Which Electronics system to choose?

[Norman_E]

Often pondered what I would do if in your position and have only come to six conclusions:

1/ I would avoid buying all one manufacturers system - I wouldnt want to find that one bit goes down and cant be replaced from the same manufacturer ( maybe gone bust like Raymarine did?) giving comms problems
2/ I wouldnt bother with a log unless racing. Most seasons I dont bother to put my log is - forever cleaning it if I do. So I've proved to my own satisfaction that it isnt really needed.
3/ I would base my system round NMEA 2000 and try to get it talking via blue tooth or similar
4/ no argument - I would go for another under deck autopilot using the simrad hydraulic ram. Its bulletproof but expensive.
5/ I would chose an expensive serviceable mast head annenometer. The cheap and nasty NASA type ones have a limited life whereas the expensive ones can usually be serviced to replace things like bearings and seals.
6/ I would not have combined radar and plotter - redundancy issues.

I should add a PS. I would not buy Garmin given how they have treated cdustomers for their old models before now. There may be an element of bias in this - Garmin to me are the marine equivalent of Apple and Microshaft and Google, all rapacious immoral american firms wanting world domination.

Good point about masthead units. I have managed to keep my old but high quality VDO Logic MHU in use, because it has proved very reliable, and I have a spare one. I have the B&G MHU that came with the Triton kit, but am not impressed by its plastic mounting arrangements, so it will stay unused until the VDO wind instrument finally turns up its toes.

As for autopilots, mine is an old Simrad AP11, which appears good for more years of service. I learned recently that the current AP24 can still connect to all the old parts, including the drive unit and the compass.

 

[grumpy_o_g]

£195? I just looked on the Marine Superstore website and saw them at £359. https://www.marinesuperstore.com/posit/shop/index.php?category=7&group=17 They would certainly be one hell of a bargain at £195. I did get one, secondhand but unused off ebay for £180, but paid £345 for the other.

Garmin have just announced the GMI20 which may drop the price of the existing model a bit. Given the price of a GMI10 I dread to think what the price of a GMI20 is.... http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2013/04/more-vibrant-and-easier-to-use-garmin-introduces-gmi-20-and-ghc-20.html

 

[grumpy_o_g]

If ultrasonic was the best, it would be used in Americas Cup, Volvo Ocean Race etc. But it's not. Accuracy, weight, and details like this: one example product has wind speed accuracy in wet conditions: 5 knots (5.7 MPH) RMS.

I was surprised at the claimed accuracy (or lack of it) for wind velocity but it was the idea of no moving parts and the 3-axis detection, etc. that appealed to me most. That plus the fact it wasn't my money. I don't really know how accurate the anemometer types are to be honest.

 

[Boo2]

I am happy with the current generation technology now, so see no need to go any better. The 3G/4G radars whilst having many plus points also have weak spots against 'normal' radars.

Hi FullCircle,

You sound as if you have looked into that, would you care to expound a bit on what you see as the advantages and weak spots of the 3G/4G radars ?

Thanks,

Boo2

 

[Talulah]

...
2/ I wouldnt bother with a log unless racing. Most seasons I dont bother to put my log is - forever cleaning it if I do. So I've proved to my own satisfaction that it isnt really needed.

Raymarine instruments require speed through the water to calculate true wind speed/direction.
(You would expect it to default to SOG using the GPS if available but they don't. Yet.)

 

[Talulah]

Hi FullCircle,

You sound as if you have looked into that, would you care to expound a bit on what you see as the advantages and weak spots of the 3G/4G radars ?

Thanks,

Boo2

I upgraded last September to new Radar/Plotter/Instruments. Initially I thought I would go B&G Zeus Plotter, 4G radar and Triton instruments.
In the end I opted for Raymarine. Firstly I was put off at the Southampton Boat Show by the lack of interest by the sales people. Then when I looked at the dimensions of the Zeus display it wouldn't have looked quite right where I wanted to mount it. And then the costs were just getting silly.
6 months on I'm very pleased with the new Raymarine C/E Series. These new plotters are so much better than the older range. The digital Radar is just so much better than the old analogue one connected to the C70.
(With the new digital radar I just wouldn't worry about the performance difference when comparing it with 4G radar.)
The one thing I'm not happy about is the new Raymarine i60's wind instruments buzz. They obviously cancelled the sailboat testing due to lack of wind otherwise they would have realised how annoying that is. (They were shocked to discover this defect on their new infant product but haven't yet fixed it.)

