Ofcom, a personal view

Tome
Under current privacy laws it is impossible for the MARS database to be anything but skeletal it none the less is a very useful tool for the rescue authorities to have and I for one am happy for my details to be listed.
Although the MCA and Ofcom are different bodies maybe some of the monies raised were used in a roundabout way to recently update Dover CG station so that they have the ability to triangulate a signal to < 1/2 degree, that they can record on any frequency. I beleive that they also have AIS capability. Money well spent!
I conceder myself lucky that I don't "boat" on the Solent so we just do not get the same problems as the guys down there. Here on the East coast we just don't get the same level of grief you guys get on the VHF channels.
Maybe if Ofcom started nicking a few people that operated a radio illegally then the word would spread amongst the boating fraternity and things may quiten down a bit.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
<<If licenses were free how would you police the issuing of licenses & the suitablity of licensees to hold a license. How would the MARS Database be kept up to date. If there were no MARS Database how would the rescue authorities know the correct reaction to a garbled distress call>>>

Other countries seem to get by though, including one that has many, many more pleasure vessels than the UK. Those countries have different approaches but if you are genuinely interested I suggest you explore the internet for the processes that exist in USA, Australia and New Zealand, for example.

With respect to the MARS database, many nations do not provide information to that for pleasure vessels. My own vessel is not in the MARS database (you can check, the callsign is ZM2452, MMSI 512000106) and that does not detract from its safety in any way whatsoever just as in the same way the MARS database does not hold information (to the best of my knowledge) on serialised, as opposed to MMSI programmed, 406 EPIRBS - administrations maintain their own database of callsigns and in some countries that is given to other non-government organisations to manage eg in NZ the Volunteer Coastguard do it, you get a callsign by phoning and auto billed on phone account some minor cost for its issue (around equivalent of GBP6), there is no annual charge. If one wants a callsign issued by the administration that option still exists (we have to do that because we carry SSB) - in NZ cost is about 15GBP per annum and in USA is (last time I looked) USD200 for 10 years (ie equivalent to USD20/annum).

Australia has taken the approach that callsigns are not required at all by pleasure and smaller commercial vessels for VHF.

In most western nations around 85-90% of all pleasure vessels are under 6 or so metres, having ongoing cost free VHF adds significantly to safety in that from what I can see, there is an increasingly high take up of VHF's in those smaller boats which comprise most of the fleet and have the most likely need to call for assistance, because of the ease of purchase and no ongoing costs and administration hassles associated with their use.

In the countries where there are no ongoing costs the spectrum is regulated and managed just as usual and from what I have seen the only issues are ones of there being far more boats with VHF's than would otherwise be the case (which must be an excellent thing).

John

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi John,

Sorry but your point needs balancing, as this is not a new contention by any means. The administrations that you mention do indeed allow non-international, VHF-only pleasure craft to be exempted from the requirements for Ship station Licences.

However that is because the vast majority of their pleasure craft DO NOT make passage to foreign administrations. However here in the UK with our closest foreign administrations only a little more (East or West) than an hour's sailing away do not have the luxury of having "Domestic" craft.

As an aside I was dealing with an FCC official who was panicking last week as the Bahamas have decided to fully implement the requirements of the Radio Regs, thereby now requiring US vessels to be properly licensed when in their TWs.

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Team Executive,
Maritime & Aeronautical Team, Ofcom
 
Well you'll be pleased to read that you wont be receiving any more of my "snazzy" newsletters as Ofcom has decided that it doesn't want them anymore.

As to skeletal detail, MARS comtains most of the information requested on the SRL application form. However, to those without the access passwords (SAR authorities and Radio Administrations) onlyt the MMSI, callsign and vessel name is available. It is also worth bearing in mind that we in fact pass this information direct to the MCA to save them from needing to access MARS to see detail of our own licensed vessels.

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Team Executive,
Maritime & Aeronautical Team, Ofcom
 
Mike

You miss the point. People are looking for value. If there is no visible enforcement or regulation, then the MARS database is the only tangible benefit for the licence fee and you will find it hard to swing the argument in your favour.

If, however, Ofcom had a more visible role in representing its users I would be happier to pay the fee. For example, a recent post about regular DSC alerts causing users to switch off their sets would have served as a good example. You could have taken the matter up but instead chose to justify the status quo (not allowing a volume control on the alarm). Shame.

