HAM/SSB - another question

[oldvarnish]

I didn't want to hijack the other thread, so:

I have a friend who is an ocean sailor and an experienced HAM operator as well as marine SSB user.

He said to me; 'If I was in the ocean and in distress and wanted to put out a radio call, the HAM radio would be the one to go for.'

Anyone agree that HAM radio would give you a faster emergency response in a mid-ocean situation?

 

[KellysEye]

I suspect a Ham would take an emergency call from a non-Ham, I would if I was a Ham. The fastest is Inmarsat, just press a button. However all that apart we had Falmouth Coastguard's frequency set in our SSB so your friend could done that which would be faster than going through a Ham.

 

[snowleopard]

I suspect a Ham would take an emergency call from a non-Ham, I would if I was a Ham.

Yes, I believe Ham operators will take emergency calls. There is always someone listening so there is a very good chance you will be heard by someone on land who can raise the alarm.

2182 is the marine distress frequency but its range is not great and I doubt all that many are listening these days. There are designated distress frequencies in the higher bands but I wouldn't like to count on them doing any good.

 

[KellysEye]

>2182 is the marine distress frequency but its range is not great and I doubt all that many are listening these days. There are designated distress frequencies in the higher bands but I wouldn't like to count on them doing any good.

I agree, I don't think ships listen to 2182 any more they don't have dedicated radio officers now. The problem with other distress frequncies is if you talk to Australia or Brazil it's just wasting time. Many boats going over the Atlantic have called Falmouth CG both for emergencies and medical advice . In 2004 Ocean Wanderer was in touch with them when a small ship started following them and they might have needed assistance.

 

[maby]

Just pray you don't end up with Tony Hancock!

 

[Bosun Higgs]

2182 is the marine distress frequency but its range is not great and I doubt all that many are listening these days. There are designated distress frequencies in the higher bands but I wouldn't like to count on them doing any good.

As Snowleopard hints there are 6 distress frequencies from 2.182mc/s to 16.42mc/s but what monitoring there is of them I do not know. I suspect it is limited but its an interesting question so I have emailed the MCA to ask.

That said I really dont know what is being suggested. On the ham bands you would nearly always be able to find someone "on line" and I have little doubt that anyone hearing a mayday would try to help. But what help a ham in ( say) central Guatemala could give I do not know - problems with language, with understanding position data, with knowing what to do when the message has been understood..

I really have no doubt that an epirb would be more effective than either marine or ham ssb . As well as being way cheaper.

 

[prv]

As Snowleopard hints there are 6 distress frequencies from 2.182mc/s to 16.42mc/s but what monitoring there is of them I do not know. I suspect it is limited but its an interesting question so I have emailed the MCA to ask.

I believe the US Coastguard listen to at least some of them. These folks also offer to handle emergency traffic on their particular frequency.

I really have no doubt that an epirb would be more effective than either marine or ham ssb

Absolutely!

Pete

 

[Bilgediver]

>2182 is the marine distress frequency but its range is not great and I doubt all that many are listening these days. There are designated distress frequencies in the higher bands but I wouldn't like to count on them doing any good.

I agree, I don't think ships listen to 2182 any more they don't have dedicated radio officers now. The problem with other distress frequncies is if you talk to Australia or Brazil it's just wasting time. Many boats going over the Atlantic have called Falmouth CG both for emergencies and medical advice . In 2004 Ocean Wanderer was in touch with them when a small ship started following them and they might have needed assistance.

There has just been an e mail circulated by the US coastguard regarding 2182 which might amuse.

USCG!
USCG NOTICE: RADIOTELEPHONE DISTRESS WATCHKEEPING

Mariners are advised that due to the aging Coast Guard Medium Frequency radio
infrastructure, calls to the Coast Guard on the international radiotelephone
distress frequency 2182 kHz may not be reliably received by the Coast Guard.

Areas where maritime broadcasts on 2670 kHz are being received satisfactorily by
mariners should not be affected. Similarly, mariners using high frequency (HF)
radiotelephones equipped with digital selective calling (DSC) capable of
operating on the 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 MHz distress frequencies should not be
affected.

Coast Guard watchkeeping services on these HF radiotelephone and DSC distress
frequencies are posted at
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=cgcommsCall.

Mariners who receive a distress alert or call that has not been acknowledged by
the Coast Guard are asked to assist if possible and advise the nearest Coast
Guard unit using whatever means are practicable


End of message.



There are now very few SSB shore stations monitoring voice transmissions as the commercial world has gone to GMDSS and so use this for emergencies. This can involve Inmarsat , Epirb, or DSC on one of the many SSB DSC frequencies. Most SSB ship to shore traffic is now either RTTY/telex or Email and not voice. For voice the commercial world use satellite.

There are many Ham Marine nets world wide and these help fill the gap for voice messages. Here is one of many lists.

http://www.cruiser.co.za/radionet.asp

 

[KellysEye]

>There has just been an e mail circulated by the US coastguard regarding 2182 which might amuse.

In the mid 2000's they announced they were going to stop all MF/HF broadcasts and traffic for the reason they said in that notice 'aging Coast Guard Medium Frequency radio
infrastructure'. There was a massive outcry against the propsal from the long distnace cruising community and they backed off. It's a shame it was used up to 500 miles from shore, albeit as mentioned you can call the coastgurd on their frequency.

>I really have no doubt that an epirb would be more effective than either marine or ham ssb

I disagree, an Epirb doesn't allow you to talk to the coastguard and explain the problem.

