1. VOS data com. systems SystemServiceFormat Tranmitter + Anten. cost Cost per report Coverage Delivery way Remark Inmarsat-CStdASCII0 € (GMDSS)1.00 €Global Turbowin Code 41 or not Inmarsat-CStdASCII0 € (GMDSS)0.40 €Global Half compressed reports Argos256-bits150 €0.40 €GlobalGTS Transmission delays Minos station Globalstar256-bits1500 €0.20 €RegionalFTPMet.no ? Inmarsat-CData R.256-bits1500 €0.15 €RegionalEmailNew Batos systems IridiumSBD256-bits~300 € ?0.08 €GlobalEmailPlanned for Batos MeteosatDCP ASCII or binary > 4500 €0.00 €RegionalGTSGerman Milos AWS Manned VOSAWS systems PMO-3 workshop – Hamburg – 23-24 March 2006

2. Inmarsat-C (standard) Advantages - GMDSS beacon of the ship is used (by almost manned VOS) - alphanumeric FM-13 SHIP messages reported from the ship (no processing needed ashore – important aspect for code 41) PMO-3 workshop – Hamburg – 23-24 March 2006 Drawbacks - hight cost of transmission (1.00 €/report) - unfair share of the transmission costs (code 41) : a few NMSs pay communication costs for VOS recruited by others Remark : Some NMSs ask for a direct reception of the SHIP reports of their VOS fleets The « code 41 » procedure is then not used but communication costs remain high Only manned VOS are concerned here

3. Inmarsat-C (standard) Existence of bilateral arrangements - e.g. between DWD and Met Office ; DWD and KNMI - allow to reimburse communication costs (e.g. for German VOS) E-SURFMAR compensations - 54 k€ in 2005, 59 k€ in 2006 - about 300,000 reports compensated in 2005 ; 315,000 in 2006 - about 0.18 €/report – to be compared to the real cost (~1.00 €/report) Only manned VOS are concerned here PMO-3 workshop – Hamburg – 23-24 March 2006

4. Inmarsat-C (standard) PMO-3 workshop – Hamburg – 23-24 March 2006

5. Alternative com. systems For AWS - any system may be used since the AWS is fitted with its own transmitter - e.g. Argos, Globalstar, Inmarsat (Data Reporting), Iridium, Meteosat For manned VOS using Turbowin for instance - it seems difficult to report pure binary data through the GMDSS beacon - but it should be possible to report half-compressed data through this way (~0.40 €/report) - or to fit Turbowin laptops with an Iridium modem + antenna (0.08 €/report) Equipment (300-500€ laptop excluded) to be amortized - or to use the cheapest system used aboard by the crew to report ashore: (Globalstar, Iridium…) Remark : In any case, « code 41 » would be abandonned because of the necessity to have data processing centres PMO-3 workshop – Hamburg – 23-24 March 2006

6. Binary compression Characteristics - a SHIP report tits in a 256-bits block (32 bytes) Advantages - reduces the communication costs (0.15 €/report for Inmarsat, 0.08 €/report for Iridium) - rather looks like to an Argos compression than BUFR or compressions commonly used by computers - data received through e-mails Drawbacks - needs a data processing centre to uncompress the data and then code them into GTS formats - to simplify the work, a ship is attached to a processing centre => data stream control possible = advantage Not linked reserved to Batos or Inmarsat only PMO-3 workshop – Hamburg – 23-24 March 2006

7. Binary compression Each ship is attached to a processing centre Monitoring and Metadat PMO-3 workshop – Hamburg – 23-24 March 2006