Ideal Electronics / Navigation Package Wish List if You Were Renewing

[colemj]

Originally Posted by msponer

- An absolutely ridiculous automatic starting diesel de-watering pump

I don't know what this is - how and why do you de-water diesel? Are you talking about a fuel polisher or other filtering system? What would make it ridiculous?

Describe please?

Mark

[colemj]

Originally Posted by msponer

- A suitcase minisub (the kind for inspecting piers and etc), to check on the anchor, mooring, or just see what kind of sealife is down there

You need to sail in warmer waters

Mark

[capngeo]

Originally Posted by colemj

I don't know what this is - how and why do you de-water diesel? Are you talking about a fuel polisher or other filtering system? What would make it ridiculous?

Describe please?

Mark

I suspect he meant a diesel POWERED dewatering pump for emergency hull flooding

I must be behind the curve on toys,,,

1. iPad
2. depth sounder
3. GPS
4. compass
5. dividers
6. sharp pencil
7. Parallels
8. Eyeballs

[Kettlewell]

As I said in another thread I like the navigation electronics to be completely independent of each other, but also redundant. Here is the order in which I consider them essential:
1. Fishfinder/depthsounder x 2 (currently have one fishfinder and one just depth) Depth is the most useful piece of electronics in coastal navigation, neck and neck with the GPS and VHF. But my thinking is that if I have depth I can still plot my position with that and hand bearings and visual sightings, and/or a sextant if need be. Chances are at least one of my numerous standalone GPS units will be working though.
2. VHF radios (at least one hard wired and two or three handhelds)
3. GPS basic readout type x 2 (with output to DSC VHF, possibly with AIS)
4. GPS chartlotter PC using hockey puck GPS (usually have at least two or three PCs onboard anyway) I prefer paper charts in close, but chartplotters can be useful, especially offshore.
5. Iridium or other sat phone for weather and email. (only one, they are too expensive)
6. SSB for weather and email (only one, they are too expensive)
7. Radar (only one as they are optional)
8. AIS (only one as they are optional)

In addition I have all the traditional stuff onboard too, including paper charts, various chart plotting devices, dividers, hand bearing compasses, binoculars (critical), a sextant, tables for the sextant, calculators, guidebooks, tide tables, government pilots. All this stuff is essential.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

...a sextant, tables for the sextant, ... All this stuff is essential.

Let's just agree to disagree on that one.

5 independent and rugged GPS's on board and a sextant is essential gear? As in don't go boating without one?

Mark

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

I prefer paper charts in close, but chartplotters can be useful, especially offshore.

I find this exactly the opposite - particularly offshore, where the chartplotter is completely useless unless it is displaying AIS or radar. Close to shore while I am actively navigating and helming the boat, the chartplotter does not blow away or get folded wrong, or require my reading glasses to be found, or require a flashlight in the teeth, etc.

Strange, we use paper charts offshore and chartplotter near shore. Both are available at any time and in every place, of course.

Mark

[colemj]

Originally Posted by capngeo

I suspect he meant a diesel POWERED dewatering pump for emergency hull flooding

Ah. Well that does make more sense, doesn't it? I guess I tripped on the placement of the words and my brain wouldn't let go.

Mark

[Kettlewell]

5 independent and rugged GPS's on board and a sextant is essential gear? As in don't go boating without one?

I wouldn't go offshore without one. I suppose it depends on the area you are cruising, but the reason I prefer paper in close is that in a lot of interesting places the best charts of the area are the paper ones, often in a guidebook--the available electronic charts aren't anywhere near as good. Plus I like to be able to instantly see not only the detail but the overall area at the same time, which you can do with paper by having both handy. With the chart plotter you tend to get focused in on either a very small area at decent scale, or a large area with no scale. Going up my home river in Mass. I can open up the big paper chart and not only get the best scale available but see the entire river at the same time. Unless you've got a 30" x 40" sunlight viewable screen at your helm you can't do that with the electronic chart.

[goboatingnow]

And did I mention that you can use any components you like from any manufacturer? So find a chartplotter you really like and install the autopilot you really like and get the displays that your wife thinks are the cutest, and finally break yourself free from the whirlybird wind and speed transducers and get ultrasonic ones - and then thumb your nose at Garmin or Raymarine or whoever when they try to sell you a full boat load of single sourced gear of which only a couple of components you actually prefer.

Currently all major manufactures promote NMEA 2k compatibility even RayMarine as seatalkng is NMEA2K. Hence your original view that integration means single source is no longer true for any of the big 4 . What is true is that there are software incompatibilities between all the Big 4. Features that are accessible on their own network, may not be accessible on a multi - manufacturer N2K system. ( this is especially true for sensor or device setup). for example no standard PGNs are available to setup Rays AIS Transceiver, but the private PGNs are incorporated in its MFDs. In fairness this is more a failure of NMEA.

