DSC, its time to make the MCA listen

[Sans Bateau]

Some of you will, I am sure, have read my post on the Scuttlebutt forum (about to go off the page) titled "So whats the matter with DSC?" You may also have read the post on the PBO forum by 'bendyone', again the subject being DSC.

I will not discuss the subject matter here, but the PBO post was concluded with the opinion, driven by Jon Brookes of ICOM, that the only way we stand any chance of DSC becoming a usable safety device ie people not turning their sets off to stop the rubbish, is for us to all write to the MCA.

According to Jon Brooks, there are 66,000 registered marine VHF users in the UK and that a recent survey showed that 12% are disappointed with DSC, for the same reasons as demonstrated in these threads. If we can arrange for nearly 8,000 letters to land on the desk of Mike Martin, or as Jon suggested Martin Hart at the MCA, then we may get somewhere. If all that effort then fails, turn the radio off.

Personally I will print off a copy of the threads and send them to the MCA so that they can see this issue is very much on our agenda.

 

[bluedragon]

I've just bought a DSC set...hopefully not a mistake!
Could you just summarise in few lines or bullet points the issues that concern users? This would be helpful at the start of a new thread on this subject I feel. Many thanks.

 

[Sans Bateau]

Please just read the two threads I have mentioned, I too have just bought into DSC, I hope its not a mistake!

 

[Thistle]

Can I ask you to try to enlist the help of the RYA in this campaign? Although they are not everyone's favourite organisation they do have some advantages we don't have. Please see my post on the other thread here.

 

[richardabeattie]

If you want us to respond why not tell us what the issues are. I have no idea what these threads are or how to get to them and would like to see the summary you were asked for.

 

[Thistle]

Click on the word "here" at the end of my post and it should take you to the other thread.

 

[Marsupial]

I’ve had a bit of a read and to me the problems with DSC seem to be this – but please people add to the list at will:

1. The DSC alarm happens even for no urgent situations and cannot be “selectively” turned off/controlled.
2. The range of channel 70 is greater than VHF so alarms are raised even when there is no hope of making voice contact.
3. Selective listening would be a good idea, i.e. the ability to accept DSC calls from other vessels in a set radius
4. Because of this crews prefer to switch the set off at night or in quiet anchorages thus reducing the audience for a real emergency.
5. Dual sets, (Navtex and VHF/DSC) are difficult to use quietly as Navtex only.
6. The number of alarm calls from malfunctioning DSC sets is unacceptable (common off Dover) – MMSI 0000000000 is recorded on the log.
7. Unlike VHF sets that were basically the same, DSC sets are basically different so crewmembers on a new boat can find themselves with unfamiliar equipment that is not intuitive.

FINALLY MY OWN PET HATE ON THIS SUBJECT:

Davids message to the MCA:

The marine industry wanted DSC so they could reduce the number of people on watch.

SO as no one is listening.. CAN WE TURN IT OFF PLEASE!

 

[LORDNELSON]

"The range of Channel 70 is greater than VHF". I am unclear about this remark, I thought Channel 70 was/is a VHF channel?

 

[Marsupial]

Nelson

The technology is not clear to me either channel 70 is digital mobile phone technology as far as I know that can utilise satelites whereas VHF is analogue line of sight - antenna to antenna, (as I understand it) but it's a fact that you can receive a DSC alarm on ch70 from a station that is over 100 miles away, as a result you have no way of making voice contact with it on channel 16. - That as I see it is one of the main objections voiced on the other threads.

 

[BrendanS]

It's still VHF, but digital, not analogue. Digital has a slightly better range in some circumstances (but don't worry about it, it's a technical thing, and range is not significantly different) but is definitely not satellite, and nothing to do with mobile phones.

It is worrying though, how little people seem to know about how DSC works?

 

[Sea Devil]

The same problem occurs with 406 EPIRB's which were brought in to stop listening on the emergency channels of SSB's. Now nobody listens to these frequencies on ships and very few coast stations in the world.

