Talk:United States Merchant Marine/Archive 1

This archive

This archive was created as per Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. With the exception of grouping some comments together and making slight modifications to section headers, I believe it's a faithful representation of the state of the prior talk page. Haus42 13:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Initial comments

I learned a bit about the US Merchant Marine writing this article. I discovered that a Merchant Marine is a member of the US Merchant Marine and that the term Merchant Marine is frequently and incorrectly used to identify both the organization and a member (or worker) of said organization. Also, it's Merchant Marine not Merchant marine. vudu 08:04, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Merchant Marine

Why "merchant marine" (lower case) rather than "Merchant Marine"? All these "sailors" belong to a Merchant Marine organization, whether American, Russian, or Japanese. Just interested in the logic. vudu 20:50, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

can be spelled with lower cap or capitals it all depends what Merchant Marine is referred to

In my experience, merchant mariner is the preferred term used to define a member of the Merchant Marine. This also helps differentiate between the Marines of the US Marines and the Royal Marines.
Note: Associated Press style makes the military Marine uppercase; Oldfarm 04:19, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

By the way, the photo of the gun crew in the article may not be merchant seamen, they are probably members of the United States Navy Armed Guard who were in the US Navy. Oldfarm 04:26, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The gun crew in the picture are merchant marines. The photo is from my family archives [referred to as the eekives.] Merchant marine ships were highly sought after by Axis submarines, navy ships and airplanes because of their cargoes. Thus the Merchant marine ships were armed, though not very heavily, and the guns were manned by the crew. Carptrash 17:45, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Life at Sea section

So far I have been the primary author of the Life at Sea section. Little by little, based upon feedback, I have upgraded the content from what originally was described as "docu-drama." Subsequent re-writes still earned me a Wikipedia "Tone" template warning that the tone was not appropriate for an encylopedia. But I am making progress! Now the latest comments merely reference the text as "overly sympathetic." At least no one disputes the facts as I write them. Life at sea: Isolated? Check. Occupational hazards? Check. Bemoaning? I don't think so.

My own critque is that the Life at Sea text narrative is weighted towards the difficulties of life at sea. So far the account does not include much about the upside of living a life at sea, such as travel, nature, teamwork, adventure, and more. Rakasta1, or others, care to join in to add balance to the text? Fishdecoy 00:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Is it me or do parts of the Life at Sea section sound like a docu-drama? Info about watch routines is good, but other material is less informational and more sentimental. Pesco 16:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Oldfarm 18:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Life at sea is no breeze. Pesco and Oldfarm, how about joining me as content editors for Life at Sea? For instance, storms at sea is a valid topic but the text is lacking informational content. The U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics for the year 2001 lists more than 200 sinkings in waters around the world (apparently U.S. flagged vessels). Another database notes the cause of sinkings and minutes or hours till sinking from the casualty.Marine Statistics

Fishdecoy 01:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Are there any editors interested in contributing content related to job/careers for U.S. mariners? For instance, the Jones Act is a major factor, as is the Department of Defense's Military Sealift Command's employment of civilian mariners, which has helped compensate for the scarcity of traditional seafaring jobs in recent decades as the size of the U.S. merchant fleet has declined.[User:Fishdecoy|Fishdecoy]] 16:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

-- This life at sea section is far too empathic. You don't see the Army page bemoaning how difficult being in the infantry is. I am a merchant marine (Chief Mate) and I've sailed with private and MSC ships in the past. If anyone needs current info on the state of the industry let me know. Rakasta1 08:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Here are some paragraphs I drafted. Let me know what you think.

Life at sea for the Merchant Mariner of the 21st century is a both a physically demanding and technologically challenging profession. Careers are highly specialized and require a great commitment to gaining on the job experience as well as constant post graduate education to maintain proficiency in a rapidly evolving industry. Ships no longer possess the heterogeneous characteristics of the Yard & Stay or Break Bulk ships of the past. They have been supplanted by specialized ships with unique cargo systems and propulsion methods. The modern sailor finds they must devote much of their career to becoming competent in the ship class with which they take employment.

