Seatalk / NMEA 0183 & 2000 Help connecting GPSmap 750s, vulcan9 & AIS (NAIS- 300 )

[tom3987]

Hi,

i am looking for some help on the seatalk, nmea 0183 & 2000.

The current setup i have:
St60+ wind
ST60 tri
ST6000+ autopilot
Garmin GPSMAP 750s



I want to add:
NAIS- 300 https://softwaredownloads.navico.com/Simrad/SimradYachting_Software - Copy/Downloads/documents/NAIS300_User_Manual_Iss_1_0_Dec_07.pdf - i have bought this.

B&G Vulcan 9 Chartplotter for outside. NMEA 2000 - will be buying shortly

Standard Horizon GX1400 GPS to replace the main VHF. (NMEA 0183) - will be buying shortly


Im trying to figure out the best way to do this. The STs are using seatalk but it looks like the Garmin is using nmea0183 (I think).

My understanding is that seatalk is daisy-chained. So the data comes into one ST unit then into the next. Im assuming im missing the switchover as i can't see how this data is showing on my garmin as i can see the cable is NMEA. Im assuming there will be a converter of some sort?

the AIS looks to be NMEA0183 i think, this has come with a separate GPS. I want this to show on both chart plotters.


The autopilot has "raytheon type 100" which has SeaTalk & NMEA is this the "Converter" or is this solely for the autopilot.


The Vulcan 9 will be mounted outside. next to the STs (i know i will have repeated data but im thinking redundancy).


If I get the NMEA 2000 backbone and link this in with the NMEA 0183 with a converter, will all the data from the STs come through? as this is seatalk > nmea 0183 > nmea 2000

My thinking is if this is the case, then I would just need to connect the AIS to the backbone and the Vulcan 9.

Im new to all this if you can guess.

Ive attached some pictures of the set-up so far.

I want to make sure they all talk to each other before i buy them.

 

[tom3987]

I seen this online

 

[tom3987]

I have seen this converter - Raymarine Seatalk ST1 to STNG Adaptor Kit
Raymarine Seatalk ST1 to STNG Adaptor Kit

"Everything you need to convert Raymarine Seatalk1 to SeatalkNG and create a backbone." is this NMEA 2000?

 

[KompetentKrew]

I have seen this converter - Raymarine Seatalk ST1 to STNG Adaptor Kit
Raymarine Seatalk ST1 to STNG Adaptor Kit

"Everything you need to convert Raymarine Seatalk1 to SeatalkNG and create a backbone." is this NMEA 2000?

Yes.

SeaTalk is similar to NMEA 0183, but incompatible - they're both like 80's or 90's style serial data protocols, but they effectively talk different languages.

SeaTalkNG is NMEA 2000 with a different connector on the end - you can just cut the end off a SeaTalkNG cable and wire up an NMEA 2000 connector instead. The connectors are often sold as "field installable" NMEA 2000 connectors, but pricey. You might find Farnell cheaper.

So if you use the Raymarine Seatalk1 - SeatalkNG converter the data from those instruments will be available to everything on the SeatalkNG / NMEA 2000 network.

A NMEA 2000 network must always be arranged in a backbone configuration - see the pics in post #3 of this thread.

 

[tom3987]

Yes.

SeaTalk is similar to NMEA 0183, but incompatible - they're both like 80's or 90's style serial data protocols, but they effectively talk different languages.

SeaTalkNG is NMEA 2000 with a different connector on the end - you can just cut the end off a SeaTalkNG cable and wire up an NMEA 2000 connector instead. The connectors are often sold as "field installable" NMEA 2000 connectors, but pricey. You might find Farnell cheaper.

So if you use the Raymarine Seatalk1 - SeatalkNG converter the data from those instruments will be available to everything on the SeatalkNG / NMEA 2000 network.

A NMEA 2000 network must always be arranged in a backbone configuration - see the pics in post #3 of this thread.

Thanks for this . I think the Garmin 750 is using NMEA 0183 which is getting the data from the ST60s, this is using sea talk. How would this be in Seatalk is not compatible with 183? Im struggling to find the link/crossover if you get what i mean?

 

[PaulRainbow]

Hi,

i am looking for some help on the seatalk, nmea 0183 & 2000.

The current setup i have:
St60+ wind
ST60 tri
ST6000+ autopilot
Garmin GPSMAP 750s



I want to add:
NAIS- 300 https://softwaredownloads.navico.com/Simrad/SimradYachting_Software - Copy/Downloads/documents/NAIS300_User_Manual_Iss_1_0_Dec_07.pdf - i have bought this.

