VHF presents from the US of A

[kilkerr1]

My lovely brother-in-law wants to buy me a birthday present (27th March in case anyone else wants to as well...). He's heard me banging on about handheld VHF. He asked which one. I said the ICOM IC-M31. He said fine. He can get one for just over $70. Wow, I said, bargain, you're a star.

My question is whether there's anything different with 'em the States, like, oh I don't know, frequencies or something. Will it work for me over here? I have the feeling there's no difference and this is a daft question, but thought I'd check anyway.


<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://kilkerr.members.easyspace.com/santateresa_pics.htm>Santa Teresa and other t'ings</A>

 

[Neraida]

I'm sure that I will be corrected, but as far as i know, as long as the set has "international" channels, it'll be fine. The US range just has a few more.

The problem comes whan you buy DSC sets from the US, as i think its a different system, and it don't work. That's why i have avoided the "bargain" ICOM sets on ebay...

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.ybw.com/cgi-bin/forums/postlist.pl?Cat=&Board=wanted>Stuff Wanted </A>

 

[Solitaire]

James - DSC is DSC. It's a world wide standard and forms part of the GMDSS system. The GLOBAL MARITIME DISTRESS and SAFETY SYSTEM. All sets used in the UK must conform and be marked with the CE mark. Sets bought in the US do have different channels.

<hr width=100% size=1>Boating is <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.powerboattraininguk.co.uk>Serious Fun</A>

 

[BrendanS]

You may find it's not CE marked, which technically makes it illegal to use her - should you ever get stopped.


<hr width=100% size=1>Utinam logica falsa tuam philisophiam totam suffodiant

 

[BrendanS]

David, sadly not true. USA have a subset of DSC which is not as feature rich as the DSC standard in Europe. The standard is set to change in the near future, to bring more countries into alignment, and the new standard will be less feature rich than the one we currently have in Europe (probably). MainlySteam and I explored all this in great detail a few months ago if you want the full details on the different specs etc. - can't remember what the thread was called, but you can search on it

<hr width=100% size=1>Utinam logica falsa tuam philisophiam totam suffodiant

 

[Solitaire]

I came across Boating is <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.powerboattraininguk.co.uk>Serious Fun

 

[BrendanS]

They allow the use of a class called SC-101. this is a hybrid of class d and class f, and is not as fuly specced as required here. The USA are not the only ones not to have declared, New Zealand, Oz and many others are in the same position, and many use an equivalent to SC-101


<hr width=100% size=1>Utinam logica falsa tuam philisophiam totam suffodiant

 

[pvb]

Is it really that different?

Lots of people (manufacturers in particular) would have us believe that SC101 is vastly inferior to what we have in Europe. In practice, when you actually look at the various standards, there's not a lot of difference. The USCG has a <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/gmdss/dsc.htm>useful list of the various classes</A>. Compare SC-101 and Class D. I'm fairly confident that US sailors visiting Europe aren't putting their lives in danger by virtue of their inferior DSC standards.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Solitaire]

Interesting - worthy of more investigation on my part.

<hr width=100% size=1>Boating is <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.powerboattraininguk.co.uk>Serious Fun</A>

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: Is it really that different?

Yes, and in fact most international sets significantly exceed SC-101 and therefore provide choices as to the extent of the functionality the purchaser wants eg a fisherman on a small lake has entirely different needs to someone sailing in a busy waterway.

I put the following in another thread, but it may be useful to repeat it here. Maybe it will prompt someone in the know to confirm or deny /forums/images/icons/smile.gif.

While it does not affect me at all, I do wonder what is going to happen regarding type approval of VHF radios in the EU now.

Last year the IEC standard for Class D radios (which I understand the EU type approvals have been essentially based upon) was reduced back to that commonly found on the international ie non-EU, radios. The USA during the review of the standard, made it clear that if that change occured they would likely make Class D radios mandatory in their jurisdiction.

