Analog vs. Digital Radar

[mws222]

Can anyone explain to me the difference between analog and digital radar? I have the Raymarine E120 system, and I'm trying to decide between the two. Any ideas? Thanks

[Capt. Debbie]

In general the difference bewtten analog v digital radar or Fish Finders is signal processing. The transducer or radar transmitter send out a pulse. This pulse remains analog. The difference is when it returns.

The analog bounce back wave is digitized( converted to digital) so computer processing can occur of what the bounce back wave includes.

Now that's all software. The Head unit dissects the pulse that has been converted to digital. The more sophisticated the sofatware written, the more that bounce back signal can be proceessed. meaning more details to show you.

But as far as the transmitter/transducer nothing has changed. It's what is does with that bouce back signal that good signal processing software can find little things a pure analog signal processor can not.

More money for digital = more details. Question for you, is that new details digital adds worth me paying any extra money for? So see what new features you have do a cost value analysis for yourself.

For instance a high end commercial radar will track an object relative to you, and give you that objects course and speed. To know that, it must know a bit more like your speed, and which direction is true or magnetic north. Probably more than you'll want and definitely not something you want to pay $1000's extra for.

I hope this help you some?

Capt. Frank

[Gerry Zagorski]

Yep - I think Frank pretty much summed it up....

The only other thing you might want to concern yourself with is the communiucation interfaces on the 2 different units you are looking at..

Lots of boats and electronic manufactureres are using newtorking interfaces to allow their stuff to be networked together to work in concert with one and other... Your speed from your GPS shows up on your depth finder or depth shows up on you chart plotter etc... You can even interface camera in the salon or engine rooms to the screens of your other units... These all in one units are good for that sort of stuff since you buy them in a package and they all play together nicely...... If however you are using separate units for each and you want to interface them now or in the future you need to concern yourself with the interfaces a given unit supports or lack thereof... Not sure but I would think that the digital unit is more likely to have the interfaces you want now and into the future..

If however you are using separate units and not planning to network them you can likely save a few bucks and go for the ananlog unit..

[mws222]

Well I guess to be more specific, I'm debating between the Raymarine RD218 Radome and the Raymarine RD418D. Price wise, they are pretty close, but the truth of the matter is, with the digital radome (and I'm not sure how familiar you are with the Raymarine systems), I'm going to need to the get Sea Talk HS network switch. So if I decide to get the digital radar, I have to spend alittle extra money. If I get the analog radar, I can just plug it into the back of the E120.

To be honest though, based on the research I've done, and the answers you guys have given, I'm leaning toward the digital just for future compatability. Network cables are the future of marine electronics in my opinion, so I'd rather that than end up with an obsolete analog radar that doesn't use Seatalk HS.

[Tuna Tales]

I have the Raytheon (Raymarine) 20XX dome...I can see the lobster pots in the mudhole doing 18 to 20 kts at night with no problem. It is 4KW...with a 3.9 degree beam.

I was always told go with the higher KW and lower beam degree...the digital sounds nice and would probably look at buying one of those if and when I needed it.
However, I like separate units...my GPS, LORAN, FF/Depth finder are all wired separate- just my preference.

Good luck with your purchase...


Joe T.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Originally Posted by mws222

To be honest though, based on the research I've done, and the answers you guys have given, I'm leaning toward the digital just for future compatability. Network cables are the future of marine electronics in my opinion, so I'd rather that than end up with an obsolete analog radar that doesn't use Seatalk HS.

Exactly.... I think you are making the right call....

[Capt. Debbie]

Network cables are the future? Really? Perhaps you have not heard for Blue Tooth and Wi Fi wireless?

In my opinion (based on 21 years in computer controls engineering): Cables are for now. Wireless is the future. The Marine Industry has not gotten there yet.

Look around you else where. What do you see is the network scheme? Keep them separate. Don't marry yourself into a hard-wired network for the long run. My two cents.

capt. Frank

[mboy]

Originally Posted by Capt. Frank

Network cables are the future? Really? Perhaps you have not heard for Blue Tooth and Wi Fi wireless?

