Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-15-2019, 07:12 PM   #21
Member
 
City: Green Cove Springs
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 14
Yes I use the NEMO to send the navigation data over wifi but are there any suggestions to access the other NMEA PGN in a readable form on an Ipad?

Thanks

Paul
__________________
Advertisement

PaulGel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2019, 07:43 PM   #22
Guru
 
Aquabelle's Avatar
 
City: sydney
Country: australia
Vessel Name: Aquabelle
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander Flushdeck
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 757
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveaday View Post
What about a Yacht Devices Voyage Recorder for logging?

https://yachtdevicesus.com/products/...corder-ydvr-03

Ben

Ben: fyi if it is helpful....MaxSea Navigator v3.2 has a voyage recorder module as an option.
__________________

Aquabelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 07:04 AM   #23
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulGel View Post
Yes I use the NEMO to send the navigation data over wifi but are there any suggestions to access the other NMEA PGN in a readable form on an Ipad?

Thanks

Paul

The only one I've used for NMEA 2000 (PGNs) is Maretron, using their IPG100 to get N2K data on my IP network. I have then used Maretron's mobile app over wifi. I think it's the most complete and capable offering. You have to incur the cost of the base system, but the Mobile app is then free.


Aside from that I have only used the Navionics iPad app, and I gather that has been replaced by something else now. But it uses 0183 over UDP, not N2K.
__________________
www.MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 10:38 AM   #24
Veteran Member
 
stevemitchell's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Rendezvous
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedtree View Post
It's more like "Maretron doesn't support [fill in the blank]". They only support their own devices.


I used Nemo + my boat's wifi to provide nav data to Navionics running on an iPad. It worked great.
Agreed on Maretron. Both of my previous boats had over 20 different Maretron devices on them (one had far more) and you had to use Maretron software with either the USB100 or IPG100 to configure anything at all.

I like a lot of their products, and in many cases, they're the only game in town for specific ones, but it sure would be nice to have a bit more flexibility in how you can interact and configure them.
__________________
m/v Rendezvous
1988 Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
stevemitchell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 10:45 AM   #25
Veteran Member
 
stevemitchell's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Rendezvous
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedtree View Post
The only one I've used for NMEA 2000 (PGNs) is Maretron, using their IPG100 to get N2K data on my IP network. I have then used Maretron's mobile app over wifi. I think it's the most complete and capable offering. You have to incur the cost of the base system, but the Mobile app is then free.


Aside from that I have only used the Navionics iPad app, and I gather that has been replaced by something else now. But it uses 0183 over UDP, not N2K.
I've used the IPG100 too, and it does give you the ability to have N2K PGNs on your IP network, but there are very limited options for actually consuming that data. As twistedtree mentions, you can use their iPad app, or N2KView, their PC application.

All of the other solutions out there that I am aware of send 0183 data over a TCP or UDP port, which when you think about it is pretty disappointing. Just going through the inventory in my head of all of the various mobile and PC apps that I can think of, and other than Maretron's and Coastal Explorer+Nemo, I can't think of a single one that doesn't use the older NMEA 0183 protocol.

That's an interesting question - why haven't we seen the move to N2K for any gateways? There are a ton of additional types of data that N2K can deal with that 0183 never was designed for. Strange...

SignalK is the only thing I can think of that is gathering from many networks and presenting things as a stream that isn't just 0183. It can output JSON and other types of data, which aren't really end user protocols, but still gives it tons of flexibility.

Until Navionics, iNavX, and <insert your mobile app here> starts looking at supporting NMEA 2000 PGNs, I don't think these gateways will get any more interesting or feature-ful.
__________________
m/v Rendezvous
1988 Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
stevemitchell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 01:24 PM   #26
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevemitchell View Post
I've used the IPG100 too, and it does give you the ability to have N2K PGNs on your IP network, but there are very limited options for actually consuming that data. As twistedtree mentions, you can use their iPad app, or N2KView, their PC application.

All of the other solutions out there that I am aware of send 0183 data over a TCP or UDP port, which when you think about it is pretty disappointing. Just going through the inventory in my head of all of the various mobile and PC apps that I can think of, and other than Maretron's and Coastal Explorer+Nemo, I can't think of a single one that doesn't use the older NMEA 0183 protocol.

That's an interesting question - why haven't we seen the move to N2K for any gateways? There are a ton of additional types of data that N2K can deal with that 0183 never was designed for. Strange...

SignalK is the only thing I can think of that is gathering from many networks and presenting things as a stream that isn't just 0183. It can output JSON and other types of data, which aren't really end user protocols, but still gives it tons of flexibility.

