NAVTEX KAPUT?

[D.J.J. Ring, Jr.]

From Richard Monjure.

25 years ago, I told the maritime community that GMDSS was all about discontinuing radio and radio officers and they denied it. 

Here's the proof.

73

DR

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: RichMonjure <RichMonjure@>
Date: Tue, Aug 19, 2025, 10:16 PM
Subject: NAVTEX KAPUT?
To: D.J.J. Ring, Jr. <n1...@arrl.net>

Hi Dave,

On a whim, I asked "AI" if the U.S. Coast Guard still makes NAVTEX broadcasts.  Here is what it said:

No, the U.S. Coast Guard is phasing out and proposing to terminate its NAVTEX broadcasts over medium frequency (MF). The outdated equipment, difficult to find and expensive parts, and the availability of information via satellite services led the Coast Guard to propose transitioning to satellite-based broadcasts. While the Coast Guard used NAVTEX to transmit urgent marine safety information, this information is now largely available through satellite services.

Why the change?

Outdated Equipment:

The current MF NAVTEX equipment is old and requires replacement, with parts being difficult to find and expensive.

Satellite Services:

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has recognized satellite services as the primary means for broadcasting marine safety information, and the U.S. Coast Guard is seeking to align with this global standard.

Redundancy and Reliability:

The transition to satellite services aims to provide more reliable, cost-effective, and better products to mariners.

Prevalence of Satellites:

Satellite receivers are now common on many vessels, making the transition feasible with minimal impact on most maritime users.

What does this mean for mariners?

Information Source:

.

Mariners should continue to rely on satellite-based services for receiving marine safety information.

Redundancy:

.

For smaller vessels or those without satellite equipment, NAVTEX served as a vital backup. The change necessitates ensuring vessels are equipped with satellite receivers to receive critical warnings and forecasts.

Satellite-Specific Receivers:

.

Approved GMDSS (Global Maritime Distress and Safety System) satellite terminals will be able to receive the information that was previously broadcast over NAVTEX.

END

And to think we rolled into and out of all those ports on radiotelegraphy ships, no problem.

73,

RM

[D.J.J. Ring, Jr.]

I told you so 25 years ago.

https://qsl.net/n1ea/sos.htm

73

DR

[Larry B]

From about 2014 until I retired in 2019 I was the secretary (and then Chairman) of the IMO NAVTEX Coordinating Panel, overseeing the allocation and operation of international NAVTEX stations. NAVDAT was certainly being discussed in great depth at the time and was awaiting formal acceptance by the IMO when I left the role.

At the time, NAVTEX was still being heavily used, with new stations being commissioned especially in Asia. However, the main issue with new stations was the issuing of new 'B' characters (which were limited to the 26 letters of the alphabet for each NAVAREA and associated transmission timeslots) - and in busy areas such as NAVAREA I it took a great deal of time and care to allocate a 'B' character which would avoid interference on 512 and/or 490 kHz especially at night - and even then, when night-time propagation was good, one would still get interference from adjacent NAVAREA stations with the same allocated timeslot. Mutual interference was probably the main issue with the NAVTEX system, along with timeslot over-running and broadcasts of a a political nature which certain countries would undertake - and receive a stern rebuke from the IMO and the NAVTEX Coordinating Panel.

NAVDAT would certainly help to eliminate the interference aspect, although the latter two issues could only be reduced by more careful procedures from the relevant National NAVTEX Co-ordinator.

Things move on - NAVDAT was heavily investigated and tested by the various IMO Committees and Sub-Committees (as was Iridium before it was granted GMDSS acceptance) and brings the global MSI service into a more technologically improved state, although there is still a place for the NAVTEX system as a reliable and tested backup.

Larry +

[John Davies]

Larry, thank very much for that concise description. It has answered all the questions I had.

John Davies 9V1VV

--
OUR FACEBOOK PAGE:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/707451009311335/
 
THIS IS THE "RADIO OFFICERS, &C" MAIL LIST - SUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE AND OTHER SETTINGS ARE BELOW.
 
--
Have your R/O friends join the group by visiting https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/radio-officers and requesting membership. We'd love to have them.
 
--
 
To contact list owner or managers:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!contactowner/radio-officers
 
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Radio Officers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to radio-officer...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/radio-officers/66c41928-7ad0-43d0-9c8f-17ee79b4ba0bn%40googlegroups.com.

[D.J.J. Ring, Jr.]

Like all 'AI' searches it gets some of it right and some if it fills in! There are a number of countries struggling to keep Navtex shore stations operating due to costs and effectively budget caps. This includes the US where approximately 50% of the stations are in operative. At the IMO the proposal driven by Jean Charles of France, one of the most dedicated MF/HF ex radio officer administration delegates you will ever find, and supported by other administrations including the US, are proposing to introduce Navdat which has highlighted is set to be introduced in 1st Jan 2028. However there is no proposal yet to remove Navtex so as usual this will be a mess and whether flag states make Navdat a requirement with or without Navtex is still to be seen as is which countries will actually install Navdat shore stations! So if the IMO approves, with amendments to the GMDSS framework and SOLAS, but no one quite knows if anyone is going to buy it, who is going to make the terminal? In terms of units in service the leisure and fishing industry are the largest users but it is not mandatory for a lot of them so will they buy new units? Then there is the promulgation of safety information. Navtex covers a relatively small local area. Navdat has the potential to cover a larger area like satellite EGC (Enhanced Group Call) where you get iceberg warnings in the Caribbean! as it covers such a large area. So once again the agenda is about how the shore side operates. Maybe there is time to consider what the navigator wants! EGC does compliment Navtex today. It broadcasts safety information in the GMDSS framework. EGC receive only terminals would be cheaper than Navdat receivers and manufacturers would easily make them available. Note I have no issues with MF/HF its just we are where we are and why do we need to reinvent the wheel. All it needs is to work out how you promulgate the safety information relative to the local area which is not that difficult and is going to be required for Navdat anyway. Given EGC is operating today, is global and regulated I question the need for Navdat but then I don't have sovereignty issues and years of patience to come up with a new service that no one is going to buy! GMDSS, God May Decide to Save Someone! Adios Navtex.

Peter Broadhurst

Director at CIRM - Comite International Radio Maritime

Isle of Wight

From our Facebook group.

73

David Ring N1EA