VHF Radio....Have your say

[Taroona]

The ACMA want you to have your say

Concern about recreational boat users' radio standards
Responding to concerns about declining standards in the use of marine radio and compliance with the requirement to hold an operators’ certificate of proficiency, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has released a discussion paper about regulatory arrangements for VHF marine radios used by recreational boat operators.
The discussion paper invites comment from marine radio users about safety and the use of VHF radio by recreational boaters and follows concerns expressed by the National Marine Safety Committee and representatives of the maritime community.
“Correct radio use is fundamental to the safety of the maritime community,” said Chris Chapman, chairman of the ACMA. “Our discussion paper outlines a range of ideas aimed at achieving more appropriate VHF radio use amongst recreational boaters and we want the boaties to give us their vital feedback.”

ACMA says it is encouraging those with an interest in this issue to contribute to this review, including all relevant government and non-government bodies at the state and territory level, and recreational boat operators.
Since 2002, ACMA has delegated the responsibility of managing the examination and certification scheme for marine radio use to the Australian Maritime College under a Deed of Agreement. The expiry of this Deed in 2012 is a key reason for the timing of this review.
According to ACMA, the purpose of the review is to examine alternative arrangements for marine radio operator qualifications with a view to identifying the most appropriate and cost effective ways to address the needs of the sector. The review canvasses reforms to the regulation and administration of marine radio operator qualifications to simplify the process of obtaining marine radio operator qualifications and ensure the appropriateness of those qualifications.
ACMA said it has received complaints about the standard of procedures used by operators of VHF marine radios and, particularly, that this is impacting on access to channel 16 for emergency situations.
In addition, it said some operators who get into difficulties are not using the internationally accepted procedures that were developed to ensure that calls for assistance convey essential information for a rapid response.
Channel 16 is designated, internationally, as the emergency and calling channel for ships and small craft. A vessel’s crew may use channel 16 to call other vessels and coast stations, but once communication has been established, the operators must change to a working channel to continue the conversation. This ensures channel 16 remains available for emergency situations and other calls.
Currently, the two grades of qualification are the Marine Radio Operators Certificate of Proficiency (MROCP) or the simpler Marine Radio Operators VHF Certificate of Proficiency (MROVCP).
ACMA is interested in receiving comment on issues such as:
-- The mandatory nature of Certificates of Proficiency for operators of VHF marine radio; and,
-- The possibility of marine radio use for safety purposes being addressed by other agencies involved in recreational boating regulation.
The discussion paper, VHF Marine Radio Operator Qualification Arrangements – Non-Commercial (Recreational) Vessels, is available on the ACMA website.

Submissions should be sent to email: mrowp@acma.gov.au by December 18, 2009.

[RJ5023]

However the system is changed to allow everyone to get a license, I think that everyone who goes boating with a radio should be made to get one - including 27mhz users.

Until you've done a training course there's a very good chance that you won't understand just how serious correct radio use at sea really is. I didn't, despite using one for many years.

If you use your radio in the correct way, you'll be helping to save lives. If everyone else uses their radio in the correct way, it'll be your life that's saved.

If the system for getting a MROVCP license can be made even easier/cheaper, that just has to be good news for us all.

Cheers,

[andkat]

I have sat the licence, and failed!!!
I can sit here and quote all the required Mayday's etc. I understand the fundamentals, but I have to pay another $50.00.
They need to make the course and license more user friendly!!!!!!!

[Feral]

They need to cut all the crap out of the course, make it simple and easily available - IE online.

Until then I wont bother. More than happy to pay the fine when they come save my ass, coz thats the only reason I have the radio anyway.

[RJ5023]

andkat,

I'm still wating to find out if I passed mine. I fell foul of a very large flaw in the system. I studied privately (no oganised course) for the MROVCP (VHF) license and then contacted a local invigilator to sit the exam.

Wasn't until I was well into it that I found some questions that had nothing to do with VHF. Invigilator couldn't help at that point "You're in the middle of an exam!". When I finished it we talked it over and found that he had ordered the MROCP exam by mistake and that's what I'd just completed. Hopefully enough of the HF/MF stuff stuck during my weeks of reading.

So I've studied pretty hard, paid $56 for the exam paper and who knows what will happen? Another $56, another exam and a month wait if I failed it?

Anyway - I learnt a lot, but I do think the system could be improved. It's a great thing that the invigilators put in their own time to help us out, so I've got absolutely no gripe there. It seems to me that the AMC should make sure that the exam papers given to students are very clearly marked "VHF" in very large letters or even make the papers different colours so that it's obvious to the invigilator.

When you're a bit nervous, haven't sat an exam for about 30 years - and in a strange environment (a bloke's kitchen in my case) it's very easy to make a mistake like this.

MROCP .ne. MROVCP!

Cheers,

[Razgo-]

there is a very good online course available. all it needs is to be able to then do the exam online and submit.

I was able to do my boat license exam by mail and hand it in and then just did the practical.

be good to do the VHF license that way and just do a short practical no more than an hour.

[Coontakinta]

Why does it have to be online?
I reckon police it better & root out the cowboys. Also agree with RJ, a licence for both would be ideal!

[cehart]

Should be more accessible and by offering on line it would be cheaper and therefore more people may be inclined to do it rather than have a third party organization undertake the training and test, charge more money and not offer the flexibility with regards to times and venues and put some people under pressure by the thought of failure and of course even more money to re do the test again.


