Info Diving and Seamanship

[jeffsky29]

Yes, and not only you, I read 7 posts instead of what could have been a single post to gain the same information

My question post was 3 posts total - question, answer and me confirming the answer to be correct.

The nitpicking from tursiops and now you, has turned this into 8 posts.

So chill and move on.

 

[IDNeon357]

Just came across this thread. The lack of seamanship knowledge by the general boating public is appalling. I have been involved in a number of court cases involving allegedly negligent boat operators. When I take the deposition of the (for want of a better term) boat driver, I only use proper nautical terms in my questions. 99% of the time, unless I'm dealing with an ex merchant marine or retired Navy seaman, they have no clue what I'm talking about and ask that I put my question into layman's terms. I don't accede to their wishes because the very fact they don't understand the question using accurate established terms proves my point that they have no business operating a 50' twin diesel trawler in a crowded harbor or a Donzi speedboat doing 45 knots in a fog bank. End of rant.

This kind of gimmickry is not wrong, legally, but logically it's completely flawed.

A German can be an excellent sailor and not speak a lick of English, but if you insist they speak only English, they will appear incompetent to you by your methodology regardless of the facts.

While industry vocabulary can be a measuring stick, I'm not sure it's the best.

 

[IDNeon357]

Did anyone mention basic first aid skills (actually some of these are at the EMT level) such as stopping perfuse bleeding, maybe setting (really immobilizing) a broken bone, immobilizing a puncture wound, packing it with gauze, first aid for severe sunburn, or other exposure (hypothermia, hyperthermia), performing CPR, neutralizing a bad jellyfish sting, removing barbs from various stinging animals, etc???

Self protection against aggressive - potentially carrying firearms - e.g. handguns, rifles, ak47s (and not just 1, but at least 1 for each crew member to fend off attackers on the open ocean with plenty of ammo and clips that are full), etc.

Are traction splints even on boats? That would be the biggest one to have available. Simple enough a monkey can use it, but probably going to be the single biggest stopper of loss of blood as far as bone breaks go.

 

[Scuba Lawyer]

This kind of gimmickry is not wrong, legally, but logically it's completely flawed.

A German can be an excellent sailor and not speak a lick of English, but if you insist they speak only English, they will appear incompetent to you by your methodology regardless of the facts.

While industry vocabulary can be a measuring stick, I'm not sure it's the best.

I have no clue what "gimmickry" you are referring to. If a person is going to operate a vessel in navigable US waters, a lack of knowledge of basic seamanship terms shows utter ignorance to the laws of the sea. Operating a boat is not an "industry." It requires basic seamanship. I never insisted anyone speak only English. Do not fabricate my words. I also never said testing a deponent's knowledge of the sailor's vernacular is the best "measuring stick." However, I firmly believe lack of basic seamanship knowledge shows through clearly when a boat operator doesn't know port from starboard, or bow from stern. If I were to take the deposition of a person who spoke only German and their negligent piloting of a vessel in US waters caused the death of someone or the destruction of the vessel, I would certainly expect them to explain to me such basic things as steuerbord, freibord, unterschied zwischen magnetischem Norden und wahrem Norden..... and have a basic understanding of seemannschaft in whatever language they use. How many weekend boaters, or even those who venture offshore are familiar with the Rules of the Road (22 Code of Federal Regulations 83), let alone COLREGS Demarcation Lines and related regulations. When you get your OUPV license, come back and we can have an intelligent discussion.

 

[IDNeon357]

I have no clue what "gimmickry" you are referring to. If a person is going to operate a vessel in navigable US waters, a lack of knowledge of basic seamanship terms shows utter ignorance to the laws of the sea. Operating a boat is not an "industry." It requires basic seamanship. I never insisted anyone speak only English. Do not fabricate my words. I also never said testing a deponent's knowledge of the sailor's vernacular is the best "measuring stick." However, I firmly believe lack of basic seamanship knowledge shows through clearly when a boat operator doesn't know port from starboard, or bow from stern. If I were to take the deposition of a person who spoke only German and their negligent piloting of a vessel in US waters caused the death of someone or the destruction of the vessel, I would certainly expect them to explain to me such basic things as steuerbord, freibord, unterschied zwischen magnetischem Norden und wahrem Norden..... and have a basic understanding of seemannschaft in whatever language they use. How many weekend boaters, or even those who venture offshore are familiar with the Rules of the Road (22 Code of Federal Regulations 83), let alone COLREGS Demarcation Lines and related regulations. When you get your OUPV license, come back and we can have an intelligent discussion.

I'm only commenting on the logic used, but your experience may be completely sound and reasonable. Whether or not someone learns the language of the trade probably is a good indicator of whether or not they learn the trade at all.

But logically, whether a person can effectively communicate is not necessarily indicative of their capability of performing skills. The use of English versus German is just an arbitrary example. In vernacular, versus nautical vocabulary/terminology, the person may be able to demonstrate complete competence at skills based decisions.

 

[Wookie]

I'm only commenting on the logic used, but your experience may be completely sound and reasonable. Whether or not someone learns the language of the trade probably is a good indicator of whether or not they learn the trade at all.

But logically, whether a person can effectively communicate is not necessarily indicative of their capability of performing skills. The use of English versus German is just an arbitrary example. In vernacular, versus nautical vocabulary/terminology, the person may be able to demonstrate complete competence at skills based decisions.

The international language of the sea is English. All radio operators must have a grasp of english to communicate on the radio, and therefore all vessel masters in the World must speak English. Deposing them in English is completely legit.

 

[IDNeon357]

The international language of the sea is English. All radio operators must have a grasp of english to communicate on the radio, and therefore all vessel masters in the World must speak English. Deposing them in English is completely legit.

If someone only speaks only German, then the requirement to communicate a skill in English is illogical. But to generalize this statement I later change the terms to vernacular and nautical terms. Which gets the point across sufficiently.

 

[Wookie]

If someone only speaks only German, then the requirement to communicate a skill in English is illogical. But to generalize this statement I later change the terms to vernacular and nautical terms. Which gets the point across sufficiently.

Which brings us full circle. If someone speaks only German, they are not qualified to conduct marine radio traffic, and therefore shouldn’t be navigating a vessel.

 

[IDNeon357]

Which brings us full circle. If someone speaks only German, they are not qualified to conduct marine radio traffic, and therefore shouldn’t be navigating a vessel.

It's an example that goes right over your head.

It's irrelevant if they speak only German, they could speak gibberish. And you could be asking them in Counter-gibberish "can you turn a wrench?"

And they can be unable to effectively communicate to you AND STILL TURN THE WRENCH.

It is therefore illogical to assume that a person's competency is based upon their ability to communicate.

This doesn't qualify the statement whether it is legally required to be able to communicate to be competent, which is a separate question.

And why I'm qualifying my statement as I have previously.

 

[Akimbo]

@IDNeon357

One of the subjects of the OP (Original Post in this thread) is about the value of understanding maritime vocabulary.

A good deal of seamanship related to maneuvering and safety is all about communications -- electronically, visually (flags, colors, lights, buoys, navigation, etc.), and audibally. It would be difficult to understand these complex signals without picking up the vocabulary. A third-world skipper of a fishing panga might be competent when alone on a familiar body of water but you probably don't want them in command of your dive boat.