Boat Monitoring and electronic update

[Jeffrey S]

I don't like the idea of critical instruments be wireless only - I haven't found the stability of wireless connections to be high enough to be relied on.

If it's an NMEA 2000 sensor of some type, it's wired.

I look forward to it all being fully wireless like the Furuno DRS4W. I'm surprised you're seeing less reliability - it must be due to the basic WiFi infrastructure in the boat. That's sort of the foundation of the house - it has to be perfect since everything sits on it.

Wireless has too many advantages and will eventually replace all the wired interfaces (power doesn't count as being "wired"). I've had two face-to-face meetings with the director of NMEA and even they know the cabling doesn't have a long-term life. In reality, they should be out of the wire business and should concentrate on protocols. And then there's Signal K. It's all an interesting time to place bets on 2025.

 

[Jeffrey S]

This is not a case of just because you can...this is a case of, if you open your minds to the possibilities and are doing a change like mine, you might be able to provide redundancy, modernization, and some cool ****, at a fraction of the cost.

That's something that a variety of people here need to print out and recite every morning when they wake up before sitting in front of their keyboard.

You created a fantastic upgrade. Like I said, I pointed it out to some companies who are thinking about making products to do what you put together yourself.

 

[Northern Spy]

If it's an NMEA 2000 sensor of some type, it's wired.

I look forward to it all being fully wireless like the Furuno DRS4W. I'm surprised you're seeing less reliability - it must be due to the basic WiFi infrastructure in the boat. That's sort of the foundation of the house - it has to be perfect since everything sits on it.

Wireless has too many advantages and will eventually replace all the wired interfaces (power doesn't count as being "wired"). I've had two face-to-face meetings with the director of NMEA and even they know the cabling doesn't have a long-term life. In reality, they should be out of the wire business and should concentrate on protocols. And then there's Signal K. It's all an interesting time to place bets on 2025.

Agreed. RF is reliable and configurable. Wire runs, not as much.

I don't think electric companies would rely on wireless smart meters, if they weren't drop dead reliable.

 

[O C Diver]

First (addressing a few other comments), the touch screen is industrial, it is robust, and it is not "new fangled technology". It has been around for 20+ years. Including much of the touch functionality. It will be running many years from now. The system runs many yachts, trains, planes, and other incredible harsh industrial equipment. And....... it was way less expensive than installing a 2k based system, much less, with a lot more benefits.

I asked this question before, and now I'll ask you directly. Given your self admitted focus on modernization, how long before this system becomes insufferably antiquated, 18 months? As we dinosaurs wrap are minds around the technology, possibilities, and cost, it's only reasonable to ask if the technology will be obsolete before we get it installed, and only to be repeating the same installation process every few years?

I have a beautiful 1992 boat with a analog engine (Luggers) monitoring that has been modernize to look/act like a brand new engine.

Loaded Question: If it weren't for the cost, would you replace your antiquated analog engines with modern technology, or is your mind not open to modern technology simply for the sake of it's possibilities?

This is not a case of just because you can...this is a case of, if you open your minds to the possibilities and are doing a change like mine, you might be able to provide redundancy, modernization, and some cool ****, at a fraction of the cost.

I'm not opposed to new technology. Have been on the bleeding edge of technology, that too many times went in a different direction, leaving me unsupported. As I lack the electronic background and the skill to do much more than "plug and play", my fear is that the labor and technical support cost will make the hardware costs seem insignificant. While I see some interesting features, there's nothing yet that motivates me to be an early adopter (it's still very early in this market). When it comes to these type of boats, I bought my last one first. If I embrace this technology, it won't be till it's fully matured and I can feel confident of only doing it once.

Ted

 

[nautibeaver]

I asked this question before, and now I'll ask you directly. Given your self admitted focus on modernization, how long before this system becomes insufferably antiquated, 18 months? As we dinosaurs wrap are minds around the technology, possibilities, and cost, it's only reasonable to ask if the technology will be obsolete before we get it installed, and only to be repeating the same installation process every few years?







Loaded Question: If it weren't for the cost, would you replace your antiquated analog engines with modern technology, or is your mind not open to modern technology simply for the sake of it's possibilities?







