views of Dockwalk.


RSS Feed Print
New Licensing Requirements
Ben Franklin
Posted: Saturday, October 24, 2009 1:55 AM
Joined: 04/10/2009
Posts: 19


I am going to start this thread with a few hopes, and maybe we can get some laughs out of it. This last weeks posts have made me cranky, and I want to put myself in a better mood. I want to discuss Licensing. Not who's is better, worse, sucks, or is more highly thought of. Some of the schools have come up with their own curriculum and managed to force what they feel should be covered. So how about we do this ourselves? Henning, Junior, Chief, even you Dan, and everyone else. Let's keep this clean and civilised. But everyone has thoughts on how it should be, what they are upset about, what needs to go away, brought back, or added. We can use this post to discuss not only Licensing, but vessel documentation, inspections, authority agency control and deligation. Let's asume that we are going to try to combine commercial, fishing, offshore supply, commercial yachts, private yachts and recreational users. But lets start with Licensing and Ratings.


First, nomenclature. Every country has different names for each license and grade of license and scope of use. Offshore, coastal, near coastal, oceans, Great Lakes. Master, Master Mariner, OOW, Chief Mate, First Officer, Limited, Unlimited, Limited, Special.

We need to cover the departments. Deck, Engine, and Interior.

From bottom to top, what naming system can we use? Currently in the commercial world they have deck ratings of Ordinary Seaman, Able Seaman in varying forms, Mate, 3rd, 2nd, Chief Mate, Master and Master Unlimted. To some extent of that. How can we adopt a nameing system that covers the needs of all the varieties of seamanship and it's usability. Just names for now though, seatime and education requirements later.

Seaman- for every greenhorn just starting out, no seatime no experience
3rd Seaman- one with some time, but still things to learn
2nd Seaman- Halfway up the chain
Able Seaman- this would replace Able Seaman Unlimited, lots of time and dedicated to the maritime industry as a career

We could add endorsements to these, based on requirements for each segment of the industry. If you switch from say fishing to yachting, you would still retain your above rating, but would have to go through a Qualification to get the new Endorsement, but your new boat would know at what level of basic seamanship your at and what to expect out of you.

I am going to use the rating of Able Seaman as used above for sake of converation, we can pretend we are dealing with someone who has a clue about being underway.

Able Seaman, Fish/Yacht/Tanker/Cargo/Tow/Offshore

If someone switches, they would have multiple Endorsements.

You can also have Lifeboat, Radar (yes, I am proposing Radar for Deck Ratings), Radio Operator, Tender, Pumpman, RFPNW, Fire Marshall (this is postion on some larger vessels) and adding Bosun as an actual endorsement. Tankerman will be merged to create the above Able Seaman, Tanker Rating

I won't go into details of what the qualifications need to be, but how about if regardless if your on a yacht or commercial vessel, if you want a Bosun Endorsements, there could be a publication that clearly has items in it that need to be performed and signed off on, with the Licensed Officer's License numbers. That way it regulates the auto signing that is rampant among some vessels.

For the Licenesed Deck Personel, their needs to be a way for people to advance. Currently some systems and License tonnage uses just a Mate/Master, others 3rd/2nd/1st or Chief/Master or various other combinations.

Yachts came about with their current widely used system in large part because of seatime. They don't get underway to much. But at the same time, you have 19 year old kids running around with "Captain's Licenses". This is not condusive to safety, advancement, or a myrad of other things.

Quartermaster- the lowest level one can achieve after being in the previously mentioned new Deck ratings for a pre-determined amount of time. This is the baby mate, your working the deck still, but as a supervisor, your correcting charts, and laying plot lines, your learning how to be a Maritime Officer.

Mate- This replaces 3rd Mate.

Senior Mate- replaces 2nd Mate

Chief Mate- Stays the same for Historical Reasons

Master- I choose to just leave it like this for historical reasons and the fact that it is an easy thing to understand, though everyone will still call it Captain, right?

Again, as with the ratings, it can be broken down to Endorsements. But we also need a tonnage system that everyone can understand. Currently in the US we use GRT and ITC, Yachtmasters use GT, which alot of people think of as net. I have heard a rumor that the US is doing away with the 1600GRT/3000GT or ITC and just making it a 3000GT , so for the sake of what is being switched to, I will use GT.

I propose the following tonnage 50, 150, 250, 500, 750, 1500, 3000, 5000, 10,000, and finally Unlimited

Sorta random, sorta not. Yachtmasters 200 would upgrade to 250, a US 100, would be 150, a US 200 becomes 500, a US 1600 becomes 3000 a 3000 OOW would remain the same. I have added a few though, as there is a difference today in the kind of vessels coming out and lets face it, there is a huge difference between a 3000GT vessel and the largest ships in the world, the Emma Maersk, is around 170,000GT(it has a crew of only 13 by the way). This also allows for person working in certain segments of industry to be able to gain licensing without having to put in for the Unlimited, say the newer Deepwater drilling supply boats that need to travel a few hundred miles out, so guys running the larger offshore boats would be able to upgrade as they come ou of the yards.

Back to the Endorsements, of course the all mighty Radar Observer Unlimited. Arpa, GMDSS, Medical Person In Charge, etc. Also, how about making endorsements for Electronic Charts? Not everyone uses them, and some people absolutly swear by it.

Okay, so I know that this has dragged on and on, and if you have made it all the way here your just as bored as I am on this Friday night. So I just laid this out for everyone to play with. As this goes along, we can add seatime, education, and the various other things that make our world all add up. Just remember, everyone play nice, and maybe we will all win on this.

Henning
Posted: Sunday, October 25, 2009 1:04 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1049


So are you proposing a singular internationally recognized license? An IMO license? Take STCW to the next level? I'm all for it, but I suspect by the time UN/IMO and the international community of signatories would get it all hashed out and agreed upon, I'll be long dead and buried. Actually, I don't think it's politically possible to do. Most of the labling of licenses and ratings is heading towards international standardization, as you point out, the USCG is moving from GRT to GT and has been for years. It just takes forever for these buearocratically entrenched things to change. There are commitees formed, NPRMs (Notification of Proposed Rule Making) issued with comment periods, comments reviewed and hashed over, back to Congress which may or may not have time this session.... it justr drags on and on, and that is one country, then you have all the other countries that do the same, then the main IMO body basically does the same process with the inputs from the signatory nations.... Heck, it took from 1977 to 1995 just to implement the basics of STCW, and even then there were extensions for the US and a couple other countries. All in all from conception of STCW to full implimentation was over 1/4 of a century. Heck it took em from 72 to 77 just to work out the scope of it.

I think having endorsed deck ratings is a good idea all around, it could even be done so that the endorsement modules would count towards your officers license and then you only need to take an abreviated exam for the issuance of the ticket to check that you still retained the important knowledge. That way the individual modules could be more in depth. This would also encourage a continuing education style program rather than the "Go to school for a month and cram" method.

