Electronics for a Minimalist

[Skipper_Vic]

David makes a good point for radar and I would never counsel against it but an almost equally important system is a "full duplex" AIS. Some VHFs and stand-alone "receive only" AIS units are out there but if everyone does this then only required vessels (commercial vessels) will be squawking their speed and position.
The single biggest feature of AIS is a quick look at the time and distance of "closes approach". Looking at several moving points on a radar screen and mentally guesstimating which might be a constant bearing-decreasing range situation can be taxing.
I know this may seem the opposite of minimalist but I find my Garmin AIS, as displayed on a Garmin chartplotter, to be intrinsically easy and reduces stress. Also, in Puget Sound, the vessel traffic control folks can "see me" and "know who I am" if they need to contact me.
The downside is you need a simple NMEA 2000 network to tie your AIS, chartplotter, and optionally your VHF. It is really just a few cables that plug together but then they just come up and say hi to each other.
Good Tech should make things easier ... I realize full well that is not always the case.
Vic

 

[MYTraveler]

The single biggest feature of AIS is a quick look at the time and distance of "closes approach". Looking at several moving points on a radar screen and mentally guesstimating which might be a constant bearing-decreasing range situation can be taxing.

Since not all radar targets are broadcasting AIS, one cannot take any shortcuts in watching radar. The best solution, IMO, is to overly AIS on the radar screen, but also to use the radar's ARPA (or MARPA) function to automatically calculate and display CPA/TCPA info for the non-AIS targets of concern. It surprises me how many people have MARPA capable radar but have not taken the time to master its use.

 

[Fletcher500]

As MYT notes, AIS is great, but I would say 20% of the boats in my area use it.


Re Marpa, as noted on here in previous strings, the commercial ability of Marpa is not so hot. Perhaps the system you have is, but Simrad is still figuring it out. TT has pointed this out in detailed posts.


Lastly, Eyschulman, and anyone else who indicated they prefer paper, I am interested in hearing how you use paper charts and a compass to obtain fixes to dead reckon/plot your position when you are navigating at night, or when its foggy. I don't mean to sound confrontational, but I don't think you can unless you know something I am not aware of?

 

[eyschulman]

Agree with most points here, and often less is more. Personally I am amazed as to what can be bought these days, especially in the solid state realm for fairly reasonable amounts of $. If someone is willing to spend the practice time, these newer systems are very user friendly.

Question - if you are running at night, which I assume you must do once in awhile, how do you get a fix to DR/plot with your paper chart and compass?

Don't get me wrong. I use electronics but the chart and compass and DF are constantly cheeked against the plotter. I also use radar to back up the plotter all superimposed. One of the big issues with plotters is scale. Different scales on a plotter may hide critical information that is more readily appreciated on a paper chart. obviously you don't need paper to navigate it just increases the usefulness of the electronics in my opinion and now also the US Navy's opinion after some costly incidents..

 

[MYTraveler]

Re Marpa, as noted on here in previous strings, the commercial ability of Marpa is not so hot. Perhaps the system you have is, but Simrad is still figuring it out. TT has pointed this out in detailed posts.

My system is Furuno, and I am quite happy with the info it provides. The only time its MARPA (or maybe I have ARPA, I am not sure) info doesn't agree with AIS info is when the AIS info is too old to reflect another vessel's course changes.

 

[tallswede]

I have started out with a Garmin 741 xs system on my boat. It has Chartplotter/sonar on it and can have radar and AIS added to it as I can afford them. It has it's own wifi network and I use my Ipad at the flybridge helm. Simple to install and use. I like the split screen options and tide/current/water temp features too, I love it so far. If I ever upgrade my instrumentation to NMEA it will display that too.

Kevin

 

[Pgitug]

Garmin 740 Series is great.

 

[FF]

We have covered many miles inshore with a hand held GPS and hand held VHF.

No depth sounder besides a marked pole for the shallow spots.

Inshore its no problem , offshore there is lots less to hit.

An autopilot is a delight , if the funds are there.

 

[twistedtree]

Re Marpa, as noted on here in previous strings, the commercial ability of Marpa is not so hot. Perhaps the system you have is, but Simrad is still figuring it out. TT has pointed this out in detailed posts.

Just to be clear, I've seen nothing to indicate that MARPA, per se, is problematic. The only issue I'm aware of is that Simrad's MARPA doesn't work worth a darn. But the problem is specific to Simrad, and not that it's MARPA vs ARPA. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a radar simply because it's MARPA.

As an update, Simrad says they have improved MARPA in two different sw releases, but only for the Halo radar. There have been no improvement for any of the other radars. It's been 2.5 years and counting.

I haven't been able to get any objective evaluation of how much it is improved in the Halo. One user said it worked better, but none of Simrad's customers realized there was a problem in the other products for a couple of years, so I'm hoping for more.

An ideal demonstration would show 5-10 target over a period of time, each target with both AIS and MARPA, with consistent correlation between the AIS and MARPA tracking across all targets. In other words, show that it works correctly all the time, every time, across a variety of targets.