Until Navionics, iNavX, and <insert your mobile app here> starts looking at supporting NMEA 2000 PGNs, I don't think these gateways will get any more interesting or feature-ful.

I think there are a few reasons for this.


First and probably foremost is that there is no standard for N2K over IP. That's a real impediment to an app developer who wants to utilize N2K PGNs to display data, etc. A standard for this has been "coming soon" for a very long time - probably 5-10 years - called OneNet. I attended a seminar on it at METS and it is supposedly in final review prior to release. That will open up a lot of doors, but may still be slow to take off.


The other impediment to N2K flourishing is that it's not really an open standard, and let me be really specific about what I mean by that because it seems to put some people into a tizzy when I say it.


The N2K spec can be licensed by anyone who wants to sign up. That's an open door. There is a fee involved, but you need to buy pretty much every standard of any kind that I have encountered, with the exception of IETF RFCs for all the IP protocols. The Ethernet & wifi standards (all the 802 standards) need to be purchased, but the IP protocols that run on top of it are open to anyone to download, read, and participate in the process. The point is that having to pay for the spec is not a big deal, and is a common practice.


What's unique about N2K is that the license includes a confidentiality clause that binds you to secrecy about the contents and workings of the standard. This is above and beyond the normal copyright that any document carries that protects against blatant reproduction.


So even though the door is open for anyone to license the standard, once you step through the door, you can't reveal what's inside, or how it works. This totally puts the kabosh on any sort of open professional or academic discussion, and blocks anyone who might want to write a paper or book, like some sort of how-to. Ethernet, IP, and countless other standards have scores of books written about them, leading to an educated and conversant pool of engineers, and a thriving market. No such books can be written about N2K, and it leaves people like me to figure it out by observation and reverse engineering. That would be no way for someone to build a product, even if they wanted to.


There have been a couple of N2K code bases developed via reverse engineering (actually, maybe only one), including the one that's used for SignalK. A big part of the excitement around SignalK was that it is completely open, enabling the sort of flourishing market found elsewhere. But in all frankness, SingnalK strikes be as a total belly flop. It doesn't seem to have gone anywhere.


Another impedament is that building an N2K gateway is a lot more complicated than building an 0183 gateway. An 0183 gateway just spits out sentences. You can spit them over RS422 (NMEA 0183), spit them over UDP, or nearly anything else. And on the computer side, it's just a serial data stream. Couldn't be simpler.


But N2K utilizes CanBus which has a whole datalink management structure to it. There are management and housekeeping PGNs to sort out addressing, who can do what, etc. etc. Any give implementation needs to decide which functions are handled by the interface and drivers, and what is handled by the app using the interface. Things like reporting what PGNs a device can send becomes very complicated because the gateway doesn't know what the apps are capable of. So who answers when asked? And what if there are multiple apps using the same interface at teh same time, like CE and TimeZero? Are they distinguishable by other devices on the network such that the AP knows which autopilot messages to listen to? These are all solvable, but every vendor does it differently. What's missing is a standard programming interface like Sockets for TCP that provides a standard way for apps to use an interface.


Meanwhile, the usual suspects of electronics vendors would love to get you hooked on their total, integrated systems, so nobody really has much incentive to do anything about this. The advice I hear all the time to "buy everything from the same vendor" is exactly what they want to hear.
__________________
www.MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 02:02 PM   #27
Veteran Member
 
stevemitchell's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Rendezvous
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 83
I completely agree with you on NMEA 2000 and it's open/closed stance. I have written much about it over the years, and been very outspoken about how it is purpose built to make money, not to help boaters.

While I agree that an 0183 gateway is simple, and that an N2K one would be more difficult, it could be done if someone put their mind to it. Many thousands open source and commercial products have been created to solve just this in many, many more complicated networking and protocol spaces.

I think the biggest issue is that the folks who control NMEA 2000 don't really want it to be as open, want to lock you into one vendor, and have no motivation to change that. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

I don't think SignalK is a total belly flop - in fact, I am using it to bridge different systems together that you can't do without either paying for expensive hardware, or you simply can't do at all. It is not the panacea of unifying NMEA 2000 with everything else, but it is making strides in allowing end-users to interact with NMEA 2000, NMEA 0183, and other data sources where no one else seems to be. It definitely does not solve the main problems this thread came up with originally, but it is a good tool to have on board.

Until someone develops open source or more open protocol versions of an autopilot and radar, this whole system will remain closed. Vendors want it that way, NMEA 2000 wants it that way too. If we do get something that is more open, then things like OpenCPN, CE, SignalK and many other tools will be great to use, cost effective, more flexible, and undoubtedly grow and connect more together to form a really cool solution.