Next question is should the masters and mates of passenger carrying vessels be require "check rides" as we have with aircraft. Should we require recurrent training in proceedures and handling, especially simulator based, where things can be run fully into the danger zone of operations? This is a standard for any air carrier traffic whether it's a 4 seat Cessna 172 under Pt 135 or a A-380 under Pt 121/125. As soon as someone is paying for the ride other than the owner paying the bills, you gotta jump through the hoops.

As for the step ups in licenses above the 3000 ton level, that is an issue that struck home hard when the Gulf of Mexico oilfields went out deep water. The companies needed bigger boats to run out larger stacks of pipe and more mud because of the longer run times between the dock and rig, and you can't let them run out of either. So they brought in some of the bigger OSVs, problem was they were over 1600 GRT, so the companies had to bring in Unlimited masters from the Deap Sea shipping sector. Problem there is, most of them have come through the Academy programs and aren't close quarters boat handlers. Most of their confined water work is handled by local piots who take it in from the seabouy and back out to it. They were, for the most part, out of their element. Within the first few weeks, several accidents occured with the boats hitting rigs and such, so the boat companies put us oilfield/workboat guys back on the boats to handle them around the rigs and inside up the rivers and such while paying the unlimited guys a high wage to basically be an administrator and sit their ticket onboard. Well, the companies got tired of paying that extra money and much rabble was roused and we ended up with the 6000GT OSV ticket as well as Letters of Authority to operate specific individual vessels that fell above even that. Basically it requires the company to send a letter to the USCG requesting them give authority to the specified mariner to operate the vessel for them and that you would be insured. With that the USCG issued a letter to carry with your ticket that was valid for that vessel and for that company only. As it is now, for a 1600GRT ticket, one needs tme on vessels above 200GRT, but to go above that one needs an Unlimited Masters ticket and that requires time on vessels > than 1600GRT. So that leaves no natural progression except to either go back to AB on a deep sea ship or gain time on an LOA or 6000GT-OSV ticket. That leaves for a very small hawse pipe to come up through. I would like to see the academies put forth an upgrade program, that would be of value, something that one could do in a few 6 week periods and/or Distance Learning/Self Study stuff.

 Adding at least a 8,000 GT license with a sea service -Master/Mate/Supervisory Position- requirement of  >1000GT. This would bridge the gap and remove the primary barrier that gets in the way of advancing to an unlimited license.


junior
Posted: Sunday, October 25, 2009 7:05 AM
Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 1026


More " ticket talk " !!! You guys are always looking at yachting thru commercial lenses. Yachting is not operating LNG ships, its driving and maintaining thousands of 25 to 30 meter motorboats on a Champagne run. The commercial sector already has a logical time tested approach to training and licensing. This is about yachting. When you guys continue to " talk ticket " you convince young crew that the only way ahead is to fly up to the superyacht academy and get " tarred and ticketed " . These ticket magnets burn a lot of cash and never make a good impression. I can state , with over 30 years on yachts , that only base knowledge is required for 95 percent of all positions in the yachting industry. Rules of the road, safety and communications as presented in something like the Yachtmaster is all you need. The object of all licensing procedures is to solve specific problems. "THE PROBLEM " for the yachting industry is supplying the endless stream of crew necessary to keep 95 percent of the yacht fleet in business. Specific yachts , like the occasional 100 meter Brontosaurus or a rare 150 meter Blue Whale , obviously need a different approach and hopefully they would be manned only by commercial ticket holders. To keep the yacht fleet operating you need to keep them from colliding with hard objects and run a good maintenance schedule.. A yachtmaster with a strong work ethic and competent maintenance skills is the gold standard that yacht owners seek. . Don't complicate things with ever more regulation.
Henning
Posted: Sunday, October 25, 2009 11:05 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1049


Look Junior, your yachting may not require any thing, that's nfine. There are every year more yachts being commissioned that are over 3000GT. There is no way to come up from a 290' <3000GT) yacht to a 330'>3000GT). You will not get a job running either of these, or even a 120' boat without the appropriate ticket. The insurance companies won't allow it, forget the flag states. Flag States are seeing yachts, especially those over 500GT as commercial vessels and are requiring full ISM & MSM even. Whether you think yachting should be all done on references and experience is irrelevent once you get into bigger boats. You can have all of that you want, you don't have the ticket, you don't get the job. With smaller boats that are strictly private, there is more latitude, but once you get above 500GT,or take paying passengers, you've got to meet the burden of proof the governments set. Really, most yachts are work boats, especially charter yachts, with the job being recreation. The operate much the same, and the governments are starting to regulate them much the same. 20 years ago yachts over 120' were extremely rare and were converted commercial vessels, WWII small ships and old lumber schooners and such. Now a 120' is an entry level yacht with quite a few >200' built every year and even a couple 400' plus. The fleet of yachts is growing in size and complexity, not to mention cost. The insurance companies aren't turning over these assetts to unlicensed mariners.
junior
Posted: Sunday, October 25, 2009 1:03 PM
Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 1026


Henning, these monster yachts have nothing to do with yachting. To devise a licensing system that allow yachties to operate them is foolish. Any young crew out there reading this, IF YOU HAVE THE AMBITION to run one of these monster yachts, immediately drop your varnish brush, ring Kings Point, Sunny Maritime, Maine Maritime, do the time and become a professional, commerical sailor. The only captain of a 100 meter plus yacht that I know is a retired Norwegian Cruise ship captain. I can only hope that this is how you become an officer on huge yachts. The rest of us...99 percent of all yacht activity, inhabit the real world. In this real world I seek a young guy who likes boats and spent three years working in general yacht maintenance at Rybovitch. On a busy yacht Ive got problems to solve and this is the kind of crew who has helped me thru three circumnavigations, two dozen transatlantics , countless refits and endless cruises. In my world, when the water is pouring thru the rudder bearing with each wave cycle I sail her into the harbour, stand the yacht against the qauy, pull the rudder at low tide. and .MY GUYS HAVE TO DO IT. When you propose any system that prohibits these type people from working yachts, we a all in trouble,. The 2 young UNTICKETED yachtmasters in training, fresh out of the shipyard in Germany, who sailed with me this summer simply have the ambition to gain the Qualification , secure a captains job on a 30m meter sailing yacht, see the world for five years before they jump off the yachting train, move ashore, make babies, and get on with life. This cycle cannot be broken. Hopefully the licensing authorities understand the different between a ship and a yacht. If it fits into a marina its a yacht, if its alongside the commercial quay its a ship. When I read the thoughts of the MCA, I can understand that they too struggle to find the break point between yachting and shipping. Lets us all hope that they are wise and resist the needs of the yacht training industry, who would like to require every crew to spend 10 grand at the Superyacht paper folding academy.
Ben Franklin
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:52 AM
Joined: 04/10/2009
Posts: 19


