FINAL REPORT - Stakeholders - Ofcom

• 161.975 and 162.025 ( formerly channels 87 and 88) maintained for AIS;
• Reduction in the number of two-frequency channels for port operations and ship
movement.
The remainder of the current Appendix 18 frequencies together with part of the private
maritime VHF band might then have been available for other applications, subject to the
agreement of neighbouring administrations:
• Circa 156.9-158.4 MHz paired with 161.5-163 MHz (excluding the AIS channels
161.975 and 162.025 MHz) subject to additional rationalisation to take account of
other use within the United Kingdom of certain frequencies within these bands.
After studying in detail licensing statistics and channel availability a number of issues
have become apparent:
• Whilst the sub-band 156.075 -156.275 MHz and its 4.6 MHz pair remain
relatively clear, public correspondence channels in the lower part of the
international band have already been assigned to other users.
• The private CSR band adjacent to the international band is additionally used for
other services within the UK, possibly message handling which would need to be
addressed in proposing major changes.
• Public correspondence undoubtedly remains a requirement for ships and small
boats. If future generations of terrestrial mobile services offer reduced coverage
of European waters the demand is likely to increase. This question requires
much more study at the European level before relinquishing all the current
internationally assigned spectrum resource.
The Consultant is still of the opinion that a major rationalisation of VHF maritime spectrum
is warranted but this is not a simple task and requires an in-depth study and public
consultation to determine the correct course of action.
6.8.11 Socio-economic Issues
If any UK specific solution is implemented in the VHF maritime bands it must be
remembered particularly that coast station equipment is only required in small quantities,
economies of scale cannot be achieved, irrespective of whether conventional or more
advanced technology is used.
From the economic point of view, the implementation of an interim system with 12.5 kHz
channel spacing complementary to the present system with 25 kHz channel spacing,
which has to be maintained due to the international character of VHF maritime radio and
in particular to meet the requirements of the GMDSS, might not be desirable. It could
place an unnecessary financial burden on the shipping industry, which would have to
change equipment again, once a final digital solution was finally introduced. It should,
however, be borne in mind, that such a radical change in the maritime mobile service will
take a lot of time to achieve, since developing countries in particular will require a very
long transition time to implement the new system.
In order to obtain a feel for the cost and numbers involved in a change which would
require new equipment licensing statistics were taken from the last Annual Report and
Accounts of the Radiocommunications Agency, Table 6-6. This indicates that numbers of
CSR licences are reasonably static but ship station licences have grown at a rate of about
10% in the last year. Not all CSR licences are for a single base station so some care is
needed in interpreting these figures but let us assume that around 65,000 equipments
could be involved in any changes. The figures also suggest that there were 3625
assignments in 2003 and some 3665 assignments in 2002.
Page 229