 

[ffiill]

Think the point is that there are marine ham nets out there as well as hams scanning the airwaves. In fact that is why I think Marine dedicated SSB is probably a waste of time and money wheas a ham set is very useful and at least you dont need a penny for the electricity meter!(Tony Hancock as you will recall if you are old enough)

 

[Conachair]

Think the point is that there are marine ham nets out there as well as hams scanning the airwaves. In fact that is why I think Marine dedicated SSB is probably a waste of time and money wheas a ham set is very useful and at least you dont need a penny for the electricity meter!(Tony Hancock as you will recall if you are old enough)

Out of interest, on marine ssb bands does anyone bother with call signs? Or just use their boat names.

Back to the OP, if there was some info I desperately wanted to get to the outside world and the computer was still working then I think PSK31 would be the way to go. Hard to think of an example though. maybe if you came across a boat load of refugees off africa and propagation was too bad to get an email through or no one was listening to voice, then a repeated psk31 message could well get through and get picked up by someone, there always seems to be activity on those frequencies.
Pretty unlikely scenario though.

 

[wadget]

>

I agree, I don't think ships listen to 2182 any more they don't have dedicated radio officers now.

Yes they do. It causes no harm to leave it on 2182 and if you hear something its serious and you may be able to be of assistance its just common sense to leave it on. Also 2182 is not like ch16 where you can listen to hours of idiots checking their radios, if someone is calling it will be serious.

 

[Conachair]

Yes they do. It causes no harm to leave it on 2182 and if you hear something its serious and you may be able to be of assistance its just common sense to leave it on. Also 2182 is not like ch16 where you can listen to hours of idiots checking their radios, if someone is calling it will be serious.

Not sure what ships listen to but didn't the requirement to maintain a listening watch on 2182 go out in 1999?

Might be a good idea but unfortuanately most of us just can't spare the power to leave a HF radio on all the time.

 

[whipper_snapper]

Anyone agree that HAM radio would give you a faster emergency response in a mid-ocean situation?

No!

With the exception of the established marine nets, which will give you helpful and knowledgeable people but not 24/7 by any stretch of he imagination, it will be a lottery who you talk to and if they have the wit to do anything helpful.

Before one long passage I was aware of an informal chat net that operated daily and covered the area well, so I asked them if they would mind if I dropped in daily and reported my position so that someone knew in case of emergency. No problem they said, they were dead pleased to have an exotic visitor.

After 1 week of duly doing this, the net coordinator asked where i was. I replied with a lat-long, he said no no no don't give me all those numbers, I have no idea what they mean, where are you? They had never been recording my position, just my rough description in the general chat.

 

[prv]

I agree, I don't think ships listen to 2182 any more they don't have dedicated radio officers now.

Yes they do. It causes no harm to leave it on 2182 and if you hear something its serious and you may be able to be of assistance its just common sense to leave it on.

While I'm sure any seafarer would be happy to help in an emergency they knew about, I find it unlikely that many would go around actively listening on HF for the rather unlikely event of distress being signalled that way. Their only concern is to get their cargo of boxes/cars/oil to its destination as quickly and cheaply as possible.

The only ship's bridge I've been on, a square-rig sail-training ship, has an HF and MF setup that looks the business, but I've only ever known it be switched on once. That was for the Tall Ships' Race, which had a daily net to establish everyone's positions (every ship with HF would put out a call on VHF to record nearby competitors without it). Otherwise the HF is switched off and long-range comms is by satellite email.

Might be a good idea but unfortuanately most of us just can't spare the power to leave a HF radio on all the time.

To be fair, the discussion was about ships, which have all the power you could want.

Pete

 

[wadget]

Not sure what ships listen to but didn't the requirement to maintain a listening watch on 2182 go out in 1999?

Might be a good idea but unfortuanately most of us just can't spare the power to leave a HF radio on all the time.

Yes the requirement went out in 1999.

However they are required to listen for dsc alerts on 2187.5 kHz however nearly everyone will also listen on 2182 unless the set is in use for something else.

This is exactly the same as how most people will be keeping a constant watch on Ch70 for dsc alerts while listening on ch 16 unless they are using the set for something else.

 

[Bilgediver]

Not sure what ships listen to but didn't the requirement to maintain a listening watch on 2182 go out in 1999?

Might be a good idea but unfortuanately most of us just can't spare the power to leave a HF radio on all the time.

They maintain a DSC watch on SSB just like we do on VHF.

 

[Conachair]

Yes the requirement went out in 1999.

However they are required to listen for dsc alerts on 2187.5 kHz however nearly everyone will also listen on 2182 unless the set is in use for something else.

This is exactly the same as how most people will be keeping a constant watch on Ch70 for dsc alerts while listening on ch 16 unless they are using the set for something else.

Thanks (& bilgediver)

Thats heartening to know. Though if things were that bad think I'd be looking at the eprib, but nice to know that if the radio was still working then you could probably get hold of someone.

 

[wadget]

Their only concern is to get their cargo of boxes/cars/oil to its destination as quickly and cheaply as possible.

I think most seafarers including my self would take offence to this. getting cargo to its destination as soon as possible is the aim of the ship owners. Seafarers care deeply about the practice of good seamanship and professionalism.

The only ship's bridge I've been on, a square-rig sail-training ship, has an HF and MF setup that looks the business, but I've only ever known it be switched on once. That was for the Tall Ships' Race, which had a daily net to establish everyone's positions (every ship with HF would put out a call on VHF to record nearby competitors without it). Otherwise the HF is switched off and long-range comms is by satellite email.

Pete

The MF/HF set should be on whenever the ship is in sea area A2 ie outside of vhf range of a shore station. This might have been the reason that it was generally turned off. Its used in the tall ships for its greater range as the fleet tends to end up quite spread out. However in most of the tall ships races there is no requirement for ships to be keeping watch on MF/HF as the ships are generaly still in sea area A1.

 

[prv]

I think most seafarers including my self would take offence to this.

My apologies. I hadn't realised you were one of said professionals, and clearly know better than I do on this topic

Pete