Junior,
 Here at the Boat Show right now, there are several 150 foot vessels sitting here. Anyone without a license AND the experience has no business operating these vessels. These are complex machines. They are small ships, yet still yachts. Experience means nothing if you do not hold the tickets. That is the way it is.  What I am proposing is for vessels primarily over give or take70 feet. So if you choose not to hold a ticket or want a Yachtmaster style, no experience type ticket, then there are still plenty of boats out there. But anything over that, you are now playing out in the ocean, with other commercial vessels, and they expect that the people "on the road" with, know exactly what they are doing. And so far as the only Captain you know on a 100mtr vessel is a retired norweign cruise line captain, you must not know as many people as you claim. I know several people who have worked through the hawsepipe, and went to get the tickets, USCG so that means they spent many years just getting seatime, who are running the big offshore vessels. A 1600GRT will cover that. And also, the last 3 ships, all over 43,000GRT, I worked on, were ALL Hawsepiper Masters. All six of them. One actually made it through to 3rd Mate, then went back to Mass Maritime and got a degree. These people I have been underway with have made me beileve that experience AND education is needed. So a yachtmaster, no matter what the size, is not a real ticket in my mind, you have no experience. You need many times more seatime to get an Able Seaman MMD, and then you have to pass the rules of the road, they just changed the requirements, and now you have to take lifeboatman also, regardless of what kind of AB you want. As a Yachtmaster you spend more time polishing and drinking then underway, and last time I checked, Mother Nature does not care if you have a Yachtmaster or Commercial Ticket, but I would rather take a shot with the guy who has a proven ticket in the amount of time spent on the sea. I spent the last 3 out of 4 years underway, no less then 8 hours a day at sea, most of the time no less then 7 days at a time, with minimal time in port. I have been in 140-225 foot boats working offshore all over 400GRT, all over 700GT, one over 1000GT, all year, all weather, all times of the day. I have seen 20foot plus in the Gulf of Mexico. My commerical ticket means that I spent some serious time and dedication to my profession, regardless of the country of issuance, it PROVES I have experience, not listing my good buddy as a reference. All my seatime is documented on paper, officially from my company and provable to the USCG upon request, and that is what shows my experience. A yachtmanster, means in most cases, that someone was too impatient to wait and get the TIME AT SEA to go take their classes. They think so highly of themsleves, yet rush into things. If you can get a Captains license in one busy season, it is not a respectable license. Prove that you are competant and DEDICATED deckahand first, get an Able Seaman card(all countries issue one), then after spending time at sea, get a mates license, and then prove that you are a capable mate, then you get to be a Captain. Anytime some kid in Fort Lauderdale says he is a Captain, and he has a yachtmaster, and he has experience with 3 years in the bizz, I laugh. I have more time at sea, then he has been out of highschool, and I ain't that old. My license was done with experience. And with classes. After I got the seatime.

Ben Franklin
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 1:25 AM
Joined: 04/10/2009
Posts: 19


Henning,
 Yes, a universal system. One that takes into consideration the new world of the Maritime industry. One that is the same in every country. Exactly the same. One could then take the courses, after due experience, in their home country, close to home, and turn in their papers to their appropriate authority, and like our new MMC, maybe even use it as their passport. No matter where your from, jobs would become much more clear to what people are qualified for, because of the universal nomenclature. More options as to tonnage limits. A way to weed out the passer-bys. Instead of a yachmaster, one can get the seaman card, that would still have seatime requirements, meet certain classes. A deckhand on a yacht or offshore vessel does not need a small captains license. Get a good deck rating, and be respected for accompishing something. Then if your willing to put 10 years into yachting you get a Mate license first, then do a few years hopefully learning from a good captain, how to properly handle the vessel and the crazy amount of paperwork that goes with it. Have that deckhand get practicals signed off and spend 3 years doing it. Why do people feel that they have to go from zero to hero in one step.

One of the things that is happening, is that the nature of the Maritime Industry has changed. Complex vessels, new styles of vessels, a shortage of personel, lack of affordable schools. It needs to be set up so that one can take their classes in stages and be rewarded for the seatime efforts by being able climb the ranks.

For the ratings I provided, one year of seatime for Seaman to 3rd Seaman. 1 year for 3rd Seaman to 2nd Seaman, and another 2 years to Able Seaman. I say two years, becuase this would also entail taking certain classes.
Begining with Seaman to 3rd, you have to take what are the BST part of STCW as well as RFPNW. Currently, if you take the RFPNW class, you get some of your watches waived. Do away with that. Make it mandatory along with the required watches. From 3rd to 2nd, take Advanced Firefighting and Radar. At this point you are a qualified member of a watch team, so while you are gaining the experience, you can take the radar to better understand what your involved. Also, with AFF, you should be an active member of the fire team. This makes you a contributing member of the crew. From 2nd to Able Seaman, within 2 years, you should be able to get the seatime, plus Medical Person In Charge, Shipboard Damage Control, Radio Operator, or if you vessel has is GMDSS and Ship Stability. Then after you have these classes, along with the seatime you become that Able Seaman. After 1 year as an Able Seaman, then you can take Maritime Law, Ecdis Arpa, DGPS, And the other classes needed to compleate a mates license. This allows you to focus on using pieces of the knowledge, grow into a position of autority and break up the high costs of doing all the classes at once and craming so much knowledge in at once. All the years I am proposing also, are in Seatime, 360 days, 720 days, etc. An 18 year old kid, would take roughly 6 years to get to the able seaman level. 24 years old he is more mature, been on the job, had a chance to absorb the knowledge from the courses, and will be a comfortable seaman. He will have been able to decide at that time if he is going to make a career at sea or try something new. He also will not have spent the money on excessive classes. By the time he is 30, he could have a good size Mates License and a small Masters, and if the courses are the same no mater the size of the vessel, he will be more then apt at being good at his job. He will have OJT skills and the class knowledge required to run the new vessels being produced.

junior
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 5:26 AM
Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 1026


I must admit that its been so many years since I dealt with the American system that I don't know the sea time protocol but I do remember that 35 years ago I needed 720 days of sea time to get an introductory American ticket. 720 days !!!! This is the problem. For me it was easy...I grew up on boats. 720 days for a young guy who did not grow up on boats, so that he may drive a sunseeker next summer on the milk run, is just ridiculous. How are they going to get this time. We just did a 10, 000 mile cruise over 150 days....That means the future Sunseeker driver needs to sail on a busy boat for 4 years. HOW THE HELL ARE THEY going to do this, half the fleet is at sea 50 days a year. The BUSY charter boat on my port side did 10 weeks this year. The 35 meter on my starboard side has 1100 engine hours and its 10 years old.. If a young guy cant rapidly get on the water and start driving his Sunseeker he will never work up the maturity, experience and resume needed to grow.. You cant buy a resume and maturity at the sea school. Remember...any new system you propose is not for the benefit of you, its for the benefit of the young crew that are entering the YACHT industry, not commercial. . It must be cheap and fast because if its not , kids of modest income don't stand a chance. What does a GMDSS course cost these days..2000 dollars ? The young guy working at the shipyard next door is making 1000 dollars a month. Who needs GMDSS to drive a sunseeker over to the beach. Who the hell needs ARPA to motor over to ST Tropez. DGPS ?????????? And Ship Stability YIKES !!!! just tell him to store the cases of champagne in the bilge.
Henning
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:15 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1049


junior wrote:
I must admit that its been so many years since I dealt with the American system that I don't know the sea time protocol but I do remember that 35 years ago I needed 720 days of sea time to get an introductory American ticket. 720 days !!!! This is the problem. For me it was easy...I grew up on boats. 720 days for a young guy who did not grow up on boats, so that he may drive a sunseeker next summer on the milk run, is just ridiculous.
 