The false emergency alarm rate for 406 EPIRBs is something like 88% and in many sea areas most alarms are only responded to by a navtext request for 'ships to keep a sharp lookout'.

I suspect the DSC alarm system is a similar cost saving exercise which routes the call with position to a coastguard radio control station in the midlands! It also makes it real easy for the CC to relay Pan or Mayday messages over a very wide area. If the reasons are financial then it may be hard to put the clock back so is there another solution?

Do we really still need the obligation to monitor 16? Does this obligation still exist?

Should yachties just decide to disconnect DSC and use another channel as another channel as a calling channel? There are several ship to ship channels available and it would not take long for the word to get round.

In effect that is what happens now with emergency SSB TX - nobody uses the emergency frequencies and contact is made on chat frequencies....

What VHF channel would be most suitable as a yachtie calling channel?

 

[Marsupial]

Brendan

Further evidence if it were needed that we should never trust a techie, I was told (by a techie at LIBS) that ch70 is SMS, the same as texting on a mobile phone, the simrad simulator mentions satellites as do other sources on the subject but I dont know for sure and - as you say its nothing to get upset about, after all its just a few bits of wire plastic metal and sand arranged in a particular way with the odd electron thrown in for good measure it either works or not /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif.

Other posters to this thread were asking for a set of bullet points distilled from the other threads I thought I had provided that with, I conceed, my own pointed remark against the establishment that took us into this mess /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif.

There are articals on the web which suggest that the Austrailians have abandoned DSC - does anybody know if there is any truth in that?

 

[Talulah]

For me the biggest single problem is that there is no volume control. The alarms are always at full volume. There is no acknowledgement by the regulators that the volume required within the confines of a small cabin is different to the volume required when on the bridge of a merchant vessel. I am happy for a distress alarm to be at full volume but all the others should be selectable.
I suspect the the figure of 12% disatisfied is not a true reflection of the problem.
I for one frequently turn the set off especially when in the range of the likes of J'berg traffic who seem to send these alarms all the time. The system is a good idea in theory but clearly now that these issues are arising it is time for the industry to review the situation. The question is wether they actually review the situation and act accordingley or having deployed the system and laid down the rules that's it.

 

[Anonymous]

[ QUOTE ]
There are articals on the web which suggest that the Austrailians have abandoned DSC - does anybody know if there is any truth in that?

[/ QUOTE ]Surely a marsupial shouldn't need to be asking us poms?! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif But seriously, whatever its faults, DSC does allow the yachtsman to send a distress or urgency alert complete with vessel ID and exact location in just a few seconds, leaving him free to handle the emergency.

Suppose a crew had a serious accident - bleeding that needed you to keep applying pressure, resus, choking, shock, possible heart attack, or similar, then wouldn't it be nice to be able to get that distress or urgency alert off and leave the radio knowing that at the least the CG will be waiting for your call when you have time, or at best that help is on the way? Indeed, if you sent a DSC distress alert and triggered an EPIRB at the same time, surely they wouldn't assume it was a false alarm.

Switching off isn't the answer. What one needs to do is fit a volume control with an off position so that when you judge it necessary you can turn the sound down or off.

 

[Marsupial]

Lemain

I totally agree, its hard enough to get SWIMBO in the boat at all, its capacity is 3MT and I reckon we have 2.9MT of safety gear! the most expensive DSC she could find (simrad RS dual station), hand held vhf, epirb, radar, seame, life line, life raft, life jackets, flares enough to start a war, harnesses, spare nave lights?, hand held, backup gps backup gps for the backup gps, electric chart plotter, yeoman plotter, bretton plotter x 2, two hand held compasses, grab-bag with loads of stuff in it, power pack! 12volt starting battery, 230v petrol genny, dinghy with two 2hp outboards - gasp, and loads of other kit - most of which we hope NEVER to get friendly with - and the most usefull bit the VHF is being switched off by the ears that will probably be required to render assistance if we do ever get into trouble. . . . . so what was the question again? /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[ShipsWoofy]

I disagree with the opinions that a volume control should be fitted. Although the problems are mainly that the alarms wake up off watch crew. Once a DSC all ships has been sent you will still have to visit the radio. The moment you acknowledge the call whatever your radio was doing prior to this will be reset and it will be sat there waiting for any voice messages on 16.