Regards
Tom

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi Mike

I would contend that the vast majority of pleasure vessels in UK do not visit a foreign port as it is highly probable that the big majority of them are under 6 or so metres (as I said, in most western administrations 85 -90% seem to be estimated as being so). Very small vessels are likely to be the ones to which carriage of VHF most adds to their safety and it should be, in my opinion, as administratively easy and as cheap as possible for them to do so.

I know very small vessels do cross the Irish Sea and the Channel (including, famously, Uffa Fox in International 14's and, less famously, vessels which are trailored), some even swim it, however I would suspect strongly that they are by far the minority. Most small vessels under 6 or 7m never stray more than a couple of miles from shore and also operate predominantly in their home waters.

Perhaps someone knows what the distribution of pleasure vessel sizes is in the UK and could post that.

It would have been a fair comment on your part to have pointed out too that in NZ, at least, NZ flagged pleasure vessels clearing for a foreign port have to submit to a compulsory safety inspection and that would likely pick up any vessels unwitting intending to so depart without an individual radio licence. Many of the larger vessels here also carry HF and so have an individual licence in any event and, as elsewhere, there do not seem to be any difficulties managing a no licence and licence required systems in parallel.

As I have pointed out in other threads, I have no intention of saying what the UK should do - is none of my business, and as far as pleasure vessels goes does not affect me - but just intended providing information as to what some other countries do, in my view, successfully.

Thanks for your proactiveness in responses Mike and even from afar I value them for the insights they give.

Regards

John

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
There is visible enforcement - I was in Brixham Marina in 2002 when the chaps from the RA were on the marina inspecting licence discs. I had a chat to them about it - it was their second visit. They had been there some weeks before and had issued warnings to boats without licences and on this particular day were there to "enforce" against those who had not taken heed of the first warning...

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Its funny that you should mention Uffa Fox. The first boat that I went Foreign in was a Fox Terrier, a 22ft lifting keeler, designed by the great mans company. She belonged to a friend & we had many sailing adventures in her.

Your opinions regarding Marine Radio & its usage do often seem at odds with my own & many others here in UK. I can only assume that you suffer from a whole lot of different problems on the other side of the world & the ones that we frequently complain about must seem just as alien to you.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Oh dear

Sound and fury signifying nothing

Who said Ofcomm had responsibility for safety; er, well, actually Graham ( to whom I addressed the post) did;

"my real opinion of your work which is ultimately all about our safety".

I have been in this game for some 20 years and for all this time some department or agency of government have been responsible for radio licensing.

You have most vividly described the chaos that is the result of the control and supervision of the airwaves that has resulted from their stewardship.

Why do you think paying money to employee people to send you bills for more money will improve things?

If you don't like classic cars as an analogy what about CB

No testing, training, examination or anything else - just buy a license. A purely financial transaction, No attempt to regulate other than by published rules and type approval of equipment.

CB bands have now matured from a fairly chaotic beginning and now present no great problem to anyone.

Why do you suppose marine bands would be different.

Interesting that you mention the MARS database on the day the computers died. But that apart, if licenses were free, simply a matter of registration then info put on database. Something like the old CG66 (I think) form. Certainly the license fee does not finance this It can't, since it doesn't even cover cost of all the employees.

As for taxi usage (mentioned by Jules of TC)
All public and private hire vehicles and drivers have to be licensed by the local authority and are subject to fairly stringent requirements. Any operator using marine band equipment would most certainly lose their license and hence their livevlihood. A risk they would be unlikely to take. This is amply demonstrated by the huge quantities of old PMR and similar equipment floating about the market (a friend of mine buys it by weight), None of this seems to find its way into taxis.

Jules also mentioned educating the great unwashed. The fact is that quite the opposite is occuring. I have held an amateur license for more than 30 years. To get the license I had the pass an examination. A real one with questions that demanded writing and sums and pictures for answers. I then had to pass a Morse test at 12 wpm.

Now an "amateur" license is available virtually for the asking. Resulting in lots of users who do not have the knowledge to operate powerful transmitters safely and without causing interference. Not exactly what I would want for marine band.

That is what succesive regulators have achieved for amateur radio.

The personal abuse I will ignore



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
OK my answers may appear terse but it's late and these are old issues, so apologies in advance.

