|
Sea Service Scam and Scandal
I had occassion to sit through the last 20 minutes of a presentation by
one of the local "Captain's License" schools to a group of people interested in meeting the USCG qualifications for "six pack" and 100-ton certification. I couldn't beleive my eyes and ears. The rep from the school displayed the Sea Service form on a screen and began instructing his audience on how to game the system! "Be creative" he said. "The Coast Guard wants to work with you to be sure you qualify for the exam. The Coast Guard wants you to be licensed. Remember, you can use all your time on any registered or documented vessel since your 16th birthday as long as you owned the vessel or can provide the registration number and get the owner to sign off on your time" (He was corect about time on any registered vessel since age 16). "When you fill in the hours, never ever put down that you spent less than four hours underway. If you think you were out for two or three hours, round that up to something just over four. 4.3 or 4.5 would look better than 4 exactly. You don't need to have a log, just use your memory and write in enough days over enough years that you wind up with at least 360 4-hour shifts of sea service and be sure that 90 of those days are within the last three years. Most peole will want to show a lot more days in the summer months than in December and January." "If you boat out into any area that would be considered near coastal rather than inland waters, make sure that you count the entire day as near coastal service. If you're out of the inland waters for even an hour or so, make sure that you claim at least four hours near coastal for that day." "In this block up here, you will be asked to fill in what your duties were aboard the vessel. Never put down "engineer", even if that was your job. The USCG will only allow you to count hours spent as an "engineer" to apply to your engineer's license, not your captain's license and once you have declared the time as an "engineer" you can't go back and refile with another description of duties- you just lose all that time forever unless you want to get licensed as an engineer. Make sure that you write in "owner/operator" if you owned the vessel, or "crew" or "deckhand" if you did not." "We have a group of people at our school who will review your application before it goes to the USCG to make sure you won't have any problems qualifying for a license". **** Outrageous. And an insult to generations of licensed masters who legitimately earned the right to test. It has long been known that sea service forms are typically filled in with a wink and a nod, but it was still appalling to actually hear somebody from a licensing school advise a group: "be creative, round up the hours if need be, and remember the Coast Guard wants to work with everybody to allow them to test for a license." What can "be creative" mean in this context, exactly, other than "lie your butt off?" I'm wouldn't want to tar all such schools with the same brush, but in this specific case the school's policy (as represented by the group presentation) does a disservice to the entire maritime community and will certainly put a lot of underqualified people into positions of responsibility for which they are not prepared. |
I'm wouldn't want to tar all such schools with the same brush, but in
this specific case the school's policy (as represented by the group presentation) does a disservice to the entire maritime community and will certainly put a lot of underqualified people into positions of responsibility for which they are not prepared. Gaming the system has become the American way of life, Chuck. Look at the business career of George W. Bush. -- LOL! I had a notion that was coming.. |
Tom,
It is called OCD. When you couple that with his NPD it becomes a handful. -- Starbuck "You are accustomed to ostracism from childhood because you are overweight, deformed, stupid, or have an extremely short [deleted]." "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 12:40:07 -0400, Harry Krause wrote: Gaming the system has become the American way of life, Chuck. Look at the business career of George W. Bush. Jesus Harry, can't you EVER discuss something without bringing up George Bush? You are on the verge of becoming really annoying. |
|
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:19:58 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:08:08 -0400, PocoLoco wrote: ~~ snippage ~~ I've a strong feeling there are a few folks right here in the group who will have a six pack license very soon now! (Or maybe they'll just *say* they do!) Is that a really bad thing though? Even if you go to a school that teaches it's own test (which a lot of these schools pretty much do), you still have to slog your way through safety, regs, navigation (which in and of itself is a pretty valuable education), signal recognition and you actually learn a lot even if it is only to pass a test. As to the experience thing, not everyone had a lot of experience and at that, the OUPV is a qualifier of sorts as there are distance qualifiers and the like. Around here, you see a lot of OUPV Captains who