B&G Vulcan 9 Chartplotter for outside. NMEA 2000 - will be buying shortly

Standard Horizon GX1400 GPS to replace the main VHF. (NMEA 0183) - will be buying shortly


Im trying to figure out the best way to do this. The STs are using seatalk but it looks like the Garmin is using nmea0183 (I think).

The Garmin can only use NMEA 0183. Pretty sure it is getting the ST60 data from the ST6000 vis 0183

My understanding is that seatalk is daisy-chained. So the data comes into one ST unit then into the next. Im assuming im missing the switchover as i can't see how this data is showing on my garmin as i can see the cable is NMEA. Im assuming there will be a converter of some sort?

No converter, see above.

the AIS looks to be NMEA0183 i think, this has come with a separate GPS. I want this to show on both chart plotters.

Do you have the 300N or 300L ?

The autopilot has "raytheon type 100" which has SeaTalk & NMEA is this the "Converter" or is this solely for the autopilot.

Again, see above.

The Vulcan 9 will be mounted outside. next to the STs (i know i will have repeated data but im thinking redundancy).

If I get the NMEA 2000 backbone and link this in with the NMEA 0183 with a converter, will all the data from the STs come through? as this is seatalk > nmea 0183 > nmea 2000

If you fit a Raymarine ST to STNG converter the Seatalk data will then be converted to STNG, which is N2K with stupid Raymarine connectors. You then build a N2K network and connect that with a STNG to N2K backbone converter cable. You can then connect the Vulcan to the N2K part of the network. If the AIS is a 300-L you can also connect that to N2K.

You can connect the AIS to the second Garmin 0183 port.

The Standard Horizon VHF, with its internal GPS will be stand alone.

My thinking is if this is the case, then I would just need to connect the AIS to the backbone and the Vulcan 9.

Only if it's the 300-L. If it is the 300-N, you're a little bit screwed.

Im new to all this if you can guess.

Ive attached some pictures of the set-up so far.

I want to make sure they all talk to each other before i buy them.

This is a mish-mash of various makes and protocols and has the potential to be a nightmare, especially if the AIS is the 300-N model.

 

[Ostara24]

I have a converter box by raymarine that turns seatalk from ny st60’s into nmea 0183 for my older ics6 nav head and vhf/ssb, would that make sense in your situation?

 

[PaulRainbow]

I have a converter box by raymarine that turns seatalk from ny st60’s into nmea 0183 for my older ics6 nav head and vhf/ssb, would that make sense in your situation?

Sorry, no. The OP has very limited 0183 ports and the Vulcan has none. Besides, the converter you have is no longer available.

N2K is the way to go at the moment for most people fitting new equipment.

 

[RivalRedwing]

N2K is the way to go at the moment for most people fitting new equipment.

Hi, when you say 'at the moment' do you see anything new coming down the tracks?

 

[PaulRainbow]

Hi, when you say 'at the moment' do you see anything new coming down the tracks?

The latest iteration of NMEA is "Onenet". That is Ethernet based. I don't see it replacing N2K entirely, as N2K is well suited for much of what it's currently used for. I think Onenet will be used more for Radar, sonar etc, hopefully rather then the current manufacturers proprietary protocols.

Those are just my thoughts, i don't have any inside information.

 

[laika]

The latest iteration of NMEA is "Onenet". That is Ethernet based. I don't see it replacing N2K entirely, as N2K is well suited for much of what it's currently used for. I think Onenet will be used more for Radar, sonar etc, hopefully rather then the current manufacturers proprietary protocols.

I was going to ask "are there actually any OneNet products yet?" but seems onwa have something (albeit from the disclaimers based on the draft standard) : NMEA ONENET Standard . I keep waiting for OneNet support before buying a radar or upgrading my plotter. the standard was, what...10 years late in being published?

While the NMEA have always maintained that N2K will continue to work alongside OneNet, for recreational boating I'm not sure it'll be desirable to have 2 different systems when we can have one but given the glacial speed at which marine electronics moves it's obviously going to be a while before we can ditch our trusty CAN networks

 

[Baggywrinkle]

Try this ....


I used a NMEA2000 WiFi Router from Yacht Devices to network a mess of ST1, NMEA1830 and NMEA2000 .... with both AIS and normal NMEA Baud rates.

Be very careful what gets forwarded onto the old Seatalk1 network, in my setup the Gateway routed everything everywhere, which sounds great except that the ST1 link got overloaded and resulted in the Autopilot being unable to hold a course. It took me an entire afternoon of sea-trials to get to the bottom of it and a change in the routing table on the WiFi router fixed the problem.