Recently Icom (which, based on past threads, many forumites do not seem to realise is a Japanese company not an American one), for example, have been making minor changes to their international radios and renaming them eg the IC-M402 and IC-M502, both of which are not available in the EU and were not Class D radios, are now IC-M402A and IC-M502A respectively and are available in the USA (at least). The original 502, with which I am most familiar out of those two radios, basically meets the new Class D standard except that it does not cater for Group calls. The only significant change I can see in the 502A version is that it now caters for Group calls which seems to me to mean that the minor changes are oriented to making these radios meet the new Class D standard.

It would then seem that the EU is going to have to alter its type approval requirements to match the new Class D, in which case all the international radios will be easy contenders for approval within it. Alternatively, the EU will have to maintain some standard which is not even aligned with any of the ITU IEC ones anymore and be even further out on its own limb.

I think that if I was in the EU and wanting to buy a VHF radio just now I would wait a while to see what develops.

Apart from pricing (and the opportunity for international sourcing if the EU aligns with the new Class D) there are some other things which international sets allow and which have been gripes on this forum, such as the ability to turn the alarm off so that one can sleep! I do not recall that being prohibited in the new Class D standard (and I have not checked) but it may mean that you will be able to get sets with that functionality, just as one example.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Is it really that different?

No one has mentioned SC-101 as being unsafe, so not sure why people keep bringing this up. However, you cannot receive emergency calls on DSC if you are using the radio, so would be unaware that someone needed assistance. Might not worry everyone. I also have a suspicion that SC101 does not require you to have a keypad, there by nullifying the whole concept of DSC in practice. Still, it's all moving towards a global unification of the standards anyway

<hr width=100% size=1>Utinam logica falsa tuam philisophiam totam suffodiant

 

[BrendanS]

As I said, been done in great detail here, and probably more concise than you'll find without extensive internet searching. Do a search here on sc-101 etc.

<hr width=100% size=1>Utinam logica falsa tuam philisophiam totam suffodiant

 

[Solitaire]

Re: Is it really that different?

I've just been really "geeky" and have had a look at this SC101 - from what I can make out, SC101 is the designation given to Special Committee (SC) 101 on Digital Selective Calling. A committee set up by The Radio Technical Commission for Martime Services - The RTCM. Now, I've not tracked down the actual report but it seems that there are a whole range of these SC's covering EPIRBs adn PLB's - SC 110, DGNSS - SC104 etc etc. I then found a site featuring an ICOM set were the features were listed. The pertinent ones being:
" Built-in DSC capability that meets U.S.C.G. SC-101
The DSC watch function monitors Ch 70, while receiving another channel. It allows you to send a formatted distress message in an emergency. The position request function indicates a caller's position. Up to 30 DSC IDs are memorized.

Channel 70 is the international channel set aside for DSC - so on what premise why does the system therefore not work?? It's VHF and its on Ch 70. It sends a digital signal to a reciveinjg station which, if DSC enabled, should respond accordingly. Reseting to Channel 16 or to an appropriate working channel if ship to ship routine call is required. Now there are differences which effect Europe/UK regulations which is why all sets for use in the UK must be CE marked. But I'm still puzzeled why the DSC function on "US" sets would not function as a "UK" Class D set would?


<hr width=100% size=1>Boating is <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.powerboattraininguk.co.uk>Serious Fun</A>

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Is it really that different?

The set you are describing meets SC-101 as they state, and exceeds it, LIstening on Ch70 while recieving on another channel is not an SC-101 requirement.

<hr width=100% size=1>Utinam logica falsa tuam philisophiam totam suffodiant

 

[Solitaire]

Re: Is it really that different?

