Calling an MMSI # WITHOUT having an MMSI number ?

[smac999]

use the AIS to get their boat name. call them by their boat name on your local calling channel.

one of many reasons why AIS is great

dsc calling is stupid. nobody uses it

[clownfishsydney]

Originally Posted by smac999

use the AIS to get their boat name. call them by their boat name on your local calling channel.

one of many reasons why AIS is great

dsc calling is stupid. nobody uses it

Disagree. We used it a lot when sailing North Queensland last year and I use it all the time in Sydney to call our dive club buddies.

Back to the OP's post, you need to get a radio licence and then a proper MMSI. I agree that for safety reasons, this insistence to have a licence to get an MMSi is stupid, but it is even stupider to make up your own. Last year when sailing back home we had a helicopter appear on the chartplotter via AIS. Turns out it was a fishing trawler who had made up his own MMSI which happened to be a series dedicated to aircraft.

[RaymondR]

There are at least hundreds and possibly thousands of VHF users on the Australian coast the majority of whom are unlicensed operators with unregistered ships stations. The vast majority of these people are law abiding citizens and generally not scofflaws.

As does AIS the DSC system has the potential to enhance safety and consequently it's proper use should be encouraged by the authorities.

Just as obviously it is not going to achieve it's full potential if burdened with excessive bureaucratic requirements.

Pretty well all the unregistered and unlicensed VHF users would also be required to carry an EPIRB which it is required be registered to the users vessel with AMSA. This is not a great burden as they have implemented a system of self registration via the internet and it is fee free.

As a continental nation isolated from any other country and VHF being pretty well line of sight it appears extremely unlikely that the use of VHF transmitters will interfere with any other nations radio use, Australia's international obligations in respect of radio frequency spectrum use are extremely unlikely to be infringed.

It is sheer bureaucratic stupidity that the DSC system cannot achieve it's full potential in Australia.

[Alan Mighty]

I don't disagree with your argument, RaymondR, but concerning:

Originally Posted by RaymondR

As a continental nation isolated from any other country and VHF being pretty well line of sight it appears extremely unlikely that the use of VHF transmitters will interfere with any other nations radio use, Australia's international obligations in respect of radio frequency spectrum use are extremely unlikely to be infringed.

Remember that Aus includes three or more Torres Strait islands (the inhabited ones I can think of are Saibai and Boigu) that are only 3 - 5 nautical miles from PNG. Well within VHF range of a masthead VHF antenna. And close enough that people travel between Aus and PNG by aluminium dinghies with outboard engines.

The marine VHF band can often be quite noisy in Torres Strait.

Late addition: and of course if we are talking about the Exclusive Economic Zones claimed by the Aus govt, we have several direct neighbours, including France (and I've read reports of non-Australian flagged fishing vessels who transmit AIS as they travel through French waters and then, as soon as they cross the EEZ border into Aus EEZ, their AIS is turned off. That happens on the Kerguelen plateau, as fishing vessels move from the French EEZ around Iles Kerguelen into the EEZ claimed by the Aus govt around Heard & McDonald Islands. Of course, the Aus EEZ around Heard & McDonald is now in doubt, ever since that weirdo arbitration panel, tasked by Philippines to mediate a dispute with China over islands in the S China Sea, delivered a bizarre interpretation of what is a rock and what is an island. Since the strange Aus foreign minister (I've run out of adjectives to describe weirdness) acclaimed that arbitration panel decision, one assumes she and the government of drongos of which she forms part have given up claim to an EEZ around Heard & McDonald Islands).

[meirriba]

I am not sure that I understand the discussion roots fully.
DSC equipment is not required for yachts in most countries (it is required in Israel where I am based), and I believe it is not required in Australia.

BUT - if you do want to have the (questionable IMHO) benefits of VHF/DSC, then why do not do it properly, i.e. with the formal registration and 'good' MMSI?

[clownfishsydney]

Originally Posted by meirriba

I am not sure that I understand the discussion roots fully.
DSC equipment is not required for yachts in most countries (it is required in Israel where I am based), and I believe it is not required in Australia.

BUT - if you do want to have the (questionable IMHO) benefits of VHF/DSC, then why do not do it properly, i.e. with the formal registration and 'good' MMSI?

It would appear he does not want to do it the legal way.

As I stated above, it is a stupid rule. I see no reason why you should have to have a radio operator's licence to get an MMSI. This means that you cannot have an AIS transponder without a licence nor use DSC features of VHF. The benefits of having all boats with MMSI far outweigh the benefits of a person having a radio licence.

