Combined VHF and AIS

DoubleEnder

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 Apr 2002
Messages
1,562
Location
N Hemisphere
Visit site
I am planning to replace my fixed VHF with a unit that has integral GPS receiver. I don’t have a very sophisticated onboard electronic setup. I have an old SH plotter which is probably on its last legs, and I use a tablet as a plotter. I do have a depth sounder but that’s about it. I don’t have much space and I don’t like complexity. I’m not going to fit a large screen multi function display.

I am now considering entering a race that requires us to have an AIS transponder. I can see the value of this but I really do not want more kit than necessary. So the question is can I get a new VHF that has AIS transponder ( not just receiver) capability, and does it need a separate antenna? Or can I use my masthead VHF antenna for both functions? I know that the GPS receiver has an internal antenna in these sets.

Thank you
Graham
 
I am now considering entering a race that requires us to have an AIS transponder. I can see the value of this but I really do not want more kit than necessary. So the question is can I get a new VHF that has AIS transponder ( not just receiver) capability,

No, no such thing.

and does it need a separate antenna? Or can I use my masthead VHF antenna for both functions? I know that the GPS receiver has an internal antenna in these sets.

It needs it's own GPS, mostly internal, but not exclusively so. You can use the masthead antenna if you connect it to a splitter. IMO, a better idea is to fit a mobo style antenna at the pushpit, wired so that the connector can be unscrewed from the main VHF and used as an emergency antenna, handy if dismasted.

I can recommend the em-trak B100 AIS
 
No, no such thing.

nQP7zBF.png
 
The GX6000 is intended to be a transceiver but has had problems getting FCC approval and is currently only available in the receiver mode. Even if it were available as a transceiver, it would still need a second antenna. The ad JD has posted as a picture mentions both these factors.
I, like JD, have a Matsutec 33a ais transceiver, which is a remarkably capable box. Uses a tiny amount of power, it’s gps antenna sits happily in the corner of my wiring cupboard without needing to be mounted outside and gives plenty of range via a cheap antenna on the pushpit. It also doubles as a back up navigation aid: no charts but a reasonably useful navigation package.
 
The GX6000 is intended to be a transceiver but has had problems getting FCC approval and is currently only available in the receiver mode.

The GX6500 is/was the transceiver, but it's never been released. It does look like they may have re-badged it as the GX6000 though.
 
It's good to see Jumble Duck agreeing with Paul. :encouragement:

Richard

Sorry. My bad. I knew about the GX6500, saw that it had been replaced by the GX6000 and assumed that the new one was also a transceiver. From what duncan99210 says, it will be - just not quite yet.
 
I spoke to SH at the show who said the 6500 is very close, but they told me that last year. I can't remember the reason now I think it needed seperate gps and antenna to the VHF.

I got fed up waiting and bought a seperate AIS in the end.
 
I asked at the show too, and they said factory space had been allocated for the 6500. Whether that's going to happen or not is anyone's guess.
 
I'd been interested in the combined GX6500 unit as well..

Looks like there are some recent comments on the panbo forum..
standard-horizon-gx6000-vhf-wireless-ram-4w-mics-finally

The GX6000 instruction manual is on the SH website and only mentions AIS RX..
www.standardhorizon.com MarineManuals

I think I might stick with my separate AIS transceiver... (Although it would be interesting to see the circuit board / schematic for the GX6000 and see if the parts are there but just disabled in software :cool: )

There is a nice link in the panbo page showing the GX6500 Firmware update process
 
Much as I like the idea of the GX6500, I don't think the pricing is going to make it super-attractive over separate units. The requirement for separate antennas is a pain. I guess it was either an approvals issue or not wanting to add further cost with a splitter circuit.
 
Top