 
720 days takes 3 years for most people planning on a maritime career to accumulate, working on Dinner Boats, Ferrys, Tour Boats, Party Fishing Boats, Commercial Fishing Boats, Oilfield Boats, Inland Tugs... I did my time on old schooners hauling rides, chartering for weddings, dusters, Hollywood, and my own sailboat... Any time you spent on boats since your 14th b-day that you didn't pay for counts. If you are on a hitch doing 12hr days, they count as 1.5 days against the 720. 3 years is just about sufficient to gain enough experience to make you reasonably safe in a command position. If you're working deck on a standard 28on 14off hitch on a boat in the Gulf of Mexico oilfield, you can have your 720 days done in just under 2 years. Big yachts do not need cruise ship captains or even academy guys. Yachts operate much more like a workboat than a ship. We spend most of our operations time in confined waters and often close quarters. We do not take pilots aboard for every docking and we do not typically have assist tugs. Your world of yachting exists still, but not so much for the readers on this board. Most people on this board work, or want to work on larger yachts. I agree that the RYA system is silly, they pass a test with little sea time and less experience and that really dilutes the validity of all licenses, but for anyone who really wants to work in the industry and go on to the bigger boats will have to eventually go through the tickets.

junior
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:40 AM
Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 1026


When the season ends in the majority of maritime locations all boat movements on the waterfront stop. The good guys, the guys I like to work with, stay involved with yachts and pay the rent by working for the winter in the marine industry. Very good skills these guys are learning. BUT NO SEA TIME. AND no time for superyacht academy. How are you going to keep these guys on the inside and make sure they become yacht captains.
Henning
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 7:11 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1049


You either follow the boats to other cruising grounds as people in this end of the yacht sector, the charter yacht sector do, or you take off season jobs on commercial vessels. If you only seek to work the Yacht Club sector of the industry, well, it takes more seasons to build up the sea time for a ticket. The USCG reviews each application on its own merits, and if you did time in a ancillary service in a supervisory position, they have been known to give some credit there. The work boat sector has it pretty well worked out. We make sure that the people who belong in the wheel house get there. I've sent quite a few deck hands to the CG to take their first ticket exams. No school required.


Henning
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 7:44 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1049


Ben Franklin wrote:
For the ratings I provided, one year of seatime for Seaman to 3rd Seaman. 1 year for 3rd Seaman to 2nd Seaman, and another 2 years to Able Seaman. I say two years, becuase this would also entail taking certain classes.
Begining with Seaman to 3rd, you have to take what are the BST part of STCW as well as RFPNW. Currently, if you take the RFPNW class, you get some of your watches waived. Do away with that. Make it mandatory along with the required watches. From 3rd to 2nd, take Advanced Firefighting and Radar. At this point you are a qualified member of a watch team, so while you are gaining the experience, you can take the radar to better understand what your involved. Also, with AFF, you should be an active member of the fire team. This makes you a contributing member of the crew. From 2nd to Able Seaman, within 2 years, you should be able to get the seatime, plus Medical Person In Charge, Shipboard Damage Control, Radio Operator, or if you vessel has is GMDSS and Ship Stability. Then after you have these classes, along with the seatime you become that Able Seaman. After 1 year as an Able Seaman, then you can take Maritime Law, Ecdis Arpa, DGPS, And the other classes needed to compleate a mates license. This allows you to focus on using pieces of the knowledge, grow into a position of autority and break up the high costs of doing all the classes at once and craming so much knowledge in at once. All the years I am proposing also, are in Seatime, 360 days, 720 days, etc. An 18 year old kid, would take roughly 6 years to get to the able seaman level.
 
6 years is far too long. If it takes 6 years to bring a greenhorn to AB, I'm doing a crappy job training my crew. What you are calling an AB though is more of the qualification level of Mate. I think 180 days is a more realistic figure. For AB you should have to test RoR, Deck Safety, and Knots along with STCW 95 BST and a signoff from a captain as to watch standing competency. 180 days later you can do the BRM, GMDSS, ARPA and Radar and all that wheelhose bit along with Advanced Fire Fighting, another RoR, Nav General and Plotting tests and get an OOW. 360 days later you can do Stability, Law, another RoR a more in depth Nav including celestial and get your Mates Ticket. 360 days on that ticket and you can get a Masters in a tonnage appropriate to the boats you came up on up to 250GT. Larger licenses require more time as Mate on vessels in that size catagory, or time as Master on the next lower catagory. That's 4-5 years including time off to learn the job, and that's enough.


junior
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 8:44 AM
Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 1026


Your missing the point. Somehow a licensing system FOR YACHTS has to allow you to get your foot in the door painlessly, then build up different levels of qualification. By foot in the door I mean driving yachts, banking 40 grand a year, gaining REAL sea time, learning your trade.. I believe the yachtmaster system does this very well. In the US, the system is far to dense and as a result I can go for YEARS without meeting a fellow American on the water internationally. THATS RIGHT YEARS. When you set up all these jump thru gates and start throwing all this fluff jargon around you discourage entry to young guys. Some of this stuff is just ridiculous. Stability and ship construction ? Are you reballasting your yacht ? Lets hope the young yachtmaster on the Leopard sport next door is not thinking about swinging over to Joes GRP shop to have the flybridge chopped and a Helicopter added without consulting a Naval architect. Surely he is smart enough to say ..Hey too many people in that tender, make two trips..... The correct type of captain who moves to the big yachts absolutly needs this three years driving the Leopard Sport experiance. Maybe the reason you dont see a young American driving that Leopard Sport is because he cant qualify and by the time he does he is overqualified.
Henning
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:05 PM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1049


junior wrote:
Your missing the point. Somehow a licensing system FOR YACHTS has to allow you to get your foot in the door painlessly, then build up different levels of qualification. By foot in the door I mean driving yachts, banking 40 grand a year, gaining REAL sea time, learning your trade.. I believe the yachtmaster system does this very well.
 
