Stand alone or integrated radar

[Little Dorrit]

I am looking at radar options and would be interested to hear on the benefits of having stand alone radar (separate plotter) Vs integrated (overlaid on chart plotter).

I'm thinking that the first would give some back up in event of plotter/AIS failure or do the benefits of fully integrated outweigh this advantage?

 

[matthewriches]

The consumer market is now really focussed on network scanners if you’re spending reasonable money on an install so you buy the scanner and any compatible screen, this will normally work out the box then with the addition of another screen and maybe a few network components, you can have radar on another screen or a 2nd screen with charts of the other for example. Pretty much all chart plotters also do radar overlay if that’s your cup of tea. Or split screen which can be handy if you have a large enough display to warrant this.

 

[johnalison]

Many sailors won't want to waste the space by having two screens, so integrating them makes sense. I have the small e7, so splitting the screen, although available, is not very useful. I sometimes use the overlay, but this is displayed at a lower contrast than with radar alone, so for most purposes I switch between the two.

Having the ability to quickly alternate between plotter and radar is handy, and with the single screen you have than option of showing other information, such as waypoints, on the radar screen. There is also the advantage that you use the same controls, so that zooming involves the same action, in my case with the touch screen.

 

[PaulRainbow]

I am looking at radar options and would be interested to hear on the benefits of having stand alone radar (separate plotter) Vs integrated (overlaid on chart plotter).

I'm thinking that the first would give some back up in event of plotter/AIS failure or do the benefits of fully integrated outweigh this advantage?

There are not many reasonably priced stand alone radar systems these days. Your best bet would be to fir a chart plotter that can display radar (check that it does, because there are many that don't). cheap tablet makes a good emergency backup for the chart plotter and some fixed chart plotters will mirror to a tablet. Take a look at the Garmin GPSMap range (noting that the echoMAP range will neither display radar or mirror the plotter).

 

[Graham376]

We have stand-alone radar and plotter. I wouldn't want to lose both if a single display packed up. Radar display packed up a few years ago, coming out of Gib at night in fog, if the plotter had packed up as well, it would have been far more worrying.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

We have stand-alone radar and plotter. I wouldn't want to lose both if a single display packed up. Radar display packed up a few years ago, coming out of Gib at night in fog, if the plotter had packed up as well, it would have been far more worrying.

+1 That's the argument used over at Attainable Adventure Cruising - what they call 'mission critical equipment'. I think these days with multi purpose screens you can easily have two screens and choose what you want on each, thus keeping redundancy, as well as integration.

However, realistically, for most coastal cruising, then a single screen, on an integrated system, would be a perfectly reasonable solution.

 

[Yngmar]

I am looking at radar options and would be interested to hear on the benefits of having stand alone radar (separate plotter) Vs integrated (overlaid on chart plotter).

I'm thinking that the first would give some back up in event of plotter/AIS failure or do the benefits of fully integrated outweigh this advantage?

Apart from the obvious issues with taking up extra space, power and wiring, the key benefit of an integrated solution is that you can overlay the radar data with the chart and AIS targets (assuming you have AIS, which I expect most people considering Radar will do). The chart overlay is perhaps moderately useful at best, and only if you have to creep around unfamiliar coastlines or harbours in the dark or fog, which I can't say we do a lot, except in one instance, where the non-overlay was just as well. Preferred it in fact, because the overlay can be quite confusing and visually difficult to process on an already busy chart. I don't think it's essential at all. Making out which Radar target is which AIS target is perhaps somewhat useful if you're in very busy waters as it allows you to easily identify which targets are not on AIS and thus need to be tracked manually.

The upside of buying non-integrated radar is, you don't have to buy all the bits from one manufacturer. And you can buy stuff that isn't even designed for integration, such as the Onwa kit, which is probably a bit more affordable than the usual Raymarine/Navico/Garmin triumvirate.

