Norway Deck Officer Class 5 common mistakes
Norway Deck Officer Class 5 · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
When asked to determine risk of collision, the candidate answers only "the bearing is steady" and stops there, without checking whether the bearing is changing appreciably and without considering compass bearing versus visual bearing over a proper interval.
Candidates memorise Rule 7 as a single phrase and never practise applying it to a moving plot, so they cannot distinguish a slowly changing bearing from a truly constant one, especially at long range or in a crossing situation at close quarters.
What to do instead
Practise a fixed drill: take at least three bearings over a defined interval, compute the change per unit distance run, state whether the bearing is steady or appreciably changing, and add the caveat that a steady bearing with decreasing range means risk exists and action is required. Do ten worked plots with near-constant bearings until the distinction is automatic.
In stability calculations the candidate mixes up GZ, KG and GM, or treats GM as the sole measure of stability and ignores the GZ curve, free surface effect and the effect of a shift of weight on G and B.
Formulas are learned as isolated symbols without a physical picture of the ship heeling, so the candidate cannot say which point moves when weight is added high or low, or why a large GM can still coexist with a dangerous angle of deck edge immersion.
What to do instead
Build one annotated side-elevation sketch of a hull with K, B, G, M and Z plotted, and re-derive each quantity from that sketch. Then work numerical problems that require stating, in words, how each of G, B and M moves for a given weight change before calculating anything.
The candidate applies COLREGs rules in isolation, giving a correct single-rule answer but missing that a give-way vessel must also take early and substantial action, that the stand-on vessel's duty changes when risk becomes imminent, and that narrow channels, traffic separation schemes and restricted visibility have their own overriding rules.
Revision is done rule by rule in numerical order, so candidates never see how Rules 8, 16, 17 and 19 interact in a single scenario, and they default to the first rule that seems relevant.
What to do instead
Work scenario-based questions, not rule-based ones: for each encounter state the governing rule, the give-way and stand-on duties, the required action and its timing, and any special-area rule that modifies the answer. Write out the interaction chain explicitly before answering.
When plotting a position or a course to steer, the candidate ignores variation and deviation, or applies them with the wrong sign, and confuses true, magnetic and compass bearings in the final answer.
The cadet-style mnemonic is remembered but not practised under time pressure, and candidates rarely draw the compass-error diagram, so sign errors survive to the answer sheet.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed written convention: always convert to true before plotting, show the arithmetic line by line with variation and deviation signed, and finish by converting the answer back to the bearing type the question asked for. Do a set of conversions in both directions until error-free.
The candidate answers a watchkeeping question by describing what the officer on watch does but omits the master's night orders, the handover procedure, the conditions for calling the master, and the prohibition on leaving the bridge.
Watchkeeping is revised from a summary list rather than from the structure of a bridge organisation, so the candidate knows the general duty but not the specific triggers and handover content examiners look for.
What to do instead
Prepare a one-page bridge routine card covering handover items, periodic checks, the list of situations requiring immediate master notification, and the rule on bridge presence. Answer watchkeeping questions by walking through that card in order.
In cargo stowage questions the candidate gives a general statement about securing cargo but does not address the specific hazard: liquefaction of bulk cargo, shifting of grain, weight distribution and hull stress, dangerous goods segregation, or ventilation of hygroscopic cargo.
Cargo operations are studied as a list of cargo names rather than as physical behaviours, so the candidate cannot connect a cargo property to the stowage, trimming, segregation or ventilation measure it demands.
What to do instead
For each major cargo group, write three lines: the physical property, the hazard it creates at sea, and the operational control that manages it. Answer cargo questions by naming the property first, then the hazard, then the control.
The candidate describes a man overboard or abandon ship response as a sequence of actions but omits the immediate priorities: notifying the bridge, releasing the lifebuoy with light and smoke, initiating the turn, posting lookouts, and the mayday relay with position.
Emergency procedures are recalled from a narrative rather than from a checklist, so steps are remembered out of order and time-critical first actions are dropped.
What to do instead
Learn each emergency as a numbered checklist with the first three actions fixed in memory. Rehearse aloud, in order, against a clock, and always finish by stating the distress or urgency communication and the position report.
In meteorology the candidate names a weather system or a cloud type but cannot explain its cause, its associated wind shift and pressure trend, or what it implies for the vessel's passage planning.
Weather is revised as vocabulary and symbols on a synoptic chart rather than as a sequence of physical development, so the candidate cannot link the observed pressure and wind to the forecast evolution.
What to do instead
Study each system as a life cycle: pressure pattern, wind veer or backing, cloud sequence, precipitation and visibility, then the practical routing consequence. Practise reading a described pressure sequence and stating what happens next and when.
The candidate answers ship handling questions with generic advice such as "approach slowly" without quantifying the effect of wind, current, shallow water, bank effect, interaction between ships, or the pivot point and transverse thrust.
Manoeuvring is learned from observation rather than from the forces involved, so the candidate cannot predict how the vessel will behave in a particular condition or state the counter-action.
What to do instead
For each manoeuvring topic, learn the force, its direction, its magnitude relative to speed and depth, and the helm or engine response. Answer by naming the force, its effect on the pivot point or drift, and the specific corrective action with an order of magnitude.
In maritime law and conventions the candidate cites the name of a convention or a certificate but cannot state its scope, the obligations it places on the master or company, or the survey and certification cycle it requires.
Conventions are memorised as titles in a list, often from outdated summaries, so candidates cannot answer questions about application, responsibility or validity of certificates.
What to do instead
For each convention in the syllabus, record four items: what it regulates, who is responsible, the key certificate or record, and the survey or validity period. Verify each entry against a current source and answer by applying those four items to the scenario given.