Sorry Brendan, I'm just trying to get my head around your original post where you said that the US used a class SC101 which is a hybrid of class d and class f and that DSC was not DSC in the context of it being a global system! However, if I understand you last post and via my own understanding, SC101 is a special committee report on Digital Selective Calling laying down certain recommendations and minimum requirements. However, International brands such as ICOM and perhaps Raymarine and Simrad, market sets in the US which meet and exceed the requirements. Therefore DSC is DSC where the sets exceed the minimum standards of SC101. The fact that currently the Area 1 zone does not exist (currently) in the US seems somewhat a function of their set up and full adoption of GMDSS. Or am I missing something - which is perfectly possible.

<hr width=100% size=1>Boating is <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.powerboattraininguk.co.uk>Serious Fun</A>

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Is it really that different?

the thing you have to understand is that europe implemented the DSC requirements in whole. The US decided that they would not impllement in whole, and allowed a new class of their own making (taken up by many other countries).Manufacturers decided to provide sets with functionality above those requirements.
I certainly didn't say DSC wasn't global, just pointed out that things varied by country and region, and that you cannot buy a DSC set in the US and use it here. Some you can, some you cant' . They'd probably all work fine, but some bought in US and other countries are not legal here by right of their DSC functionality and also CE marking.

It's not an easy topic, as it's complicated by CE certification which is an entirely different subject to us end users, but impacts manufacturers.

<hr width=100% size=1>Utinam logica falsa tuam philisophiam totam suffodiant

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: Is it really that different?

<<<But I'm still puzzeled why the DSC function on "US" sets would not function as a "UK" Class D set would>>>

As far as the digital message and the interaction with the shore or other ship station is concerned it would work exactly as a Class D (or EU set) would. Putting aside technical issues of build design quality such as frequency stability, spurious emissions, etc, the only differences may be ones of functionality.

For example, I mentioned that the M502 does not handle Group calls (which for many is irrelevant) but for general and distress calls etc would do the job. There may be some sets where a voice distress call made while a DSC distress call is in progess from the same set will terminate the DSC distress call or the repetition of that call but I do not think Class D prohibits that (but I think EU does prohibit it, but stand to be corrected on that and Class D - just too lazy to look it up). But that is an operational thing and the reasoning of DSC in a declared sea area is, as far as I understand, that one does not make voice distress calls unless the DSC system has failed to provoke a response. I know that in the UK you are encouraged to make both calls together though which, in my mind, is a bit like saying that "We have declared a Sea Area A1 but we have not got much confidence in what we have done so you had better give a voice call as well".

Of course, the telling thing is that any non EU flagged pleasure vessel can enter UK waters with a non EU set and operate DSC quite satisfactorily and with no intervention from the authorities. The only constraints are that the set will likely not have the M channels, or if sailing in other parts of Europe, the special channels that some of them also have. Chances might be, if one had access to the cloning software for the set (and that is not easy to do) you could enable those channels.

It is important to note that Class F has, as far as I know been defunct for a long, long time and no sets are built to it, and that most international sets exceed SC-101.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kilkerr1]

OK, this is all way over my poor wee heed now. I enjoy starting a heated debate, but my original question was what does all this mean for my little ICOM handheld? DSC isn't an issue, with the majority of handhelds, no?

The one I'm looking at is the new entry level one, and if you'll all just turn to page 64 of the March issue of Sailing Today...or see it <A target="_blank" HREF=http://kilkerr.members.easyspace.com/santateresa_pics.htm>Santa Teresa and other t'ings

 

[Twister_Ken]

Off the point

The DSC crowd below seem to have forgotten the original question.

I'd be 99.9% certain that a US spec Icom handheld would work perfectly well in the EU.

My handheld is a Garmin. The instruction book came in the standard 93 languages (inc American) and stated that it was suitable for worldwide use. I seem to remember that there was some set-up option to select which set of channels I wanted, and once that was done - the work of one second – it all worked perfectly. Odds-on the Icom is the same.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[bigmart]

If I were you I would call Icom & ask them if a US set is type approved for uk use. I suspect that if the model number is the same as the UK set then it will be fine.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1>