I'm not opposed to new technology. Have been on the bleeding edge of technology, that too many times went in a different direction, leaving me unsupported. As I lack the electronic background and the skill to do much more than "plug and play", my fear is that the labor and technical support cost will make the hardware costs seem insignificant. While I see some interesting features, there's nothing yet that motivates me to be an early adopter (it's still very early in this market). When it comes to these type of boats, I bought my last one first. If I embrace this technology, it won't be till it's fully matured and I can feel confident of only doing it once.



Ted

I'll try my best to answer.

First question:
Given your self admitted focus on modernization, how long before this system becomes insufferably antiquated, 18 months?

With the PLC, my guess is a very long time (relative term I know). I would think 10+ years.
How would you compare that to other options. Remember I still have manual switches there, but the engine monitoring, bilge monitoring, electrical monitor on it, I would argue because it is used in factories and many many other non recreational boats, it is built to last much longer than day a nmea2k system.

With the IoT items, 5-10 years would be my guess. It because I'm into this entire system sub 1000$ dollars, that is a reasonable ROI compared to other options (security monitoring).

"Loaded Question: If it weren't for the cost, would you replace your antiquated analog engines with modern technology, or is your mind not open to modern technology simply for the sake of it's possibilities? "

I like this question loaded or not. When I first saw this boat, we owned a 58' SonShip, which I loved, my wife saw the potential in this boat, and I agreed for one reason. The engines. I threaded DD8v74TA's for lugger L6140's. Why? Typical time between rebuilds, improved fuel economy.

That being said, if someone would offer up to install JD/Luggers with similar longevity, installed for free, and it improved my current situation, I would do it, not because it is not analog, but because they would have 3500 hours less on them all other thunders being equal.

Could not agree with you more on your last statement. But what are we comparing. Remember my new technology is limited to only those items I use when I'm not on the boat, so limited chance for being stranded. And those are consumer items so no technical experience is needed. As it relates to to the PLC (engine monitoring, system monitoring, switching). These things are set and forget, solid, proven. If you are comparing the complexity of analog gauges vs digital, well you were not in the market anyway, if you are comparing a PLC system compared to say a maratron system, well I would argue, with this you get more reliably, with more people able to fix it, and for less cost. Besides, I still have kept my mechanical gauges in the engine room and my existing analog alarms, in adaption to the system alarms.

Are you asking as if I am suggesting anyone with mechanical gauges go out and replace them. I'm not, I'm suggesting if you are refuting your boat or want the benefits indescribed, a PLC should be considered and IMHO chosen over installing something else.

If you want a security system or monitoring all the things I describe like water levels, doors, windows, hatches, Motion, cabin temps, please consider the IoT revolution because it is easy to use, cheap, and pretty darn cool. If you don't want a system to monitor those things, then poor a scotch and have a cigar and spend some time on TF!!! Or steaming to your next destination.

Hope that answers your questions.

 

[BandB]

Have been on the bleeding edge of technology, that too many times went in a different direction, leaving me unsupported.

That's the edge I try to always avoid. Something new, see me in six months please. See me after customers have used it and have experiences and you've addressed any issues.

I love technology advances, but I'm somewhat resistant to change, always resistant to unproven change. Then so much of today's technology, I can't predict at all whether it's going to be hero or zero. I had no idea what social media would become. But then I was slow to move from keyboard to mouse and I didn't understand why anyone wanted to touch a screen as opposed to a keyboard and mouse. I followed the crowd and learned though.

 

[O C Diver]

Could not agree with you more on your last statement. But what are we comparing. Remember my new technology is limited to only those items I use when I'm not on the boat, so limited chance for being stranded. And those are consumer items so no technical experience is needed. As it relates to to the PLC (engine monitoring, system monitoring, switching). These things are set and forget, solid, proven. If you are comparing the complexity of analog gauges vs digital, well you were not in the market anyway, if you are comparing a PLC system compared to say a maratron system, well I would argue, with this you get more reliably, with more people able to fix it, and for less cost. Besides, I still have kept my mechanical gauges in the engine room and my existing analog alarms, in adaption to the system alarms. View attachment 62553

Are you asking as if I am suggesting anyone with mechanical gauges go out and replace them. I'm not, I'm suggesting if you are refuting your boat or want the benefits indescribed, a PLC should be considered and IMHO chosen over installing something else.