 

[Lucky Duck]

Raymarine instruments require speed through the water to calculate true wind speed/direction.
(You would expect it to default to SOG using the GPS if available but they don't. Yet.)

I belive Raymarine describe that as Ground wind rather than true wind.

The one thing I'm not happy about is the new Raymarine i60's wind instruments buzz. They obviously cancelled the sailboat testing due to lack of wind otherwise they would have realised how annoying that is. (They were shocked to discover this defect on their new infant product but haven't yet fixed it.)

My old ST60 wind used to make an annoying buzzing sound but it wasn't really that noticable - was never sure if that was unique to that unit or a 'feature'.

 

[maby]

Make sure that your autopilot and plotter are compatible. I fitted a Raymarine autopilot and Lowrance plotter in our previous boat and they would not talk to each other (via NMEA2000). I phoned Raymarine support who tole me that it was a known problem but it was up to Navico to fix it. I phoned Lowrance support who told me that it was a known problem, but they could not fix it because Lowrance would not give them the necessary information about the input requirements of their autopilots!

 

[prv]

6/ I would not have combined radar and plotter - redundancy issues.

I think you'd struggle with that one. As far as I'm aware, nobody now makes a radar aimed at the leisure market that has its own separate display - all use a plotter screen.

You'd either have to buy one of the few standalone radars intended for small fishing boats etc (I think Foruno have one) - or use two plotters and set one in chart mode and one in radar.

Pete

 

[Talulah]

My old ST60 wind used to make an annoying buzzing sound but it wasn't really that noticable - was never sure if that was unique to that unit or a 'feature'.

It's really noticeable when enjoying a quiet sail.
One instrument not so bad but combined effect of two wind instruments buzzing (i60 and i60CH) mounted above companionway rear of hatch.
For other locations (at mast, by wheel) or when motoring not such an issue.

 

[laika]

Raymarine instruments require speed through the water to calculate true wind speed/direction.
(You would expect it to default to SOG using the GPS if available but they don't. Yet.)

As Simon14b says (and I believe has been discussed here before)..that's "ground wind": Not actually as useful as "true wind" as it's the latter in which we sail.

2/ I wouldnt bother with a log unless racing. Most seasons I dont bother to put my log is - forever cleaning it if I do.

Whilst I hear what you're saying about fouling (I replace mine with the blank whenever I leave the boat for a few days but still occasionally have to put it full astern to clear the log), aside from the role in calculating true wind and telling you the effectiveness of your (cruising) tweaking, surely the log is one of your two primary navigation tools? Even if you use GPS a log is useful for telling you how accurate your tidal stream calculations were allowing you to tweak your course appropriately. Perhaps not such a big deal if where you sail is primarily eyeball nav, but you never know when you might want to go further afield.

To the OP..I don't believe "broadband" radar saves you that much power: pulsed radar is higher power but in shorter pulses. I think the main consideration is whether you want long range or short range clarity. Do have a look at some of the tests the mags have done on broadband radar: I seem to recall that useful range was less than claimed range. I would tend to buy everything from one manufacturer unless there's a good reason not to: this avoids any finger pointing from manufacturers should two things not play well together. Do consider things like cost of charts: Your plotter manufacturer obviously dictates the charts you have to buy.

 

[Talulah]

As Simon14b says (and I believe has been discussed here before)..that's "ground wind": Not actually as useful as "true wind" as it's the latter in which we sail.

Accepted. But wouldn't it be better to default to ground wind when no speed through the water is available from the log?

 

[Lucky Duck]

I guess they would have to choose some arbitary time period for a zero reading to be recived before swapping over to the GPS as it could be you were stationary in the water for whatever reason.

IIRC their i70 units have the option to display 'ground' wind in the same formats as 'true'

 

[prv]

I guess they would have to choose some arbitary time period for a zero reading to be recived before swapping over to the GPS as it could be you were stationary in the water for whatever reason.

I don't know the full detail of Seatalk messages, but I would absolutely expect "no data available" to be distinguishable from "speed is zero".