Unfortunately, I think the general boating public votes with their dollars, and doesn't insist with vendors more that they want better choices.
__________________
m/v Rendezvous
1988 Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
stevemitchell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 04:20 PM   #28
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevemitchell View Post

Until someone develops open source or more open protocol versions of an autopilot and radar, this whole system will remain closed

I'm surprised you find auto pilots "closed". To me, they one of the most interoperable devices across brands. The control panel to computer is proprietary, but doesn't matter unless you want to use something else as a control panel, like an MFD.


But instrument inputs are all standardized, as is the typical rudder position output. And the coms to allow the pilot to follow a route from a chart plotter or PC app is all standardized too.


Radar, definitely proprietary, as a fish finders and other sonar images. But otherwise most are pretty standard, give or take a few bugs here and there.
__________________
www.MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2019, 04:28 PM   #29
Veteran Member
 
stevemitchell's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Rendezvous
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedtree View Post
I'm surprised you find auto pilots "closed". To me, they one of the most interoperable devices across brands. The control panel to computer is proprietary, but doesn't matter unless you want to use something else as a control panel, like an MFD.


But instrument inputs are all standardized, as is the typical rudder position output. And the coms to allow the pilot to follow a route from a chart plotter or PC app is all standardized too.


Radar, definitely proprietary, as a fish finders and other sonar images. But otherwise most are pretty standard, give or take a few bugs here and there.
You are correct, they are one of the most interoperable for sure.

However, even though they are interoperable, there still are many that I have come across that do not work 100% reliably or share all of the data if it is not the same vendor. Even though they both state they support the same sentences/PGNs, more often than not there are still limitations that should not be there if they truly are supporting them.

I guess I was just hoping someone would make one that does truly do this. Perhaps the new one I've installed that claims 100% NMEA 2000 compatibility will live up to this!
__________________
m/v Rendezvous
1988 Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
stevemitchell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2019, 07:09 AM   #30
Member
 
jan legein's Avatar
 
City: Antwerp
Country: BelgiŽ
Vessel Name: Monara
Vessel Model: Trawler yacht - 1960
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 12
N2K View

Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedtree View Post
It's more like "Maretron doesn't support [fill in the blank]". They only support their own devices.


I used Nemo + my boat's wifi to provide nav data to Navionics running on an iPad. It worked great.
Twistedtree, I assume that N2KView will read all NMEA messages (0183 and 2000) that the Nemo gateway collects and puts on the NMEA2000 backbone, but that you will need the Maretron gateway USB100 to connect it to the PC?

I'm planning to install some Maretron and Actisense sensors on Monara (Monara - Introduction), want them to talk to my Nemo (still in the box), and understand from this thread that I will need 3 gateways... Nemo, USB100 and NGW-1...
jan legein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2019, 08:04 AM   #31
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan legein View Post
Twistedtree, I assume that N2KView will read all NMEA messages (0183 and 2000) that the Nemo gateway collects and puts on the NMEA2000 backbone, but that you will need the Maretron gateway USB100 to connect it to the PC?

I'm planning to install some Maretron and Actisense sensors on Monara (Monara - Introduction), want them to talk to my Nemo (still in the box), and understand from this thread that I will need 3 gateways... Nemo, USB100 and NGW-1...

I think that's mostly, if not completely correct. But let me re-state just to clarify.


N2KView can display most N2K messages (PGNs). But it does not process 0183 messages at all. Any 0183 data needs to have been converted to PGNs to be displayed.


The 0183 to PGN conversion can be done by a number of devices, including NEMO, Actisense devices, etc. Just check the documentation very carefully to be sure any particular device will translate the sentences you care about, at the required rate. I found a lot of challenges in this respect. See this article Adventures of Tanglewood: NMEA 2000 to NMEA 0183 converter challenges


Once some device converts 0183 data to PGNs and puts it on the N2K bus, then any connected device has access to it.


N2KView running on a Mac or PC can connect to an N2K bus in one of two ways. You can use the maretron USB100 for an N2K to USB connection. It's the least expensive route, but only supports a single connected device. The other way is with the IPG100. The IPG100 takes N2K data and puts it on ethernet, but in a format only accessible to Maretron. So it's like Nemo in this respect, except the data access over Ethernet is proprietary. The advantage of the IPG is that you can run N2K from any connected system (but only as many instances as you have licenses), and more importantly you can use N2KView Mobile, and that does not require an extra license. Plus you can run N2KAnalyze from any system, all at the same time. Personally I would only get an IPG100 because it is so much more flexible.


