Cheap Chinese AIS Transponder

[Neeves]

I'm only not keen on AIS as when we sail up, or down, the coast in Oz a vessel over 300t is an exception. South of Sydney they are like hens teeth. Our fishing fleet has been decimated and is limited to a very few vessels that work well offshore. We do not have fog, I'm surprised I can recall how to spell it.

We might join the East Australian Current, at the 100 fathom line, but no-one sails further offshore - unless they are going to NZ.

Our greatest hazard are small, or medium sized runabouts (day and night) and as we need watch for them (because they do not need nor use AIS and their lights at night are ineffective) then we are unlikely to miss anything 6 stories, high emblazoned with lights and 300' long.

Here AIS is simply not necessary. It might be nice to know that its the QMII or whatever, but so what, I'd have little need to speak to them. If I'm really close and personal, I read the name with bins or quote location from radar, and speak to them - they always reply politely, its as unusual for them as for me and breaks monotony for them. I have had some very pleasant conversation with Captains of large commercial vessels, not something I suspect happens much in The Solent.

I had a very long conversation with the Captain of a bulk fuel tanker as to why we were making an average of 10 knots, and had been doing so for miles, and not showing a steaming light - and all based on quoting Lat and Long.

I understand why AIS is essential in HK, Singapore and The Channel - but in many other places its simply does not add value. From comment on this thread many others think AIS does not add value for the opposite reasons - its 'so essential' its drowning in its own success - and that will only get worse.

Its a different world here.

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

I'm surprised at some of the vehemence shown against the OP's acquisition, which, in my view should have been welcomed as a sign of the times, viz. a potentially affordable safety aid. Yes, AID, we all know the limitations ... it's just another possible assistance that could save lives, used intelligently in combination with our basic seamanship.

+1

The manufacturer also makes a rather neat AIS fishing net buoy marker (which will clutter up your screens even more) but would be something of which I could really be enthusiastic. Heaven - to know where the prop traps were located!

Jonathan

 

[GHA]

IFrom comment on this thread many others think AIS does not add value for the opposite reasons - its 'so essential' its drowning in its own success - and that will only get worse.

It's only "drawing in it's own success" in a few Square miles of water north of the Isle of Wight

Elsewhere it's extremely helpful, channel, Biscay more and more fishing boats transmit, transport ocean it's excellent, see which ships are drifting not under command just inside the med after Gibraltar, the list goes on. Not vital or essential but a very cheap, low power, useful provider of accurate data.

 

[BruceDanforth]

I'm surprised at some of the vehemence shown against the OP's acquisition, which, in my view should have been welcomed as a sign of the times, viz. a potentially affordable safety aid. Yes, AID, we all know the limitations ... it's just another possible assistance that could save lives, used intelligently in combination with our basic seamanship.

It is not type approved and breaches the terms under which he is licensed to operate on the marine radio bands, possibly to the detriment of everyone else.

I expect you know best though.

 

[GHA]

It is not type approved and breaches the terms under which he is licensed to operate on the marine radio bands, possibly to the detriment of everyone else.

I expect you know best though.

??

I just got an email from Huayang Tech confirming the HP-33A (and HP-33 and HP-33N) has EU CE type approval. They attached the certificate of conformity.

 

[BrianH]

I understand why AIS is essential in HK, Singapore and The Channel - but in many other places its simply does not add value. From comment on this thread many others think AIS does not add value for the opposite reasons - its 'so essential' its drowning in its own success - and that will only get worse.
Its a different world here.

Jonathan, definitely not sniping at you as you made it clear that your personal circumstances just do not require it. I fully understand that in many locations it makes no sense to add unnecessary kit.

But it isn't just the locations you cite; the Adriatic is populated with many large and potentially dangerous commercial vessels and crossing their paths, say out of Trieste when passing through the apparent convoys can be helped by the CPAs revealing which ones to dodge between.

We also have a plethora of very fast ferries that obviously have contempt for the armadas of leisure boaters and seem to have a habit of charging straight through them. I can understand their frustrations sometimes but once having to call one of them on VHF coming straight at me I am sensitive on the issue.

Peace.

 

[JumbleDuck]

It is not type approved and breaches the terms under which he is licensed to operate on the marine radio bands, possibly to the detriment of everyone else.