Single source is not any more or less reliable then any other form. The other thing of course, is that despite people rabbeting on about multi vendor, its just not possible to build a complete multi vendor network, primarily because of course chart sharing and radar sharing is beyond NMEA 2k.

dave

[colemj]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Currently all major manufactures promote NMEA 2k compatibility even RayMarine as seatalkng is NMEA2K. Hence your original view that integration means single source is no longer true for any of the big 4 . What is true is that there are software incompatibilities between all the Big 4. Features that are accessible on their own network, may not be accessible on a multi - manufacturer N2K system. ( this is especially true for sensor or device setup). for example no standard PGNs are available to setup Rays AIS Transceiver, but the private PGNs are incorporated in its MFDs. In fairness this is more a failure of NMEA.

Single source is not any more or less reliable then any other form. The other thing of course, is that despite people rabbeting on about multi vendor, its just not possible to build a complete multi vendor network, primarily because of course chart sharing and radar sharing is beyond NMEA 2k.

dave

Yes, I mentioned in another thread that Raymarine seems to have finally seen the light on standards.

And I didn't mean to imply that single source was less reliable. My argument was supposed to be that one can pick and choose components based on personal preference and suitability for the space available without taking everything a single vendor provides.

If Raymarine needs non-standard PGN's to setup a device, and they do not provide the means to do so through a computer, then that is Raymarine's fault. If there are non-standard PGN's that are necessary for operation, but only provided through a Raymarine MFD, then that is the fault of NMEA. And we are really only talking AIS, which is a special case in this particular point in time.

Other sensors and transducers such as wind, speed, depth, etc that work on standard protocols can be accessed, calibrated and adjusted from any vendor's device. I just set the offset on our Airmar depth transducer using the Simrad autopilot and it immediately took effect on the Furuno radar. Similarly, I recently set the air temperature calibration on the Maretron wind transducer using a computer and it shows up on the Simrad and Furuno MFD's.

I just built a multi-vendor system out of gear from Raymarine, Maretron, Actisense, Simrad, Furuno, Airmar, Standard Horizon and B&G. It was all simple plug and play. One certainly can pick and choose just those components that they like best, or best fit existing cutouts and mounting space, and have them work seamlessly together. The only part that forces a hand is the radar when it is combined with a chartplotter. Separate chartplotters and radars integrated together are no problem.

I'm pretty confident that the market has forced the player's hands and that any company who continues to make gear in a manner that attempts to lock in other of their gear will not last long going forward. They will compete on individual component features, quality and price and not use one good component to sell a bunch of bad ones. Raymarine has made a great step forward with their i70 and E70 (or whatever their new MFD's are called). I think they get it now.

Mark

[goboatingnow]

There are still issues with NMEA 2K. many transducers cant be setup by other manufacturers equipment, primarily because NMEA ignored setup and calibration in the PGN for all but the simplest sensors. There is also the problems of source selection, ( and auto fail over) which is not well implemented. Again there are issues with PGN data interpretation ( panbo did a bit on this last year).

Yes its all doable, but its not obviously that simple.

But hey its a roll your own, I like single source ( in the main) for all the primarily components, because you get teh best bang for your buck as its pertains to integration. I believe SIMRAD has the edge at the moment, especially as regards radars, autopilot integration, audio/video jukeboxes and distributed switching.

Dave

[colemj]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Yes its all doable, but its not obviously that simple.

All I can say is it really was that simple for us:
1. Run a network cable from the top of the mast to the back of the arch
2. Mount the instruments and transducers in their places
3. Plug their pigtail cables into the main network cable and turn on power

There was no step 4.

Mark

[Lagoon4us]

Originally Posted by colemj

All I can say is it really was that simple for us:
1. Run a network cable from the top of the mast to the back of the arch
2. Mount the instruments and transducers in their places
3. Plug their pigtail cables into the main network cable and turn on power

There was no step 4.

Mark

What is a network cable? Is it multi strand, numbered with an easy method of tying into?

[downunder]

Originally Posted by Lagoon4us

What is a network cable? Is it multi strand, numbered with an easy method of tying into?

Back in Post 3. He is using Maretron Y2K Network cabling

http://www.maretron.com/products/cabling.php


"all Maretron parts and cabling. All instruments, receivers, transducers, sensors and outputs drop onto this backbone.
2. Backbone terminated at a Maretron ultrasonic wind/weather station at the top of the mast and a Maretron GPS receiver at the back of the arch."

[Lagoon4us]

Originally Posted by downunder

Back in Post 3. He is using Maretron Y2K Network cabling

Maretron : Marine Electronic Instruments


"all Maretron parts and cabling. All instruments, receivers, transducers, sensors and outputs drop onto this backbone.
2. Backbone terminated at a Maretron ultrasonic wind/weather station at the top of the mast and a Maretron GPS receiver at the back of the arch."

OK thanks i just looked and kept the link. A bit like plumbing!!!! So essentially you 'T' off to each instrument and make up the cables to length in between?