Very shortsighted Australian Government policy.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Just fyi, my wife works for BoatUS, and the MMSI program was within her department, so I am in fact pretty familiar with all the details (public and non-public) . ( I should add the disclaimer that I am of curse only expressing my own opinion here )

I will only add three more very short comments here:

#1 world cruisers tend to get pretty good at finding practical ways to deal with bureaucratic barriers. It is simply a skill and attitude needed to live the life.
#2 if anyone here has in fact never ever broken a law in their life - never ever broken the speed limit for instance - then they have the moral authority to throw the 'broken law' stone, but for most of us we live in glass houses, most of us make practical decisions about complying with laws.
#3 We sort of have to assume that dsc provides some safety benefit (otherwise why are we required to have it) . . . so if given the choice between a functional dsc radio (with a non-valid international number) vs a non-functional dsc I personally believe the first is safer. We can and do all agree it is preferable to have all the proper paperwork and proper number, but short of that in the OP's case and the choice is between functional dsc and non-functional dsc, I personally think the practical answer is functional dsc.

Sure, sure -- but is getting a simple radio certificate and real MMSI a "bureaucratic barrier" that needs creative ways to get around? Really?

It's not the bar exam.

Functional DSC is better the non-functional DSC for sure and in any case, but for crying out loud, just get the certificate. There are times when there are good reasons to bend rules, and I've surely done plenty of it in my life, but with respect, this is not one of them.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by clownfishsydney

Disagree. We used it a lot when sailing North Queensland last year and I use it all the time in Sydney to call our dive club buddies.

Back to the OP's post, you need to get a radio licence and then a proper MMSI. I agree that for safety reasons, this insistence to have a licence to get an MMSi is stupid, but it is even stupider to make up your own. Last year when sailing back home we had a helicopter appear on the chartplotter via AIS. Turns out it was a fishing trawler who had made up his own MMSI which happened to be a series dedicated to aircraft.

DSC is an essential part of the GMDSS system. It is very powerful and useful for different non-emergency uses, and I use it a lot, but I agree that most people do not use DSC outside of an emergency.

But in an emergency, especially a really urgent one, where time is of the essence, DSC distress signalling is a crucial feature. It immediately puts the whole system on alert and immediately and automatically notifies all vessels around of your position and nature of emergency. It has longer range than voice communications. It cannot be overspoken by others using the channel, which can be crucial if you are far from the SAR or CG station ("capture effect"). You do not want to be without DSC distress signalling just out of laziness. You will probably never need it, it's one of those things that when you need it, you REALLY need it.

Likewise you do not want to be broadcasting some made up MMSI that identifies you as, say, a helicopter. This creates confusion which can kill you if you are in urgent need of help. Having proper details of your vessel in the IMO database, linked to a proper MMSI, can be of real practical help in getting rescue assets to you in case of a disaster.

It's very little trouble or expense to get this sorted properly and legally, and in my view, really no excuse not to.

[double u]

"...never ever broken the speed limit for instance - then they have the moral authority to throw the 'broken law' stone, but for most of us we live in glass houses, ..."
(saw this just now...)
EXCELLENT, Evans! EXCELLENT!!!
(& btw: breaking the speedlimit very often seriously endangers 3rd parties & sometimes even takes 3rd parties lifes...!)

[continuouswave]

Originally Posted by SteelCruiser

... after finding [another vessel's] MMSI number from my AIS receiver, is it...possible to call them...without first inputting an MMSI number of my own?

Exactly how your particular radio (Uniden UM380) will behave is unknown to me, but if the radio is compliant with current recommendations, it won't allow any use of DSC features until the radio has been programmed with the MMSI of your vessel.

The reason for this is easy to understand: in order to make a INDIVIDUAL digital selective call (DSC) of type ROUTINE to another DSC-equipped vessel, your DSC transmitter will have to send its maritime mobile service identity (MMSI) to the other vessel. Without that information the other vessel would not know how to reply to your call.

You can make an inference about how your radio will behave by looking to see if it is approved for sale in the USA by the FCC. In the USA federal regulations require DSC radios to comply with the recommended behavior I mention above.

[continuouswave]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

I once read a story about a debate in the US Senate where a pro-program senator remarked that the program would only cost one billion dollars. An opposition senator rose and stated in reply "yeah, a billion here and a billion there and pretty soon your starting to talk about real money"

This is often attributed to Senator Everett Dirksen. See

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Everett_Dirksen

Read the section under the heading "Misattributed."