US spec DSC sets

[Andy_Hampton]

I am considering buying a US spec DSC set from a seller in the UK, and will then have to get a license. I've read previous threads about the pros and cons of buying from the US and the main disadvantage quoted is that US kit is class F DSC, and the UK authorities will refuse to issue a license for this. Having read the license application form on the Ofcom website, it doesn't appear to ask for details of the equipment to be used. Does anybody have any experience of this situation?

Andrew

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[TheCount]

If it is not CE marked (as usually sold on ebay!) You buy it, you use it , you get nicked, you get fined £5000.

Cheap set wasn't it?????

<hr width=100% size=1>Still, what do I Know??

 

[BrendanS]

One of the better summaries I've seen! <g>

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[Andy_Hampton]

That's me told then! It just appeared to me that whilst the US kit can't do everything that the European units can, there didn't seem to be much difference, they wouldn't do any harm, and the chances of being inspected were minimal. On balance though, I think I'll play it safe! Thanks for making up my mind.

Andrew

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[numenius]

Come on now, you didn't seriously for one moment think that a spec made by the most technicaly advanced country in the world would be accepted in europe did you? Not when theres another spec which just so happens to cost you (the consumer) much more to buy....
Our government/men in grey would rather you die than get something cheaper (not everyone can afford the UK/Euro spec DSC sets).

God forbid we should get reasonably priced safety equipment like the U.S!

<hr width=100% size=1>http://members.lycos.co.uk/boaty1965/index.htm

 

[MainlySteam]

While it seems common in Europe to refer to them as "USA radios" they are, in fact, international radios ie those used by all the world except for the EU. The rest of the world never refers to them as "USA" radios because they are actually meant for everyone. Which leads to -

There is also a misconception that many of the manufacturers of "USA" (sic) radios are American, I even see many references to Icom being American on these forums. In fact Icom is Japanese, as are many of the other marine radio manufacturers such as Standard Horizon, Furuno, etc - to the best of my knowledge all Icom radios are manufactured in Japan (or at least under direct Japan management if elsewhere in Asia).

Finally, it is incorrect to say, as many have been, that "USA" (sic) VHF radios are Class F - class F radios have not been manufacturered anywhere for many years as far as I am aware and never applied to fixed mount sets in any event. A USA standard was developed (accepted by the rest of the world for recreational and in some cases small commercial VHF's), SC-101 - all sets generally exceeded that standard which otherwise has been accepted as being sufficient for recreational vessels. Last year the ITU issued a new standard for Class D radios (Class D is what the EU was basically aligned to) which closely matched the functionality of many existing international VHF's. From looking at the manuals of Icom's latest non EU VHF's (the same product as before but now with an "A" added to their name eg IC-M502A) these seem to be aligned to the functionality requirements of the new Class D standard. It would seem that the EU will persevere now with its own standard which would seem to be completely at variance to the ITU's.

I have an interest in radio and also work in the marine industry - as many will realise, I am constantly intrigued by the EU's determination to take a route on this completely at odds to that accepted by everyone else.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[philip_stevens]

If you cast your mind back to the early days of CB radios, the same thing happened there. US radios were not accepted, and we had a version that was completely at odds with the rest of the world - including the European mainland.

And again, our government had to have it licenced at £10, whereas the US was free.

<hr width=100% size=1>regards,
Philip

 

[Mike_Martin]

Whereas I agree on a personal level with some of what has been written (although there are other issues such as CE marking, interface requirements a legal requirement in Europe etc) I feel that I should correct the CB statements.

The actual problem with US CBs was that they caused Domestic TV Intereference (TVI) as a matter of course due to their AM operation. The UK and Europe allowed FM operation on 27MHz (although there are variances on the spot frequencies) which alleviated this problem. UK CBers operate on both the UK's 40 channels and mainland Europe's 40 channels hence the fact that UK CBs have 80 channels. Oh yes and the CB licence is actually £15.

