We must shop at different websites.
I was looking at MSRP. Google shopping shows about $250. Still that is up a lot from the cheaper and poorer splitters of a few years past.
You are working hard to keep your beliefs safe from harm.
And here I thought I was keeping an open mind. *grin*
I disagree that 1 dB is trivial, especially for voice. I won't argue the point. The scenario in which it is important just doesn't come up often. There are enough surprises without blowing off a deficit that can be avoided. Life is a compromise and we all make our own choices. Regardless we are best served when we know we are making a compromise.
A separate antenna mounted on a rail is definitely worse than a shared one mounted on the mast top. Your horizon examples prove that. It becomes particularly so when people hire professionals to install it with cheap coax and Shakespeare connectors.
Which goes directly to your point that not all "professionals" are professionals, or may be working out of their area of expertise.
It also goes to my point about compromises. Comparing ships to tugs to recreational boats, 30 to 50 minutes warning is fine for me. You may want more, so a masthead mount is better. I like the redundancy of a separate antenna away from the mast, so a pushpit or radar pole mount is better.
Lightning doesn't count as a failure. That most likely would also take out the VHF and all other systems. It is destruction, not failure, and no fault of a splitter.
I agree. That's why I labeled it. Full disclosure.
You don't have any experience or knowledge on good splitters besides that which I just taught you yesterday - but you have seen failures of them already?
As I noted early one I have experience with the Vesper splitters and have installed them for customers who requested a splitter. I tell my customers what I think is best and then generally do as they ask (unless there is an explicit safety or regulatory issue).
Running a separate antenna system to the masthead on most boats is not good because of the separation issue you have brought up.
I obviously agree. Directionality is something few users will notice but definitely hurts.
Running a separate antenna to the arch on our boat requires 75' of LMR400 - but it wouldn't fit in the chases anyway. And I don't want the loss in performance the lower height takes away. Running to the spreaders just isn't practical with our rig configuration. The cost of dropping the rig alone, which is required for many people, far exceeds the cost of a splitter.
I rather like RG-214 myself but what the heck? *grin* Being able to make the cable run is obviously an issue. Lots of boats--I'm not saying yours--have a lot of abandoned wiring aboard which makes everything more difficult. I've seen boats with 2" structure for an arch or hard top with a 1/4" hole for wire. Silly.
Dropping the rig for a wire pull to a spreader (or the masthead for that matter is a cost issue. I am personally averse to dropping a rig but for many people its okay. Some folks have a long list of things they want to do the next time the rig comes down and the next project is the tipping point.
Being a "professional" does not give a license to stay unchallenged or demand their word stand above others. Above all other professions, the marine industry is chocked full of dangerous idiots and should never be trusted without heavy research.
I definitely agree. I would say that anyone who purports to be a professional should be able to explain an issue in terms his or her customer can understand and provide the supporting footnotes themselves.
Like I said, ours seems to be ~10nm.
Which isn't unexpected between recreational vessels with low mounted antennas over water (no intermediate topographic blockage). Masthead to masthead you really should be doing better. Are there other issues? Singapore-level traffic? I forget where you are.
I have not yet had a chance to write to John and Ben about some deterministic tests. John is the only person I know off the top of my hand who doesn't have a vested interest and does have the test equipment to make measurements. Ben has the contacts to borrow gear to test. The idea is on my tickle list.
Your point about taller commercial ships and the longer horizon is valid. Perhaps they have a filter set for class-b that only shows them at 10nm because that is deemed plenty time to deal with them? I know chartplotters have this setting. Like I said, 10nm is routinely the distance commercial shipping seems to notice or respond to us.
I'm just speculating of course. Recreational boats are generally considered unpredictable; I'm not saying you (or me! *grin*) but as a class we behave unpredictably. Ten is a nice round number so I can easily see standing orders that say "any recreational boat within 10 nm do something about." Completely off the wall guess.
When I see a ship at long range (15, 16, 18 miles) when it appears we are heading to a bottleneck and a combination of chartplotter and some math in my head suggests that we are headed to the same place (a commercial inlet, usually) when I call them the response has always been "Yeah we see you." That sure isn't radar on our little fiberglass boats. *grin* It's AIS. Going to the earlier subplot that usually leads to me offering to give way and follow them in. Once in a while something else happens (once an LNG carrier offered to let me in since he was going to snarl things up badly for a while--HUGELY decent of him, sometimes someone knows already that a pilot is going to be late and they have to loiter anyway, and sometimes there is a freakin' parade and I have to work out a way to get in without waiting for a week from Tuesday).
Of course, we are using a splitter, so most likely that is the problem.