has distance limits like 50 or 75miles, Inshore and you very seldom see OUPV Captains with Near Shore qualifications. I don't see the get your OUPV Captain's license schools as a bad thing - I do see the under-qualified Master's as being a bad thing though. That's one reason I downgraded mine because I really wasn't using it and there really wasn't a reason for me to have it. I disagree with using false pretenses to obtain recognition. That was one of the main reasons I didn't vote for Kerry. -- John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 00:22:59 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 20:00:13 -0400, PocoLoco wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:19:58 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:08:08 -0400, PocoLoco wrote: ~~ snippage ~~ I've a strong feeling there are a few folks right here in the group who will have a six pack license very soon now! (Or maybe they'll just *say* they do!) Is that a really bad thing though? Even if you go to a school that teaches it's own test (which a lot of these schools pretty much do), you still have to slog your way through safety, regs, navigation (which in and of itself is a pretty valuable education), signal recognition and you actually learn a lot even if it is only to pass a test. As to the experience thing, not everyone had a lot of experience and at that, the OUPV is a qualifier of sorts as there are distance qualifiers and the like. Around here, you see a lot of OUPV Captains who has distance limits like 50 or 75miles, Inshore and you very seldom see OUPV Captains with Near Shore qualifications. I don't see the get your OUPV Captain's license schools as a bad thing - I do see the under-qualified Master's as being a bad thing though. That's one reason I downgraded mine because I really wasn't using it and there really wasn't a reason for me to have it. I disagree with using false pretenses to obtain recognition. That was one of the main reasons I didn't vote for Kerry. For OUPV (Six Pack) license, it's 360 days of experience on any water over any period of time with 90 of those days being within three years plus passing a recognized school. That's not hard to obtain even for the most casual boater. I reckon you're right. -- John H "All decisions are the result of binary thinking." |
|
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 20:00:13 -0400, PocoLoco wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:19:58 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:08:08 -0400, PocoLoco wrote: ~~ snippage ~~ I've a strong feeling there are a few folks right here in the group who will have a six pack license very soon now! (Or maybe they'll just *say* they do!) Is that a really bad thing though? Even if you go to a school that teaches it's own test (which a lot of these schools pretty much do), you still have to slog your way through safety, regs, navigation (which in and of itself is a pretty valuable education), signal recognition and you actually learn a lot even if it is only to pass a test. As to the experience thing, not everyone had a lot of experience and at that, the OUPV is a qualifier of sorts as there are distance qualifiers and the like. Around here, you see a lot of OUPV Captains who has distance limits like 50 or 75miles, Inshore and you very seldom see OUPV Captains with Near Shore qualifications. I don't see the get your OUPV Captain's license schools as a bad thing - I do see the under-qualified Master's as being a bad thing though. That's one reason I downgraded mine because I really wasn't using it and there really wasn't a reason for me to have it. I disagree with using false pretenses to obtain recognition. That was one of the main reasons I didn't vote for Kerry. For OUPV (Six Pack) license, it's 360 days of experience on any water over any period of time with 90 of those days being within three years plus passing a recognized school. That's not hard to obtain even for the most casual boater. Harder than you might imagine, if you hope to actually follow the rules. You need to be *underway*, not just aboard, for a minimum of 4 hours. Motor out into the harbor for an hour, drop an anchor, shut down the boat, fish all afternoon, motor back for an hour: zero time. Sit on the boat in the marina or motor across the bay to the restuarant dock for a cocktail? Zero time. The lowest number of engine hours one could rack up and meet the qualification would be 1440 hours - and only if the boat were never operated for more or less than 4 hours. If you operate for 12 hours straight, you can still only claim 1 day per 24/hour period. Most people would need to operate 2000 engine hours plus; and for a lot of pleasure boaters in short season climates we're talking about 20-25 years of operation to get 360 days of at least 4 hours underway (legitimately). I would personally be ashamed to "qualify" on the basis on a wink, a nod, and a lie. |
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote in
