Marine band going digital

[Monitorman7001]

Marine band going digital with a modified version of the dPMR the ECC have produced a report and ETSI modifying the DPMR standard with manufacturers.
https://docdb.cept.org/download/350...WEi36JdbN1D5_sRmIQz_FSqLmv9YuR-Cpw_S_59DQc0Pk

Work Programme - Work Item Detailed Report

 

[dlwtrunked]

"an analysis to investigate the feasibility of implementation of digital voice radio
telephony in the VHF maritime mobile band "

An analysis only of a possibility as far as I see--and I suspect will meet with lots of opposition.

 

[mmckenna]

ITU has been looking at this for a few years now.

There is an established plan to go to narrow band FM. No timeline yet.

A actual plan to migrate to digital is a ways off. As dlwtrunked said, it'll be met with a lot of opposition from those that don't want to give up their 20 year old VHF radio.

 

[jaspence]

It means either having two radios or a radio that can do both analog and digital unless a good plan is developed. I remember the first switch from analog VHF/UHF in law enforcement to P25, and it was not a smooth, easy transition in my county. Those that stayed with analog had various patch systems and some held out or couldn't afford the new radios.

 

[majoco]

Jaspence said

and it was not a smooth, easy transition in my county.

So think what a giant c**k up it's going to be worldwide! I would be a lot easier to allocate every shore station with another frequency and run two in parallel, the old one remains on NFM and the new one on digital with the audio combined. Just wait'n'see how many vessels change over to digital within five years......

 

[sonm10]

I don't monitor marine, but why dpmr?

 

[mmckenna]

I don't monitor marine, but why dpmr?

Simple, well established emission, good range, carries data, true 6.25KHz channels.

 

[KC3ECJ]

They shouldn't make all channels digital. That would be nuts. Just as nuts if such a proposal came up for VHF air band.

There are so many organisations and people out there with craft, an unknown huge number, where this would not be practical to implement.

 

[mmckenna]

They shouldn't make all channels digital. That would be nuts. Just as nuts if such a proposal came up for VHF air band.

There are so many organisations and people out there with craft, an unknown huge number, where this would not be practical to implement.

You should probably read the linked document. It addresses that.

Digital radios can do mixed mode, analog/digital.

The timeline suggests dual mode in the late 2020's and early 2030's, and eventual shift to digital in the mid 2030's.
They also discuss 20 year lifespan of marine radios.

Don't get confused with consumer/recreational users. When dealing with commercial vessels, countries can enforce rules that would say when digital must be used. GMDSS is an example of that. Rules change, and vessel operators can be forced to meet requirements.

The document also clearly talks about long term plans for addressing distress calling. As in: keep it analog? Go to mixed mode? Go full digital? The document doesn't make a decision. This is planning and discussion type stuff, not a standard set in stone.

100 years ago it was spark gap transmitters and CW. We've evolved, and the equipment and standards did along the way. The equipment and standards will continue to improve, and there is no reason to shove a stick in the ground and tie us to this point in time where 25KHz analog is the -only- option. Thankfully we've moved on from CW/spark gap to better things.

 

[KC3ECJ]

You should probably read the linked document. It addresses that.

Digital radios can do mixed mode, analog/digital.

The timeline suggests dual mode in the late 2020's and early 2030's, and eventual shift to digital in the mid 2030's.
They also discuss 20 year lifespan of marine radios.

Don't get confused with consumer/recreational users. When dealing with commercial vessels, countries can enforce rules that would say when digital must be used. GMDSS is an example of that. Rules change, and vessel operators can be forced to meet requirements.

The document also clearly talks about long term plans for addressing distress calling. As in: keep it analog? Go to mixed mode? Go full digital? The document doesn't make a decision. This is planning and discussion type stuff, not a standard set in stone.

100 years ago it was spark gap transmitters and CW. We've evolved, and the equipment and standards did along the way. The equipment and standards will continue to improve, and there is no reason to shove a stick in the ground and tie us to this point in time where 25KHz analog is the -only- option. Thankfully we've moved on from CW/spark gap to better things.

This is about somebody making money. Digital audio quality for such narrow bandwidth is garbage.

If you have a deep voice like Sam Elliott, you'll probably be fine, if you sound like Lacey Chabert, forget it!

It is needlessly adding another layer of complexity. People trying to fix something that isn't broken.

 

[MtnBiker2005]

This will be handy to have available. Always nice to know the MMSI info when the person is talking on the digital radio. Since people can pull up the MMSI vessel name.

"The capability of transmitting the identification (MMSI) of the radio for the entire duration of the digital voice conversation (ITU)"
" NXDN uses 16 bit user and 16 bit group address space. dPMR uses 24 bit address, both need modification to support 32 bit MMSI address as radio ID."
" ETSI is working on a draft document (ETSI TR 103 784 [6])1 for using digital voice calls in the marine VHF band. It is based on the modified dPMR protocol to use 32 bit address space instead 24 bit. (ETSI TS 102 658, 2019-01; ETSI, 2019)"

 

[mmckenna]

This is about somebody making money. Digital audio quality for such narrow bandwidth is garbage.

