RIB.net Radio Channel (Solent - but can work anywhere)

[Poly]

Originally Posted by GuyC

That will serve me right for not looking at Page 2!

No more than it serves me right for thinking you’d list channels in a logical order.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

Its a pointless rule! You can't stop my CH 08 VHF transmitting from outside of the area into the area.

I’m not sure it’s totally pointless (although it may be unenforceable that is a different thing). If they need that much band width they for tugs etc it seems a reasonable position - yes some people will ignore it and some signals from outside their jurisdiction will propagate through, but if it’s known about it will reduce the traffic and make their life easier.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by willk

Crikey, things have moved on. I remember when the Salty Solent Seamen had to fly a RIBnet Burgee upside down and hope someone noticed...

No wonder you hate flegs so much - all those hidden meanings!

[Pikey Dave]

Or just avoid the Solent[emoji6]

[willk]

Originally Posted by Poly

No wonder you hate flegs so much - all those hidden meanings!

I DO hate flegs! (but possess two RIBnet burgees and a Saltire from my first passage to Scotland)

I think this overall RIBnet channel concept is doomed, not for technical reasons but for social behaviour reasons. Over the years I've found boat to boat comms to be a real barsteward. People just can't get their sh1t together to be on the right channel and fumble practical comms something awful.

I run ops with two VHFs, one running watch on 16/CG ops, the other on group comms - in many ways it's the ideal setup and yet it never seems to work out.

IMO the Group MMSI thingy will never work....

[scrambler]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

Its a pointless rule! You can't stop my CH 08 VHF transmitting from outside of the area into the area.

But surely the onus is on you to ensure that your transmission isn't encroaching into the Port area.

[lakelandterrier]

Wow,

according to my (albeit now dated) RYA VHF Radio handbook

Annex C:- International Freq Non USA
Inter-ship: CH 06, 08, 72, 77
also classed as "inter-ship"
Port Operations CH 09 (Pilot), 11, 13(Bridge to Bridge), 14.
CH 69, 73 Coastguard Working, CH10 Maritime Safety.

The notes state " although there are 11 inter-ship channels, only the channels NOT SHARED with Port operations should be selected for inter-ship use ie 06, 08, 72 ,77."

I've used CH08 as a working channel in the Solent / Southampton Water often & recently without any official telling to me clear the channel.

[ShinyShoe]

Originally Posted by scrambler

But surely the onus is on you to ensure that your transmission isn't encroaching into the Port area.

Nope.

I have a licence that permits me to use those channels as designated by ofcom. Southampton Port can create a byelaw that places additional requirements, but they only apply in their jurisdiction.

I can legally transmit on M1 in the UK, but not in France. The law does not require a Yacht with a 40ft mast and 25W transmitter to make sure they are not transmitting to France.

It's the reason we have international channel allocation. Southampton should have got a private channel for additional port ops, and insisted it's tugs and pilots have access to it.

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

Nope.



I have a licence that permits me to use those channels as designated by ofcom. Southampton Port can create a byelaw that places additional requirements, but they only apply in their jurisdiction.



I can legally transmit on M1 in the UK, but not in France. The law does not require a Yacht with a 40ft mast and 25W transmitter to make sure they are not transmitting to France.



It's the reason we have international channel allocation. Southampton should have got a private channel for additional port ops, and insisted it's tugs and pilots have access to it.

I did wonder under what powers they decided to purloin an international channel.

[lakelandterrier]

I don't get this.

International i.e, global allocation designates 07, 08, 72, 77 as inter-ship
Port operations 09, 11, 13,14 - surely Southampton Port should be on one of these.
Not sure they have legimate authority to overrule international conventions.

Still, as I don't often venture into Port of Southampton waters, i'll take my chances