February 14, 2009 21:11
>There is a movement toward radar that puts all or most of the processing smarts in the radome unit and interface with a display of your choosing (PC?) over an ethernet interface (Cat-5 cable etc). While there are several big names doing this Nobletec, Garmin, Raymarine it is not totally clear what is going on with hardware and with communication protocols. >
This is a good place to mention a trend that I've not read a word about in the marine press:
A friend with a new Garmin system was talking to Airmar about using one of their generic depth transducers for his Garmin, since the Garmin transducer was $1200 and the generic "smart" tranducer more like $300. What Airmar warned him about was that although the transducers were identical in operation, the Garmin version that they (airmar) was making for Garmin included an identity chip that the Garmin software system was going to query to make sure it was authorized Garmin. If it wasn't, then the Garmin unit would significantly cut the power and degrade the utility otherwise available on the unit. When my friend confronted Garmin, they claimed it was a "safety" feature.
I had been thinking of adding Furuno transducers and maybe a RD-30 generic display. I called Furuno tech support and asked if they were doing the same thing. The fellow said no, that's not what Furuno would do, etc. I mentioned that Airmar had suggested that most brands were in the process of doing the same thing--tit for tat. He said, no, it couldn't be, Furuno wouldn't do such a thing, and that he would research my question and get right back to me. I'm still waiting after 4 months for a call.
All the manufacturers are touting all the interoperability and the wonderfulness of NMEA 1083 and 2000 universal languages--then working in secret to prevent the system from working--all for greed, I can only guess. Yet no one manufacturer has everything one could ask for. So be very careful in any planning an integrated system from multiple manufacturers. The long time advice about installing only independent devices still stands.
donal
This is a good place to mention a trend that I've not read a word about in the marine press:
A friend with a new Garmin system was talking to Airmar about using one of their generic depth transducers for his Garmin, since the Garmin transducer was $1200 and the generic "smart" tranducer more like $300. What Airmar warned him about was that although the transducers were identical in operation, the Garmin version that they (airmar) was making for Garmin included an identity chip that the Garmin software system was going to query to make sure it was authorized Garmin. If it wasn't, then the Garmin unit would significantly cut the power and degrade the utility otherwise available on the unit. When my friend confronted Garmin, they claimed it was a "safety" feature.
I had been thinking of adding Furuno transducers and maybe a RD-30 generic display. I called Furuno tech support and asked if they were doing the same thing. The fellow said no, that's not what Furuno would do, etc. I mentioned that Airmar had suggested that most brands were in the process of doing the same thing--tit for tat. He said, no, it couldn't be, Furuno wouldn't do such a thing, and that he would research my question and get right back to me. I'm still waiting after 4 months for a call.
All the manufacturers are touting all the interoperability and the wonderfulness of NMEA 1083 and 2000 universal languages--then working in secret to prevent the system from working--all for greed, I can only guess. Yet no one manufacturer has everything one could ask for. So be very careful in any planning an integrated system from multiple manufacturers. The long time advice about installing only independent devices still stands.
donal