So you have to acknowledge and consequently reset your radio back to dual watch, tri watch etc. This as much as the alarm can be a pain in neck. Especially if as our South Coast buddies are saying they are getting alarms every 15 minutes or so. It may cause a skipper to miss an important port op's message on ch12 for example.

We do not need volume control IMHO, we need certain stations to be a little more judicious on their use of DSC alerts.

As to waking off watch crew, there is always the option of switching off the internal speaker and having only the cockpit speaker running. But I still think some education to those stations which cause regular problems to be the way forward.

Ooop north, the only DSC alerts I have heard have been from Holyhead CG warning of imminent gales, the jury is still out for me as to whether I want this or not, on the mooring it is a pain (where I have heard them so far) but on passage, I think it might be welcomed, I don't know.

 

[DJE]

DSC (or my set anyway) actually makes it more difficult to monitor CH16, CH11, or any other channel. When the all ships alarm goes off I nip below and acknowledge it. The set then switches to CH67 or whatever the working channel is and I listen to the broadcast. After a while I wonder why CH16 or CH11 has gone quiet and then realise that the set did not switch itself back after the broadcast and it is still on CH67.

 

[Colvic Watson]

Well that's decided then. I'll wait another year before going DSC - it sounds an absolute nightmare.

 

[Gypsy]

Re: Aussies abandoning DSC

My understanding is that the Aussies (I'm one) have NOT abandoned DSC but have decided DSC on HF is more appropriate than DSC on VHF. When you consider the totality of the Australian ocean SAR coverage this makes sense as it is impossible to cover the area with enough VHF stations. On the other hand the greater part of the commercial and non-commercial boating activity is within practical VHF range so there is still an undercurrent of activity to get DSC on VHF supported - but no acceptance by the authorities to date.

As far as the discussion of the technology used for DSC, I believe you will find that the VHF DSC is simply a digital transmission to a shore based relay centre (and anyone else in VHF range) which is then on forwarded by the shore basestation via satellite and/or other terrestial paths to emergency monitoring and control centres for response and delegation of the closest SAR body for action.

My experience of DSC is in the Med. Given that navigation in most areas is within sight of land I do not always turn my VHF on unless I am sailing solo or a long passage - however I have experienced numerous DSC alarms and my view is that the whole system is far too complicated for most recreational sailors to be truly usefull. An EPIRB with GPS must surely be a better bet for safety. Until radio sets have a simpler user interface beyond a single display line and 2-step function keys just to read an alarm we are unlikely to get good reaction even if the emergency is only a mile or two away. Also, to send an alarm one needs to select the type of emergency and this is also a challenge if under pressure and having to work with a one line display and function keys.

The bottom line is I feel that in the current environment the extra expense of DSC would be better spent on an EPIRB with GPS.

Ray

 

[duncan]

that point, DJE, is the primary reason I haven't fitted the DSC radio sitting in the cupboard - it's a straight swap (identical fittings etc) and MMSI is issued etc
at this time of year there is a small fleet of inshore fishing boats most weekends and they stay focused on 06/08 including calling to keep 16 clear, so I listen in on 16/08/06 and there are frequent incidents etc like anchors stuck/engines failed that 'just get sorted' amongst the group. DSC just seems to turn everything into a life or death issue involving the whole world..............
I have got involved a number of times with Portland in response to C16 calls for vessels in the vicinity of.....but fear I would simply switch a DSC radio on to use it rather than be part of support network available to others.