 

[PaulRainbow]

I was going to ask "are there actually any OneNet products yet?" but seems onwa have something (albeit from the disclaimers based on the draft standard) : NMEA ONENET Standard . I keep waiting for OneNet support before buying a radar or upgrading my plotter. the standard was, what...10 years late in being published?

While the NMEA have always maintained that N2K will continue to work alongside OneNet, for recreational boating I'm not sure it'll be desirable to have 2 different systems when we can have one but given the glacial speed at which marine electronics moves it's obviously going to be a while before we can ditch our trusty CAN networks

I have yet to actually see any Onenet devices yet and i suspect it will be some time before we do. Proprietary Ethernet protocols (Garmin Marine Network, Garmin Bluenet, Raymarine Raynet etc) All seem to be able to do what Onenet promises (albeit using proprietary protocols) so there doesn't seem to be much of an incentive for manufacturers to invest in Onenet.

From what i have read, the basic gist of it is that N2K is here to stay for devices like depth, wind, speed etc, it's low cost and simple and works just fine for carrying the data and powering such devices. I can't see what Onenet brings to the table for these devices, additional switches and cabling make it more expensive and add a lot of extra work for installers.

If/when anything happens, i think we'll see the simple devises above on a N2K network connected to Onenet network/N2K gateway, with Onenet being used for devices requiring higher data transfer speeds (radar, sonar, etc.

I can't help thinking that it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, other than allowing, say, a Garmin radar to be used with a Raymarine MFD, but will Garmin/Raymarine actually want that ?

At this time, for instance, i have a N2K network that handles depth, speed, engine data, tank levels, trim tab positions, auto pilot, logs etc etc, with data being displayed on two Garmin plotters, 2 autopilot controllers, 2 GMI20s and 2 Android tablets. I also have a Garmin Marine/Bluenet network that networks two MFDs and radar, sharing data, radar, camera, charts etc. Hard to see how Onenet will add any value.

 

[RivalRedwing]

heaven forbid a universal standard solution replaces the proprietary systems that hinders interchangeability of components and breaks some near monopolies

 

[laika]

I can't help thinking that it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, other than allowing, say, a Garmin radar to be used with a Raymarine MFD, but will Garmin/Raymarine actually want that ?

Everything you say about N2K not going away any time soon I completely agree with. A bus topology is simpler in many boating use cases than a star topology for instruments. N2K connecting to OneNet via a gateway was always part of the OneNet design. However I think onenet is solving some practical problems that I actually want it for. The electronics companies standardised on N2K and once consumers have the option of having interoperability I suspect they'll want it. Would anyone here buy a chart plotter which only had proprietary interfaces and not N2K? Raymarine don't even keep a standard interface for digital radar between generations and it would be marvellous to be able to hop manufacturers when a new technology comes out (like Raymarine MFD owners couldn't do when novice launched their solid state stuff). "OneNet compliance" would be a guarantee of basic interoperability and longevity for stuff like radar.

Most importantly though...IP networking is ubiquitous. Onenet gives us the opportunity to have a standard mechanism for tunnelling data through the internet and sending data over wifi without hacking together some non-standard mechanism to stuff N2K into an IP packet. Yes Yes the NMEA standard dictates the full stack with no mention of wifi but the layer 2 police aren't going to be coming after me if I break those rules

 

[Baggywrinkle]

The automotive industry has been fighting with this problem for years - and now we use ethernet in cars for a lot of inter-component commmunication with a proprietry twisted pair pysical layer (cheap). The massive disadvantage of Ethernet over CAN based communication is cost ... cost for switches, cost for the processing power to support a full functioning IP stack. This cost can be absorbed into the more expensive components as they have more capable processors, but the simple, cheap stuff like networked sensors can't currently absorb the oncost of ethernet while still remaining competitively priced. Therefore, IMO, both will co-exist for a long time yet.

My first job when I started in Rover Group back in 1989 involved writing a paper comparing CAN, VAN and J1850 ... here we are 35 years later and we are still using CAN networks in modern cars (albeit with a bigger payload and higher speeds). It is simply very good at what it does, as is NMEAXXXX. The reason that marine equipment all talks to each other is not solely because of the physical layer, it's primarily because of a standardised message catalogue - something the automotive world has failed to produce.

 

[Alicatt]

The automotive industry has been fighting with this problem for years - and now we use ethernet in cars for a lot of inter-component commmunication with a proprietry twisted pair pysical layer (cheap). The massive disadvantage of Ethernet over CAN based communication is cost ... cost for switches, cost for the processing power to support a full functioning IP stack. This cost can be absorbed into the more expensive components as they have more capable processors, but the simple, cheap stuff like networked sensors can't currently absorb the oncost of ethernet while still remaining competitively priced. Therefore, IMO, both will co-exist for a long time yet.