If you want a security system or monitoring all the things I describe like water levels, doors, windows, hatches, Motion, cabin temps, please consider the IoT revolution because it is easy to use, cheap, and pretty darn cool. If you don't want a system to monitor those things, then poor a scotch and have a cigar and spend some time on TF!!! Or steaming to your next destination.

Hope that answers your questions.

I repowered a couple of years ago. The John Deere gauges are mechanical, driven from a digital display, which is over a can bus cable from the engine computer. If a manufacturer designed a plug and play system to tie into my gauge wiring harness, I guess I could see having it available on one of my MFDs. Pairing all the engine sensors to accomplish the same doesn't seem to be worth the effort.

The security system monitoring part is still an open question for me. I think a bunch of sensor maybe cool to play with but a poor substitute quality redundant systems and well followed procedures. Still haven't settled on an alarm system other than docking next to a US Customs and Boarder Patrol boat and office. Too give you an idea of my mind set, I don't use a remote garage door opener. My garage doors have dead bolts that can only be opened from inside the garage. Not willing to trade security for convenience. Not conceptually sold on security systems that can be deactivated remotely by myself or some ingenious hacker.

Ted

 

[Northern Spy]

PLC is hardly bleeding edge. It is ruggedized and standardized in industry for a long time. 20 year old PLC systems are common. 10 year old is probably average.

 

[BandB]

Too give you an idea of my mind set, I don't use a remote garage door opener. My garage doors have dead bolts that can only be opened from inside the garage. Not willing to trade security for convenience.

Wifey B: WOW! I can understand when you're out of town, but you manually do it every time every day? I didn't know anyone did that.

Are you scared of them taking something that's in your garage or using it to get into your house?

I see your point, just shocked me a bit.

 

[Bob Cofer]

I used one of these to connect my old school FL120 to the N2K backbone on Ebbtide. I can now display engine info on both 740s displays and my laptop when in use.

I have reserved space on my helm to install a small touch screen HMI which will operate a basic din rail mounted PLC and I/O to control most of the auxiliary systems on board.

 

[twistedtree]

I repowered a couple of years ago. The John Deere gauges are mechanical, driven from a digital display, which is over a can bus cable from the engine computer. If a manufacturer designed a plug and play system to tie into my gauge wiring harness, I guess I could see having it available on one of my MFDs. Pairing all the engine sensors to accomplish the same doesn't seem to be worth the effort.

Actually, this is available off the shelf. It's how I display all my engine data, using the Murphy gauge as a backup only. Maretron's J2K100 converts J1939 engine data to NMEA 2000, and from there is can be displayed on a number of N2K devices, including most modern MFDs.

You have a JD 4045, right? That's what I have as a wing engine and I use the J2K100 for it. If you are interested, shoot me a PM. I have an extra one that I can make you a deal on.

 

[BandB]

Actually, this is available off the shelf. .

I think you make a huge point there in that so much of this is becoming available off the shelf, standard item, now. The technology we paid significantly for 3 years ago, was available as a basic, stock item for a fraction of the price last year.

 

[O C Diver]

Wifey B: WOW! I can understand when you're out of town, but you manually do it every time every day? I didn't know anyone did that.

Are you scared of them taking something that's in your garage or using it to get into your house?

I see your point, just shocked me a bit.

My vehicle doesn't fit in the 3 car garage, it's full of play toys.

Ted

 

[DHeckrotte]

Oh, dear! So many acronyms that I cannot even begin to guess at the meanings! Toys are great, but for me KISS.

Bear in mind that my most recently purchased piece of digital music playback equipment was designed and made in the USA in 1920, weighs in at about 1000lbs, plus the 850 or so digital recordings - instructions to make it do its thing - that I have, weigh over a pound apiece.

Important comparative issue for us boaters; unlike modern digital equipment, it's been outdated for 75 years, but is endlessly restorable, sounds wonderful and works perfectly.

Sort of like a lead or a sextant and ephemeris.

 

[Britannia]

Oh, dear! So many acronyms that I cannot even begin to guess at the meanings! Toys are great, but for me KISS.

Bear in mind that my most recently purchased piece of digital music playback equipment was designed and made in the USA in 1920, weighs in at about 1000lbs, plus the 850 or so digital recordings - instructions to make it do its thing - that I have, weigh over a pound apiece.

Important comparative issue for us boaters; unlike modern digital equipment, it's been outdated for 75 years, but is endlessly restorable, sounds wonderful and works perfectly.