Are we assuming that only decent British (or decent European) types could possibly design a proper radio transmitter, and that the Chinese, the Japanese, the Americans, the Canadians and so on are incapable of doing so unless the Big White Chiefs check their work?

 

[Bi111ion]

So lets summarize
1) It turns out it is CE type approved but some contributors have highlighted the need to be extra careful with active devices like an AIS transponder as it has more potential to mess up other vessels AIS if it malfunctions. My own view is one should be vigilant that all EM, acoustic or other emissions from your boat are not interfering with any vessels or aquatic life.

2) In very crowded waterways like the Solent it may be prudent in clear conditions in the daylight to turn off your AIS transmissions. On the other hand it has been suggested that if filtering was better on AIS display software this would not be necessary. It is not an issue with the AIS bandwidth just with clutter.

3) It is necessary to have a Ship Radio licence for any marine radio transmitter and you add an AIS transponder to your license on the Ofcom web site

4) It still seems very good value for a unit that combines GPS, AIS display and AIS transceiver in one device. I have bench tested this device, and tested it with a temporary installation in the marina. So far I see no reason not to recommend it, but I hope to give an update when it is installed properly.

Thanks everyone for your comments and happy sailing in the new year!

 

[Alpha22]

Obviously forged, using a pirated copy of photoshop no doubt

Thanks for sharing.

Is there any way of checking it's validity?

 

[BruceDanforth]

We aren't assuming anything. Go ahead and adorn your boat with cheap tat gear from ebay...

Are we assuming that only decent British (or decent European) types could possibly design a proper radio transmitter, and that the Chinese, the Japanese, the Americans, the Canadians and so on are incapable of doing so unless the Big White Chiefs check their work?

 

[AngusMcDoon]

So lets summarize
1) It turns out it is CE type approved but some contributors have highlighted the need to be extra careful with active devices like an AIS transponder as it has more potential to mess up other vessels AIS if it malfunctions. My own view is one should be vigilant that all EM, acoustic or other emissions from your boat are not interfering with any vessels or aquatic life.

2) In very crowded waterways like the Solent it may be prudent in clear conditions in the daylight to turn off your AIS transmissions. On the other hand it has been suggested that if filtering was better on AIS display software this would not be necessary. It is not an issue with the AIS bandwidth just with clutter.

3) It is necessary to have a Ship Radio licence for any marine radio transmitter and you add an AIS transponder to your license on the Ofcom web site

4) It still seems very good value for a unit that combines GPS, AIS display and AIS transceiver in one device. I have bench tested this device, and tested it with a temporary installation in the marina. So far I see no reason not to recommend it, but I hope to give an update when it is installed properly.

Thanks everyone for your comments and happy sailing in the new year!

Just one to add - the onus is on the importer to check that the device is conformant. If you buy through the standard means (i.e. a EU based retailer), that isn't you, and if it turns out that the device is not conformant because the type approval was not done correctly or was forged, then Ofcom will chase the importer (and there are plenty of examples on Ofcom's website of their doing this). If you buy the unit directly from the manufacturer in China, then you are the importer, and the onus is on you.

 

[Bi111ion]

Is there any way of checking it's validity?

I tell you what, next time I am Shenzen I will visit the large and apparently reputable EM test facility. As I work on computational electromagnetics, am a Fellow of the Institute of Engineering Technology and a Professor of Applied Mathematics I will try to blagg my way in to visiting their facility and check their equipment is calibrated and up to spec. (I would be blagging by the way as while what I just said is true I am not an expert on electromagnetic compatibility - my professional interest in electromagnetics is more specialised and I am still learning a lot about RF). Then I will report back. That is just as long as you are all prepared to go and visit Garmin, Raymarine, etc and do the same for your non-Chinese units.

No wait a minute. I am being silly. I retract that offer. I would much rather go sailing, and I am sure you would too!

 

[BruceDanforth]

http://www.huayang-tech.com/En/About.asp

10 years of development with a team of 20 so does that mean it's been going 6 months?

