Chief Mate / Master Shipboard Assessments

**todd.harter** · October 6th, 2008, 05:46 PM

TH

**El Capitan** · October 6th, 2008, 07:20 PM

Todd - I'm a bit unclear as to what your actual question is, but I think I understand where you're coming from. Correct me on any of the following - Your looking to get your proficiency signed off M-5-1A through D for proficiency in ARPA, right?  In most cases, this is all covered in an approved ARPA class. I'm not sure where you're attending school, but a certificate from an approved class will garnish you the competency sans sign off, therefore eliminating the need for an onboard assessment. MITAGS, STAR, MPT, Mid Atlantic, Pacific Maritime and a number of others all offer this approved course, and since you need an ARPA class anyway to serve aboard ARPA equipped vessels, this is a no-brainer as to whether this is a class to attend. Real ARPA equipment, coupled with actual simulator time is the way to go. If you've already taken an ARPA class that was not an approved class for proficiency, I think you can get it done fairly quickly by being on the bridge during your next port of call, and getting the old man to sign you off without gun decking it. Did I miss anything? For more reference on this, here's the link to a page that spells it out pretty clearly in one of AMO's newsletters - STCW '95 requirements for deck officers to upgrade to chief mate or master level after 1 February 2002 Good Luck...

**todd.harter** · October 6th, 2008, 07:54 PM

TH

**El Capitan** · October 6th, 2008, 08:48 PM

Todd - Considering that the assessments are done as part of an ARPA class in 5 days, I don't feel that a vessel in normal trade would have any problem signing someone off in one port of call on the M-5-1 portion of the practical assessments. We're talking Control and Function Operation, Determining Target Data, Parallel Indexing, and BRM while manning the ARPA. I would say that if you were a regular member of my crew, had your #$@& together, and were worth your salt as a mariner, I wouldn't hesitate in signing you off knowing that I've observed you in action for much longer than what's required in the assessment, or the course. If James Cavo takes a glance at this discussion, I'm sure he'll jump in with some advice as well. *** Just my humble 2 cents, but I don't think the old man would have any problem signing you off if you've been around for more than a hitch or two, especially as a 2nd Mate. Now if you don't have those Chart Corrections up to date...well, that's a different matter! :-) Leave the letter of explanation out of it. Congratulations on tackling the advancement, and good luck!

**todd.harter** · October 6th, 2008, 10:35 PM

TH

**jdcavo** · October 7th, 2008, 09:31 AM

.

**El Capitan** · October 8th, 2008, 11:10 PM

TH - I assume you're serving in the capacity of 2nd Mate on the vessel you're currently assigned to. I'm not sure what "service" it's currently in, or how long you've been assigned to this particular vessel, but I think all of that relative to the discussion at hand. I do respect J.D.'s input on the subject, but, at the same token I feel that as an "assessor" onboard my vessel, where I'm assessing the competency of one of my junior officers slated for advancement, I have to take some exception to the part. Most new officers are required to be signed off as competent on equipment in accordance to ISM, ISO, and STCW standards in the professional Merchant Mariner world. This being the case, I'm sure you had to figure out how all the functions were to be manipulated on the equipment on your vessel even if your company does not have a comprehensive SMS onboard, and, somehow you must be able to get the vessel from point "A" to point "B" with some degree of competence, otherwise you wouldn't be standing your own watch, and the "Norwegian" Captain and Chief Mate most likely would not have been willing to sign your assessments. That being said, if you've performed your duties with some modicum of responsibility up to this point, I would say that an instructor at a school has far less knowledge of your capability after 5 days, than the old man does after say 5 months of service aboard his ship. However, with the threat of reprisals down the road should you decide to pump the bilges in Raritan Bay one day, the only advice I would give you (while keeping J.D.'s answer in mind), is to go ahead and do it exactly by the book, and have some unsuspecting U.S. Master or Chief Mate slap the ink in the appropriate block forever lending his name to your competence. Or, go ahead and pay one of the schools the $995.00 dollars, and go ahead and get it over with. Fill in the blanks a bit more, so we don't get into too much of a pissing contest here, and tell us more about your current shipping situation. As for the culpability portion of signing someone off - James, I have to say that you've pretty much sealed the deal for me. Just in case one of the up and comers ends up being the next Joe Hazelwood someday, I'll refrain from signing anyone else off . I can't think of how else one is to protect himself from the "authority over them for fraud" threat that lingers over someone, that will be interpreted by a hearing officer in an "official" administrative hearing. BULL#$%@ !!! A perfect way of policing a system that was flawed to begin with. When is it do you suspect that we'll finally catch up with our "Norwegian" and "British" brethren? Or are we going to make a few more exceptions, and excuses?