Sort of like a lead or a sextant and ephemeris.

A pianola?

 

[BandB]

My vehicle doesn't fit in the 3 car garage, it's full of play toys.

Ted

Wifey B: Well, duh. I guess if I didn't park in the garage I wouldn't care much about the remote either. I think one must rename it to "storage area" as opposed to garage, or maybe in your case to "Toy Chest." I don't keep my toys in the garage.

 

[kev_rm]

PLC's and proprietary network protocols. Did I just get teleported to the 1990's?

 

[O C Diver]

Wifey B: Well, duh. I guess if I didn't park in the garage I wouldn't care much about the remote either. I think one must rename it to "storage area" as opposed to garage, or maybe in your case to "Toy Chest." I don't keep my toys in the garage.

The toys have wheels and license plates. It's a garage.

Ted

 

[dw8928]

I've been researching this issue myself as I am about to fitout my own boat. Want to have iPad as MFD: because it is multipurpose and Apple devotes $billions to updating it every year - therefore upgradeable/best in class apps.

Small airplane pilots are using iPads constantly and there are anti-glare screen guards if that is a concern (even though the new iPad comes with anti-reflective screen coating now)

Making the boat wirelessly communicate with each system is the confusing part:

Advantages:

1) Get to choose best-in-class for each system (radio, autopilot, depth finder, speed, fish finder, etc) - simply connect to network after install

2) don't have to worry about running wire to helm (except power wire for iPad and each system must be connected to power somewhere)

3) Built-in redundancies for GPS: a) iPad has GPS (if you want it). WiFi ONLY iPad is just fine and you can get an external wireless GPS for less than the cost of an upgrade to the cellular iPad. Most cellphones can connect their cellular connection to your iPad anyway, b) Standard Horizon VHF Radio GX6500 will have GPS & AIS transponder c) my cellphone will also work on the same system and have the same great apps.

Disadvantages: Are there any? My car has drive-by-wire for brakes and throttle - there is no physical connection to the systems other than a wireless connection and power.

At least one marine networking supplier I read talks about their systems working the same automotive networking standards.

Loaded Question: If it weren't for the cost, would you replace your antiquated analog engines with modern technology, or is your mind not open to modern technology simply for the sake of it's possibilities?

 

[O C Diver]

Disadvantages: Are there any? My car has drive-by-wire for brakes and throttle - there is no physical connection to the systems other than a wireless connection and power.

At least one marine networking supplier I read talks about their systems working the same automotive networking standards.

I'm guessing I'm 5 to 10 years out from my next systems upgrade. If wireless is the future, hopefully it will be standardized by then with all the bugs worked out. I'm happy to let others blaze the trail and wait for the major marine electronics manufacturers to figure out what they don't know yet.

Ted

 

[twistedtree]

I certainly see the appeal in the vision you describe. But to make it happen, there are a variety of problems that need to be overcome. See below for some examples. Some parts may take a while to become reality

I've been researching this issue myself as I am about to fitout my own boat. Want to have iPad as MFD: because it is multipurpose and Apple devotes $billions to updating it every year - therefore upgradeable/best in class apps.

Small airplane pilots are using iPads constantly and there are anti-glare screen guards if that is a concern (even though the new iPad comes with anti-reflective screen coating now)

Making the boat wirelessly communicate with each system is the confusing part:

Advantages:

1) Get to choose best-in-class for each system (radio, autopilot, depth finder, speed, fish finder, etc) - simply connect to network after install

This last part is easier said than done. What network do all these parts connect to, and how do they get the access credentials? For devices that have some sort of user interface, you can enter in the info, much like you do on your TV. But what about devices that don't have any controls, like GPS, a depth sounder, or a speed sensor? This becomes a real challenge if you are connecting to some sort of wifi.

Or perhaps it's some other form of wireless, maybe like alarm systems use? That might work, but considering how half-baked NMEA 2000 is after 15 years, I think getting the industry to standardize on something wireless will take a very, very long time.

2) don't have to worry about running wire to helm (except power wire for iPad and each system must be connected to power somewhere)

But as soon as you have to pull a cable, any cable, you have incurred the work involved in wiring devices. So why not just wire them?

The obvious retort is to make everything battery powered which is certainly possible. But that would mean an annual climb up the stack, disassembly of several devices, battery replacement, then reassembly, taking care to maintain weather proofing. Then do the same with all the bilge components. Doesn't sound very appealing to me.

