ROVworld Subsea Information

UI 2017 Trade Show Registration
Feed Preview
ROVworld.com Forums
ROV SEAEYE FALCON for Sale
GOOD CONDITION
SPARES PARTS
For information email to : falcontosell@hotmail.com
What is the alternative?

To answer that, let me ensure that we are on the same page. My complaint is regarding MTCS and other companies that provide competency certs with no actual training.

Like many others, I found myself in a situation in which a client requested a supervisor certificate. Though I had been working as Rov Supv. for over 10 years at the time, I didn''t have a cert. On the other hand, a junior supervisor had a MTCS certificate and if I didn''t get one, I would be on the next job as a tech. The company informed me that they would help me obtain a cert. via MTCS, through a grandfather clause, which seemed fair enough, after all I had been a Supv. for over ten years and didn''t have a problem demonstrating that. So the process began, signatures, copy of entire log book, evidence and more evidence and in the end even some essay questions, and of course let''s not forget the payment.

So far so good, I had no problem with any of that. The problem came later, once the cert expired! Why would my cert expire? Anyway, at the time, all you had to do was pay the money and they sent you a new cert, which is where the problem starts. If I don''t need to do anything to get a new cert except pay money, than what is the point?

Now the situatition is even worse. Cert expired again, but not only do you have to pay the money, and considerably more, but you have to send all the evidence and again! So not only is it expensive but it is an exhaustive waste of time.

Once you have obtained a qualification and have continued to work in that capacity, then there is not need to keep proving that you can do your job. That''s normal, just like you dont keep renewing you diploma, or degree.

Back to your question, what is the alternative?

MTCS certifications should not expire. Simple

We can go on and on about it, but once you have attained a certain level, then you dont fall back. If you fly your ROV through the bow thruster, you''ll still be a Supervisor, most likely an unemployable one and MTCS cant help you.

Call it what you want, ranting, whining or whatever, but if you want to say nothing and ignore the problem, then you can be that type of person. But if you are who you say you are, even though I think you work for MTCS, then we are in the same boat.

Same with the MIST course, I remember doing that online, read the material answer the questions until you get enough correct to pass, and magically you have a certificate. I could have let my son do it.
Hi there.
looking for manipulator orion 7P (new or second-hand).
i don''t need it''s spare.
regards
Hi Sir.
I search Orion 7 function.
if you are OK , i want to get a picture.
best regards.

atsushi
[quote:deddf68cd0=\"cjbrown29\"]Manufacturer: VideoRay
Model: NTSC Scout
120/240 VAC
50-60 Hz
250 feet
With tether and carry case

Located in Canada, looking for offer.

cjbrown29@comcast.net
Text 425-518-0539
[quote:7da9c964d6=\"oceanengineer\"]A POWERFUL AND MANUEVERABLE INSPECTION CLASS VEHICLE

The Phantom® S5 is a portable, high-performance ROV that combines superior power, telemetry, and payload with ease of use, ruggedness and reliability. It has five high performance Tecnadyne® thrusters — four vectored horizontal and one vertical.

Image

PHANTOM® S5 TECHNOLOGY


The Phantom® S5 is a portable high performance ROV that combines superior power, telemetry, and payload with ease of use, ruggedness and reliability.

    Superior power
    Superior telemetry and payload
    Easy to use
    Rugged and reliable
    Powerful overall performance envelope
    More versatile than other vehicles of its class
    Black polypropylene, non-conductive / non-corroding frame
ROV still available
Hi all
Looking for a ROV to be used in conjunction with our boat tours, maxim depth 1000’. Would like to broadcast to a large screen tv if possible.
If possible unit should come with a grabber arm and extra lighting.
Any suggestions ?
AmpTramp
Having read all of the above I have to say I am disappointed that a company would be so willing to be underhand in sending in the documentation required for assessment in the manner Bazinga says. The company should be reported to IMCA directly.

The MTCS certificate is not and has never been endorsed by IMCA. IMCA set a standard and MTCS or any other training school teach/train to that standard.

We could get into the whole right/wrong argument of that all day long and it will end up being a long drawn out no end in sight type of conversation.

So lets get to the real world. Assuming the system works as it should the candidate should complete a task for example a tether re-term. That would be one activity in a few different competency areas. Here is where it starts to fall apart. Quite often the signature on the sheet of what was a witness goes into the assessors box the witness may be the most competent person in the world but if they are not trained as an assessor they should only sign as a witness.

Once the competency pack is completed and evidence is also produced to support the signatures then it should be sent in for assessment this can be by an assessor within the candidates company or agency. MTCS also do this.
Reading the new E-portfolio documentation on the IMCA website they seem to expect the company an agency worker is on contract to could do this for them.

When MTCS/other company do the assessment they should be reviewing the evidence. The candidate should have a sheet with a who is who of signatures on the completed competency so it can be audited fully if required.

This is almost the same style of system used in NVQ/SVQ qualifications across multiple industries. The only difference I can see is that the assessing company is possibly not audited to the same level as there is body interested in doing that including IMCA.

So the system is flawed but what system is not.

A competence cert can be issued by any employer Raptor is right however a letter of reference does not count as evidence of competence alone neither does just a log book of work experience. I am sure all of us have worked with guys who have been in the industry a long time and are very incompetent however they are mates with the ops manager and manage to keep getting jobs.

I agree three years is a bit short for any renewal and also to be honest if you are staying at the same level then you should maybe just prove you are still working in the industry and the renewal should be issued for significantly less than it currently is.

Companies like certification it gives them a warm and fuzzy feeling that they can hide behind when something goes wrong and the a court case is pending. Until IMCA grows some teeth in the area of ROV training and actually assesses and issues competence certification itself then this is the system we have and it will not change. Competence certification seems to be in fashion at the moment, so for the offshore worker it is the extra piece of paper required to be employable by an agency and the piece of paper staff seem to need to have any chance of promotion.

I have for sale a VideoRay Pro 4 with commercial dive configuration for sale. Comes with 3 tethers, 2 at 1000'' and one at 200 plus feet. This ROV is rated to 1000'' Comes with 3 shipping cases. 2 Umbilicales do not have shipping cases.
ROV has about 160 hours logged. Great condition! Check it out! Paid 60K

For Sale $25,000.

https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/310475889674987
Subscribe

Add to Google
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL
Add to My MSN
Subscribe with Bloglines
Add to netvibes
Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Subscribe with PageFlakes
Subscribe in Rojo
Add this site to your Protopage
Add to Newsburst
Subscribe in NewsAlloy
Add to Blogarithm
ROVworld.com Forums in ATOM 1.0 format
ROVworld.com Forums in RSS 0.91 format
ROVworld.com Forums in RSS 2.0 format


Valid Atom 1.0
Valid RSS
Search ROVworld NEWS

Site Info