|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|03-15-2008 08:27 AM|
We have at the helm the Raymarine C80 with a 2kw radar. You have the option of splitting the screen or overlaying which can be a great advantage as opposed to two seperate units. It is also linked below at the nav station redundatly to our laptop. I have no problem with Garmin or other units but chose the Raymarine due to my other instruments were also Raymarine and the Seatalk system was easy to integrate together.
As others have said I would think long and hard about doing the Cape.
|03-15-2008 04:28 AM|
Please note in my post that I qualified my preference for separate radar and plotters/depth/AIS. displays with the ideal that they both output those displays to a PC or laptop screen...where the helpful overlap function can be combined or overlaid. I do not object to the practice (although it can make a screen quite cluttered), but to the idea of having a single screen to access multiple and discrete devices, which I think is folly. Same with the display at the helm...make it a "remote" if you wish, to the nav screen in a protected place where you can also use paper charts. Otherwise you are stuck at the helm in sometimes poor conditions trying to deal with information on the screen plus information from the environment, like the sound of distant engines, breakers or hard to see nav lights atop rocks.
And then the helm display shorts out, and you are rummaging for a chart tube and a handheld GPS?
No thanks. Better to keep this stuff out of the way. A boat in no sense moves so fast that you need constant "live feeds" anyway, and if it's bad enough to actively helm, it's bad enough to have the entire crew up and working on the nav while you handle the wheel.
Again, to reiterate: software will accomplish on a laptop (or a flatscreen in the saloon, if you wish) exactly the same integration of radar, AIS and plotting as on a "marinized screen" that, if it goes, will leave you blind in the electronic sense. That's why I'll have a bunch of little displays, one 7" radar at the helm, and a PC screen velcro'd in place to show me details as needed. If the PC goes down, I still have all the elements in place, without the glitz.
|03-14-2008 09:53 PM|
We have the Raymarine C120 with a 4kw radar. We love it. Prior to this we were Garmin devotees, and there certainly is nothing wrong with Garmin. The Raymarine is very eash to use, and is very intuitive. Plus, having the radar and plotter integrated is a HUGE plus. I know others disagree and have expressed the view that integrated systems give you risk of knocking out multiple systems with one failure, but overlaying the radar, or even splitting your screen, really makes navigating a snap. I suspect I'll never go without this type of setup again (subject to further technological advances of course).
On the boat, I think condition and equipment is more important than brand for a coastal trip like the one you're contemplating. Many "lesser" builds are less suitable in large part because over time portions flex, rigging is not sufficiently stout, ports/hatches leak excessively, deck leaks due to poor bedding has caused delamination/rot of the deck coring, compression post failure, etc. If your boat is well maintained, the rig is in good shape, through hulls in good condition, rudder and rudder bearings, steering, etc. in good condition, you should be fine. Likewise, it's more important that you sail smart. The best built boat will have trouble if you go around Cape Hatteras in the wrong weather, but a Sunfish can make it in the right conditions.
|03-14-2008 09:47 PM|
camaraderie, no problem! I was sincere in my quest to discover if there was a structural or other deficiency in the Hunter. In the first post, I was not clear on the model of Hunter. I sincerely appreciate your candor since you thought I may be placing my family in undue risk of harm.
Thanks for the advice on the ICW options. The more I think about it, the more I lean toward your plan. Even if there is no real threat to the boat or crew, why beat 'em up with the chance of being scared or seasick or bored as you watch one point of land slowly drift by..............
Did that in a Nor'easter that moved down the coast to FL. Watched the lights of Miami on a northern track for more than 12 hours. No real danger, just the boat and crew taking a beating.
Cruisindad: I will take your suggestion and head to WM this weekend to play with the buttons and flashing lights! Normally the staff sees me hanging 'round the boring stuff comparing the price difference in buying line by the bag or the foot, this block or that cleat!
Thanks for the input.
|03-14-2008 09:26 PM|
Reb...my bad...I was thinking Legend 375 not Cherubini which are much better built and should be up to the task if well maintained/upgraded as yours sounds it is. 6 aboard for that trip should be interesting!