3) Built-in redundancies for GPS: a) iPad has GPS (if you want it). WiFi ONLY iPad is just fine and you can get an external wireless GPS for less than the cost of an upgrade to the cellular iPad. Most cellphones can connect their cellular connection to your iPad anyway, b) Standard Horizon VHF Radio GX6500 will have GPS & AIS transponder c) my cellphone will also work on the same system and have the same great apps.

Disadvantages: Are there any? My car has drive-by-wire for brakes and throttle - there is no physical connection to the systems other than a wireless connection and power.

I'm pretty sure your car is drive-by-WIRE, not drive by airwaves. All the electronic controls in cars are connected via CanBus, which happens to also be the basis for NMEA 2000. And from what I'm reading, even the brake-by-wire cars area really just braking control layered on top of a traditional mechanical system. The brake-by-wire in a hybrid car, for example, controls the regenerative braking and how it relates to the underlying hydraulic braking.

At least one marine networking supplier I read talks about their systems working the same automotive networking standards.

Right, I think that is probably a reference to the underlying CanBus which is common between N2K and the automotive control systems.

 

[fryedaze]

I discovered last week that my NEW Raymarine e125 and e127 are already listed as retired/legacy equipment on the Raymarine site. I just had them installed in the fall 2014. The manufactures strategies are all set to make money. If they did not change the products the sales would drop. They are very clever at changing connector and wiring pin locations on products that really haven't changed. I did some research on Airmar transducers and cables. Raymarine and others just change the connector or pin locations on the MFD so you have to buy products from them.
So, I have the same question as Ted. How long will this fancy touch screen hold up? I want 20 years! If it blows up I will be bitchin as I lay out 3-5 or more boat bucks to buy the next new thing.

 

[ksanders]

OK, I am a big advocate of boat monitoring and alarming.
Being able to remotely monitor the status of my boat is invaluable. I know this because my boat is unattended wth only weekly visits from my boat watch service during Alaska's long winter.

What I am not in favor of is unnecessarially adding complexity to a boats systems.

For example replacing the switches that are already at my helm station with switches that I can control with my ipad serves little practical purpose since the only time I would tend to operate those switches is while physically at the helm.
It also increases the risk of a large system malfunction if for example those switches rely on a single processor, or a single ethernet, or other com link for their operation.

Having individual switches lowers the potential scope of a equipment failure.

When considering technology additions to our boats it would be wise to analyze these potential "improvements" for single points of failure, and determine if the risk of an outage is worth the reward.

This idea of single point of failure goes further. In the networking world we have learned over time to limit the scope of an outage by limiting the size of a layer 2 network. Now I see people jumping onto the NMEA 2K bandwagon, but I wonder if they are deploying redundant N2K backbones, or if they are putting all of their devices (for example two engines data) on a single N2K backbone. I will admit that I am not running a N2K system on my boat, but if I did I would probably opt for redundancy, because of the massive impact to operations that a N2K backbone failure would represent.

 

[BandB]

Kevin, your emphasis on redundancy is so important. Redundancy is vital. This is far different from the twins vs single argument because electronics are far less dependable than engines are. Redundancy is a factor whether you have an elaborate and complex wifi network or just use a simple system.

 

[ksanders]

Kevin, your emphasis on redundancy is so important. Redundancy is vital. This is far different from the twins vs single argument because electronics are far less dependable than engines are. Redundancy is a factor whether you have an elaborate and complex wifi network or just use a simple system.

Yes, a big issue I see, but more so on smaller boats is the proliferation of MFD's.

A MFD can either increase or decrease the overall reliabity of your system depending on how they are deployed.

If you use one MFD for RADAR, SONAR and Charting you run the risk of a single hardware failure causing a large magnitude information outage.

If you deploy two MFD's then you can mitigate the potential scope of a MFD caused outage, resulting in increased system reliability.

My concern is that as we add technology, we need to also keep in mind what the potential impact of the loss of a single component represents.

 

[BandB]

My concern is that as we add technology, we need to also keep in mind what the potential impact of the loss of a single component represents.

Very true. Now, the good thing is that the components become more dependable over time. This doesn't mean we don't need to have redundancy though.