The accident rate and p--s poor boat handling skills I see in this industry don't warrant you optimistic appraisal IMO. You can always get your foot in the door. If you are reasonably bright, you can have learned enbough to make you safe for a small command in 3 years. Before that I do not accept that your "just walked in" 6 months on the job should be turned loose on anything up to 200 GT. Maybe add a Coxswains rating that gives them 45' or 45GT and a maximum of 33 passengers. That would allow them small yachts and even water taxi. Water taxi is the best job for really getting you basic and advanced boat handling skills down, especially one like Avalon Shore Boat.


reyx
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 1:11 PM
Joined: 30/07/2009
Posts: 4


"If you switch from say fishing to yachting, you would still retain your above rating, but would have to go through a Qualification to get the new Endorsement, but your new boat would know at what level of basic seamanship your at and what to expect out of you." Ben thanks for the laughs, acctually that has crossed my mind to switch. As you have been in, 20 feet waves, or did you say meters?, nono, will be nice. Boys and girls, there is a solution, its called school, it takes 3 years to finish and you can enter it after you have done your 24 months at sea. After the age of 16, on a min. 12 Grt commercial and registered vessel. punktum.. This is how it is done, and it is not complicated, what makes things complicated are make-belive schools. This is my simple fishermans view, only hold a <3000 Grt + some pile of other documents. Downgrading gives us problems, to speak in terms you can understand, how would traffic be like if cars where driven be persons that have gotten their tickets in a similar way as Henning got his, counting time from the age of 14 playing in the swimming-pool. And junior, please do not downgrade basic learning, atleast have some know-how of stabilation calculations, to many bad things have happen to those that did not. As I said, a fisherman.
Chief
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 3:29 PM
Joined: 02/06/2008
Posts: 341


I thought I could stay out of this silly discussion but since it is about one of my favorite issues, I just couldn’t do it.

 

I describe it as silly because it really has been something akin to beauty pageant contestants describing how they would achieve world peace and cure cancer. The common theme among all the ideas introduced so far is that existing and very effective methods of producing competent seafarers should be short circuited to enable people with less experience to serve in a role for which they have little meaningful experience or training.  This is the same thinking that led the MCA to acquiesce to the demands of yacht builders, owners, unlicensed crew, and brokers to create the yacht licensing quagmire that exists today. The solution to this mess will not be found by creating even more loopholes.

 

Just as no one foresaw the rapid increase in the numbers and size of yachts when the current yacht license scheme was hatched, the idea that the upper limit of that system would also be reached so quickly could not be imagined. Quite frankly, any demand to further dilute the training and experience required to obtain an unlimited license is ill-conceived and will only add more confusion for crew and fodder for the license mills without contributing anything to crew competence or marine safety.

 

The MCA yachting license, flawed as it may be, already exists and is unlikely to go away. It provides an avenue by which yacht crew can progress along a defined path. If that path has been abused and contorted by those who follow it, it is what you have made it. Don’t look to national maritime authorities to distort existing and proven professional licensing schemes to accommodate the desires of a very very few recreational boat operators.

 

The OSV scheme mentioned by one contributor is the result of an attempt to corrupt the standards so that a very few individuals and companies could profit from a narrow exception. This hasn’t increased marine safety or employment opportunities. It is only an artifact of a system in the Gulf of Mexico that indentures a tiny group of mariners to a very small part of a small industry. It serves the oil field interests and feeds the egos of a handful of lower level license holders but does nothing to provide them with wider employment opportunities.

 

As far as American license holders are concerned, the MCA system is available to them, they are not mutually exclusive. The sea time and training acquired for a US license or certification can be used to acquire an MCA/RYA certificate. An American seafarer can live in a parallel licensing universe and enjoy the advantages of both. Furthermore, it is the flag state maritime authority that determines equivalency. My advice to American certificate holders is to submit your documentation to flag and see where you stand. I believe you may be better off than you might think.

 

The road to an unlimited license is open to anyone who wants to take it. The difference in training, experience, leadership, and professionalism between recreational boaters and professional mariners should not be so readily dismissed. The lack of comprehension of that difference is, in my opinion, why those who promote removing the barriers between  recreational and  professional certificates are out of their depth.


junior
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 4:08 PM
Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 1026


" The MCA yachting license, flawed as it may be, already exists and is unlikely to go away. It provides an avenue by which yacht crew can progress along a defined path " Chief understands... You guys must be careful that you are not proposing a license regime which protects your jobs. Very easy to do and misguided. No yachtmaster, superyacht academy kid can take my job...even if they worked for free....It wouldn't work. Experience is critical. Reyx, the " to speak in terms you can understand " guy , you don't need to talk down to me. Im an old guy who spent my youth on fishing boats , got tickets coming out of my bum , twice your sea time and 100 times your geographic experience. It is very worthwhile to question the schooling sea time equation and by all means do question exactly what a yacht crew should be. Id suggest you explore these issues in the future. Henning, the level of Marine accidents may be spiraling ever upward ??...I don't know. I don't keep track of this stuff. Show me the per yacht mile accident rate.. I do know that there is one hell of a lot of yachts out there operating in close quarters . Some weeks I feel like I'm navigating in some kinda Mad Max bus depot for yachts. I observe plenty of poor seamanship and plenty of poor etiquette. Whether these youngsters are a danger to navigation or simply a social problem is a good question.
Anonymous
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 5:17 PM
Yachtie charlatans! There is a "universal" system. It's merchant marine. The MCA white list recognizes most professional marine educations as long as they are signatory to and follow IMO guidelines and vice versa. It is the very lifeblood of an international marine industry. However, all "yacht schemes" devised some flagstates to accommodate a minute part of the marine world is not recognized as professional training. You can swap one way, but not the other. If you are not willing to do it the hard way, the proper way by most countries standards, you stay within the confines of the "non commercial" yacht schemes, yacht license peddlers and the like. You might be the best white boat driver around, but you will always be a featherweight, lacking in what most countries require from their seamen and officers. Do not for one second think that a 500 ton yacht is something else than a ship, and therefore require less training and formal qualifications.
reyx
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:14 PM
Joined: 30/07/2009
Posts: 4


junior, that was not intented, and dont try a peeing contest, for the record, I opperate on deep-sea trawlers in the arctic area between Newfoundland to Spitzbergen, not forgiving waters. We know that we know our buisness, you know..if we make misstakes, bad things happen. It irritated me that "fishing" was put in that place by Ben, ok.. Think that "Chief" has a some idea what is involved in running a fishing/freezing-trawler, when I started 27 years ago the death toll was high, now it is down to zero, that is how good we are. Loss of limps, is getting down. It is a ticket issue, so when you downgrade you have started an avalance that will keep going, the most dangereous person is the one that over estimates himself, with zero in experience or knowlidge how can one judge danger. Cutting corners will always get back to you, at the worst possible moment. When it is seriously recomended that proper mariners education should be lightly thought of, argh. the fishermans view. Back to you Ben,
Chief
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:59 PM
Joined: 02/06/2008
Posts: 341


"Think that "Chief" has a some idea what is involved in running a fishing/freezing-trawler ..."

 

Oh yes indeed. I spent several seasons on a containership converted to a factoryship/processor that was mothership to a fleet of midwater trawlers in the Bering Sea. I know very well what you did and the conditions in which you operated.