A mayday call to the authorities without a licence is always going to be better than no call at all.

[QF3 MROCP]

andkat,

I'm still wating to find out if I passed mine. I fell foul of a very large flaw in the system. I studied privately (no oganised course) for the MROVCP (VHF) license and then contacted a local invigilator to sit the exam.

Wasn't until I was well into it that I found some questions that had nothing to do with VHF. Invigilator couldn't help at that point "You're in the middle of an exam!". When I finished it we talked it over and found that he had ordered the MROCP exam by mistake and that's what I'd just completed. Hopefully enough of the HF/MF stuff stuck during my weeks of reading.

So I've studied pretty hard, paid $56 for the exam paper and who knows what will happen? Another $56, another exam and a month wait if I failed it?

Anyway - I learnt a lot, but I do think the system could be improved. It's a great thing that the invigilators put in their own time to help us out, so I've got absolutely no gripe there. It seems to me that the AMC should make sure that the exam papers given to students are very clearly marked "VHF" in very large letters or even make the papers different colours so that it's obvious to the invigilator.

When you're a bit nervous, haven't sat an exam for about 30 years - and in a strange environment (a bloke's kitchen in my case) it's very easy to make a mistake like this.

MROCP .ne. MROVCP!

Cheers,

RJ...

sounds like the invigilator was in error. Blind Freddie can tell the difference between the two exam papers. They are clearly marked at the top of the front page. Also when you first read the beginning, it details the fact of the number of questions, 25 for VHF & 50 MF/HF so the invig.. should have picked up the error before you started.

The staff at the AMC are helpful. I would be giving them your story and let them sort something out.. The invigilator should be struck of the list...

Any reason you didn't call a VMR and go along to one of their training courses? I have no doubt that would have put you at ease after 30 years out of the exam mode??

Peter

[QF3 MROCP]

The ACMA want you to have your say

Concern about recreational boat users' radio standards
Responding to concerns about declining standards in the use of marine radio and compliance with the requirement to hold an operators’ certificate of proficiency, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has released a discussion paper about regulatory arrangements for VHF marine radios used by recreational boat operators.

Submissions should be sent to email: mrowp@acma.gov.au by December 18, 2009.

More comments on this thread as well....

http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/sho...d.php?t=155492

[ashh]

just be done with it and make it mandatory when getting a boat license....
no radio certificate, no boat license...simple

[RJ5023]

RJ...

sounds like the invigilator was in error. Blind Freddie can tell the difference between the two exam papers. They are clearly marked at the top of the front page. Also when you first read the beginning, it details the fact of the number of questions, 25 for VHF & 50 MF/HF so the invig.. should have picked up the error before you started.

The staff at the AMC are helpful. I would be giving them your story and let them sort something out.. The invigilator should be struck of the list...

Any reason you didn't call a VMR and go along to one of their training courses? I have no doubt that would have put you at ease after 30 years out of the exam mode??

Peter

It's true that the invigilator probably should have picked up the error - but he's just an ordinary bloke trying to juggle all kind of issues, and also giving me (a stranger) time on his weekend, while his wife waits for some of his time. I wouldn't want him struck off - we need people in the world today who are willing to give their own time to help others without reward.

I was in a hurry to get my license because my new boat was due to be delivered with a VHF within 2 weeks - one month ahead of schdule. The local VMR course was scheduled to be held some time about now (from memory).

In retrospect, it might have been better to have done the VMR course anyway - hindsight is a bastard isn't it?

I didn't contact AMC because IF I was fortunate enough to pass the MROCP exam I thought I might be shooting myself in the foot. They might say that I didn't sit the exam I was supposed to and rule out the result (my thinking anyway). Why take the chance? If I failed I have to do it again anyway, so I'm on a hiding to nothing.

Still waiting for news on the exam result. I completed it two weeks ago yesterday. Why so long?

Cheers,
RJ

PS I have sent my tale of woe to the ACMA address - thanks

[Owen]

I think that it should be part of your license and it should be mandatory to have a radio fitted to any vessel that requires a license to drive.
BUT... if you are going to have it for one band then you must have it for all.
Up here 27Mhz is practically useless. I'm not even sure VMR monitors it.
So why should we have to pay to have a functional piece of emergency kit on board when those in the S.E. do not? i.e. They can run 27mHz with no real problems if al they want is a backup safety device.
The standard of operation here is pretty good (at least any time I'm on the water). Maybe it's not in Brisbane?
I'm fine with a license if it's to ensure proficiency, but not as any sort of elitism or source of revenue.
I would advocate for an online option (or via VMR or similar if you don't have online facilities available to you) for those that already have a boat license and for the purposes of 5 yearly refreshers (when you renew your drivers license). The refreshers should be set out so you at least have to read the latest regulations to pass.
Hands up all those that remember every flag and marker in their boat license test?
Every rule in the car license test?

If you were the kind of ###### that would disrupt the emergency channels before the test then it's unlikely the test will effect any personality change.
All you trying to do is educate about proper procedure, so why not put it with what is already a learning environment (i.e the boat license)?

[FNQCairns]

The US doesn't force a VHF licence, same oxygen same water chemistry, same species...... I suspect the life of those recreationally on the water over there is held a regard or two higher than it is here....gotta be a reason.

cheers fnq

[haggis]

i done the radio course about twelve months ago with peter ,
makes the course easy to understand glad that i did
cheers jimmy