P) "Who said Ofcomm had responsibility for safety; er, well, actually Graham ( to whom I addressed the post) did"
A) The MCA has the responsibility for Marine Safety within UK TWs and we now Ofcom have responsibility for managing the radio spectrum. Suprisingly we work very closely with the MCA in managing the Maritime radio service


P) You have most vividly described the chaos that is the result of the control and supervision of the airwaves that has resulted from their stewardship.
A) So you imagine that it would be better without someone ensuring that abuse and misues are kept to a minimum, I would suggest that is rather the reverse of logical.

P) Why do you think paying money to employee people to send you bills for more money will improve things?
A) This is hardly worth answering, as clearly the money pays for the implementation of the internationally agreed rules for making the service work.

P) CB: No testing, training, examination or anything else - just buy a license. A purely financial transaction, No attempt to regulate other than by published rules and type approval of equipment.
A) As a Radio Amateur, I am suprised that you are not aware of the requirement for a CB radio licence to use the service!

P) CB bands have now matured from a fairly chaotic beginning and now present no great problem to anyone.
A) Actually the CB service, since legalisation in 1981, has degraded to an almost unusable medium. The illegal service regulated itself in a proper manner, unfortunately, it caused huge nationwide expense by causing Domestic TV Interference and therefore couldn't be legalised.

P) Why do you suppose marine bands would be different.
A) They wouldn't, they too would degrade to the level of kinder garten users

P) MARS, if licenses were free, simply a matter of registration then info put on database.
A) Why should it be free, when it costs money to do and how can £20 per year possibly be a barrier, this is as cheap as HMG licences get, oh except of course CB and Amateur radio licences!!

P) Something like the old CG66 (I think) form. Certainly the license fee does not finance this It can't, since it doesn't even cover cost of all the employees.
A) The licence fee financed a recent push for people to use CG66, I believe the phrase I coined in Airwaves was "This scheme is totally free and could help to save the lives of you and your crew/passengers in an emergency"

P) As for taxi usage (mentioned by Jules of TC)
All public and private hire vehicles and drivers have to be licensed by the local authority and are subject to fairly stringent requirements. Any operator using marine band equipment would most certainly lose their license and hence their livevlihood. A risk they would be unlikely to take. This is amply demonstrated by the huge quantities of old PMR and similar equipment floating about the market (a friend of mine buys it by weight), None of this seems to find its way into taxis.
A) Well of course it doesn't because they already know that they will be fined by Ofcom (in the same way that they would if they didn't have their PMR licences) for illegal use of Maritime radio equipment, just like the caravan site owner on the S.Coast last year caught using 5 Marine portables!

P) Jules also mentioned educating the great unwashed. The fact is that quite the opposite is occuring. I have held an amateur license for more than 30 years. To get the license I had the pass an examination. A real one with questions that demanded writing and sums and pictures for answers. I then had to pass a Morse test at 12 wpm.
A) Then, of course, you applied for your Amateur radio licence which I would expect has supplied you with information regarding changes, if any to the service over the last 30 years and of course gave you your call sign.

P) Now an "amateur" license is available virtually for the asking. Resulting in lots of users who do not have the knowledge to operate powerful transmitters safely and without causing interference. Not exactly what I would want for marine band.
A) I'm not quite sure what this point is intended to prove. As you well know Amateur radio is not a "safety of life" radio service and it does cause interference most commonly Domestic TV Interference and it is a term of a Radio Amateurs licene that they will rectify spurious emissions or face action from Ofcom.

P)That is what succesive regulators have achieved for amateur radio.
A) Amateur radio is regulated by the ITU in the same way that the Maritime service is, however, it is not likely to impinge on the effectiveness of SAR resources if its rules are not followed.

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Team Executive,
Maritime & Aeronautical Team, Ofcom
 
I think Mike Martin has answered all your points much better than I possibly could. Suffice to say I am amased at your ability to read what you want to see, even when it does not exist, for example, comments regarding personal abuse, that I am not aware were written anywhere in the whole thread.

I hope you enjoy your boating & that your vision of radio licensing never comes to fruition.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi Bigmart

OK on Uffa Fox - while I had been aware of his International 14 exploits since my youth (and his other exploits too) I enjoyed recently reading Sir Peter Scott's autobiography The Eye of the Wind in which he also talks of Uffa Fox and certainly quite alot about International 14's.

Perhaps you misunderstand where I am coming from on the radio bit. I work internationally and so have no intention of giving the impression that boating in NZ is in any way comparable to other countries. What I am saying is other countries (including NZ) manage without individual licences for VHF and the arguments that are being used in the UK for not doing so are not unique to the UK. I also have a special interest in radio.