Method of employment is also a major factor that affects the life of a Merchant Mariner. A common option is to join one of the sailing unions. These unions operate as a supplier of licensed mariners to ship owners who contract with them. Ship assignments are based upon seniority. Much of the US container ship and tanker fleet is manned by unions. Another option is the Military Sealift Command. MSC hires “civilian mariners” to operate US government ships in support on military operations all around the world. A majority of these ships are ammo, food and fuel ships that underway replenish Navy battle groups. Although, MSC does operate missile tracking ships and hospital ships as well. The third option is to seek employment with a private company that mans its own fleet. Much of the oil exploration operations in the US are staffed by non-union / non-government mariners. These include jobs aboard drill ships, semi-submersible platforms and off-shore supply vessels.

Licensing plays an important role in a mariner’s career. The license is issued by the U.S. Coast Guard and is broken down into 2 departments, engine and deck, each with 4 corresponding levels of competency culminating with Master for the deck department and Chief Engineer for the engine department. The minimum crew of a ship is dictated by the Coast Guard on the ship’s Certificate of Inspection. The COI lists the number and class of licenses that are needed to safely man a ship. Thus, employment requires having the correct license for the mandated position aboard a ship. Obtaining a license begins with attending one of the 6 state maritime academies or the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy which is a federal institution. Upon graduation you will be issued a 3rd Mate or 3rd assistant engineer license and may apply with a company or union. In order to upgrade your license you will need to gain more sea time and attend Coast Guard mandated classes and finally passes a raise in grade exam. Rakasta1 08:43, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Looks good but I have a few comments. 1) What you wrote above is more of an employment conditions section rathe than life at sea section. While the currenlty written section is overly sympathetic, it does have some interesting information in it. 2) rather than completely replace that section, you may want to think of removing the employment items into an employment section that has what you wrote 3) licensing deserves its own section or a subsection under employment conditions. Currently it is also the second paragraph of the "Operations" section. Maybe you can merge what you wrote about licensing with the information in that paragraph and create a new section out of it. --- Skapur 14:42, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Since this section was general in nature, i.e. it refers as much to a Filipino sailor as it does an American, I think it should be in the article that comes up when someone types "Merchant Marine" or "Merchant Navy" in the search box. That said, I popped it into the Merchant Marine page. Please feel free to revert if you disagree. Haus42 05:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Disputed image

It was my understanding that the United States Navy Armed Guard, not merchant mariners operated the weapons on armed merchantmen. Hence the disputed tag on the image. --J Clear 23:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

These reference, point to fact that merchant mariners at times did man guns, some without training during the heat of battle, others having received gunnery training.

Merchant Marine Distinguished Service award

http://www.usmm.org/heroes.html

Includes specific accounts of merchant mariners manning guns in emergency, or having volunteered for gunnery duty.

http://www.usmm.org/men_ships.html

Fishdecoy 00:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

--It is my understanding that Navy hands were assigned to merchant marine ships to handle the weapons since civilian mariners have no formal weapons training. When I attended the Merchant Marine Academy there is one particular painting of a mariner manning a gun after all the Navy gunners are killed. The name of the painting escapes me now but it was a noteworthy event becuase an untrained mariner was able to take over for Navy and fight on. I will try to find the pictures name.Rakasta1 08:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

-Found it. The painter is W.M. Wilson. It depicts Edwin K. O.Hara, a cadet, manning the ship's gun after the Navy Armed Guard is killed. No title is listed but here is a web site that will tell you more...http://www.dvrbs.com/Monuments/Camden/CamdenNJ-AmericanMerchantMarineMemorial.htmRakasta1 08:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't doubt that they did man the guns when needed and gave good account of themselves, but the photo clearly isn't heat of battle as they're all staring at the camera. Does someone have a better citation than "eekives" to verify the caption? --J Clear 02:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