I tell you what, next time I am Shenzen I will visit the large and apparently reputable EM test facility. As I work on computational electromagnetics, am a Fellow of the Institute of Engineering Technology and a Professor of Applied Mathematics I will try to blagg my way in to visiting their facility and check their equipment is calibrated and up to spec. (I would be blagging by the way as while what I just said is true I am not an expert on electromagnetic compatibility - my professional interest in electromagnetics is more specialised and I am still learning a lot about RF). Then I will report back. That is just as long as you are all prepared to go and visit Garmin, Raymarine, etc and do the same for your non-Chinese units.

No wait a minute. I am being silly. I retract that offer. I would much rather go sailing, and I am sure you would too!

 

[AngusMcDoon]

Are we assuming that only decent British (or decent European) types could possibly design a proper radio transmitter, and that the Chinese, the Japanese, the Americans, the Canadians and so on are incapable of doing so unless the Big White Chiefs check their work?

Only you have suggested that, no one else. Wherever in the world a transmitting device is made for import into the EU it has to be type approved to 1999/5/EC as you well know. It works the other way round too - an EU made device has to meet Chinese standards for sale there. If you buy a known brand through an EU retailer you don't really have to give this a second thought because you can be pretty sure than it is conformant.

However, if you buy from an unknown manufacturer directly from China by Ebay, you do because 1) you are the importer so the onus is on you to do so and 2) a radio transmitter is unusual because it could cause widespread disruption to many other people.

 

[GHA]

2) the Chinese have history more than any other manufacturing nation of trying to circumvent the CE marking process to keep prices low. This is unethical as it puts dangerous items in the hands of unsuspecting users and harms the business of those manufacturers that do thing properly. A faulty radio transmitter is unusual in its ability to cause widespread disruption to many other people.

Do you really think Huayang may have faked the CE certificate of conformity?

 

[BruceDanforth]

Nobody has ever flogged any tat on ebay.

Ever.

Do you really think Huayang may have faked the CE certificate of conformity?

 

[AngusMcDoon]

Do you really think Huayang may have faked the CE certificate of conformity?

I am neither saying they have or have not as I have no evidence either way. If you want to know for sure, check the certificate's number with the EU's CE compliance office, as any mainstream importer will do.

 

[Bi111ion]

http://www.huayang-tech.com/En/About.asp

10 years of development with a team of 20 so does that mean it's been going 6 months?

The Certificate of Conformity list the manufacturer as Shenzhen ShenChuang Electronics Co., Ltd Huayang Tech is the supplier. Most of you will have products in your home and possibly on your boat made in this factory. Their website says they have over 800 employees 200 in Quality Control, and that they are ISO9001 certified. This does not seem to be a two bit operation.

 

[BruceDanforth]

http://www.sc-digital.cn/about.asp

And they can make a quarter of a million different kinds of products. Most impressive.

The Certificate of Conformity list the manufacturer as Shenzhen ShenChuang Electronics Co., Ltd Huayang Tech is the supplier. Most of you will have products in your home and possibly on your boat made in this factory. Their website says they have over 800 employees 200 in Quality Control, and that they are ISO9001 certified. This does not seem to be a two bit operation.

 

[Neeves]

Barnacle,

No offense taken - I simply did not want to be seen as being against an item of safety gear (given my own rants on other safety gear) - that in my opinion - has less usefulness in my chosen cruising ground but might be essential elsewhere.

But it is sad that ICOM have pulled out because they, might, deem it too expensive to gain approval of their SSB (and no-one rants about that). Me thinks priorities are wrong - we should be jumping up and down about the cost of compliance.

A thought is that - someone, somewhere on this thread has indicated the equipment does meet whatever standards are being upheld as sacrosanct. It beggars belief that records are not held in the holy place where standards are bestowed - if not, its a disgrace (considering how much it is all said to cost). Is it not possible, and simple, for that award of the standard to be checked with whoever agrees compliance. Does the compliance certificate not have a number, can the record not be checked?

If the equipment complies then at the prices quoted one can see an interesting market for the manufacturer - and a low priced compliant, reliable unit is going to make the current players look at their own prices (or profit margins). We should, with caution, be encouraging new entrants to the field and being as constructive as possible.

Jonathan

Edit: As I was pondering my reply, the preceding post came in. it seems there is a Certificate of Conformity - it should be easy to check its validity, which might silence the critics.

Further edit, Good work in coming up with the manufacturer - we wondered how a small team made all the kit (and guessed they were simply some form of front (not being derogatory, not sure waht to call them)