: On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 00:54:29 GMT, otnmbrd wrote: ~~ snippage ~~ With all due respect to those members of the USCG, giving those test ..... IF they do not have the time, experience needed to hold that license, they are not qualified to pass on someone else's ability to hold that license. A straight forward multiple choice exam, tells you only how well an individual takes exams and not how well they actually know the subject and/or can perform the required task...... That's not true at all. A well designed multiple choice test can evidence knowledge. You design a multiple choice test to have a true, plausible, one false and one sort-of false. A properly designed test demonstrates not only the knowledge, but depth of understanding beyond rote - again if properly designed. Although your point is well taken, I still have a problem with this type test for a license. This type test requires that the TEST, "is" properly designed and that the person being examed "is" properly schooled in the possible answers. Some parts of the exam could easily be handled by "multiple choice", but there needs to be a greater "hands on/practical" input, wherein the examiner is able and allowed to adjust for wrong answers due to stupid mistakes, someone who has problems with test, someone who knows the test but not the application, etc. I've met too many good seamen who have a tough time with exams and too many bad ones who with a bit of study, can pass any exam. There are many members of the USCG, well trained and experienced to give these lower grade licenses, but they should be allowed to review these test and come up with practical and essay type exams that will make it apparent when someone's "time" is real or bogus. Hard to do because it takes way too much time to interpret not to mention literacy problems - not everyone is a writer, author and editor. It takes my wife most of a weekend during a test cycle to correct 75 1,000 word essay tests for honors curriculum. Examiners don't have the time to examine these type of "tests" and even at that it's much too subjective - you get a guy who isn't qualified but can spin a line and somebody who is qualified and can't spin a line. I disagree with all of this. Most importantly, the last part. By having examiners who have practical experience in the grade of license being given, they will know when someone is "spinning a line", and when some one is having a problem explaining but knows what they are doing.... As for time .... this is how these test were once given. The time factor is not that important.... it's not a question of finishing a semester on time, it's a persons livelyhood and whether or not they know what they are doing. The point is that at the OUPV level, this is a good way to do it. The only way to prevent abuse is to place a qualifier that you need to operate at the OUPV level for X amount of time before you even think of qualifying for higher level licenses. At the OUPV level, you may be right, but I'd still prefer to see some practical, hands on input. otn |
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 00:54:29 GMT, otnmbrd wrote Much of this points up my problems with the USCG having total control of licensing/documentation of licenses. Don't be too hard on the USCG... your complaints are systemic to ALL licensure done by the Federal Government. BG Don't get me wrong, I get along well with the CG, but the system needs review and I think, basic revision. Although we work in the same "medium", how we go about it and what we have to know can be, and frequently is, two different animals. The process of documenting ones time is open to much creativity in the smaller (SixPac -25ton) grades, that I must agree, can be and always will be subject to some disgression. This is an issue of ownership.... not tied directly to the 25 ton license. Any *owner,* if prone to dishonesty, can "document" all sorts of time on the company vessel. Here you have different tonnage vessels requiring different paperwork, but for some this is indeed true. This doesn't really work any better. In aviation, an applicant for a license must take a written test, an oral test, and a practical test... and doofuses still pass through the system.... mostly those with "experience" and no formal training. FAA, FCC, USCG, and other use the same format in various ways. As for your example, I suspect that the seaman who had trouble with the multiple guess format would be even more challenged in writing an essay. What are the qualifications of the FAA tester? You will always get some "doofi" who will pass through. The old system used question cards that were corrected by the tester on the spot. The tester had the option to send someone back to rethink or give extra questions to cover the issue ..... time was not the issue. Although many people who have problems with test, may also have problems with an essay or oral type exam, an examiner who is "up" on the subject can frequently get a better read on how well the person knows the subject when it is written or oral. Some subjects/questions can be multiple choice, but many need to be "essay". It's not a simple issue, but my feeling is it should be addressed ...... BG Oh well, I'm off to Hyannis for my one week of good food and relaxation ..... Standby "Black Cat". otn |
Chuck is absolutely right.
