Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon *DELETED*

Re: And one more point

Capricorn et al, Regardless of the debate on here, if you feel it is not improper and you aren't going to be prosecuted then don't let anyone tell you what to do, you have your own mind, remember /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

If you post it and someone doesn't like it, "what they gonna do?" There may be a group of people who will benefit - I think you've shown in your original post that was deleted that no names were mentioned, noody was injured or killed, you were simply airing concerns - as far as I'm concerned, use your own common sense and post things anyway, rather than spending forever trying to convince someone to adopt your point of view, there are bigger things to worry about in the world and as long as a VHF message that you've heard isn't wholly inappropriate or gives boat names, names of persons involved, addresses etc along with severe injury or death details due to a point mentioned earlier about families worrying it could be a relative...

Isn't there an entire site called Overheard Boating or something where people send in funny VHF conversations and there are pages and pages of conversations?
 
Re: And one more point

Overheard Sailing - just found it. Yet another way of wasting time on the Web.

Just had a quick look, and this leapt out at me:

[ QUOTE ]
Customer: We have a problem, the boat is leaning over.
Charter office: Ermm… okay. How far?
Customer: About 45 degrees!
Charter office: Are the sails up?
Customer: No. We’re at anchor.
Charter office: Okay, here’s what you do. Wait six hours and when the tide comes in, move the boat off the reef. Then you can come back here, because we’d like to talk to you.

Where: Whitsundays, Australia, Overheard on a radio schedule one morning


[/ QUOTE ] /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
I cannot take anoymore of this thread! Will they let me into the Mobo forum if I offer to fell my mast?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is funny, the same people will go nuts blaming the government for gold-plating every law arriving from the EU, well, maybe it's not the government.

I always thought it was the Germans who followed laws blindly, I see I was wrong. I have lost the will to live /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif
 
Re: Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon

At one point I thought that it was legal to listen to any radio transmission. However there is no doubt that the 2006 act says explicitly that it is illegal. I wonder if this is a recent change that only came in with the 2006 act.

There does have to be intent, but to tune a VHF to Ch 0 without good reason would be taken as intent
 
Re: Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon

That would make sense.

Not sure how they would catch you though! I suppose if you used the information and they didn't like what you did with it.
 
Re: Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon

[ QUOTE ]
I understood that you can listen to ch 0 but not broadcast on it (unless you are authourised). Is this really illegal?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Totally.

Ch0 is a private channel used, with HMCGs permission, by declared facilities at the direction of HMCG.
Two lifeboats on passage, for example, could not use Ch0 to talk between themselves.
 
Re: Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon

[ QUOTE ]
There does have to be intent, but to tune a VHF to Ch 0 without good reason would be taken as intent

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have thought that having a radio which switched to Ch 0 would be evidence of intent as well as being illegal.
 
Re: Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There does have to be intent, but to tune a VHF to Ch 0 without good reason would be taken as intent

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have thought that having a radio which switched to Ch 0 would be evidence of intent as well as being illegal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends where you come from.
Ch0's use by HMCG is country specific - for example, in the US, it is a standard fit channel and one well known radio type approved for the EU can switch to it as standard (although tx is disabled). Therefore there can be a legit reason for having it on the radio (if bought outside the UK) but not for having it turned on.
 
Re: Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon

[ QUOTE ]


I would have thought that having a radio which switched to Ch 0 would be evidence of intent as well as being illegal.

[/ QUOTE ]
In fact it is not illegal to possess equipment capable of receiving such transmissions, so it is legal to own a "scanner", it is the use of it that is illegal.
 
[ QUOTE ]
It is funny, the same people will go nuts blaming the government for gold-plating every law arriving from the EU, well, maybe it's not the government.

I always thought it was the Germans who followed laws blindly, I see I was wrong. I have lost the will to live /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

You beat me to it.

One minute we are all blaming the MCA for their strict requirement to report any incident from their non sensical interpretation of the EU law and yet now many seem equally bad and OTT regarding discussions about the incidents which many of us heard on Ch 16 last weekend.

This thread has gone on so long I have forgotten the actual details that Capricorn posted but IIRC he described situations mentioning a sunseeker. I read the post and thought it sensible but agree with others that its nice not to name specific boat names or people but cannot now remember if Capricorn did that.

I don't consider a sunseeker a specific boat.

Discussions about what has gone wrong is one of the strengths of this forum and I and I am sure many others have learnt a lot from this Forum as a result.

So providing no names and no criticism of sailors who have died (based only on speculation) I could not care where the info comes from - Ch 16 is fine by me!

Now lets all get some common sense and off our high horses.
 
Re: Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon

I doubt it.

The 1949 Act had these words or words very much like them.

I suspect some idle legal draughtsman has simply copied the section, changing only a word or two to suit and left it there. There was a case in 1949 where public traffic was commonplace, today its simply a waste of words, like so much other legislation produced in the last 10 years.

I would suggest that you ignore it completely, I intend to.

As an afterthought I suspect if all the laws that are still on the statute book were actually enforced we would still be hanging sheep stealers, and transporting shoplifters to Australia. Tesco would have gone bust on the losses.
 
Re: Mayday Off Portsmouth Saturday Afternoon

Under the 1949 Act, if taken the way some interpret it, I would not be able to tell you that I saw Holland beat Italy on the TV last night (Yeah!!!). I am not going to tell you what the score was, as I dont want the thought police knocking on my door.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I

You beat me to it.



This thread has gone on so long I have forgotten the actual details that Capricorn posted but IIRC he described situations mentioning a sunseeker. I read the post and thought it sensible but agree with others that its nice not to name specific boat names or people but cannot now remember if Capricorn did that.



[/ QUOTE ]

Names, locations and times were mentioned. If there was anything to learn, none of that was necessary.

Personally, I learned that some people thought the skipper involved thought the skipper should have let the coastguards get on with the job and some people thought the coastguard operator was a bit ratty.

I shall continue to read the MAIB reports of significant incidents, CHIRP etc. and leave the speculation and gossip about incidents half understood on the VHF radio to those who find such things illunimating and entertaining.
 
[ QUOTE ]

I shall continue to .... leave the speculation and gossip about incidents half understood on the VHF radio to those who find such things illunimating and entertaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you had actually done this, then those of us who found my thread useful and interesting could have contributed and had an interesting discussion and those who didn't could have just passed it by and everyone would have been happy.

But you didn't, did you ? You ruined what could have been a worthwhile thread, at least to those of us less noble and worthy than you who might have appreciated it, with some inane rambling based upon an interpretation of the Wireless Telegraphy Act that completely ignored the spirit and purpose of that legislation, because to do so made you feel clever and important.

Thank you so much.
 
I am completely behind you with your comments.

On this Forum there are contributors whose advice is excellent unfortunately there are others that are complete twats.

The secret is to suss out the worthy ones and don't bother wasting your time responding to the twats.

Last thought - please make allowances though for those that quickly post and don't quite come over either as good or polite as they would otherwise have done. Those posts normally attract the attention of another regiment of Forum Police that disect the spelling, grammar and puctuation /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Puctuation!!!!!Oh dear ...

[/ QUOTE ] Never mind the puctuation.
What's disect mean? <span style="color:white"> .......................... </span> Not in my dictionary!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top