Radar or Not ?

[CarinaPDX]

Monte-

I don't think you got a direct reply to the important part of your question. The Simrad broadband radar scanner works only with Simrad (and possibly other Navico brands: B&G, Northstar, Lowrance) displays. The Raymarine scanner only works with the Raymarine display, Furuno with Furuno. So unless you want to switch both the display and scanner to Simrad, it won't work. If you do switch, then you will have to look at interfacing the other Raymarine equipment to the Simrad stuff, which might be possible with N2K but it may be beyond you, or just change everything to Simrad. Talk to the builder about the total package; you want everything integrated.

Both Raymarine and Furuno make great radars, so you can't go wrong there. The Navico/Simrad broadband radar uses different technology which has certain advantages but also has a few shortcomings; this is new technology so it is improving very quickly. If you buy now you would definitely want the new 4G scanner.

I would recommend that you stick with the standard Raymarine package with Raymarine scanner (because that is the package the factory is used to installing and it is a good product), unless you are someone who needs to have the very best. Then I would say Furuno, unless you need the latest technology, in which case go for the Simrad. Your choice; there is no bad decision here.

[capecuddy]

The broadband radars work with all navico brands. I have a 3G radar and it works well with my HDS-10. The 4G will also work, but until a Lowrance sw update is released, some of the 4G functionality is limited.

The broadband radars operate really well on their automatic settings. Many folks pan them because their range is limited (and trivialize the ability to see a can or nun 25 feet off your bowrail). You need to view the BR24, 3G and 4G as a different class of radar. They are all about navigational safety....not fishing, not looking for birds and not looking for boats that are not likely to affect your travel any time soon. They employ FM/CW waveforms at very low power which allows them to use speed as a discriminator between targets and sea/rain clutter.

What makes a good broadband radar great is adding a heading sensor so that you can use it as an overlay to your chart screen. Nothing like having waypoints, visual spotting, AIS and DSC waypoints and radar all add to your operating picture.

The broadband radars all use primarily Ethernet which makes their dependence on chartplotter software fairly proprietary.

[monte]

Thanks a lot Carina, Ill stick with the raymarine HD model as suggested
price seemed expensive at $3500 factory fitted when the scanner only costs around $1500 tho. I would assume its just a matter of mounting the scanner and running a cable to the plotter. I will get an independant quoate. I think I will add an AIS tranciever as well for the sake of it

[SailFastTri]

Originally Posted by Tia Bu

So, FWIW, I think for foggy waters I would select, in order of preference: 1) an AIS receiver, 2) an AIS transceiver, 3) a radar and an AIS transceiver, if I could afford them.

AIS is only effective with other boats transmitting/receiving AIS. Radar sees all boats, including commercial boats who fail to run their AIS (I've come across many -- especially ferries) and small fishing boats or sailboats. There are far more of those than commercial boats, and I don't want to hit any of them.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by gravosa

rain fog fog rain rain fog....radar is exelent "tool" for navigation as well if no one told you that before.

Seem majority of boatowners don't use radar for navigation but rely on GPS. Unfortunately that why they only see it as benefit in poor vis.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

AIS is only effective with other boats transmitting/receiving AIS. Radar sees all boats, including commercial boats who fail to run their AIS (I've come across many -- especially ferries) and small fishing boats or sailboats. There are far more of those than commercial boats, and I don't want to hit any of them.

Exactly, radar should come way before AIS on any yacht that does some extended (away from home waters) cruising. It'll work in the rain if you train yourself in the use (or better take lessons) and it also works pretty well in the dark, something that's always left out in these discussions. Many of us sail at night

Not just for finding that other boat/ship out there, also for bearings and distance measurement on land features (navigation), tracking squalls etc.

ciao!
Nick.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Dhillen

If you cruise further afield than your home waters you will find radar an essential piece of safety gear. This is particularly the case in the developing world where much of the traffic won't by AIS equipped, meaning they are there but your AIS will not see them. A caveat is radar doesn't see wood so well. We had the 4KW Furuno job that was great but sometimes wouldn't pick up large wooden dhows when we crossed the Arabian Sea. Sinbad could have snuck right up on us which is why it is essential not to let radar replace good ole eyeball scanning of the horizon. Fore and aft.

I would like to point out something not mentioned in the previous posts and that is the radar display should be in the cockpit. If you are shorthanded and in a tricky area at night you can't be running up and down below checking the radar. In high traffic areas this is just too confusing with targets moving around twice your speed.

When cruising our rule of thumb is always if the boat is moving the radar is on.

Cheers.

Dhillen

Has anyone here ever hit, or been hit by, another boat, because of lack of radar?

[zeehag]

radar is not essential. radar is a luxury. EYEBALLS are necessary. collisions are not avoided by radar alone. one can sail for centuries sans radar. is a lil more difficult to sail without eyeballs. eyeballs and brain make boats not collide, not radar.

[sck5]

its a pretty nice luxury though. Going up and down chesapeake bay in the dark it is nice to know what is out there

[Hud3]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

Has anyone here ever hit, or been hit by, another boat, because of lack of radar?

No, but I've avoided being run down in very heavy rain squalls, twice.

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

Has anyone here ever hit, or been hit by, another boat, because of lack of radar?

Depends...collisions are often because of the lack of skills or due dilligence of at least one of the two skippers...RADAR doesn't overcome that but allows you to make an advance decision before you are in extremis.

But the USCG says if you have a RADAR...you should be using to avoid collisions...so a lot of others think that RADAR must be a useful tool in preventing collisions.

[Mahaila]

As a slight aside, any opinion on the relative value of a pivoting mount for the antenna? I'm told it improves display clarity as the antenna stays more level with the horizon.

[Hud3]

My transponder was on a stern-mounted pole, and the platform could be manually leveled. I did find that the screen presentation improved a bit when it was level.

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by Mahaila

As a slight aside, any opinion on the relative value of a pivoting mount for the antenna? I'm told it improves display clarity as the antenna stays more level with the horizon.

I would have to look it up...but many small radars have/had? about a 15 degree tolerance of being off level...so a big heel would definitely affect performance off your beam

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

Has anyone here ever hit, or been hit by, another boat, because of lack of radar?

Nearly. On the Galapagos - Azores route. Four in the morning, fog and showers. The bastard came from behind and if not for admiral's watchkeeping practices and our immediate starting the engine and running away, I would not be writing this here now.

If we had had radar, would not have happened. One can see a big ship coming way in advance, even with the most primitive radar.

b.