I use my Boston Whaler on the Pacific Ocean about 70 days a year. I'm coming up on having had it for 8 years. That's 560 days. The engine has 725 hours. I have maybe six days on the Pacific that qualify towards a Captain's license. wrote in message ups.com... Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 20:00:13 -0400, PocoLoco wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:19:58 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:08:08 -0400, PocoLoco wrote: ~~ snippage ~~ I've a strong feeling there are a few folks right here in the group who will have a six pack license very soon now! (Or maybe they'll just *say* they do!) Is that a really bad thing though? Even if you go to a school that teaches it's own test (which a lot of these schools pretty much do), you still have to slog your way through safety, regs, navigation (which in and of itself is a pretty valuable education), signal recognition and you actually learn a lot even if it is only to pass a test. As to the experience thing, not everyone had a lot of experience and at that, the OUPV is a qualifier of sorts as there are distance qualifiers and the like. Around here, you see a lot of OUPV Captains who has distance limits like 50 or 75miles, Inshore and you very seldom see OUPV Captains with Near Shore qualifications. I don't see the get your OUPV Captain's license schools as a bad thing - I do see the under-qualified Master's as being a bad thing though. That's one reason I downgraded mine because I really wasn't using it and there really wasn't a reason for me to have it. I disagree with using false pretenses to obtain recognition. That was one of the main reasons I didn't vote for Kerry. For OUPV (Six Pack) license, it's 360 days of experience on any water over any period of time with 90 of those days being within three years plus passing a recognized school. That's not hard to obtain even for the most casual boater. Harder than you might imagine, if you hope to actually follow the rules. You need to be *underway*, not just aboard, for a minimum of 4 hours. Motor out into the harbor for an hour, drop an anchor, shut down the boat, fish all afternoon, motor back for an hour: zero time. Sit on the boat in the marina or motor across the bay to the restuarant dock for a cocktail? Zero time. The lowest number of engine hours one could rack up and meet the qualification would be 1440 hours - and only if the boat were never operated for more or less than 4 hours. If you operate for 12 hours straight, you can still only claim 1 day per 24/hour period. Most people would need to operate 2000 engine hours plus; and for a lot of pleasure boaters in short season climates we're talking about 20-25 years of operation to get 360 days of at least 4 hours underway (legitimately). I would personally be ashamed to "qualify" on the basis on a wink, a nod, and a lie. |
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:59:29 -0700, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Chuck is absolutely right. Chuck has a point, but it's not a good one. I use my Boston Whaler on the Pacific Ocean about 70 days a year. I'm coming up on having had it for 8 years. That's 560 days. The engine has 725 hours. I have maybe six days on the Pacific that qualify towards a Captain's license. So you only go out for 1.2 hours at a time on average? Why bother to go at all? :) He is only in the boat for a little over 1.2 hours of the trip. |
No, I'm only under way 1.2 hours a day, on average. I'm anchored and
diving maybe 4-5 hours each day I'm out. "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:59:29 -0700, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Chuck is absolutely right. Chuck has a point, but it's not a good one. I use my Boston Whaler on the Pacific Ocean about 70 days a year. I'm coming up on having had it for 8 years. That's 560 days. The engine has 725 hours. I have maybe six days on the Pacific that qualify towards a Captain's license. So you only go out for 1.2 hours at a time on average? Why bother to go at all? :) |
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:52:10 GMT, "Bill McKee" wrote: "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message . .. On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:59:29 -0700, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Chuck is absolutely right. Chuck has a point, but it's not a good one. I use my Boston Whaler on the Pacific Ocean about 70 days a year. I'm coming up on having had it for 8 years. That's 560 days. The engine has 725 hours. I have maybe six days on the Pacific that qualify towards a Captain's license. So you only go out for 1.2 hours at a time on average? Why bother to go at all? :) He is only in the boat for a little over 1.2 hours of the trip. Er...huh? He is a diver. |
