DSC radio

[Malcb]

On the Navman 7200 you can turn off the DSC if you wish. So if you had to make a DSC mayday call it would be a simple matter of resetting it to on and then pressing the DSC button.

You can also have either high or low volume in the 'Ring alert' the 'Beeps' relate to the sound made when you press the radio buttons, 'High, Low or Off.

I played around with all the options yesterday.

 

[Robin]

Thanks. The 'ring alert' volume high/low option may still be for individual incoming DSC calls rather than all ships calls though, the manual doesn't make it at all clear. I suspect an all ships or Mayday call to come through at full cacophony somehow so it would need the DSC option to be switched to 'off' to solve the problem. Actually it was better this year than last in the Channel I found, although I must admit I frequently forgot to switch on or turned off after the 'nth' radio check.

 

[Ships_Cat]

I have an international Icom (not an EU one) which I believe the DSC watch also can be turned off on too. I have never tried it as we don't get many DSC distress or urgency alarms here (in fact I have never received one in NZ) /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif.

The manual says with respect to one of the key press programming options "DSC Watch ON/OFF" which I assume does the trick.

But that radio is not available in the EU.

John

 

[cliff]

[ QUOTE ]

in fact there is an international legal requirement for ships to have ch16 and dsc monitored with written proof this is done to be available for inspection, and the sets have to comply with stringent standards which include the dsc alarm . ch 16 is probably required by yachts in some local areas under local byelaws.
and of course every radio operator should be qualified, part of which is having the knowledge of the radio regs ........
/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]Where? lets have a link to the mandatory requirement - there is no law that you even have to have a VHF on a leisure craft AFAIAA.

As for every radio operator having to be qualified - that is BS - anyone can operate a VHF under the supervision of a qualified operator. I would refer you to your training sessions and the nice RYA booklet on VHF Radio page 5 para"operator qualifications" Where you not paying attention when you sat your exams or have you not even sat your exams yet?
--------------------

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity"

 

[JonBrooks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

As for every radio operator having to be qualified - that is BS - anyone can operate a VHF under the supervision of a qualified operator. I would refer you to your training sessions and the nice RYA booklet on VHF Radio page 5 para"operator qualifications" Where you not paying attention when you sat your exams or have you not even sat your exams yet?


[/ QUOTE ]

The operators cert is required under international maritime regs.
The surpervision part mean "direct supervision" i.e. you must be in a position to monitor and if needed stop the 3rd party TXing.
Whilst we know it happens, you should not send some one off to use the radio out of ear shot or supervision.

If they TX anything wrong or profane you as the holder of the operators cert would be liable.

Regards

 

[cliff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

As for every radio operator having to be qualified - that is BS - anyone can operate a VHF under the supervision of a qualified operator. I would refer you to your training sessions and the nice RYA booklet on VHF Radio page 5 para"operator qualifications" Where you not paying attention when you sat your exams or have you not even sat your exams yet?


[/ QUOTE ]

The operators cert is required under international maritime regs.
The surpervision part mean "direct supervision" i.e. you must be in a position to monitor and if needed stop the 3rd party TXing.
Whilst we know it happens, you should not send some one off to use the radio out of ear shot or supervision.

If they TX anything wrong or profane you as the holder of the operators cert would be liable.

Regards

[/ QUOTE ]Quite correct, but it does not mean all radio operators must be qualified, which was the original erroneous (BS) statement.
Moving on perhaps you would answer my question posted earlier....
[ QUOTE ]
O.K. Jon, is there any way to turn off or mute the alarms so one does not hear them apart from turning off the radio?

I am sure there must be a "fix" somewhere - "cut this wire and fit a switch" or the like. From the polls it appears some 33% of boaters do not have DSC and are not interested in fitting a DSC set UNLESS the alarms can be turned off ie never to be heard, not just remotely cancelled but totally silent as is the existing VHF apart from vox reception.

It seems a shame to turn a set on only to transmit but what else can one do to get some peace and quiet. (maybe don't buy on in the first place!)

[/ QUOTE ]

From the polls we have approximately 16% of DSC owners who only switch on their sets to transmit and another 16% who would also switch on their sets in adverse conditions - a pretty damning result by any measure when combined with those 33% of all respondents who would only be interested in fitting DSC if there was the facility to mute the alarms completely.

So Jon, is there a fix for the obvious problem?
--------------------

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity"

 

[bigmart]

[ QUOTE ]

As for every radio operator having to be qualified - that is BS - anyone can operate a VHF under the supervision of a qualified operator. I would refer you to your training sessions and the nice RYA booklet on VHF Radio page 5 para"operator qualifications" Where you not paying attention when you sat your exams or have you not even sat your exams yet?


[/ QUOTE ]


No its not!

If you read the original post the poster was referring to Ships, not yachsmen. So you took his comments out of context. Not an unusual problem on these fora!

Martin

 

[JonBrooks]

From the polls we have approximately 16% of DSC owners who only switch on their sets to transmit and another 16% who would also switch on their sets in adverse conditions - a pretty damning result by any measure when combined with those 33% of all respondents who would only be interested in fitting DSC if there was the facility to mute the alarms completely.

So Jon, is there a fix for the obvious problem?

16% of how many?

Is it 16% of the 69,000 Ships Radio licence's currently issued in the UK?

Apart from Navman, who seem to have found a loop hole which no one else has, it is not down to us to make changes as we feel like it.
We have to build to the spec that is laid down.

Mind you we could, like some other ignore it with things like no distress menu, get a slap on the wrist from R&TTE then get 12 months to put it right yet still sell the wrong product but hey we are not like that.

That's why we have been around for over 40 years and will still be around for a good few to come.

Sorry I am the wrong person to lobby over this.
You need to lobby the MCA.

As I said before I have raised this issue and will continue to do so at various meetings I attend but you the end user need to all raise it to.
This has been suggested by me and Mike Martin but as of yet very few have done anything about it.
We can only do so much you need to help to if you want it sorted.

 

[cliff]

[ QUOTE ]
No its not!

If you read the original post the poster was referring to Ships, not yachsmen. So you took his comments out of context. Not an unusual problem on these fora!

Martin

[/ QUOTE ]This is "Yachting and Boating World" not commercial shirt lifters international. We are talking leisure craft here so any comments are taken in that context - I personally could not give a **** for what might or might not apply to commercial vessels sailing in international waters. We are talking DSC in Leisure craft and the fact that so many seem to be turned off or so many leisure users refuse to fit a DSC set because of the alarms based on the respondents to the above polls
--------------------

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity"

 

[bigmart]

Your personal preferences are somewhat irrelevant. You can harrang anyone if you take their responses out of context.

Your respondee stated that he was referring to commercial vessels. Is he supposed to read your mind whenever he posts. As you chose to ignore the basis of his comments are we all supposed to be scared to post here in case you choose to misread our utterances.

Martin