 


junior
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 8:37 PM
Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 1026


Yes indeed, I have great respect for all commercial seaman, oil supply boats guys working under rigs, fisherman, Rescue authorities...all of em. Us guys on the little fragile egg shell sailing yachts also work out on deck in weather that will make your hair stand on end. This is not what the topic is about. The question is what type of licensing system gives the greatest flexibly and allows participation to the most entrants. Yachts are funny things. If a key crew walks ashore, meets a pretty girl, is overwhelmed by love and blows up on short notice I have to replace him fast. The replacement must fit many criteria other than pure seamanship achievement. Nationality, language skill, age, sex, attitude, . A skilled seaman may very well reject my position becasue he knows he is going to get cold, wet and live inside a small sailing box. For me its important to have a big group to choose from. If skills are lacking a crew may still be suitable at a lower wage or with additional supervision. Better to live with this type of scenario than it is to live with rigid licensing rules and a crew shortage.
G. Threepwood
Posted: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:13 PM
Joined: 31/07/2009
Posts: 28


I don't think the prospect of working and living on a small vessel puts skilled seamen off. What puts them off is meager pay for junior positions, bad crew rotations and the general lack of proper health and insurance coverage. A skilled seaman will not throw his/her experience to the wind iot compete with the "backpacker" yacht gang, be it from europe/aussie/kiwi/SA or any other nationality. You simply do not throw away your NVQ's, maritime academy training, commercial sea time, DP license etc on a career so fickle. By the time you have your license, more often than not, you are providing for somebody else in addition to your good self. If the yacht world continues to recruit from the "backpacker, young and beautiful" bunch, the problem of crew members eloping because they found love will continue, and the only ones available will be the young and beautiful on the rebound looking for the next ride. If the yacht world sets higher standards for training and tickets, the work force would be more stable and impromtu crew additions decrease rapidly. The crew turnover in the yachting industry is appalling and wouldn't fly in any other business. And we're talking about safety at sea. Would you be happy fly with an airline that had 30 pct newbies on every flight?
Ben Franklin
Posted: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 1:38 AM
Joined: 04/10/2009
Posts: 19


Hi All, Ben here
Henning, I think I might have mis communicated my little system. The Able Seaman that I was refering to in my post, would be the equivelent to an Able Seaman Unlimited, but with some more qualifications. , and in a sense a Mate in Training. Maybe your right about making it 4-5 years. On a smaller vessel this person could be left alone in charge of a Navigational Watch,in the open or maybe restricted to Daylight only? And Junior, a person with this level of knowledge could be working on a yacht and gaining experience under supervision of an experienced person like your self who has the desire to make sure the new guys know exactly what they are doing. Maybe that Able seaman like Henning said would allow him 45GRT so he could run that sunseeker if he desires. How about if it took 180 days seatime from seaman to 3rd seaman, then have some courses, then another 180days, with a few more classes to second, then 180 to Able Seaman(which would be todays Able Seaman Unlimited), and since this person would have more responsibility, 360 days and then they take the last few classes that they need to get the mate license? Junior, don't you think a person who has done this, would have the desire, knowledge, real life experience, and some decent schooling, having also broke up the cost, tht would make him a competent Master of a small vessel or a good Quartermaster on something slightly larger  if he should so desire?

Chief, I am not trying to dumb down Merchant Mariner qualifications to play to yachts. I am trying to propose a way to implement a respectable and efficent way to make responsible seaman in all aspects of the Maritime Industry. One system so that one does not have to have multiple tickets from multiple countries. This involves recognizing that we are required to take more classes and have more training as the vessels become more complex. I would like to see a way tht the training and seatime requirements stay up with the times. An Able Seaman today does need more training due to the fact that vessels are crewing with less persons, are working more, and they need a chance to be able to in a timley manner absorb all the skills and knowledge that will make them good officers.

To our fishing friend, Please don't think I was trying to discount anyone in the fishing industry. In the US system there already is a AB Fish MMD available, just not too many guys take the time to go get it. I wsa simple proposing a singular deck rating skill set document, that if a person was working on a particular vessel, would have something that says they also have a skill set tht is unique to what they have been doing. I checked, it was 20foot that I said, in my reference to the Gulf of Mexico. And I do know and respect the skills of commercial fishermen, I spent November to Febuary with 4 days of port in the Bering sea while in the Coasst Guard one year, sitting on station, making weather patterns just in case you guys needed us. We were in 40+ feet at some points, getting our rear ends handed to us, and that you guys were out there in much smaller vessels attests to the skills of those seaman. I also spent time on tankers and cargo vessels, and as with all the areas of the Maritime Industry, there were differences. A person, if so desiring to switch to a differnet segment, would just by having their tickets read, would be instantly regonized of having a skill set of X as well as having specialty ratings. In the Coast Guard and Navy, a person has their rank, seaman, 3rd class Petty Officer, 2nd, 3rd, Chief, what ever, and then they have their designator, Cook, Boatswain Mate, Machinery Technician, Yeoman, etc. But they all have a basic skill set of knowledge based on their rank, and then specialty based on their everyday job. I was trying to propose something like that.



Anonymous
Posted: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:46 PM
I still find it funny that under USCG rules I qualify for a 500 ton masters license.. but Not a 200 ton. How can I qualify for the bigger license... seatime is counted on boats over 50 tons.. for the 200 ton you need seatime on boats over 100 tons.. I keep scratching my head over it, but am taking full advantage of the loophole. They really need to fix the system. Just a thought
Once
Posted: Saturday, August 27, 2011 8:08 PM
Joined: 27/08/2011
Posts: 7


Three questions, the first two about proposals for reg changes.

First, in regulations by any authority, then, now, or the future, how do you judge the quality of sea time?  For example, how do you know, or if you know, judge, the sea experience of a longliner who stands thigh deep in water, though his boat is 100gt, while he works twentytwo hours on, two off, for 28 to thirty days at a stretch?  Or if he's not baiting hooks, is hunched over in the lazarette untangling line?  Or if his boat is at the dock and he's three days straight, without sleep, loading iced fish into a semitrailer (that, after all, might be part of his job)?  How is it that  a Fisheries Observer gets no creditable seatime at all even though he's on twentyfour hour call, usually works 12 plus hours a day, half of it on the trawl deck or in the fish bins while he endures the same food, the same talk, the same weather, the same sixty foot seas and danger as the Japanese ABs--while anyone can write up seatime on his own little boat running around in this calm bay or that?   Or the seatime of an AB on a North Sea supply boat in the winter, in dangerous operations off the Thistle platform while a thirty foot swell rolls in; how do you compare that to AB work chipping paint on a 60,000 ton container ship in the South Pacific?  What the hell is a wheel watch, anyway, on a ship that is nearly always on automatic pilot?  How do you compare working booms and driving cranes?  How do you compare the wheelhouse time where the watch is four on, four off, one hour and twenty minutes at the wheel at a time, the rest of the watch either on a wing or making coffee in the galley, with the two to four hour straight wheel watch on an ocean going tug?  How do you compare gillnetting Bristol Bay to purse seining Puget Sound?  How do you compare watch time in the Strait of Gibraltar with watch time in the Strait of Juan de Fuca?  How is INLAND towing time in the crowded Grenville Channel less valuable than Near Coastal towing time.?  Why are oilfield divers, who have the most intimate contact with the sea and, in many cases, do more rigging and deck work than any AB on a modern freighter, unable to qualify at least some of their work as sea time?   How do you compute sea experience with regard to weather?  Is time spent in and out of a typhoon on an 1100 ton research ship  any different from time on the same boat always in calm weather?  Of course it is.  But how do you put that into the regulations so that the regulations aren't something of a joke?  Are Force 12s equivalent to Force 7s?  And why isn't most of a Cook's time--Cook on a cargo ship or fish processor--countable as deck time--especially as the most difficult work on most ships is that of the Cook, who must be, if he's really good, always up to it.  He goes the same places, sees the same weather, the same danger, and might have to launch the same lifeboats.    He also might spend a lot of his smoking time on deck watching such operations as the tying up and anchoring.  The watch standing in the wheel house is by comparison with his cooking, easy work.  He can take a test.  He can take a test about the anchoring and then know as much as the ordinaries who've been on the boat for four months.  And chances are, he probably already knows a lot more than they do about chipping paint.  Why can't the USCG figure this out?