There is no better citation for that picture than the eekives. The only person i knew who could answer the specifics of the photo is deceased. I will willingly amend my understanding of what is happening to include the possibility, even probability, that the picture was a "photo op", set up by the crew of the ship to make it appear that they were more activly involved in the operating of the gun than was normally the case. None-the- less, the shot is from a merchant marine ship, in the North Atlantic, during WWII. Carptrash 18:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The default for a US merchant marine ship in the North Atlantic in WWII would be to have United States Navy Armed Guards on board to man the guns. Are the uniforms in the image uniquely merchant marine? I.e. can we even verify that the men in the picture are merchant marine?

Well I have a whole stack of pictures from the same ship and i suppose that i could go through them all and try and identify these men in other shots that are more USmm clear. But i think the best thing is to remove the "disputed image" and be done with it. I've found myself all of a sudden involved in too many of these little wikiskermishes about stuff that is at best tangential to what my strength as a wikipedian is. I'll go add undisputed images to Leo Friedlander inste- ad. Carptrash 20:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC) [whooooops - -signed later]

Not that it settles the question of the image, but this and especially these documents turned up in my search. --J Clear 21:51, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I suggest putting the picture back in but add a more generic caption, for example, gun crew on US Merchant ship or similar. KAM 23:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

well that's the thing. We don't know if this is a gun crew or just the sailors pretending to be a gun crew. The picture is reality - what was going on when the shutter snapped, rather than something that best illustrates some encyclopediac point about what should have been going on. Carptrash 03:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Samuel Clemens?

Somebody put him in as a Mariner. Are riverboat people mariners? Lou Sander 17:21, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I wondered the same thing before adding his name. But based upon the U.S. Coast Guard's definition of mariner (http://www.uscg.mil/d8/Sector/LwrMsRvr/recfiles/mmd_info.htm), the fact that merchant mariners may work inland waters or deep water, and the contemporary example of modern paddleboats (http://www.seafarers.org/log/2006/052006/DQ.xml) being crewed by merchant mariners, I added Clemens.

However, Clemens still seems a bit of a stretch in the context of this Wikipedia article. Shall we pull his name? Fishdecoy 13:21, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see this until just now. I think we keep him, but we also put something in the article (if not already there) about inland water merchant mariners. I'm not the one to do it, as I'm not familiar with the references provided by Fishdecoy. Lou Sander 21:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I just moved this from the article

The service should never be referred to as the Merchant Marine"s".

I'm not sure what it typo and what id ment to be said, but it doesn't really stand alone very well. Perhaps if it is cleaned up and explained it can go back in. Carptrash 14:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Paul Teutul

There is a missing person from the list of Noted U.S. Merchant Mariners: Paul Teutul, Sr., who is the well-known host of American Chopper. He is cited as being a merchant marine in the POW/MIA Bike episodes, mentioning it in passing during one of the episodes[1]. Jaerune 09:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Good catch, I added him. Haus42 13:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Current Merchant Marine?

The article begins The United States Merchant Marine comprise the merchant ships that are used to transport ... ". But there is nothing in the about the number of ships that are in the program today (or, for that matter, any sense of the history of the service since WWII). Are there still ANY U.S.-flagged merchant ships? Heavily subsidized? Cost? And why no mention of the National Defense Reserve Fleet? John Broughton | Talk 01:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Depending on how you count, there are a couple of hundred private Jones Act vessels and government owned Sealift Fleet. Cargo that moves from American port A to American port B (think Alaska, Hawaii, for example) has to go on an American-flagged ship. Haus42 05:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I added a section titled "Today's Fleet" with some fleet statistics and subsections on NDRF and MSC. I think there should be a subsection on private owners/operators but haven't found the statistics yet. Haus42 17:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)