Radar recommendation

[C_Breeze]

Hi All,

I'm a noob when it comes to buying and installing a navigation system. I want to start with the radar.

Many choices but I'd like to get 1 that integrates with opencpn and the other bits to be added later.

My travel plans will take me from Seattle to Alaska, Hawaii all coasts and an Atlantic crossing.

Currently I'm considering a Garmin 18 xhd. Will this be enough for the job or something else. Thanks for the info.

[Franziska]

We just installed a B&G 4G Radome.

Works great with OpenCPN.
All you need is a 12V connection below at deck level or your navstation and a crossover Ethernet cable at the end of the big radar cable which comes with the unit.

You do not need the supplied connection box.

We bought ours recently here in France from a company selling surplus parts from the big yacht manufacturing plants.

About 1400€.

It's not the very latest model but already 4Generation solid state.

[motion30]

I do not know about 18 xhd. But I just installed a fathom 24 and it is very disappointing. Can see moving targets or small boats

[Hakan]

C_Breeze..
All Navico broadband radar scanners (3G, 4G and Halo(xx)) are well supported by OCPN-Radar plugin. (Simrad/Lowrance/B&G are just trade marks for the same maker)


Garmin HD and xHD are also working.

[merrimac]

I recommend one that does not use a magnetron, and is well supported by the plugin. I also highly recommend you get an up-to-date model with good reviews.

That leaves only one option: the Navico HALO range. If your budget doesn't stretch any further, HALO20. HALO20+ or HALO24 recommended.

Garmin HD and xHD: old magnetron radars that take 90s to wake up and use a lot of power when used. Magnetron means limited (3000-4000 hrs) lifespan.

Raymarine pathfinder (what we call "compatible with E120") are old and knackered, and use a magnetron.

Raymarine Quantum: good option on paper but disappointing resolution in practice, not as well supported by plugin (e.g. no doppler yet.)

Navico 3G and 4G: 10 year old models, now supplanted by HALO which has better performance. Good if you can find at (for instance) 50% reduced price.

Other radars: Not supported by plugin.

[Franziska]

Originally Posted by merrimac

I recommend one that does not use a magnetron, and is well supported by the plugin. I also highly recommend you get an up-to-date model with good reviews.



That leaves only one option: the Navico HALO range. If your budget doesn't stretch any further, HALO20. HALO20+ or HALO24 recommended.



Garmin HD and xHD: old magnetron radars that take 90s to wake up and use a lot of power when used. Magnetron means limited (3000-4000 hrs) lifespan.



Raymarine pathfinder (what we call "compatible with E120") are old and knackered, and use a magnetron.



Raymarine Quantum: good option on paper but disappointing resolution in practice, not as well supported by plugin (e.g. no doppler yet.)



Navico 3G and 4G: 10 year old models, now supplanted by HALO which has better performance. Good if you can find at (for instance) 50% reduced price.



Other radars: Not supported by plugin.

4G has no Magnetron & is very well supported and proven to work well with the Plug-in.
Yes they are older, but can be found much cheaper and nevertheless new.

For the average user I question if it always needs to be the very latest model.
They loose value faster and anything which is after the technology step up from Magnetron to Solid State is probably more than sufficient unless you need extremely high quality for spotting birds/fish or similar.

Doppler seems nice to have but not for double the price.
Still, if course if someone has loads of cash, go for the latest & greatest.

[merrimac]

Originally Posted by Franziska

4G has no Magnetron & is very well supported and proven to work well with the Plug-in.
Yes they are older, but can be found much cheaper and nevertheless new... etc...

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but I find it a bit interesting that you state all these things when you have only a few weeks of experience with your 4G that took much help to get running because you wired it up wrong. You even admit to not knowing how to use a radar properly. I have been a radar user for 30 years, have used a BR24 for 2 years and then a 4G for 8 years and am now on my 3rd year with HALO and I write the plugin software (with Hakan and Douwe). I even still have my 4G for testing the plugin. So, excuse me, I respectfully state that I am confident in my advise.

I happen to think that in the world of electronics, yes, a 10 year old newer design is always better because of the speed of development in solid state electronics.

Again, if you can find at a low price, 4G is still a good option. But supplies are getting short and they are no longer being made. This also means that getting one fixed in a few years will not be an option.

Performance: 4G doesn't work as well as a pulse compression radar (HALO) on longer ranges (3 nm and up). 4G is a little better below 200m. 4G also doesn't see weather (rain, squalls) or birds well.

Whether the above is worth your money is up to you. Whether you, or the OP, or anybody, listens to me or anybody else, is up to them as well.

[Franziska]

Originally Posted by merrimac

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but I find it a bit interesting that you state all these things when you have only a few weeks of experience with your 4G that took much help to get running because you wired it up wrong. You even admit to not knowing how to use a radar properly. I have been a radar user for 30 years, have used a BR24 for 2 years and then a 4G for 8 years and am now on my 3rd year with HALO and I write the plugin software (with Hakan and Douwe). I even still have my 4G for testing the plugin. So, excuse me, I respectfully state that I am confident in my advise.