I know the answers to all these questions, and so do you.  The answers are either you can't or you don't but they can't and they won't.

Second, how to you account for differences in ability?  The ABs on a ship may  be the only one's allowed up the masts; the Ordinary's might be the only one's agile enough to to go up.  One guy might learn all there is to know in being an AB on a large merchant ship in six months; another might still be incompetent, even thoough he has taken all exams, after six years.  And regarding all the time it has been suggested here that one should take as minimal proof of intention and worthiness, it makes me think of a photograph in a certain book on seafaring of long ago.  In the photograph were four or five men, as I recall--the boson, two or three mates, and the captain.  The  average age was twentyfour.  The captain was twentyone.  The ship was a large square rigger somewhere off Cape Horn.

As far as I'm concerned, all advancement that involves a substantial change in duties should require an examination, and the examination should not be too simple but also not too expensive.  But the sea duty required in order to take the examination should not be nearly as much as the USCG and many others want to make it.  Opportunity must be given for the advancement of ability, ability in all its forms.    Those who have the ability have no moral duty whatsoever to spend it (that is, to expend it, or "serve it") for very long on tasks that don't require it. 

And third.  I do not fully understand what is meant now by a "navigational watch."  At least, I don't understand the significane of this qualification in regulations concerning documents and licensing.  Long ago, as an OS, though it was by no means the first time I went to sea, I went round the world on a tramp Victory, in the 12-4, and I was on the wheel at night through the Strait of Gibraltar and on the wheel during the day in the Suez Canal, though I think it was contrary to union (SIU) regulations.  Each half of my regular watch always involved an hour and twenty minutes on the wheel, and as far as I know this was true of each of the three OSs and each of the six ABs, not counting the 68 year old Bosun and the seventy year old Deck Maintenance Man.  Besides those two, I never heard of any other kind of "day worker" until, years later, I was on a NOAA ship.  Why is so much emphasis now put on WatchStanding?  I thought watchstanding was the norm.  And as alll my experience has shown me that the day workers do more work, why do they have lesser status for licensing?.

;


Grafspee
Posted: Saturday, August 27, 2011 9:50 PM
Joined: 13/04/2010
Posts: 2


It would be good for the industry if MCA or al least Cayman Islands authorities gives FULL appliance to the IMO white list, and with that more Professionals might join the Industry.

You should not be scared of the South american Horde of proffesional crew, a fairly competition is always healthly, and it will shake many lazzy hips as well.

Sayonara!

 

 


Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, August 28, 2011 11:04 AM
Hello Everyone This is a good one. I can understand both sides of the agurment. I am young I only have my yahctmaster offshore, stcw95. however I have also done over 1000nm on diffrent yahcts, diffrent seas and with diffrent crews. In my case I would like to think that qualifictions are simply something to keep the insurance compain happy and that my experience is much more valuable, and to me it is. All that I have learnt was out there on the sea in the class room I simply put this on paper. but I have sailed with some crew who have yachtmaster oceans, OOW and they have eathier had no life experince making it hard for them when it came to running a crew or dealing with guests. Or they had no really experince on the sea and had simply spent most of there time at sea stuck in the books studying. I like the Idea of international tickets, it would allow everyone no matter what country or flag to be able to explore diffrent sections of the marine industy with out having to restudy the hole section, for example if I would ask a cargo compainy for a job my experince would probaly be as usefull as tits on a mual. If I could chage it all evey boat would be run like a navy boat.
Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, August 28, 2011 8:27 PM
The above post is a perfect example of how messed-up the yacht licensing system is that the MCA created. I am not knocking this gentleman's hard work or experience to date. He followed the system as presented to him. However, how is it possible to hold a Yachtmaster Offshore, which the MCA endorses as a Master of not more than 200 GT, with only 1000nm of sea time???!!! In comparison, to obtain an Able Seaman endorsement under the current STCW, one must have sailed 1080 days. Let's suppose that this sailor worked on an average ship that was in port at least 2 days every week. This would put him on the water 768 days in a 3 year period (assuming he sailed straight for 3 years). Cruising at an average speed of 10 knots, his sailing mileage would be 184,320 miles. All of this in order to stand a bridge watch under the oversight of a licensed mate . Yet the MCA feels that a Yachtmaster is ready for command with only 30 days of sea time, 800nm, and 12 night hours. How is this possible? How can someone be a "captain" with only a month at sea? It is absolutely ridiculous. A lifeboatman on a cruise ship has more sea time.
Anonymous
Posted: Monday, August 29, 2011 8:55 AM
sorry, I worte the post above saying about my miles and yachtmaster, I missed a 0 off. I have over 10,000 NM sea time. The minimal requirment for a yachtmaster is 2500nm. I belive the reqiremnts you are talking about (800nm and 30days sea time is for a costal skipper) I wish the indursty rules would be harder just like the cargo ships as we would then flush out some of the people who are only here for a year or 2 and as a holiday. Plus each day more and more mistakes are happening,
Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, September 4, 2011 5:32 PM
I do believe that yes the 2500nm is a minimal requirement for YM however I do know some examiners and I have been told that this is a mere requirement and mostly people are passed on the fact that this qualification will get them a lower ranking job to gain the experience they need to actually be competent YM.
Anonymous
Posted: Wednesday, September 7, 2011 1:03 PM
You are mixing qualification and certification. Qualifications can be made so high that no one will ever be right for a job. Certification is established by STCW and interpreted by the flag and in this thread we are referencing the MCA. They have set the bar so low that the industry recognizes (per your post) that a YM license should be considered only as an entry-level ticket, the same as basic safety training on a ship. BUT the MCA does not say that. The license is a command ticket for immediate use. This is so, so wrong.
Captain Andy
Posted: Thursday, September 8, 2011 11:15 AM
Joined: 17/09/2008
Posts: 93