Just for your "alternate" thinking...pulling in at Beaufort and heading up the ICW to Norfolk will take 3 days. You can go out of Norfolk to Montauk and CT in 3 more days.
Your plans for the radar/chartplotter as a "nice to have" addition to your redundant "must have" equipment is exactly reflective of my own view.
|03-14-2008 07:51 PM|
I have used (considerably) both combo & overlay units and the non-combo. The overlay is an excellent, excellent function. Your two options to have both up (radar and chart) are: Buy two seperate monitors or split the screen. SPlitting the screen reduces the functional size of both and two monitors requires room and cost.
Also, by putting either the chart or the radar on overlay you my realize or see things you might not have before. These may be buoys you thought were boats or likewise.
I personally use the Raymarine E80 system, with a 2kw radome. It is a considerable improvement over the older RL series. I have no problems with Garmin either, but prefer Raymarine (probably because I accustomed to it). The interface of that product to the other accesories is VERY easy, and you can do everything from radar, chart, XTE, color cameras, to watch movies (or so I am told... I have not done the last two - no interest).
You should just go to West Marine and play around with their models a bit and see which on e you prefer. I no longer feel one is better than the other. It all comes down to which one you like better. I will say that programming the Raymarine quick-push buttons for custom screens is a great plus and a lot easier than scrolling through the pages of the Garmin... but the Garmins may have that functio ntoo (just not the models I have used).
Regarding your boat choice, I have heard that the Cherubini Hunters were built better than the others, but have no first hand experience with that model. My experience with the others was not pleasant, so we will leave at that.
|03-14-2008 07:34 PM|
Not to hijack my own thread (is that possible?), but I am interested in the opinion of the Hunter 37 cutter as a lightly built boat. I owned a 1991 Hunter Legend 375 and would most certainly agree that it was not an offshore capable vessel. However, the 1984 Cherubini Hunter cutter is a very different boat. Heavier constructed with more substantial glass, etc.
In addition (and there is no way you could have known), this boat has been upgraded in some of the area most commonly viewed as weak points of the general production boats: thru hulls fittings upgraded, portholes installed in place of plastic pretend windows, etc.
It has been my experience that most boats can take much more punishment than the crew. Boats are lost when the crew is too exhausted or demoralized to care about survival. I have always found it interesting when a crew abandons ship and is picked up by the Coast Guard only to have the vessel found adrift days later....
If you feel the Hunter 37 is truly unsafe for this voyage...I would much rather hear it now than to prove you correct later!
|03-14-2008 07:02 PM|
Thanks for the words of wisdom. I am still debating turning the Cape. It will depend on weather and other conditions such as the confidence of the crew, any mechanical problems, etc. I will not hesitate to bail out if necessary.
I will have a full set of paper charts, a handheld chartplotter with GPS and a handheld GPS only unit. The equipment I am planning on adding to the boat is to create another layer of safety without making it do or die on the function of the system.
As the old saying goes: A good skipper has the skill to get out of any situation he/she encounters; a Great skipper never has to demostrate such skill.
|03-14-2008 06:48 PM|
Not mine on the electronics. Just be careful out there...that is a lightly built boat for going well offshore and around Hatteras. Make SURE you can get good offshore forecasts and don't miss any. We lose boats bigger and better than yours every year due to not being vigilant on the changing conditions off the Hatteras area but t sounds as if you are experienced and have some good help along for the ride. Suggest Dodge's guide to SE US inlets if you need to bail out somewhere along the way.
I disagree about the need for separate units BTW since neither the radar or the chartplotter is an essential navigation device. What is essential is your GPS, your paper charts and your eyeballs! I used a combo radar/plotter for 6 years of cruising from Maine to Grenada and found the combo to be much easier to use and understand than my prior stand alone radar without plotter. There is the additional expense as well to think about.
Anyway...good luck with it all and yell if we can help.
|03-14-2008 06:08 PM|
Thanks for the information and advice. Not sure if I was clear but we are going outside and not up the ICW. Does that change any recommendations?
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|