In the end, if people wish to discard international observations as being irrelevant (and note I am not saying those observations should be followed) and remain only interested in traditional and parochial solutions then as I have been at pains to point out, from the pleasure vessel point of view that is of no consequence to me. Not meaning that to be offensive but there are plenty of good ideas and thoughts that the experience of other countries can bring to us all.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi John

Please don't feel that I am implying any criticism. I genuinely find your alternative viewpoint refreshing. BrendanS & I have had many a discussion regarding the alternative viewpoint from a Raggie & a Stinkie. Once you understand each other some of the differences can be appreciated. This doesn't always change my opinions but it helps to understand the alternative view.

With regard to Marine Radio, my experience is only with VHF & I am by no means an expert, a couple of years ago I was all aginst the License Fee & felt that it was just another excuse to employ a load more, time wasting, Civil Servants. Various discussions on here & reading some articles in Mags. has altered my opinion. You know that I am now in favour of the licence & consider the £20 cost cheap to keep a semi disclipined system working. I suppose its just fear. When you listen to the Solent at the weekend, with some disclipine, its pretty horific. The thought of what would ensue if it were a free for all doesn't really bear contemplating.

PMR are becoming more popular & I would like to see a lot more effort put into promoting them as the preferred tool for idle chatter. This won't help with the Radio Check on the minute, every minute that you get now but anything to reduce the overall workload must help.

I think the biggest threat to safety on the water, in England, over recent years has been the shake up in the Coastguard. I have to say the some of my brushes with them in recent years give the impression of a distinct lowering of the standard of service they now offer.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi Martin

I once asked on the forum if private repeaters were used much in the UK but got no answer. Perhaps you are able to tell me?

One thing that is done here (not because of the volume of traffic, because that is low) is licencing of private VHF repeators which are, I think, all owned by societies. So around Marlborough Sounds at the top of South Island there are, from memory, 4 duplex marine VHF channels dedicated to 4 repeators which cover the whole area and which are operated by a society which anyone can join for a moderate fee (think about equivalent of GBP20/annum) in order to freely use them. There are more over to the West of the top of South Island. I would think a big proportion of the more active local boat population including all of the charter company boats, water taxis, other commercial operators, the shore based tourist resorts, etc use them and consequently one only very rarely hears any chatter at all on CH16. Many places the repeater is operated by a society of fishermen, but again other users seem to be welcome to join.

Apart from normal chit chat traffic their are operators who take voyage reports (and pass your arrival report back to the station the original departure one was made to if one is now out of their coverage), give weather (both to a schedule and on request), pass on useful information such as sea and wind conditions (which they glean from the boats the operators speak to during the day), etc, etc. Have even heard them make private phone calls on behalf (like "Would you phone such and such a number and tell them we have decided to stay out another night") and regularly they handle all the little emergencies such as lost dinghies, arranging ambulances, etc.

I have wondered if the same is available in the UK - certainly seems to get alot of traffic off CH16 in the areas where exists here.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi John

Private Repeaters? I thought you were advocating some kind of X rated Indigestion Remedy. No I've never heard of such a service. What we do have a re a load of channels that used to be designated as Ship to Shore & were used for The old GPO Radio Telephone Service. Now I would have thought they could have been made good use of.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
First things first, they are designated as Public Correspondence AND Port Operations channels. Since the end of BT's Public Correspondence services in the UK it has pretty well been expected that they will be used for their other designated function.

However, more than half of them have already been allocated to the combined communication system for UK Land Search and Rescue under the auspices of MCA SAR Branch. There is every chance that the rest will be used to alleviate the pressure on the already over-crowded existing Port Operations channels.

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Team Executive,
Maritime & Aeronautical Team, Ofcom
 
Youre like a terrier aren't you. One hint of descent & you jump on it without a thought for my poor tender feelings. There I was sticking up for you the other day & this is how you repay me. I'm off to cry into my pillow. Ah well another soggy night!

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Maybe I can send you some of our spare unused channels from here Mike /forums/images/icons/smile.gif.

By the way you upset me too, so you need twice the therapy - enjoy it.

Regards

John

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

S
Sailing to the USA. Do I need a special visa?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
2K
Roberto
Roberto
S
Amiable demands for money!
Replies
15
Views
827
penberth3
P
M
Galeon in the 50ft Class – Hoping to Borrow a Bit of Owner Wisdom
Replies
4
Views
360
Elessar
Elessar

Share this page

Top