Guys, as an indate RYA Examiner for Sail, Motor and Ocean licences, the actual requirement for attending a YM Offshore practical assessment follows: 2500 Nm, 5 days as skipper on a yacht, 50 days seatime, 5 passages over 60Nm rhumb line including 2 overnight and 2 as skipper, plus Restricted VHF radio operators certificate and a recognised first aid certificate. Examiners are very carefully picked from 16 000 RYA instructors: they are that selective, there are less than 300 in the World! Putting it bluntly, NO examiner would EVER issue a ticket to an individual who DID NOT meet the above MINIMUM requirements.
Anonymous
Posted: Thursday, September 8, 2011 12:40 PM
Capt Andy, thank you for proving my point. Your exclusive club of RYA examiners exacerbates the problem as well. Did you read the MINIMUM criteria you posted? 50 days of sea time and 5 days as skipper in order to sit for a license that allows one to sail as a Master up to 200 GT. How ridiculous is that?
Anonymous
Posted: Thursday, September 8, 2011 11:20 PM
I agree the RYA yachrmaster system is a joke i hold both offshore and ocean yachtmaster tickets plus a australian Master 5, the level of training does not even come close to what i had to do to obtain my master 5 license, and that license is only for commercial vessels up to 25m!!!! With the RYA system there are no checks on the sea time to validate it andone can make up there miles. When i sat my ocean course i wasnt even asked to submit seatime and we only used the sextant for 2mins as everyday it was cloudy making sunsights impossible, but yet i still passed the course....funny that!!! Something needs to be done in this industry as there are too many training organisations whereby u pay u pass!!!No wonder the commercial industry thinks we are a joke!!!!
Captain Andy
Posted: Friday, September 9, 2011 6:05 PM
Joined: 17/09/2008
Posts: 93


Guys, all I can say is that if you have concerns about any standards of training you have received, or have heard about, then do something about it and contact the RYA directly! They can be reached via email at enquiries@rya.org.uk. I am sure they will appreciate your input, as they are striving to maintain the highest standards possible!
gio
Posted: Saturday, February 11, 2012 12:31 PM
Joined: 07/01/2012
Posts: 13


According to IMO, in near future for all ships from 500GT will be mandatory that crew must have commercial licences by STCW
Henning
Posted: Saturday, February 11, 2012 9:21 PM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1049


gio wrote:
According to IMO, in near future for all ships from 500GT will be mandatory that crew must have commercial licences by STCW

Problem is, IMO is a body with no jurisdiction. All they can really do is request that it's signatory members agree to enact and enforce conventions (IMO makes no 'rules', they create 'conventions' since they have no authority of their own and rely on the signatory nations to follow the convention and make rules).  That's why what we have now isn't really working any better than what we had 100 years ago. Most all the same root problems still exist, they just change flag.

gio
Posted: Sunday, February 12, 2012 7:19 PM
Joined: 07/01/2012
Posts: 13


IMO is part of UN and the strongest organisation regarding maritime. IMO makes rules and conventions...STCW,MARPOL,COLREG's,SOLAS..etc all that created IMO. So if they really adopt that new rule for all ships from 500GT will be mandatory that crew must have commercial licences by STCW. So each member of IMO(country) will issue a document showing the level of mariner certification and the capacity and limitations of each. MCA captain(yacht) till 3000GT will get STCW licence as A.B (able seaman)
Henning
Posted: Thursday, February 16, 2012 4:01 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1049


Problem there is MCA would not agree to that therefor would not enforce the issue. If the MCA will not enforce the issue on MCA British Flag yachts, who at IMO will? How can IMO force the Brits to agree? They can't. Hell, even the EU couldn't make them accept the Euro, what makes you think the UN has more juice over the Brits than the EU? What would the US do? Throw GB off the Security Counsel? Not likely.

kodiakyankee
Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 12:53 PM
Joined: 20/11/2012
Posts: 1


hello, i enjoyed the above banter. i found your forum by searching for licensing questions while sitting on a tug in the wee hours. feel free to point me to another forum if this has been answered already: how do i obtain a yacht license? i hold and work on a 3rd a/e and dde ahp with stcw 95. i started on a cg ship a long time ago and have worked on the water international and domestic since 1993. hawsepiper. hold lifeboatman as well. i have no idea if or how these doc translate to yacht world and have no idea where to begin. thanks
rodsteel
Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 6:52 PM
Joined: 25/06/2009
Posts: 277


Hello KodiakYankee,

 

Here is a little light reading:

 

http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/mgn_093_eng.pdf

 

Henning, Chief or Dean may have other opinions/suggestions

 

Enjoy,

 

Rod

 


ratpack
Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012 12:15 PM
Joined: 03/03/2011
Posts: 100


Too much writing. My simple point is that if you made licences standard across the industry, that would mean training for and being examined on stuff you might never need. For example, studying for my Y3 meant I had to learn about things I had never seen in 6 years of working on YACHT and will never see because I only intend to work on YACHT but I was still examined on those subjects.
Chief
Posted: Friday, November 23, 2012 2:36 PM
Joined: 02/06/2008
Posts: 341



"... studying for my Y3 meant I had to learn about things I had never seen in 6 years of working on YACHT and will never see because I only intend to work on YACHT but I was still examined on those subjects."

That is a sad comment generally and if you wrote that on your CV or mentioned your contempt for further learning during an interview, I don't think your career would progress well.


A good engineer, or even a mediocre one possesses a trait called "intellectual curiosity." It is what leads to the abilities listed below that define a good engineer.


"an ability to apply knowledge of math, engineering, and science"
"an ability to analyze and interpret data"
"an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems"
"an ability to communicate effectively"
"a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in, life-long learning"
"an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice"



Part of "the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions" is to learn how and why various machines or mechanisms are constructed or operated. You may never see or operate a particular machine, but knowing how it works and why becomes another tool in your collection that just might make the difference between being a useless passenger on the yacht or a competent engineer.


Anyone can pick up an "owners handbook" and follow the step by step instructions. That is what too many engineers are doing now. Don't be one of those, take some pride in what you do and what you know and give the owner what he thinks he is paying for.


Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, November 25, 2012 12:40 AM
I love how yachties claim to be the best of the best, yet when it comes time to prove it, the silence is deafening. Meeting a Y-license standard that is WAY BELOW the minimum standards of STCW is not that big of an accomplishment. Complaining must be a 5-day module for the Y-tickets.
ratpack
Posted: Sunday, November 25, 2012 1:12 PM
Joined: 03/03/2011
Posts: 100


[comment edited by moderator] I never suggested I didn't want to learn, I simply responded to the original question about combining licences across the industry. Personally I love to learn new things but if combining licences were to mean I would be examined on more things that were not relevant to my field - I think that would be a bad thing.

 
 Average 2 out of 5