New VHF format goes live on 2nd January

[Solitaire]

From Thursday the revamped VHF operators certificate courses go live. There are several options available, but the cost of the issueing of the certificate is now £60, not £30 but this does include the cost of the pratcical assesment. You can read more here - New VHF format

 

[NoIllusion]

Does the new syllabus advise every Tom, Dick and Harry NOT to call Solent Coastguard for a radio check??!!

 

[Solitaire]

Does the new syllabus advise every Tom, Dick and Harry NOT to call Solent Coastguard for a radio check??!!

Not specifically, as it is more than just a Solent based course. However, I can assure you that it is a point I emphasis.:encouragement: Still drives me mad when I hear it!!

As such though the syllabus is pretty much the same, just how it is now delivered and assessed. To be perfectly honest the on line route is the way forward (IMHO), it is almost exactly the same as what we teach now and can be learnt pretty much by rote anyway, all training centres now have to send out a pre course pack which includes the RYA VHF Handbook, irrespective of what method is used to do the course, even if the candidate just wants to pitch up for the exam. The on line course is very good and easy to use. Exam candidates will be given time to familiarise themselves with the radio sets when they come to do the exam, so in many ways it should actually be simpler than doing it the old way. Where the time will be much longer is for those that want to do it purely in the classroom then the time will run on.

 

[EugeneR]

To clarify, it is possible just to do the exam without any course at all? Assuming you know the content of course. Asking on behalf of someone who has sailed for years in Canada but whose certifications are not accepted for charter in Croatia and therefor has to "tick some boxes".

 

[NoIllusion]

Not specifically, as it is more than just a Solent based course. However, I can assure you that it is a point I emphasis.:encouragement: Still drives me mad when I hear it!!

As such though the syllabus is pretty much the same, just how it is now delivered and assessed. To be perfectly honest the on line route is the way forward (IMHO), it is almost exactly the same as what we teach now and can be learnt pretty much by rote anyway, all training centres now have to send out a pre course pack which includes the RYA VHF Handbook, irrespective of what method is used to do the course, even if the candidate just wants to pitch up for the exam. The on line course is very good and easy to use. Exam candidates will be given time to familiarise themselves with the radio sets when they come to do the exam, so in many ways it should actually be simpler than doing it the old way. Where the time will be much longer is for those that want to do it purely in the classroom then the time will run on.

Sure.......just me being facetious about the Solent Coastguard........other small point is do they get taught to transmit on 1 watt when within earshot of the receiver?!

 

[Solitaire]

To clarify, it is possible just to do the exam without any course at all? Assuming you know the content of course.

Only if you already hold either an old style non DSC certificate or are in possession of an aviation radio certificate. If not then you will have to do a pre-exam knowledge check. The on line route is the best option. We have to send a course pack out to everybody which contains the handbook and the exam/certificate application. The assessor will need the URN off the pre course certificate which is printed out after successful completion of the on line element before accepting you for the exam.

So in simple terms - No!

 

[Solitaire]

Sure.......just me being facetious about the Solent Coastguard........other small point is do they get taught to transmit on 1 watt when within earshot of the receiver?!

Candidates are taught to "use the lowest transmission power where possible to have effective communication". All the training radios are linked by coax cable so power output is irrelevant in the classroom environment. I however have sets in different rooms so they can't hear the person making the call other than through the radio itself.

 

[aquapower]

Sure.......just me being facetious about the Solent Coastguard........other small point is do they get taught to transmit on 1 watt when within earshot of the receiver?!

I did mine again in November as last did assessment about 15 years ago so thought time to get up to date and was told about 1/25w transmitting during the course.

 

[itchenseadog]

I appreciate this probably sounds ignorant, but I took the Board of Trade VHF radio test back in the early 70's at South Western House, Southampton. Anyone know if this would still be current?

 

[Solitaire]

I appreciate this probably sounds ignorant, but I took the Board of Trade VHF radio test back in the early 70's at South Western House, Southampton. Anyone know if this would still be current?

