Radar is now redundant ?

[EyeOnAlaska]

Bear in mind that an awful lot of boats may have AIS receivers on them, but not transmitters, so you won't know they're right in front of you in the fog. I'd consider it just another valuable safety tool.

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by EyeOnAlaska

Bear in mind that an awful lot of boats may have AIS receivers on them, but not transmitters, so you won't know they're right in front of you in the fog. I'd consider it just another valuable safety tool.

I would venture to say that, at least around here, and in the summer when the recreational boats are out, a large majority of boats have NO AIS - sending or receive-only.

[Cari Laut]

Originally Posted by Dave Lochner

Wow! 600 mph, I want to see that boat.

And then there was the time our keel must have grown as we aground in 8-9 feet of charted water, since we normally draw just under 5 feet.

Charts reflect mean low water. If you end up in a negative tide, you could still start dredging mud even if the charted depth is correct. -3 feet seems extreme though. Granted, you then have to also take into account age of the chart, etc.


As far as to RADAR or not, yes, RADAR. As its already been stated, they are 2 tools with different advantages. AIS is amazing, but not everyone has it, and not everyone that does have it, uses it. FVs turning theres off is illegal, but still happens alot. RADAR has the advantage of other boats not being able to "turn it off" as well as tracking weather systems as mentions.


- Jay

[mnh]

I would refer you to Rule#5 for the definition of a lookout.
If you are involved in a collision in the fog, or at night, assuming you survive , and it goes to trial, the prosecutor may ask “radar..why not?”. Instead of “why”…
Good luck explaining to a marine trial prosecutor why you thought radar was not needed. Collision avoidance is obvious for all who are out there in boats. Legal risk management just is as important, especially boating offshore and in fog, or at night.
For the record, I did a lot if defense work. We don’t swim in the same ocean as prosecution attorney’s do.
Your choice of course…
mnh

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by BB7

With a large screen displaying GPS location on a super detailed chart, and AIS streaming from every other vessel, I wonder if Radar is now an outdated and redundant technology?
I have radar, but very rarely use it since the GPS chart is better.
Will soon be speccing up a new boat, and wonder if Radar is worth having.

Thoughts from your experience ?

Install radar.

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by Cari Laut

Charts reflect mean low water. If you end up in a negative tide, you could still start dredging mud even if the charted depth is correct. -3 feet seems extreme though. Granted, you then have to also take into account age of the chart, etc.- Jay

I don't know. Most places would never see -3 feet (especially here in Canada where lower, low water is used for the datum of soundings rather than mean low water as used in the States. However, in Alaska, where they can have 40 foot tidal ranges, I expect -3 feet wouldn't be all that uncommon.

[svfinlandia]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

I find the overlay function in my Raymarine MFD, where I can have the radar confirming the chart display, a fantastic capability which allows me to enter and depart anchorages in the dark with far greater confidence than with chart alone.

+1!
And definitely in the fog!
Keep your radar. If you don’t have radar, buy a radar unit.
I was heading south down the east coast (USA) near the entrance to Savannah Georgia a few years ago in a very heavy fog. I could barely see past my anchor on the bow.
Ships at anchor all around me and the AIS on, but since the ships were stationary and weren’t moving the AIS was not as helpful as it could have been. Radar showed me exactly where they were in reference to my position.

Al, S/v Finlandia

[nortonscove]

Good luck picking up random objects or non-AIS compliant vessels with a GPS chartplotter. A radar is like any other piece of equipment that adds to the arsenal in very specific situations. I've been among the ice at night and very few pieces were using AIS. I've also had the good fortune to pick up objects in the dark that could have inflicted damage.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by BB7

With a large screen displaying GPS location on a super detailed chart, and AIS streaming from every other vessel, I wonder if Radar is now an outdated and redundant technology?
I have radar, but very rarely use it since the GPS chart is better.
Will soon be speccing up a new boat, and wonder if Radar is worth having.

Thoughts from your experience ?

AIS is not streaming from every other boat, even in developed countries.

AIS and radar are complimentary, while uses overlap, one does not replace the other.

[Bycrick]

+1 for radar.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by Scorpius

I don't know. Most places would never see -3 feet (especially here in Canada where lower, low water is used for the datum of soundings rather than mean low water as used in the States. However, in Alaska, where they can have 40 foot tidal ranges, I expect -3 feet wouldn't be all that uncommon.

We use MLLW here in the States too. Other places might use LAT.

My money would be on old survey data. If it's not something you regularly check, you might be surprised at when many places were last surveyed.

[IslandHopper]

Besides the fact that Radar is now not an outdated and redundant technology.... if I were only able to have one piece of electronic navigation equipment on board it would be Radar, a Chart plotter/GPS and/or AIS I can comfortably live without.

But I don't have to, so I have it all.

[Martkimwat]

AIS is wonderful thing but relies on a GPS position. If the GPS service goes down, either through sunspot activity or denial of service for whatever reason (hackers, foreign powers emergency powers etc) then not only do you not have your position, but you also don't have AIS information. Radar will still work though and is not affected by outside forces such as GPS errors or whatever, what you see is what you got.

[Martkimwat]

Originally Posted by mnh

I would refer you to Rule#5 for the definition of a lookout.
If you are involved in a collision in the fog, or at night, assuming you survive , and it goes to trial, the prosecutor may ask “radar..why not?”. Instead of “why”…
Good luck explaining to a marine trial prosecutor why you thought radar was not needed. Collision avoidance is obvious for all who are out there in boats. Legal risk management just is as important, especially boating offshore and in fog, or at night.
For the record, I did a lot if defense work. We don’t swim in the same ocean as prosecution attorney’s do.
Your choice of course…
mnh

I can't comment on what they do in the USA but that would certainly not be the case on this side of the pond. You would only be expected to use your radar if you had it installed. it is in no way obligatory to have one installed.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by Martkimwat

I can't comment on what they do in the USA but that would certainly not be the case on this side of the pond. You would only be expected to use your radar if you had it installed. it is in no way obligatory to have one installed.

Same thing in the US. But if you're out in heavy fog with no radar, they might pick on some other points for considering that irresponsible.