**todd.harter** · October 9th, 2008, 07:35 AM

TH

**john** · October 9th, 2008, 01:36 PM

Todd,

you ahve another problem to add to the list... When I last submitted assessments they were not accepting signatures from foreign Captains. I was told this is because they have no recourse if a foreigner gundecks the assessment.

Just a heads up since this caused me *much* grief a few years back.

**El Capitan** · October 9th, 2008, 02:44 PM

John - Is it just my computer, or has Mr. Cavo's response to TH totally disappeared? It makes it look like I'm responding to thin air (which I often do, but didn't want everyone to know about it).

James, we may have days where we disagree here, but ultimately I think I can speak for all of us here when I say we appreciate you input and participation. This may not be the last time we need to debate an issue, but the only way we're going to fix it long term is to discuss, argue it, fight for it, and participate in it's change.

Afterall, it's not only our way of life, it's our livelihood...

**john** · October 9th, 2008, 03:47 PM

I am assuming he edited the comment out after Todd noted he was obtaining legal counsel. Which is exactly why the edit button is there.... no sense in anyone getting in trouble at work for a forum post especially if they have mariner's best interest in mind (I can assure you Cavo does!). I don't know what was written there before but we fully support his desicion. We also appreciate Todd's honesty.
Anyway.... edited comments are usually marked as such but this one got cleared as I was updating the forum software this morning.

**jdcavo** · October 9th, 2008, 07:59 PM

John has it figured out. It is also possible I may have flost my balance walking the thin line of caution vs. making it harder for someone to get an assessment done.
The edit tool is also hl;pful in fixing the typos I never see unti I click on "Add your comments." Responding to thin air isn't so bad, it's when the air responds back that you have to worry...

**El Capitan** · October 9th, 2008, 08:50 PM

I think we have all experienced a little vertigo now and again, and I suppose the most important thing is not find yourself all piled up in a heap. As to the thin air answering...no comment! <img alt="" src="http://gcaptain.com/maritime/forum/js/FCKeditor/editor/images/smiley/msn/shades_smile.gif" />
I'm with John - I think there are many more better informed mariner's here because of your presence and input, and we all know where your intentions are. Truth be told, I think TH does as well. I think the real challenge before us is - How do we make it better than what it is? And I think you've more than contirbuted to that end James, by just keeping us informed.
By the way John, I like the new upgrades...and, we too often forget we wouldn't be having this conversation without your efforts....Thanks!!!

**anchorman** · October 9th, 2008, 09:59 PM

El Capitan,
Maybe, if you relocated your head, the air would get better.

**anchorman** · October 9th, 2008, 10:00 PM

...as far as the thin air goes.

**El Capitan** · October 9th, 2008, 11:06 PM

Actually, I think the air here is better than where your head is.

**El Capitan** · October 9th, 2008, 11:07 PM

...at least fresher.

**CaptRob1** · October 9th, 2008, 11:59 PM

Don't know El Capitan, getting ready to head to town and have some crawfish. We'll see where the hell they imported this from. Anchorman is representing you guys well (haha).