As an example. I'd say most boats here only have one radar. When was the last time it failed to work? Sometimes it might struggle with conditions, but I'm talking the radar itself breaking. While we do have newer radars, we've put a lot of miles on and I've never had one to fail.

 

[dw8928]

This last part is easier said than done. What network do all these parts connect to, and how do they get the access credentials? ...

But as soon as you have to pull a cable, any cable, you have incurred the work involved in wiring devices. So why not just wire them?...

The obvious retort is to make everything battery powered which is certainly possible.

I'm pretty sure your car is drive-by-WIRE, not drive by airwaves. ... is probably a reference to the underlying CanBus which is common between N2K and the automotive control systems.

Well there is this for connecting to and they have competitors as well:
iMux - The Brookhouse NMEA 0183 Wifi multiplexer or this: or this: [URL="http://www.dmkyacht.com/inavx"]http://www.dmkyacht.com/inavx, or these: these: http://i-marineapps.blogspot.com/2013/02/marine-data-to-wifi.html

Wired connections can have problems by mis-wiring right from the start or develop problems from vibration/chafing and shorting/arcing, etc. A lot of those wire bundles have very thin wire bundles of 26 AWG wires for instance. Those wires are not robust. Even pests like a mouse or rat aboard can eat those wires - I've even seen an instance where a particular species of ants were attracted to the electrical current in a switch.

How do you diagnose a wire bundle? Easy - lots of frustration and work from what I have seen.

With wireless, it should be a lot easier to tell if the unit is bad versus just a wiring problem.

Abstractly, are not boats in some respect a giant cordless drill? They drill us through the water with the system's electrical current drawing from the battery which is, in turn, replaced by the alternator or genset? I would NOT install a battery powered system on my boat however - house batteries have to be replaced (with carbon foam batteries next time).

I think you are right about the CANBUS on the car!

Here is a link to Raymarine's wireless offerings: Wireless Instruments Displays | Raymarine

 

[dannc]

OK, I am a big advocate of boat monitoring and alarming....

Kevin, you said everything I was thinking as I read through this discussion.

Being able to monitor the state of the boat is a good, no, a great thing, but I worry about setting up control systems, that if they fail, will cook your goose. I have been looking at some of the new wiring technologies since they simplify things on one hand, but overall, add complication and a single point of failure. Will the wiring technology from Company A that one buys be a success in the market place or will the owner be left with a product that is not supported and one can no longer buy parts?

As more gadgets are added to a boat, one needs more switches and dials. Using digital displays and switches neatens up the helm but also can hide the switches under various menus. Will a new crew person be able to find that switch or even know a switch is there if the captain is not available? The advantage of the real switch is that it is right there in view and you don't have to power up a device to operate the switch. What happens if the display is kaput? How do you get to the switch?

The one big issue missing from this conversation is security and I am not talking about the physical security of the boat but the security of all of these Internet connected devices.

I hope the OP keeps updating the discussion with the changes he is making.

Later,
Dan

 

[BandB]

The one big issue missing from this conversation is security and I am not talking about the physical security of the boat but the security of all of these Internet connected devices.

I hope the OP keeps updating the discussion with the changes he is making.

Later,
Dan

Wifey B: I read about hackers, at least temporarily, taking over the control of a boat and hubby says it's happened more than once, so security is big. Now, they were after huge commercial rigs loaded. Researchers experimented with GPS spoofing to take over a yacht. They took a Jeep Cherokee over. Not going to put details, too much info for hackers.

 

[twistedtree]

This idea of single point of failure goes further. In the networking world we have learned over time to limit the scope of an outage by limiting the size of a layer 2 network. Now I see people jumping onto the NMEA 2K bandwagon, but I wonder if they are deploying redundant N2K backbones, or if they are putting all of their devices (for example two engines data) on a single N2K backbone. I will admit that I am not running a N2K system on my boat, but if I did I would probably opt for redundancy, because of the massive impact to operations that a N2K backbone failure would represent.

totally agree. It took me a few tries, but I can now keep running just fine with a complete loss of N2K. In fact, I think any one critical system can fail, and I have a backup that will keep me going, usually (but not always) with no degradation in operation.

And I agree about the application of technology. Most of mine has been focused on instrumentation and monitoring. More monitoring might result in false positives, but I think it's worth it to get an earlier warning detecting problems. I've also added some focused on helping me avoid mistakes and stupid moves.