In my opinion (based on 21 years in computer controls engineering): Cables are for now. Wireless is the future. The Marine Industry has not gotten there yet.

Look around you else where. What do you see is the network scheme? Keep them separate. Don't marry yourself into a hard-wired network for the long run. My two cents.

capt. Frank

I would take cable networked electronics ANY DAY over wireless (especially blue tooth).
Blue tooth is pretty old and never caught on the way the designers had hoped (mainly because it can be disrupted by a garage door opener and the range is not that great).

Basically relegated to cellphone head pieces and an afterthought in laptops for file transfer.


No one really converts to wifi to gain speed or reliability. Purely convenience

Since cable runs on a boat are not very long, I would NEVER trade the reliability of a cable for the slight convenience of wireless for my boat electronics inter communications.

Even if they ever do come out with wireless networked electronics for boats, you are a few generations away from them implementing it as networked is relatively in it's early stages.

That being said, I would not be concerned with networked electronics UNLESS they were a non proprietary type system like NMEA 2000 as proprietary gets you locked into 1 brand of hardware.

[Capt. Debbie]

As far as wireless it's a work in maritime progress. There WAM wireless VHF microphones are already there on high end VHF radios. But the marine electronics industry does have a way to go. BTW - I hate Blue Tooth too. Wi FI- I'm not too jaded by and am hopeful.

I also agree with that being locked into only one brand because they often do not interface with other manufacturers. Like my ICOM VHF interfaces with my Garmin GPS via an industry standard NMEA for DSC and distress calling.

The one unspoken advantage of networking is centralization- there is only one monitor needed for radar/FF/plotter-GPS. And it can be a bigger monitor at that, since you have more room at the console without three separate monitors/displays.

One tow boat I run, has that all in a single Garmin system of radar/FF/GPS-Plotter. I have to admit that it's nice with a 10 inch LCG monitor. However, I'm not quite sure if the radar is totally off when not in use though. Many radar units( JRC, Raytheon,etc.) have a low power stand-by mode when turned on for the radar dome/open array transmitter. That low power standby mode is much lower battery draw than actual radar xmit mode. But this standby mode does noticeably drain the batteries when the boat's engines are off.

The flip side of centralization and networking is that one monitor now becomes a single point of failure for EVERYTHING. You can live without a fishfinder but do need the GPS to get back home sometimes. Then it gets back to dead reckoning navigation skills. You do have a compass right?

Capt. Frank

Originally Posted by mboy

I would take cable networked electronics ANY DAY over wireless (especially blue tooth).
Blue tooth is pretty old and never caught on the way the designers had hoped (mainly because it can be disrupted by a garage door opener and the range is not that great).

Basically relegated to cellphone head pieces and an afterthought in laptops for file transfer.


No one really converts to wifi to gain speed or reliability. Purely convenience

Since cable runs on a boat are not very long, I would NEVER trade the reliability of a cable for the slight convenience of wireless for my boat electronics inter communications.

Even if they ever do come out with wireless networked electronics for boats, you are a few generations away from them implementing it as networked is relatively in it's early stages.

That being said, I would not be concerned with networked electronics UNLESS they were a non proprietary type system like NMEA 2000 as proprietary gets you locked into 1 brand of hardware.

[mboy]

Even with just a combo GPS/FF, it is good to have a backup GPS to get home.
I carry a handheld for that purpose with keyport harbor and tip of Sandy hook as the only stored locations.

Single point of failure i the real down fall of any networked or combo system and is a real threat.

I see the best usage of networking (aside from DSC) is multiple monitors on boats that can accomodate them. Even still some redundancy or backup is needed.

My pops has a Standard Horizon combo GPS/FF/VHF, but just bought a backup GPS/FF just in case and already has a redundant VHF radio on boat.

Definitely don't want to be the guy cruising around raritan bay (or anywhere else) pulling up to people and asking. Where am I?