If you have a deep voice like Sam Elliott, you'll probably be fine, if you sound like Lacey Chabert, forget it!

I run an NXDN trunked system and have extensively used 6.25KHz. It doesn't sound like garbage. It sounds just fine.
Usually when someone complains about digital audio quality, it's someone who's either never set up a digital system, or never taken the time to set it up correctly.

It is needlessly adding another layer of complexity. People trying to fix something that isn't broken.

Like i said, you should probably read the linked documents and do some more searching on the net before bashing it. You need to understand why they are recommending it.

 

[KC3ECJ]

I run an NXDN trunked system and have extensively used 6.25KHz. It doesn't sound like garbage. It sounds just fine.
Usually when someone complains about digital audio quality, it's someone who's either never set up a digital system, or never taken the time to set it up correctly.



Like i said, you should probably read the linked documents and do some more searching on the net before bashing it. You need to understand why they are recommending it.

Oh yes, you're the only one who has experienced digital. Nobody else has used or listened to digital systems in business, amateur, or public safety use.
Systems have been supposedly put together correctly, and there ends up ones not being set up correctly.

You realize a sizeable portion of marine use is not through repeaters? Simplex is not through a "system".
This is something is about all around the world, multiple countries, multiple companies, countless people.
You're counting on these people to cross every t and dot every i.

Are people going to be even asked if this is something they want?

 

[KevinC]

Oh yes, you're the only one who has experienced digital. Nobody else has used or listened to digital systems in business, amateur, or public safety use.
Systems have been supposedly put together correctly, and there ends up ones not being set up correctly.

You realize a sizeable portion of marine use is not through repeaters? Simplex is not through a "system".
This is something is about all around the world, multiple countries, multiple companies, countless people.
You're counting on these people to cross every t and dot every i.

Are people going to be even asked if this is something they want?

I suggest you contact the ECC with your concerns.

Here is a link to their website...

CeptNew

www.cept.org

 

[Randyk4661]

This could take decades or more to implement. We are talking international world wide.
North American railroads have missed the deadlines to go digital, now international marine and maritime radios?
Might as well do all aircraft at the same time.
Won't happen soon if at all.

 

[mmckenna]

Oh yes, you're the only one who has experienced digital. Nobody else has used or listened to digital systems in business, amateur, or public safety use.
Systems have been supposedly put together correctly, and there ends up ones not being set up correctly.

Seeing this is a hobby site, most here have little (if any) experience setting up commercial/public safety two way radios. Most who complain about digital on this site are scanner listeners using less than ideal equipment.
There are a handful of us here that do this stuff professionally on public safety systems, commercial systems, etc. We do our best to share info with hobbyists, but there are always those that will not like what we say.
That's OK with me. I'm speaking from real world hands on experience doing this stuff as a career. If you have different ideas, you are absolutely free to share them.

You realize a sizeable portion of marine use is not through repeaters? Simplex is not through a "system".

NXDN works simplex or through repeaters. I've got about 450 NXDN radios that I'm responsible for running both through a trunked system and simplex.

Been running that system since 2011, and it works quite well.

This is something is about all around the world, multiple countries, multiple companies, countless people.
You're counting on these people to cross every t and dot every i.

You should research who the ITU is and what their role is.

Are people going to be even asked if this is something they want?

Yes. Again, read the documents and see for yourself.

 

[KC3ECJ]

Seeing this is a hobby site, most here have little (if any) experience setting up commercial/public safety two way radios. Most who complain about digital on this site are scanner listeners using less than ideal equipment.
There are a handful of us here that do this stuff professionally on public safety systems, commercial systems, etc. We do our best to share info with hobbyists, but there are always those that will not like what we say.
That's OK with me. I'm speaking from real world hands on experience doing this stuff as a career. If you have different ideas, you are absolutely free to share them.



NXDN works simplex or through repeaters. I've got about 450 NXDN radios that I'm responsible for running both through a trunked system and simplex.

Been running that system since 2011, and it works quite well.




You should research who the ITU is and what their role is.




Yes. Again, read the documents and see for yourself.

I'm not going in circles with you.
I've made my point.

 

[iowajm780]

I am a daily user of an NXDN trunked system and the audio quality is fantastic.

 

[nsrailfan6130]

I agree, I monitor a railroad NXDN system here in Michigan. It sounds great as far as audio is concerned.

I am a daily user of an NXDN trunked system and the audio quality is fantastic.

 

[KC3ECJ]

I agree, I monitor a railroad NXDN system here in Michigan. It sounds great as far as audio is concerned.

Not as good as analog.