My first job when I started in Rover Group back in 1989 involved writing a paper comparing CAN, VAN and J1850 ... here we are 35 years later and we are still using CAN networks in modern cars (albeit with a bigger payload and higher speeds). It is simply very good at what it does, as is NMEAXXXX. The reason that marine equipment all talks to each other is not solely because of the physical layer, it's primarily because of a standardised message catalogue - something the automotive world has failed to produce.

My Rover/MG having BMW electronics and a Ford engine with a black box gateway between them that has some limitations on what info can be transferred between the components and the user interface, even the over the counter OBDII readers have a difficult time of it reading the Ford data through the gateway and BMW interface.
MG-Rover had an firmware update ready to roll out that would allow more engine parameters to be read through the gateway but they went bust before it could be sent to the dealers, at least it would of fixed the desync between the two systems which causes the ignition light to flash on and off all the time.

 

[KompetentKrew]

From what i have read, the basic gist of it is that N2K is here to stay for devices like depth, wind, speed etc, it's low cost and simple and works just fine for carrying the data and powering such devices. I can't see what Onenet brings to the table for these devices, additional switches and cabling make it more expensive and add a lot of extra work for installers.

From what I've seen current transducers remain primarily NMEA 0183, each with its own separate NMEA 0183 -> NMEA 2000 adaptor box.

I decided to commit to upgrading my electronics because I wanted to get data into my chartplotter, to lose the janky paddlewheel speed sensor, and also to upgrade to fancier instruments.

So what I have ended up with is:

• LCJ Capteurs wind transducer - outputs NMEA 0183, connect it to the NMEA 2000 network using the Windyplug adaptor
• Garmin GDT 43 - is a regular depth transducer, but also supplied with an NMEA 2000 black box as a kit (I know this isn't literally NMEA 0183 -> 2000, but bear with me)
• NASA EML-3 - also has an NMEA 0183 -> 2000 adaptor (although I think I can save a few pennies by using an existing device).

There were certainly alternatives for some of these, but the Airmar ultrasonic speed transducer was several hundred quid (a grand and a half with depth?), compared to the much more affordable NASA.

I really like NMEA 2000 - considering how long it has been around and the constraints of the time (in the 90's lots of small offices were still using 10-base-2 networks) I think it's actually quite clever and cool. I love how it's a single backbone from bow to stern, with devices T'd off it.

But if you consider the cheapness and ubiquity of wifi, bluetooth and tablets, I could see future transducers adopting wifi. I think some of the Airmar transducers now have bluetooth setup. If you consider the Orca chartplotter products - the base station is basically just an NMEA 2000 - wifi interface, so that they can sell you a tablet and an app and chart subscriptions. All chart plotters have wifi built in now, and clearly the subscription model could appeal to manufacturers (although this doesn't relate to physical connectivity).

Not sure exactly what the thrust of this comment is, and I don't feel like I've been very coherent. I'm not trying to argue with or challenge anybody - just some ideas that this thread has brought to the surface. But it seems to me like manufacturers are still not integrating NMEA 2000 well yet. It wouldn't surprise me if it's easier and cheaper to produce devices that you connect using bluetooth code 0000, enter the chartplotter's wifi password and then it all syncs up. And people would love this because it's far less messing around with wires and cables (see OP and the illustration in #12).

 

[Alicatt]

I have just bought a transom mount paddle wheel speed sensor which has a small converter box on it to output NMEA2000 so I can get my speed through the water to my Garmin plotter.

I put the system together on the desk to make sure everything worked together, when I first got the backbone and drop cables to connect the plotter to the VHF with AIS, nothing would talk to each other, then it dawned on me that even though all the units had their own power source they still needed the 12V on the backbone to actually know they were connected, got the power cable and then it all worked just fine.

Now I wait to get the boat out the water to get the bottom cleaned and new antifoul put on and other works done like mounting the transducers and so.

At the moment I'm using an Aldi Android tablet for Waterkaarten and Navionics, it has no GSM/internet connection so uses my phone to access the interwebs

I have a Garmin Echomap UHD95sv plotter with GT54 transom mount transducer, SH GX2400 VHF and the transom mount paddle wheel speed sensor, as there is no real access to the inside of the hull in a place to put a through hull transducer I have gone for the transom mount. The one hatch I have to the bilge is where the keel/skeg is mounted.