"Fudging" sea service for master's license

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by O C Diver

Back in '84 I received my first licence (Master inland, UPV Ocean). While I had the sea time, I felt I needed to take a prep course for all the exam questions that I had no real world experience for (what lights does a submarine display at night on the surface while making way). The class was 2 weeks in the evenings from 5 to 11pm. First class the instructor started by talking about "aids to navigation" specifically buoys and nuns. He stopped after about a minute with a look on his face. Turning around, it became clear that 20% of the class had no idea what he was talking about. 2 weeks later everybody had passed the class; a week after that 28 out of 30 of us had gotten are license on the first try. I'd be willing to bet the instructor could have taught someone to pass the license who had never set foot on a boat. All they would need was someone to fudge the sea time for them. Hard to have much respect for a licensing process that requires no practical test from an independent entity or the licensing authority.

Ted

Either we see the licensing system as OK or Broke....

Sure there are Maritime accidents but are they the result of the licensing process or lack of recurrent testing or just the variety of other accident causing factors that affect all machinery operation.

I forget what levels require what but the FAA requires recurrent testing...should the USCG?

[Sailor of Fortune]

Anybody who takes the prep courses are going to learn something whether or not they pass the course. Even though the prep courses are designed to get the student through the testing process, they are going to learn Rules of the road, plotting etc.
I have tested both ways, studying on my own, and using the prep courses. Each has its own merits and drawbacks. A license does not make someone an expert, anymore than when you passed your driving exam in high school. It is a starting place. No one gets a job because they have a captains license (in the real world at least), they must combine a license with experience, judgment and management skills. "driving the boat" is at most 50% of the job.

[O C Diver]

Originally Posted by psneeld

Either we see the licensing system as OK or Broke....

Sure there are Maritime accidents but are they the result of the licensing process or lack of recurrent testing or just the variety of other accident causing factors that affect all machinery operation.

I forget what levels require what but the FAA requires recurrent testing...should the USCG?

FAA requires a biannual flight review (every 2 years) for a users licence that includes a check ride (flight). This is done with an FAA aproved evaluator not an employee of the FAA. This is for a private pilot licence, not a pilot for higher. Doesn't seem unreasonable to me to require a one day ride along by an evaluator every 5 years to re-certify a boat captain for higher.

Ted

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by O C Diver

FAA requires a biannual flight review (every 2 years) for a users licence that includes a check ride (flight). This is done with an FAA aproved evaluator not an employee of the FAA. This is for a private pilot licence, not a pilot for higher. Doesn't seem unreasonable to me to require a one day ride along by an evaluator every 5 years to re-certify a boat captain for higher.

Ted

That's the rub...big tax dollars ...(not in the big scheme of things but for the agency tasked with it)

All of it may have little return on the dollar...meaning captains that are going to have accidents are based on their habits...not necessarily knowledge of certain procedures.

Most pilots/captains can pass check rides even though there are a menace day to day ( I was a USCG instructor pilot for 8 years).

[O C Diver]

Originally Posted by psneeld

That's the rub...big tax dollars ...(not in the big scheme of things but for the agency tasked with it)

All of it may have little return on the dollar...meaning captains that are going to have accidents are based on their habits...not necessarily knowledge of certain procedures.

Most pilots/captains can pass check rides even though there are a menace day to day ( I was a USCG instructor pilot for 8 years).

Tax $ aren't really the issue as the user pays the evaluator just as I pay all fees every time I renew my license. I see no diference with this and going to get the dotors phisical for the renewal, all costs for requiring a physical are payed by the licence holder.

While I agree with you that a bunch of menaces will get past, others will be blocked, and some who know they should probably retire may reconsider if they know they have to be evaluated before renewal.

Ted

[CPseudonym]

Originally Posted by Sailor of Fortune

A license does not make someone an expert, anymore than when you passed your driving exam in high school. It is a starting place.

That is the salient point of this entire thread IMO. As someone who holds many professional certificates and licenses it is a true statement off the water, assume it applies on the water too. Because someone is certified to do something in no way makes them competent to do it.