I happen to think that in the world of electronics, yes, a 10 year old newer design is always better because of the speed of development in solid state electronics.



Again, if you can find at a low price, 4G is still a good option. But supplies are getting short and they are no longer being made. This also means that getting one fixed in a few years will not be an option.



Performance: 4G doesn't work as well as a pulse compression radar (HALO) on longer ranges (3 nm and up). 4G is a little better below 200m. 4G also doesn't see weather (rain, squalls) or birds well.



Whether the above is worth your money is up to you. Whether you, or the OP, or anybody, listens to me or anybody else, is up to them as well.

I'd simply say, buying the latest bit of tech is not always worth the big extra amounts of cash.
Yes I have not a lot of experience with it. But, it works now, and after all the wiring mistake was due to a bad illustration in the radars manual.
Without this it would perhaps have been fairly easy.

I do not question your experience, but looking at that we got on well without radar up to now, and thinking of how often we will actually use it, I simply do not feel it will make a huge difference what model you have as a beginner.
As an expert all the extra features are perhaps awesome to have.

Still very happy that you contribute here and elsewhere.

[CarCode]

Originally Posted by Franziska

... you need extremely high quality for spotting birds/fish or similar.

Please explain how you see fish with a radar.

[mako]

A good radar will see the birds, which indicate a school of bait fish, which generally are being followed by the big boys down below. But you need good definition to pickup little terns even in a flock.

[Franziska]

Originally Posted by CarCode

Please explain how you see fish with a radar.

See Mako's answer. Exactly this.

Not related to our needs though. Thanks again for helping finding it.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by merrimac

. . . Performance: 4G doesn't work as well as a pulse compression radar (HALO) on longer ranges (3 nm and up). 4G is a little better below 200m. 4G also doesn't see weather (rain, squalls) or birds well. . .

I've been using a 4G radar for almost 10 years. I have never been tremendously happy with it, but it does the job.

The range is perfectly adequate -- no complaints at all. Reliably paints ships at 20 miles which is all I care about, and often much more than that.

The target separation is better than magnetron radars, and close range performance is much better, which is really useful.

It sees birds, at least at close range, and it does see weather to a useful degree, maybe not as good as a larger magnetron scanner.

What sucks deplorably is the MARPA implementation, which is basically unusable. Bearing discrimination is not that good -- I guess because of the small scanner. The horrible MARPA must be the result of that plus some defect in the signal processing.

My 4G radar has not been totally reliable; I have had the dreaded "missing spoke data" error a number of times.

One thing I hate about Navico is they drop support like three days after the next model comes out, and they come out with new models as if they were mobile phones.

I wouldn't buy a 4G radar again, but it's not so bad that I have felt moved to upgrade it, so far. One really good reason not to buy older models of Navico stuff, or perhaps any Navico stuff at all, is the fast orphaning of superseded models. You are really on your own very fast, and with a 4G radar, which is already a couple of generations out of date, you are on your own right out of the box. It's so bad that the remote control software GoFree was upgraded a few years ago to be completely unusable with the first generation Zeus plotters, with a compatible version not available. And you are upgraded to the new version automatically! If you don't upgrade your gear every couple of years (at what, $10k for a couple of plotters and a radar?), you are nobody to Navico.



If I do change my radar and plotters, I would strongly consider Furuno next time.

One data point, one set of experiences, FWIW.

[Hakan]

What sucks deplorably is the MARPA implementation, which is basically unusable.

I use that more or less every time my radar is on. It's working really great here. Both by alert sector detection, ARPA, or manually initiated, MARPA. Can you describe your problem more in details?
I use Win10 and all radar_pi versions since implemented.


Hmm... After more reading your post. Could it be you're talking about a MFD and not radar plugin what this thread would be about?

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Hakan

I use that more or less every time my radar is on. It's working really great here. Both by alert sector detection, ARPA, or manually initiated, MARPA. Can you describe your problem more in details?
I use Win10 and all radar_pi versions since implemented.


Hmm... After more reading your post. Could it be you're talking about a MFD and not radar plugin what this thread would be about?

Thread is about the radar set.



Is the MARPA calculation done inside the the plugin or inside the scanner?


I use the radar plugin but since I have a Zeus at the nav table as well as O running on a minicomputer, I do MARPA on the MFD and haven't tried it in the plugin.


If MARPA is calculated in the plugin and not in the scanner, then maybe worth trying changing my process.


The AIS implementation in O is absolutely superior to anything I've ever seen.

[Hakan]

The radar plugin (M)ARPA calculation is done in the plugin independently of the connected scanner and though works with every scanner.


I do agree about your views about the AIS presentation.