My personal favorite would be a Navico Ethernet radome with just the OpenCPN radar plugin (no chartplotter of theirs). Funny enough, this will give you a better working Radar than any of the chartplotter integrated ones, as the OpenCPN plugin is far better than the chartplotter software. It will give you actual, working ARPA, instead of just MARPA (or broken, buggy ARPA from a chartplotter). Reliable ARPA is very useful. As a side effect, you also get the ability to overlay it on a chart, if you so choose.

A standalone radar is not really a backup to a chartplotter (which is easy enough to get on a phone most people already have anyways). The chartplotter tells you where you are and shows you a chart, above and more importantly, underwater. The radar just tells you the above water shape of your surroundings.

 

[maby]

I think the biggest advantage of an integrated system (we have Garmin) is that it helps you to learn the radar functionality. There is a tendency to simply install radar and turn it on - which can, at the very least, result in you not getting the best out of it and, at the worst, be dangerous. Modern radars go to great lengths to simplify operation, but there is still a big difference between what you see on the screen and what is really out there. There are training courses available, but they can be quite expensive. We simply made a point of sailing with the radar on much of the time even in full daylight and good visibility and with the radar overlay on. This gives you the opportunity to learn how a blob on the radar display relates to real-world objects - both on the chart and visually.

 

[jac]

Another one for integrated.

The second screen issue is a genuine concern but if having the back up is important to you, why not mount one screen in the cockpit, visible to the helm and have a second at the nav station. You can usually use the nav station one for planning purposes and the upstairs one for assisting when underway but do then have the contingency. If they are identical kit then in the event of one failing, you could even swap their locations ( assuming suitable tools) and carry on unaffected.

I find overlay to be useful in helping to get to grips with radar - things like it not picking up a gentle beach but maybe the cliffs inshore of it instead hence the "coastline" looking odd. I also echo the comments about using it on nice sunny days so that you're familiar with it when the chips are down. If you're motoring / motorsailing under auto pilot it's probably a great chance to practice as you probably have ample electrical power and gives you something to do!

 

[duncan99210]

My set up is an integrated one, with chartplotters at the chart table and binnacle. Either plotter can control the radar, split screen display or overlay is available. If I was starting over, I’d still have an integrated system although I’d only have a plotter at the helm. I’d use an iPad with Wi-fi links providing the data at the chart table for planning purposes, rather than duplicating the helm one. Even if the Wi-fi data link disappeared. The chart table iPad would still provide navigation assistance at a fraction of the cost of a second plotter and it’s useful for every day use as well.

 

[Graham376]

I think the biggest advantage of an integrated system (we have Garmin) is that it helps you to learn the radar functionality. There is a tendency to simply install radar and turn it on - which can, at the very least, result in you not getting the best out of it and, at the worst, be dangerous. Modern radars go to great lengths to simplify operation, but there is still a big difference between what you see on the screen and what is really out there. There are training courses available, but they can be quite expensive. We simply made a point of sailing with the radar on much of the time even in full daylight and good visibility and with the radar overlay on. This gives you the opportunity to learn how a blob on the radar display relates to real-world objects - both on the chart and visually.

I completely agree with the need to learn to use radar (we used it in daylight at first) but don't understand your reasoning. Whether stand alone or integrated is immaterial as far as learning/interpreting is concerned.

 

[maby]

I completely agree with the need to learn to use radar (we used it in daylight at first) but don't understand your reasoning. Whether stand alone or integrated is immaterial as far as learning/interpreting is concerned.

With an integrated system, you can overlay the radar display onto the chart display - which makes it very clear that this "blob" is superimposed on that buoy and that "blob" is superimposed on that AIS trace which is that ferry over there. With a stand-alone radar, there is no linkage between the radar display and the chart - the radar could be set at its longest range and the plotter zoomed in to short range. Radar displays can be very difficult to interpret - having the ability to superimpose the radar, AIS and chart on a single screen with the zoom levels locked together can make it a lot easier to work out what is around you.