Pete

 

[Lucky Duck]

My assumption was that the log would be in working order but due to fouling or having been retracted it wasn't giving a speed reading.

This happens with grim regularity during the summer in my home berth where it the log becomes a home for all kinds of small creatures.

 

[prv]

My assumption was that the log would be in working order but due to fouling or having been retracted it wasn't giving a speed reading.

Ah, I see. But the original point was Bosun Higgs suggesting that the OP not bother fitting a log, and Talulah pointing out that in that case Raymarine wind instruments would not give anything except apparent wind. One might reasonably expect them to fall back to a "true" wind calculated from COG/SOG if no log instrument were connected, but apparently they don't. I don't think anyone was suggesting they should automatically switch to GPS just because the log paddle had a misguided barnacle growing on it.

Pete

 

[Lucky Duck]

Sorry, think I had got side tracked by the reference to the log;

Accepted. But wouldn't it be better to default to ground wind when no speed through the water is available from the log?

 

[machone]

first attempt choice

Thanks for the help here. I'm leaning towards a lowrance plotter with 3G or 4G radar and icom vhf with ais(plugged into plotter). It doesn't seem to matter which mini display I choose but if the garmin units are good and a cheaper they look like the winner. Do any have 'radar style' ais output? I've only heard good things about the Simrad under deck autopilots, from all decades, so probably go with that too. Am I right in thinking B&G, Simrad and Lowrance autopilot rams are all the same?

For transducers I'll go with the Navico through hull log fitting and a standard sounder(not fishfinder). Masthead unit still undecided but if I have garmin repeaters probably the garmin or if I go triton then the B&G mast unit although I note the possible lack of strength!

Does anybody see any problems with this setup, apart from the cost?

 

[maby]

Thanks for the help here. I'm leaning towards a lowrance plotter with 3G or 4G radar and icom vhf with ais(plugged into plotter). It doesn't seem to matter which mini display I choose but if the garmin units are good and a cheaper they look like the winner. Do any have 'radar style' ais output? I've only heard good things about the Simrad under deck autopilots, from all decades, so probably go with that too. Am I right in thinking B&G, Simrad and Lowrance autopilot rams are all the same?

For transducers I'll go with the Navico through hull log fitting and a standard sounder(not fishfinder). Masthead unit still undecided but if I have garmin repeaters probably the garmin or if I go triton then the B&G mast unit although I note the possible lack of strength!

Does anybody see any problems with this setup, apart from the cost?

Sounds good to me! Just one comment if you are going with Lowrance and planning to use a VHF with integrated AIS - check that you have sufficient NMEA0183 ports available on the plotter to get the connectivity you need. Lowrance plotters pair up their NMEA0183 input and output ports and the pair have to run at the same speed. This has caused problems for other people building similar configurations to yours since some VHFs with integrated AIS require the input and output to run at different speeds. The AIS out of the radio needs to run fast in order to get the data through quickly enough, but 38,400 baud is not part of the NMEA0183 standard and some radios will not accept such a high data rate in for the GPS positioning data. We did have one owner on here a while ago who had bought a Lowrance plotter and a lot of other gear but then found that he needed to use two separate NMEA0183 channels to interface with his combined radio/AIS in order to get the data rates differentiated and that left him short of connectivity for other things. He ended up returning the plotter and buying something else.

 

[machone]

Sounds good to me! Just one comment if you are going with Lowrance and planning to use a VHF with integrated AIS - check that you have sufficient NMEA0183 ports available on the plotter to get the connectivity you need. Lowrance plotters pair up their NMEA0183 input and output ports and the pair have to run at the same speed. This has caused problems for other people building similar configurations to yours since some VHFs with integrated AIS require the input and output to run at different speeds. The AIS out of the radio needs to run fast in order to get the data through quickly enough, but 38,400 baud is not part of the NMEA0183 standard and some radios will not accept such a high data rate in for the GPS positioning data. We did have one owner on here a while ago who had bought a Lowrance plotter and a lot of other gear but then found that he needed to use two separate NMEA0183 channels to interface with his combined radio/AIS in order to get the data rates differentiated and that left him short of connectivity for other things. He ended up returning the plotter and buying something else.

Thanks, I'll check. Maybe a separate AIS would be better but a combined unit seemed 'efficient'.