Technically yes, but it is invalid for the new DSC system. I say new, it has been around since 1999. You can, on production of your original certificate do the new exam/assessment.

 

[RogerRat]

Technically yes, but it is invalid for the new DSC system. I say new, it has been around since 1999. You can, on production of your original certificate do the new exam/assessment.

Hi David,
Thanks for putting this up, it's so easy for us to miss these little gems. I loved the Coastguard radio check and 25 watt 'breaker' comments..

Still, mentioning DSC as a current need, I wonder how many on here regularly use it.

Even if cruising in company not everyone has DSC set and those that do tend to turn it off like a mobile phone. Obviously, for a emergency, it's excellent giving position and type of emergency but I was wondering about true practicality of selective calling.???

Over / QSK

RR

 

[prv]

Even if cruising in company not everyone has DSC set and those that do tend to turn it off like a mobile phone.

"Turn it off like a mobile phone"? The only time I turn my phone off is in a cinema or similar environments. Having a mobile phone but leaving it turned off most of the time is practically a standing joke about old people

As for DSC, I would guess the majority of boats now have it because you haven't been able to buy a non-DSC fixed VHF for many years. And you can't turn off just the DSC bit, so although it's true that some people go about with their radios switched off (my dad, for instance) it's really no different to them doing the same pre-DSC.

All that said, you are correct that DSC is rarely used to set up routine VHF calls between yachts. This is partly because people make fewer routine yacht-to-yacht calls in the first place (using mobile phones instead) and partly due to pervasive techno-numptyism among yotties. Plenty of people haven't the faintest idea how to place a DSC call, and their response to an incoming one is to turn the radio off because it is making beeping noises and they don't know what to do next.

Pete

 

[Hurricane]

David

So, is the old style DSC Short Range Certificate still valid on a British Registered ship?

Actually, and IMHO, DSC is a waste of time.
It is a system designed by a committee.
Just think what useful things you could do with digital transmissions if it were designed to use the digital channels more efficiently.
For example - look at the latest techniques of interrogating a distant VHF radio for its position.
When I last looked, this wasn't in the GMDSS system - maybe it is now but I suspect not.
It is these kind of things that would make the system more useable.
Both in the UK and in the Med, DSC calling is virtually ignored.
Mainly because establishing a call is only 50% effective EVEN WHEN YOU ARE EXPECTING ONE.
Yes, we do use it sometimes but I'm afraid that the system just doesn't work for me.
I do keep my "address book" with MMSIs of some of my friends and sometimes we do call each other using it but, as I say it only works 50% of the time.

From a distress perspective, we do receive the occasional distress call and will always check to see if we can be of assistance but, generally speaking, any emergency would have been handled on channel 16 by closer vessels anyway.

As far as the authorities in the Med are concerned they don't seem to be using DSC calling either - the Spanish weather forecasts are announced on Channel 16 with manual switching to local transmissions.

IMO, the whole system is a "hotch potch"
It would be interesting to hear what other think.

 

[powerskipper]

Just think what would happen if you could use it for texing another vessel. LOL

 

[prv]

IMO, the whole system is a "hotch potch"
It would be interesting to hear what other think.

It's important to remember that DSC wasn't invented for leisure vessels, and it wasn't particularly invented for VHF. The goal of DSC was to eliminate the radio officer on merchant ships, who had previously kept a manual listening watch on HF morse and voice frequencies - remember those clocks with the five-minute bands marked out as silent periods for distress calls? And for routine calls as well, with the complication that you need to be on different HF bands for different ranges (as I understand it, anyway - I'm not an HF operator) and possibly need to set fiddly stuff up for radiotelex or other non-voice modes. DSC was meant to automate all of that by letting the radio gear keep watch all on its own, and only beep for human attention when a call for this ship (or an all-stations safety/distress call) came in. The system was extended to VHF as well for completeness, but because keeping a voice watch on VHF 16 is quite straightforward, that's not where the real benefits lay.

On those terms, DSC has been a complete success, because AFAIK ships don't carry radio officers any more.