Hope that helps.
__________________
www.MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2019, 10:39 AM   #32
Member
 
jan legein's Avatar
 
City: Antwerp
Country: BelgiŽ
Vessel Name: Monara
Vessel Model: Trawler yacht - 1960
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 12
Nemo Gateway without CE

Does anyone know if you can configure the nemo gateway on a PC, without running Coastal Explorer or ECS?
__________________
www.monara.be
jan legein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2019, 10:41 AM   #33
Veteran Member
 
stevemitchell's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Rendezvous
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan legein View Post
Does anyone know if you can configure the nemo gateway on a PC, without running Coastal Explorer or ECS?
Yes, the Nemo can be configured using just a web browser. I did a pretty in depth review of it.
__________________
m/v Rendezvous
1988 Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
stevemitchell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2019, 12:11 PM   #34
Guru
 
wkearney99's Avatar
 
City: Bethesda, MD
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Solstice
Vessel Model: Grand Banks 47 Eastbay FB
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 507
Heh, search is my friend here... I'm looking to better integrate/update my various network devices and am headed to the same conclusion...

NGT-1 to handle update some gear (Airmar using Weathercaster)
Nemo to handle 0183-to-N2K

I just have to double-check how many talker/listener connections I need for 0183.
__________________
-- Bill Kearney
2005 Eastbay 47 FB - Solstice
wkearney99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2019, 12:59 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
Arthurc's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Sea Bear
Vessel Model: Kadey-Krogen 54
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 462
I’d also look at ShipModul, I have one and a nemo, the Nemo is great if you are looking for NMEA to UDP for Coastal Explorer, I’m less impressed as a translation device (I’ve seen some odd behavior on my network with it on), the shipmodul is purpose built and what the Furuno guys all recommend so I went that direction. I’m keeping the Nemo just Incase I need to switch from TZPro to CE.
__________________
Kadey-Krogen 54
Arthurc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2019, 01:11 PM   #36
Guru
 
wkearney99's Avatar
 
City: Bethesda, MD
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Solstice
Vessel Model: Grand Banks 47 Eastbay FB
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 507
One thing that seems appealing about the Nemo is being able to filter 0183 messages. I've currently got an M602 Icom radio and supposedly it's DSC/DSE and GPS sentences are sometimes problematic. Like causing a GPS-In, GPS-Out retransmit.

Should we take this to a different conversation thread?
__________________
-- Bill Kearney
2005 Eastbay 47 FB - Solstice
wkearney99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2019, 07:38 PM   #37
Veteran Member
 
stevemitchell's Avatar
 
City: Seattle
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Rendezvous
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthurc View Post
Iíd also look at ShipModul, I have one and a nemo, the Nemo is great if you are looking for NMEA to UDP for Coastal Explorer, Iím less impressed as a translation device (Iíve seen some odd behavior on my network with it on), the shipmodul is purpose built and what the Furuno guys all recommend so I went that direction. Iím keeping the Nemo just Incase I need to switch from TZPro to CE.
I agree on the Nemo and some weird things happening. If you read further up in this thread, you'll see some of the limitations I found specifically around autopilots, which I have not seen with products from other manufacturers, including ShipModul. In fact, they're made to bridge the gap between 2000 and 0183 and translate things for those use cases.

I think the Nemo is trying to do this, but also it's primary goal is to connect CE to your various network devices, which it does very, very well.

Which ShipModul device are you using now? I'm building out a large Furuno setup and may want to throw one in just for testing.
__________________
m/v Rendezvous
1988 Ocean Alexander 420 Sundeck
stevemitchell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2019, 01:19 PM   #38
Member
 
jan legein's Avatar
 
City: Antwerp
Country: BelgiŽ
Vessel Name: Monara
Vessel Model: Trawler yacht - 1960
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 12
GPS NMEA 0183 output in Nemo gateway

I am installing the Nemo on Monara, but get weird readings from the GPS:

<157, 167, 62, 145, 159, 153, 157, 141, 167, 159, 157, 163, 145, 167, 81, 171, 145, 125, 229, 235, 0, 0, 117, 221, 237, 93, 0, 157, 141, 163, 159, 167, 51, 167, 149, 163, 143, 167, 101, 167, 153, 163, 157, 167, 115, 171, 153, 157, 229, 235, ...>

Anybody an idea?

I've seen a similar question from a newbie recently, it was solved, but I can't find the thread anymore.

Thanks for helping!
__________________
www.monara.be
jan legein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2019, 03:22 PM   #39
Guru
 
Aquabelle's Avatar
 
City: sydney
Country: australia
Vessel Name: Aquabelle
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander Flushdeck
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 757
What baud rate do you have the port receiving from the GPS set at? And what is the GPS antenna (brand/model)?
Aquabelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2019, 05:21 PM   #40
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,432
Where are you looking to see this stream of numbers? How is the GPS connected?
__________________

__________________
www.MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012