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 02:53:56 GMT, "Bill McKee" wrote: "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message . .. On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:52:10 GMT, "Bill McKee" wrote: "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message m... On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:59:29 -0700, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Chuck is absolutely right. Chuck has a point, but it's not a good one. I use my Boston Whaler on the Pacific Ocean about 70 days a year. I'm coming up on having had it for 8 years. That's 560 days. The engine has 725 hours. I have maybe six days on the Pacific that qualify towards a Captain's license. So you only go out for 1.2 hours at a time on average? Why bother to go at all? :) He is only in the boat for a little over 1.2 hours of the trip. Er...huh? He is a diver. Yeah - he mentioned that in another post. I wish I could still dive - that's probably the one thing I can't do that I really wish I could do again. My wetsuit shrank. And here, you require a very warm wetsuit. |
Not commericial, just for fun and taking pictures. I've sold a few pictures
here and there for publication, but I don't do any active marketing. Maybe if I retire. "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 17:13:25 -0700, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: No, I'm only under way 1.2 hours a day, on average. I'm anchored and diving maybe 4-5 hours each day I'm out. Ah - well, that makes perfect sense then. Can't very well be operating your boat while underwater unless you have a really cool remote control deal. So I take your point as a good one. However, most folk don't operate that way. It might be that one would go for 40 minutes to a fishing ground and 40 minutes back the rest of the time fishing, lounging or whatever, but you are still "operating" in the sense that you are alert for potential problems and can act if problems do arise. And technically, if you are drift fishing, you are underway - sort of. And consider this - if a tanker is anchored, is the watch officer disqualified from counting his watch hours as operational time? :) To my way of thinking though, I wouldn't denigrate your experience as being a disqualified for an OUPV license. You would certainly have the experience in terms of operating hours - it's just spaced out weird. By the way, is the diving commercial of some sort? |
Have you talked to the docs at Diver's Alert Network? Some asthmatics
can dive, but the run of the mill doc will give an instant NO if asked. DAN is at http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/ They have an 800 number for questions like yours. "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 17:07:48 GMT, "Bill McKee" wrote: "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message . .. On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 02:53:56 GMT, "Bill McKee" wrote: "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message m... On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:52:10 GMT, "Bill McKee" wrote: "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message news:55qvi15ud20ubh8j237c9p8hu4mo7nvkrr@4ax. com... On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:59:29 -0700, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Chuck is absolutely right. Chuck has a point, but it's not a good one. I use my Boston Whaler on the Pacific Ocean about 70 days a year. I'm coming up on having had it for 8 years. That's 560 days. The engine has 725 hours. I have maybe six days on the Pacific that qualify towards a Captain's license. So you only go out for 1.2 hours at a time on average? Why bother to go at all? :) He is only in the boat for a little over 1.2 hours of the trip. Er...huh? He is a diver. Yeah - he mentioned that in another post. I wish I could still dive - that's probably the one thing I can't do that I really wish I could do again. My wetsuit shrank. And here, you require a very warm wetsuit. I still have my drysuit and full gear including full face mask, but I have drug enduced asthma - no can do anymore. |
My technician has started taking one of those schools. I KNOW he does
not have much time at all being in control of a vessel but I was too polite to ask how he would get around this requirment. He does live aboard his sailboat, at the dock and it has not left the dock in 2 years. I imagine he will just use his liveaboard time. I cant figure out why he wants the license. He asked why I didnt take the course and I just wasnt interested as I dont intend to do anything commercial with boats. |
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:22:56 -0700, "Chuck Tribolet" wrote: Have you talked to the docs at Diver's Alert Network? Some asthmatics can dive, but the run of the mill doc will give an instant NO if asked. DAN is at http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/ They have an 800 number for questions like yours. Nope - already checked it out. Besides, I have some experience in the area and pretty much knew it wasn't all that good an idea. It's a direct result of some meds that I take for my RA and OA - can't be helped. I flunked the asthma test miserably. What are you taking for OA? I am on Mobic, 15mg a day. It is a wonder drug but it can have problems like Vioxx and Celebrex. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com