Leisure vessels were not really thought about when the system was designed. Presumably, someone realised late on that we'd better have it, because ships were going to stop listening for voice calls and we might need to talk to them. Similarly, there was a desire to eliminate the listening watch at shore stations. Neither of these have really happened as far as VHF is concerned, but that was the plan and presumably the reason why DSC was promoted to the leisure sector.

When you understand the big picture, it becomes clear why DSC on VHF is not a perfect match for the needs of yachts and motorboats - nobody ever intended it to be!

Just think what useful things you could do with digital transmissions if it were designed to use the digital channels more efficiently.
For example - look at the latest techniques of interrogating a distant VHF radio for its position.
When I last looked, this wasn't in the GMDSS system - maybe it is now but I suspect not.
It is these kind of things that would make the system more useable.

This part I find puzzling. What do you mean by "latest techniques of interrogating a distant VHF radio for its position" if not DSC? This is exactly what the system already does do!

Pete

 

[RogerRat]

"Turn it off like a mobile phone"?

All that said, you are correct that DSC is rarely used to set up routine VHF calls between yachts.

Plenty of people haven't the faintest idea how to place a DSC call, and their response to an incoming one is to turn the radio off because it is making beeping noises and they don't know what to do next.

Pete

Oi!

Didn'I just say exactly that?

 

[Hurricane]

It's important to remember that DSC wasn't invented for leisure vessels, and it wasn't particularly invented for VHF. The goal of DSC was to eliminate the radio officer on merchant ships, who had previously kept a manual listening watch on HF morse and voice frequencies - remember those clocks with the five-minute bands marked out as silent periods for distress calls? And for routine calls as well, with the complication that you need to be on different HF bands for different ranges (as I understand it, anyway - I'm not an HF operator) and possibly need to set fiddly stuff up for radiotelex or other non-voice modes. DSC was meant to automate all of that by letting the radio gear keep watch all on its own, and only beep for human attention when a call for this ship (or an all-stations safety/distress call) came in. The system was extended to VHF as well for completeness, but because keeping a voice watch on VHF 16 is quite straightforward, that's not where the real benefits lay.

On those terms, DSC has been a complete success, because AFAIK ships don't carry radio officers any more.

Leisure vessels were not really thought about when the system was designed. Presumably, someone realised late on that we'd better have it, because ships were going to stop listening for voice calls and we might need to talk to them. Similarly, there was a desire to eliminate the listening watch at shore stations. Neither of these have really happened as far as VHF is concerned, but that was the plan and presumably the reason why DSC was promoted to the leisure sector.

When you understand the big picture, it becomes clear why DSC on VHF is not a perfect match for the needs of yachts and motorboats - nobody ever intended it to be!



This part I find puzzling. What do you mean by "latest techniques of interrogating a distant VHF radio for its position" if not DSC? This is exactly what the system already does do!

Pete

Couple of answers

In the past, I have listened to merchant ships crossing Lyme Bay and calling the Pilots at Brixham
It seems to me that they don't use DSC either.
Do you have any evidence that DSC calls are being made the way they were intended?
Just listen to the VHF and you will see what I mean.
We will just have to differ in our views about the success of DSC.
I still consider the system to be a complete "dogs breakfast"

In answer to your last question.
Some VHF radios have the ability to be interrogated from a distant installation.
These systems can be set up to digitally report their position although I've never used this facility.
I believe this is now being used as a "kind of" parallel to AIS.
Yes - the DSC system does do this but not every set has this facility - doesn't that mean that it isn't in the DSC spec?
I think some of the yachties use this technique to find out where each one is.
I understand that some plotters will then position this information (gleaned from a distant VHF set) graphically on the plotter's screen.
I haven't specifically looked into this but my point was that this is the kind of thing you can do with a more modern approach to a "DIGITAL SC" system.

Sorry to disagree and I don't mean any malice this response but I just say what I think.
And I think the DSC system is rubbish and could have been much better implemented - for both everyone - merchant shipping or otherwise.
After all, we now have a good system of identification (MMSI numbers) - we should use them.

