Quantcast
Channel: ROVworld.com Forums - ROVworld Subsea Information
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 2269

ROV course output versus uptake

$
0
0
Hi Guys,

It has been a while and during that time I have noticed a few super techs or so they would have us believe by the way they so freely give their opinions about courses and the benefits they provide. I have a some what skeptical view of any training establishment that can cast a perceived view of industry requirements and the benefits that they can miraculously impart on an individual with out a technical background. I know that someone knows someone (we all do - get over it!!!) that is in the industry or got a bunch of job offers from doing a course only. Please take the time to think about, maybe it was just a bit of right time / right place or they knew someone? If any course can give someone the technical ability and piloting skills of a proper pilot tech - ie. 1 year as a trainee, 6 to 12 months as a pilot tech 3, 6 to 12 months as a pilot tech 2 and finally reaching the dizzy heights of pilot tech 1 if you did well and are a team player. Again we all know of some people who progressed a little faster and some guys that have made supervisor and then went back to being a sub-eng as they like techy stuff? I for one am sick that these topics are flogged to death by jokers that embellish the truth about their skills when I am sure that a good batch of construction work would probably reveal that the so called pilot tech 2 skills attained by these fly by night training organizations. These are just my and probably a lot of other people's opinions on this dead horse.

regards,

Canuck1

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 2269

Trending Articles