FLIR vs Radar

[Codger2]

And not to be confrontational, but how can you comment if you've never used FLIR?

Please re-read my post #14....I was simply agreeing with a previous post...not comparing the two systems. As for the radar image, it was adjusted to get the most "red" for the photo. My radar is incredibly clear at the ½ mile range (Which is what I use most of the time.)

 

[psneeld]

Radar will lie to you?

Like all equipmentvon the boat, you as the captain have to be smarter than it.....know its strengths and weaknesses.

Like raising kids....knowing better or not....

I am amazed at 99 percent of all boaters who think navigation is figuring out where you are....

Real navigators and the old school guys who taught me have a pretty good idea where they are and use navigation and it tools to prove where they are...then adjust from there.

Other than the million to one that going fast, using Flir and avoiding something in the water, or using it for instant situational awareness, Flir is really expensive for 99 percent of what most people do with their boats.

Radar is even a a stretch for some in usefullness, but it makes them feel better and gives multiple uses for less money than Flir.

If I ran more at night, Flir would be on my Christmas list as it is pretty useful, but you havecto have that pretty narrow slice of need.

 

[Pau Hana]

With all the comments, I'm tending to just get a new radar and continue to explore FLIR, which I'll probably get later.

The newer radars look awful nice compared to the old ones, and there's some pretty good ones in the $2K range, a bit cheaper the entry level FLIR.

And, FWIW, radar WILL lie to you... just have to know how to interpret that.

Radar cannot lie to you- it simply reflects what is out there within the scope of its band and radiated power, combined with the atmospheric conditions of the operating area.

 

[Seevee]

Please re-read my post #14....I was simply agreeing with a previous post...not comparing the two systems. As for the radar image, it was adjusted to get the most "red" for the photo. My radar is incredibly clear at the ½ mile range (Which is what I use most of the time.)

Codger,
The previous post had no FLIR experience either. I was just pointing out that both of you have pointing out some great features of radar and downplayed the FLIR, which I don't believe you can honestly do without any experience.

The ones with experience point out the goods and bads of both, and surprising a lot of them want both.

As for your radar, understand. I use mine on a very short range, too... 1/8 to 1/2 mile.

 

[Seevee]

Radar cannot lie to you- it simply reflects what is out there within the scope of its band and radiated power, combined with the atmospheric conditions of the operating area.

Pau,

The major way radar lies to you is with attenuation. Not having the power of showing things behind an image you're looking at. Like a large boat blocking out a smaller boat behind... even if part of the small boat shows. And, quite common is rain can block out the radar so you only see a short distance thru the rain and won't show all of it or the boat in the rain heading toward you.

There's also some anomalies where the radar can fail and you don't notice, like it may paint the same image on both halves of the display... or a ghost image. But those are not hard to see and probably only on older radars.

If one understands that, they can deal with it.

 

[Pau Hana]

Attenuation with regards to radar is a known entity, and a factor to be taken into consideration, just as antenna height, size, rotational speed, radiated power, and the pulse factors (pulse repetition rate, pulse width, and pulse repetition time). All combine and determine the performance of a given radar system.

With all this tech, a radar is still fairly simple- it transmits energy and turns the returning pulse into a bearing and range (and in some cases, height) of a target. Target separation at short ranges may be feasible, but is not guaranteed.

I agree that practice will lead to better interpretation of the returns, but I wouldn't call that "lying".

(You made may head hurt- bringing up all the radar theory from my Navy A school!)

 

[BandB]

If I ran more at night, Flir would be on my Christmas list as it is pretty useful, but you havecto have that pretty narrow slice of need.

Exactly why we have FLIR. In the last four years, we've run overnight 32 nights, so about 2% of the days of the year. FLIR has been nice to have those times. However, we've only navigated in tight quarters at night, in or out of ports or marinas, perhaps 8 times in those four years and then only in safe areas to do so. It's still those 8 times in which we've been extremely happy to have FLIR. The majority of those times have allowed us to avoid an overnight trip. By leaving a couple of hours before day light we've been able to arrive before dark.

Forward Facing Sonar is much the same. Perhaps 3 or 4 times a year in which we're very happy we have it. Without it, we probably would have put the RIB in the water and gone and checked things out, although that would have been inadequate at least once.

Now the rest of the time, these are nice to have. It's only in what you describe as the narrow slice of need that they become essential. Now, the logic of the average boater having either has changed significantly and will continue to do so as the price comes down and the technology improves. It won't be too long before they both become standard as part of all new electronics purchases and suites.

However, they won't replace Radar in so doing but simply supplement it and provide an additional tool. A useful tool most of the time, but an essential tool only a very small part of the time.