Mike

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

 

[snowleopard]

mike

it would be helpful if we could have a summary of the differences in functionality between the different classes of DSC. for example on the US level, can you make individual calls and specify a working channel?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

If you do a search, MainlySteam and myself debated the topic to death somewhile ago, and posted all of the differences between the different DSC classes, their features and functions, and the latest updates in where the regulatory bodies are going in unifying the standards

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[MainlySteam]

As far as I know all sets being manufactured for the international market by the main manufacturers are complying with the functionality of at least Class D (that is the new ITU Class D standard, not the old one) - there is no other Class that need worry recreational sailors, but if you are in the EU then their requirements do not match any ITU Class standard and you must buy a set specifically built for the EU (of course most of the international manufacturers outside of the EU, who are in the main Japanese, do not bother to do that - Icom is the only one to my knowledge and they do that by the "add on" approach).

The easiest way to see what Class D includes is to look at a manual for a radio and I suggest going to the Icom USA site <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.icomamerica.com>http://www.icomamerica.com</A> >Downloads and download the manual for the IC-M502A which as far as I can see meets all the functionality requirements of Class D. If you are interested in what a typical set did before the international sets went to the new Class D then if you download the same radio's previous version, the IC-M502, manual that is indicative. The only difference I can see is that the 502A now does Group calls whereas the 502 did not. You will see that these sets are not "crippled" as some posters infer by claiming them as Class F, for example (Class F is not a fixed set standard and has in any event been defunct as a standard for a number of years). Among the sets available there are the obvious choices of such things as keypad, rotary knob, or push to step digit entry for called station MMSI, memory programming, etc.

Again, there is no such thing as an "USA" set - it is perhaps better to call them "non EU sets" because everyone except the EU uses them. There is now no ITU Class that the EU sets are aligned with allowing the Class comparison that you ask for and there is no ITU Class other than Class D relevant to recreational sailors.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Andy_Hampton]

Thanks for this explanation John. Probably being a bit thick, but does this mean that a unit such as the Raymarine Ray 54 which fully meets the requirements of class D (according to the sales blurb) is still not legal in the EU, whereas its considerably more expensive but almost identical 54E European sister is? Studying the specs of the two units they seem identical except in name. Is not having a CE sticker realistically going to cost a person using a Ray 54 a £5,000 fine as mentioned in a previous posting? Perhaps this is an unfair question to ask you.

Andrew

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[duncan]

A little like asking any motorist the chances of being caught for speeding..........
Equally asking a ploiceman is not likely to get you the answer you are looking for!
Finally looking at the prosecutions for the offense in the past may well not reflect the likelyhood in the future.

On a related topic I am aware of a number of people who have recently purchase new boats from the states - crated to UK, duty VAT etc all accounted at the port of entry but was anyone interested in a CE plate?

<hr width=100% size=1>madesco madidum ..../forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Mike_Martin]

But, of course a fair question to ask me!!

The simple answer is yes! It is illegal to install equipment in the EU that is not CE marked. Not down to us I'm afraid it is way beyond either a UK or a "radio" issue.

Mike

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

 

[MainlySteam]

Hi Andy

I see Mike's reply and whatever my own views I have to go along with what he says as the law is obviously the law and as I understand it if it is not CE marked then it cannot be used. Fortunately it has no direct relevance to me but it can cause some complications in marine work for vessels flagged in territories of the UK.

I do not know what the maximum penalties are nor what would be typically dealt out along those lines in the UK but I commonly see penalties for amateur radio operation infringements in the USA over USD10,000 for such things as malicious interference. I suspect that having a non type approved set would be regarded as much less serious than that (given that a non EU flagged vessel could sail into the EU and use the same set unhindered if type approved in their flag country). I hasten to add that in USA, as here in NZ most major manufacturer's marine VHF's are type approved so there is not much chance of ending up on the wrong side of the law on that point.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[duncan]

you had to go ahead and make that definition......!

so it's illegal to install - fine, understoood etc

is it illegal to use - on a fixed installation is it not unreasonable to expect a user to take an installation apart to establish the CE status?

you know I am not an advoacte, adn I tried to avoid this distinction, but you have highlighted it Mike.

<hr width=100% size=1>madesco madidum ..../forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Mike_Martin]

It is the "snowbal effect" first count illegal installation, second count having available for use, third count actually using etc etc. However, this would really be a question for the Enforcement side of Ofcom.

Mike

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