 

[PaulRainbow]

With an integrated system, you can overlay the radar display onto the chart display - which makes it very clear that this "blob" is superimposed on that buoy and that "blob" is superimposed on that AIS trace which is that ferry over there. With a stand-alone radar, there is no linkage between the radar display and the chart - the radar could be set at its longest range and the plotter zoomed in to short range. Radar displays can be very difficult to interpret - having the ability to superimpose the radar, AIS and chart on a single screen with the zoom levels locked together can make it a lot easier to work out what is around you.

I agree with this. Using it like this in daylight also gets you used to what the different radar returns look like. Is this kind of blob a buoy or a tanker ?

 

[johnalison]

I agree with this. Using it like this in daylight also gets you used to what the different radar returns look like. Is this kind of blob a buoy or a tanker ?

Although I favour an integrated system, I don't find the overlay overly helpful. For a couple of years my wife woud complain because every time were found ourselves motoring on autopilot in a flat calm I would disappear below to 'play' with the radar. I found it easy to associate echos with visible objects such as passing ships, buoys, or even birds. She changed her mind when we ran into fog off the Weser and I was easily able to con us through the shipping.

 

[maby]

Although I favour an integrated system, I don't find the overlay overly helpful. For a couple of years my wife woud complain because every time were found ourselves motoring on autopilot in a flat calm I would disappear below to 'play' with the radar. I found it easy to associate echos with visible objects such as passing ships, buoys, or even birds. She changed her mind when we ran into fog off the Weser and I was easily able to con us through the shipping.

I would draw a distinction between learning and actually using... If I were helming in poor visibility and significantly dependent on the radar, I would either split the screen and display both the chart and the radar display separately, or display only the radar (possibly with the AIS layer merged) - it is too easy to miss a small, but very hard, object appearing as a tiny blob on a radar display superimposed on a chart. For learning, the radar overlay on the chart makes it a lot easier to understand the relationship between "blobs" and physical features.

 

[Kukri]

Merchant ships are pretty much settled on three inter-switched screens. I think Matthew Riches’ post makes sense for a yacht.

 

[Graham376]

Radar displays can be very difficult to interpret - having the ability to superimpose the radar, AIS and chart on a single screen with the zoom levels locked together can make it a lot easier to work out what is around you.

It can also make it more difficult. As Maby commented, weak radar returns can be hidden by chart detail which is what I found when having a play with an integrated system a few years ago so my decision was to have stand alone when I added a plotter.

 

[pvb]

With an integrated system, you can overlay the radar display onto the chart display - which makes it very clear that this "blob" is superimposed on that buoy and that "blob" is superimposed on that AIS trace which is that ferry over there. With a stand-alone radar, there is no linkage between the radar display and the chart - the radar could be set at its longest range and the plotter zoomed in to short range. Radar displays can be very difficult to interpret - having the ability to superimpose the radar, AIS and chart on a single screen with the zoom levels locked together can make it a lot easier to work out what is around you.

Thoroughly agree, having the radar/chart overlay makes radar images easier to interpret. Those worried about clutter on the screen can always decrease the chart detail level.

 

[Poey50]

After a lot of hum-ing and hah-ing last winter I fitted an EV-100 tiller pilot including fast heading sensor to my Raymarine system which already had radar overlaid on the chart plotter. This gave me MARPA which felt like a nice-to-have but a bit of an indulgence.

In August we went through the Chanel du Four twice in thick fog. Believe me, I was very happy to have MARPA and AIS all overlaid on the chart plotter. There were boats everywhere - most of them little fishing boats in the narrowest part of the channel. Very handy for working out which of the purple blobs were buoys that were not out to get me!

 

[prv]

I agree with the various reasons already posted for chart overlay - an extra one not mentioned is that seeing the radar layer line up with the charted features means you're using two sources of position (GPS signals and radar returns) in constant cross-check with each other. This lets you operate in "drive the cartoon boat across the map" mode, which realistically most of us with plotters in short-handed boats do at least some of the time, with a clearer conscience.

(I do also have a plotter mode set up with chart and radar side-by-side because there are circumstances when this is more useful; fortunately my new screen is just about big enough to do this in worthwhile detail.)

Pete