 

[prv]

In the past, I have listened to merchant ships crossing Lyme Bay and calling the Pilots at Brixham
It seems to me that they don't use DSC either.

One of the attributes of DSC is that it doesn't broadcast its use in a way that's obvious to casual observers - you can't hear the voice calls that aren't being made . But I agree, DSC routine calls on VHF are not especially useful and probably aren't all that widely used.

Do you have any evidence that DSC calls are being made the way they were intended?

I believe safety calls on HF DSC are important - see this post (and some other recent ones by the same poster): http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?378647-What-SSB-do-you-have&p=4516020#post4516020 . A lot of the routine HF traffic that was expected from ships has instead gone to satellite though.

I still consider the system to be a complete "dogs breakfast"

What else should we expect from a multi-decade project by an intra-governmental bureaucracy?

To be clear, I'm not trying to convince anybody that DSC is the best thing since sliced bread, just explain a bit of how it came about and why it is the way it is. A lot of people only look at the bits that affect coastal leisure sailors, not realising that they're at best an afterthought to the system.

In answer to your last question.
Some VHF radios have the ability to be interrogated from a distant installation.
These systems can be set up to digitally report their position although I've never used this facility.
I believe this is now being used as a "kind of" parallel to AIS.
Yes - the DSC system does do this but not every set has this facility - doesn't that mean that it isn't in the DSC spec?

If it weren't in the DSC spec, how would my Standard Horizon know how to ask your Icom the question?

That facility is absolutely part of DSC. I know that some early radios didn't do it, so I guess it must have been optional or something - or perhaps they just weren't fully compliant.

You brought up the subject as an example of things that DSC should do. Since DSC does in fact do it, it's a pretty poor example!

Pete

 

[Hurricane]

OK
I was a bit unfair as it is " multi-decade project by an intra-governmental bureaucracy".
I was just saying that a bit of foresight could have given us many more facilities than we have.

Compare the DSC design to the AIS design.
As far as I can see, AIS has been designed with far more forethought.
Implementation of "virtual buoys" etc extend the use from just a "ship tracking" aid to something with much more use.
AIS isn't perfect - it is only an aid - but good design has provided something that works.
Personally, I still don't think that DSC is used that much and certainly not much in the leisure industry.
I remember traveling along the South coast of France being "pestered" by the French authorities calling me on Ch16 by my yacht name - they could only have got the name from my AIS transmission.
Why didn't they simply call me using my MMSI which was being transmitted with my AIS.
This didn't just happen once - they called me every 50 miles (not using DSC) from different coastal stations.
I'm sorry - as I say, I call it as I see it.

Thanks for the discussion - it is good in these cases to have one's views challenged and some of your points I have taken on board.

 

[Elessar]

And I think the DSC system is rubbish and could have been much better implemented - for both everyone - merchant shipping or otherwise.

I completely agree.

Take making a distress call. Press red button which transmits MMSI and position, and puts you on 16, full power. So far so good.

You then would think you should say Mayday, I am me, I am here, this is my trouble.

But no, we then have to repeat the information that has just been transmitted, that is not memorable for humans, multiple times. Then we are allowed to say the imprtant stuff. If we haven't sunk already.

Why? The comittee says "AH - what if there are 2 distress calls at the same time, we might confuse them?" In my world, if I wanted to guard against this unlikely event, I would require the voice transmission of the last 3 digits of the MMSI. This 3 digit number is momorable by humans, and would make an unlikely event 1000 times less likely. But no, they insist on beurocratic nonsense.

As for DSC for contacting others, I have no idea how it works. If anything needs a manual to use in a basic manner, it is useless in my world. If it isn't intuitive, I don't use it. I could learn, but I would forget. So I have never transmitted or received a DSC call.

Like you I have been contacted by name many times from AIS transmissions, and never by DSC. I have contacted ships by name many times, and they respond. So they are listening and not relying on DSC.

An opportunity wasted by poor implementation.