# AMVER report archive



## Dryden (Jan 28, 2008)

It's good to know that all those reports were being used somewhere, and are actually recorded (in pdf format) for posterity by NOAA. Apologies if this info has been posted before, but the site below has fair amount of data sent from thousands of ships worldwide from 1955 till 1972, including ships names and callsigns, routes worked, and even the number of RO's on board (format varies with year of report).

http://icoads.noaa.gov/metadata/wmo47/cdmp_1955-72/

Extract from the current AMVER "Ship Reporting Manual":about preferred method of communicating reports 
"CW (Morse Code) is Discouraged. Due to the decline in its usage, the number of Coast Stations supporting it, its high cost, potential for error, and the mandatory carriage of upgraded GMDSS Communication Capabilities, ships
are discouraged from using this medium." Yes well....

73
Dryden


----------



## Ron Stringer (Mar 15, 2005)

Correct me if I am wrong but these do***ents are nothing to do with AMVER but are simply reproductions of the World Meteorological Organisation's annual publication "INTERNATIONAL LIST OF SELECTED AND SUPPLEMENTARY SHIPS" i.e. a list of those ships that observed weather conditions during their voyages and reported them as OBS messages.

AMVER is a vessel reporting system that was introduced and operated by the US Coastguard to plot the movements of shipping in the North Atlantic and North Pacific Oceans.


----------



## trotterdotpom (Apr 29, 2005)

AMVER .... Automated Merchant VEssel Reporting 
OBS ........ Old man's Barograph Supplier

Don't get me started!

John T


----------



## Dryden (Jan 28, 2008)

Ron,
You are right, OBS they are. Though whether the AMVER information was also used in the final NOAA data I'm not sure. These lists are interesting though e.g - R.O. numbers in fairly small Japanese vessels commonly of 3 and more and none declared at all in USSR ships. 
Dryden


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

"Don't get me started!"

Or me!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## david.hopcroft (Jun 29, 2005)

Or Me......!!

Though I can't remember where we sent them !

David
+


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

NMN
NMR
NMO

my faves............... 

Always great operators with lightening "bug" keys.

As far as the OBS goes.........I always recall the invariable "AA 00" which used to be the instant reply.................often omitting your ships call-sign.

"Just get on with it!!!!!!!!!!!"

Lovely.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Ron Stringer said:


> Correct me if I am wrong
> 
> 
> > but these do***ents are nothing to do with AMVER but are simply reproductions of the World Meteorological Organisation's annual publication "INTERNATIONAL LIST OF SELECTED AND SUPPLEMENTARY SHIPS" i.e. a list of those ships that observed weather conditions during their voyages and reported them as OBS messages.
> ...


 

Absolutely correct Ron Stringer -they're not AMVER archives at all.
(Applause)


----------



## hawkey01 (Mar 15, 2006)

GKA was an AMVER receiving station. Eventually the WT side ceased when telex was in far more use. They were sent to NewYork.

Nawkey01


----------



## Naytikos (Oct 20, 2008)

It was and remains my firmly held belief that the main reason behind the 'Amver' system was to obtain intelligence on ship (and therefore cargo) movements for the CIA.

For that reason I have never sent an Amver message in my life, even when working for an american-owned company. I told the company vice-president my views and he simply said, 'well, if that's how you feel about it.....' and that was that.


----------



## Graham P Powell (Jun 2, 2007)

Hi Naytikos, That was always my impression to!. We used to take them at GKA and some were quite lengthy and complicated messages with all the course changes etc. Eastern bloc ships never sent them.(Thumb)(Thumb)
I had to contact the US CG once when going to the aid of a ship in trouble. The idea being to find out if another ship with a doctor was closer than us. They weren't much help on that occasion I remember.

rgds
Graham Powell


----------



## trotterdotpom (Apr 29, 2005)

Naytikos said:


> It was and remains my firmly held belief that the main reason behind the 'Amver' system was to obtain intelligence on ship (and therefore cargo) movements for the CIA.
> 
> For that reason I have never sent an Amver message in my life, even when working for an american-owned company. I told the company vice-president my views and he simply said, 'well, if that's how you feel about it.....' and that was that.


I'm sure the CIA took an interest, but I doubt that was the main reason. The USCG did some sterling work in SAR. Besides that, without your input, your Old Man wouldn't have been invited to Coastguard HQ and wined and dined. Shame on you!

John T


----------



## Ron Stringer (Mar 15, 2005)

AMVER information that we sent was used to arrange a mid-Atlantic rendezvous between our ship and a Norwegian bulk carrier with an injured crewman. Our doctor was sent across in a motor lifeboat to assist but when the doctor got on board he found that the guy had been dead for some time. The Master of the Norwegian ship had only wanted to avoid problems about certifying the death. 

Put all the boat crew's lives at risk in a heavy sea, not least that of our very elderly doctor who had to negotiate the pilot ladder on and off the bulker. Recovering the boat and its crew was also very hairy in the sea conditions at the time. Luckily no one was injured apart from bruises and scrapes.


----------



## chadburn (Jun 2, 2008)

"AMVER" was the American version of the British "HORNBEAM" system.


----------



## Moulder (Aug 19, 2006)

Naytikos said:


> It was and remains my firmly held belief that the main reason behind the 'Amver' system was to obtain intelligence on ship (and therefore cargo) movements for the CIA.
> 
> For that reason I have never sent an Amver message in my life, even when working for an american-owned company. I told the company vice-president my views and he simply said, 'well, if that's how you feel about it.....' and that was that.


Blimey Naytikos - were you a Commodore Sparks or something? (Jester)

(Thumb)


----------



## chadburn (Jun 2, 2008)

The American's wanted to know which vessel's were within the SOSUS covered area's, every vessel has it's own particular noise signature which then went on "File".


----------



## trotterdotpom (Apr 29, 2005)

chadburn said:


> "AMVER" was the American version of the British "HORNBEAM" system.


Never heard of "Hornbeam" in use on Merchant ships, was it only for Naval ships?

John T


----------



## chadburn (Jun 2, 2008)

John, the "Hornbeam" system was used by the RAF, RN and selected member's of the M.N. I became involved whilst I was at FOSNI during N.S. and carried on during my M.N. Service. I still have the paperwork along with other "item's".


----------



## Naytikos (Oct 20, 2008)

Moulder:
They called me 'Corporate Communications Director' whatever that means......


----------



## Naytikos (Oct 20, 2008)

Posted by chadburn
_The American's wanted to know which vessel's were within the SOSUS covered area's, every vessel has it's own particular noise signature which then went on "File"._

I can well believe that; a twin-diesel VLCC I was on was shadowed out of Tokyo Bay for half a day by a Japanese Defence Force helicopter which would hover, lower a probe into the sea and wait while we motored past; then fly ahead and do it again. When I asked the Yokohama coastguard station what they were doing they said 'making exercises'!


----------



## chadburn (Jun 2, 2008)

Of course the Russian's were also "at it" and most probably still are, although they did not have SOSUS they did have plenty of "innocent" Trawler's towing array's around and it is now rumoured that the reason why the Conqueror's Log Book going missing in 1982 was that she was involved in snatching one prior to her unexpected diversion to the Falkland's and nothing to do with the sinking of the Belgrano.


----------

