Jeff wrote:
Ryk wrote:

Is it a "sea day" if I'm out sailing my own 35 foot sailboat, or do I
need to be under the supervision of a licensed captain?


It is supposed to be a full 8 hour day, but at the discretion of the
testing officer they will accept 4 hour days. If you "self certify"
you have to show that you actually own a boat. . . .

There's a lot of "wink wink nudge nudge" around this point.

There's a lot more winkin' and nudgin' going on than that [in the US].

I know somebody who had nowhere near 360 days afloat, who'd convinced
skippers to pad his seatime a ridiculous amount. The trick is to
involve several skippers who don't know what the others are reporting.
One of the skippers was very irate when he learned an applicant for
whom he'd been generous reporting seatime, and who claimed he was "only
going for a 6 pack and just a few days short", showed up later with a
720 day license.

And the "self certify" route is rife with fudging too. If the
applicant is the only one lying, who's gonna dispute it? Know a
skipper who has a 6 pack ticket, who was a weekend sailor with only
three years of ownership at the time. When I called him on it, he
winked and said his boat had been very, very busy those three years,
according to his logs. Know of another with a similar incredulous
story, and he said, "Every morning I'd go out to the dock and step into
my punt." Also miraculously passed the eye test, with 20/500 eyesight.

I don't fault the Coast Guard, though; they're hugely understaffed
and, especially since 9/11, have bigger fish to fry than 6 pack
cheaters.

On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 23:12:17 -0800, Mark wrote:


Jeff wrote:
Ryk wrote:

Is it a "sea day" if I'm out sailing my own 35 foot sailboat, or do I
need to be under the supervision of a licensed captain?


It is supposed to be a full 8 hour day, but at the discretion of the
testing officer they will accept 4 hour days. If you "self certify"
you have to show that you actually own a boat. . . .

There's a lot of "wink wink nudge nudge" around this point.

There's a lot more winkin' and nudgin' going on than that [in the US].

I know somebody who had nowhere near 360 days afloat, who'd convinced
skippers to pad his seatime a ridiculous amount. The trick is to
involve several skippers who don't know what the others are reporting.
One of the skippers was very irate when he learned an applicant for whom
he'd been generous reporting seatime, and who claimed he was "only going
for a 6 pack and just a few days short", showed up later with a 720 day
license.

And the "self certify" route is rife with fudging too. If the applicant
is the only one lying, who's gonna dispute it? Know a skipper who has
a 6 pack ticket, who was a weekend sailor with only three years of
ownership at the time. When I called him on it, he winked and said his
boat had been very, very busy those three years, according to his logs.
Know of another with a similar incredulous story, and he said, "Every
morning I'd go out to the dock and step into my punt." Also
miraculously passed the eye test, with 20/500 eyesight.

I don't fault the Coast Guard, though; they're hugely understaffed and,
especially since 9/11, have bigger fish to fry than 6 pack cheaters.

The point is to make sure people are qualified. The judgment of seasoned
peers (CG officials?) is often enough.

Looking beyond the numbers, wouldn't you say a skipper with an actual
years' worth of cruising experience is probably more experienced than
someone with twice as many days as a deckhand on a (probably fair weather)
tourboat?

I know a couple of architects who sat on licensing examination boards,
back when architect licensing was heavily based on an interview. They
said they could tell within 5 minutes whether a candidate was really ready
to be a licensed architect, or full of you-know-what.

Back to captains' licensing, unless you really think you're going to be
taking passengers for hire or doing deliveries, or something else that
actually requires a license, there's probably more reason not to be
licensed.

Matt O.

Matt O'Toole wrote:

Back to captains' licensing, unless you really think you're going to be
taking passengers for hire or doing deliveries, or something else that
actually requires a license, there's probably more reason not to be
licensed.

I've heard that before, but it's unclear to me. Are you any more
culpable if you have a license, but are merely out pleasure sailing,
and something goes wrong?

"Mark" wrote in message
oups.com...

Matt O'Toole wrote:

Back to captains' licensing, unless you really think you're going to be
taking passengers for hire or doing deliveries, or something else that
actually requires a license, there's probably more reason not to be
licensed.

I've heard that before, but it's unclear to me. Are you any more
culpable if you have a license, but are merely out pleasure sailing,
and something goes wrong?

Not that I'm aware of... if you're out on business and *don't* have a
license, you're in deep sh*t beyond whatever they boarded you for.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com