METS 2010 roundup, thanks to Kees

17 Responses

  1. Dan Corcoran (b393capt) says:

    Thanks Kees !
    In regards to the AIS sart devices, did anyone speak about if/when they will be approved in the USA, without the limitation of transmitting the alert to a specific MMSI?

  2. Kees says:

    Dan,
    I only discussed the US process with ExNc, and they admitted it was a lot of pain; especially as writing & reading legal documents in a foreign language is quite a challenge. They didn’t know when the process would be finished, but they have definitely started on US approval on some of their products. I don’t know whether the SART will be part of that, but I’d guess so.

  3. Ben Ellison Ben Ellison says:

    Dan, I think you’re confusing AIS Sarts with DSC man overboard devices:
    https://panbo.com/archives/2010/03/orcadsc_mob_alarm_the_real_deal.html
    I’m not sure that any AIS SARTS have yet gotten USCG and FCC approvals for sale in the U.S., but to my knowledge there are no special rules about them here.

  4. Ben Ellison Ben Ellison says:

    NMEA feels that the “too expensive” charge about NMEA 2000 development is somewhat mythical given price reductions in recent years. Here are the facts as relayed to me:
    In 2010, NMEA reduced the pricing of the 2000 standards by 22%, from $2,700 to 2,100. They also reduced the price of the database from $595 to $495 and unbundled the database so pieces can be purchased for about $225. Plus product certification was reduced by 25% from $1,000 to $750.
    To clarify some other details…
    * Manufacturer registration code is $2,200. This code is for the lifetime of the manufacturer and for each and every product that is brought to market. It is a one time fee, no matter how many products are sold.
    * A product code is $350. This is one time fee for the lifetime of a product, no matter how many products are sold.
    * Certification fee is a one time fee for the lifetime of a product as long as the basic product function does not change, no matter how many products are sold.
    * Manufacturers do not have to purchase the certification tool. This can be outsourced if they so desire. The certification tool does cost $2,400 which we encourage to use as a development tool.
    Hence the total NMEA 2000 investment for a small manufacturer can look like this:
    The complete standard….$2,100
    Manufacturer Code……..$2,200
    Product Code………….$ 350
    Product Certification….$ 750
    Total………………..$5,400
    “This over the lifetime of one product! And if there are many products, amortization of course makes this immaterial. Once a manufacturer has the standard, their registration code and even the cert tool, it is only $1,100 per product to be certified.”
    http://www.nmea.org/store/index.asp?show=cprd&cid=7

  5. Dan Corcoran (b393capt) says:

    Yes, that’s right Ben. I did confuse it with DSC MOB.

  6. JoeH says:

    RTCM has reopened the MOB standard now, and is looking at at least some limited DSC alerting to all ships, as well as using AIS for MOB devices. The Coast Guard is concerned about anything adding to DSC alarming, but some limited opening of the MOB standard may still be possible.
    The FCC will consider waiver applications allowing the sales of AIS SART devices in the US pending new rulemaking. I believe they have already approved one or two waiver applications.

  7. Kees says:

    Ben,
    I personally have no issue with prices like that. It’s the secrecy and closedness that is the real problem. If Cisco, Sun, Oracle, IBM, Microsoft and Google can work with and believe in open standards why can’t the marine industry?
    My suggestion to the NMEA: just publish the standard, keep the charge for certification & registration codes.
    Possibly reserve a manufacturer code & product codes for cottage hardware developer’s development stage. For pure software developers this isn’t even necessary as they don’t need one.
    Foster developers, they might produce the next big thing. Once they have a working product I’m sure they’d be happy to pay for the production stage. It’s the getting there that is being hindered right now.
    Here’s a suggestion: just agree that manufacturers can give away the PGN definitions with every product.

  8. Adam says:

    Kees, any word on when those Whale pumps ship? And did you get an updated look at the Echopilot 3D FLS as a follow-up to your previous METS report?
    Thanks!

  9. Kees says:

    Adam,
    I didn’t ask Whale when they would start shipping. Sorry.
    I did have a nice chat with Echopilot. They will start shipping full production of the 3D FLS in about 1-2 months; they were waiting for the final software release. It was obvious they were a lot closer to shipping now – they weren’t hiding the transducers (in various sizes) anymore, the video looked like the real thing, etc.

  10. GBN says:

    I agree with Kees nmea should mandate the release of PGNs from manufacturers 2k should not facilitate the creation of private networks like Raymarines for example
    Dave

  11. Kees says:

    That’s a different issue, Dave.
    Raymarine, like most other manufacturers, uses private PGNs to do the things that are not in the standard (yet). This is fine by it self, as long as they use the standard PGNs wherever possible.
    I have been led to believe that the NMEA’s point of view is that all manufacturers must publish not only a list of the private PGNs that their equipment uses but also the definitions thereof.
    At this time I think only Airmar does this (because they want to sell their transducers to various OEMs that repackage them).

  12. Fred says:

    JOTRON and McMurdo AIS-SARTs are FCC/ USCG approved:
    https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm
    Search for:
    1) Equipment Class = AIS
    AND
    2) Frequency Range in MHz = “161.975” to “162.025”

  13. Sébastien says:

    Thank you Kees for this report
    And what about the EasyRescue transmitter from Weatherdock ? This is an AIS MOB, in other words some kind of personal AIS SART, and they already launched it last year. I think they had some trouble to get the device homologated, so what JoeH says is really interesting. But anyway this year they were back with their AIS MOB, and Orolia was there too with an AIS MOB for both brands McMurdo and Kannad. I couldn’t say which device is better : DSC MOB or AIS MOB ? Maybe AIS MOB is better as the target appears immediately and automatically on the displays ; unless it’s just the same with DSC MOB ??

  14. Kees says:

    Hi Sébastien,
    My reference “automatic and manual versions of quite light and portable AIS SARTs.” was to the EasyRescue transmitters.
    As to DSC versus AIS MOBs — the only thing that will catch on is something that is mandated by the IMO for professional use, and then we recreational users can tag along. Since the IMO has approved AIS SART for use as of Jan 1, 2010 I guess that this is where the SART development will go. Only AIS and RADAR SARTs are approved. As every IMO regulated vessel will carry one in every lifeboat and two further stowed on the mother vessel, we’ll soon see a lot of AIS SART systems.
    Note that I found a reference here: http://www.iadc.org/committees/offshore/Documents/COMSAR%2011%20Report%20Extract.pdf
    that says:
    9.17 The Sub-Committee recognized that SART devices were not, and should not, be used for distress alerting. SART devices provided a means of locating after the transmission of a distress alert and were useful tools for SAR authorities.
    We’ll see how this plays out. I’d personally choose AIS SART devices instead of a private MOB solution that only alerts the parent ship, as they would be useful in both a MOB and a step-up-into-the-raft situation.

  15. Ben Ellison Ben Ellison says:

    Here’s an interesting overview of METS marine electronics by Nick Heyes, of Digital Yacht and MES Ltd:
    http://www.bmea.org/news/2010/niche-is-nice-in-marine-electronics-at-mets/

  16. mike phillips says:

    Hi Ben and Hi Kees,we too have found confusion among customers choosing MOB devices (we distribute the Weatherdock East Rescue AIS-SART in the UK)so look at our website we have a page devoted to making a sensible choice for type of crew,area of operation etc
    http://www.echopilot.com/easy-rescue.htm might be useful.Happy Christmas and more important : don’t fall overboard. Mike Phillips

  17. Ivan Vargas says:

    Hello to All, Does anyone has a copy of the programming software for the ExNC101 (CONFIGURATOR)?, Thank you so much

Join the conversation

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *