Our first captain-requested White Paper, investigating tech products for the Winter Refit 2017/18.
For those considering a refit for their superyachts this winter and beyond, switching to solid state radars is likely something you have tossed back and forth. However, with so much information on the topic and not much time to read it all, weighing up all the options can be a hard graft. The SYT News team has investigated the pros, cons and legalities of solid state vs. magnetron and put it all in one place, so you can easily decide for yourself what would be the best fit for your yacht. Speaking to experts from the big three companies currently producing solid state radars – Garmin, Furuno and Navico/SIMRAD – as well as an IMO representative, we talk specifications, opinions and legislation.
What’s out there?
Furuno
It has an open array FAR3000 range, which includes an S–Band radar that uses solid state technology for long range detection and an X-Band solid state radar. The latter is marketed for smaller vessels (under 30m), though it has the potential to also be used on superyachts for short range applications. Furuno’s solid state technology uses the doppler effect, meaning it can represent a target coming towards you or moving away in different colours. Dan Conway, Area Sales Manager at Furuno, said: “It is designed for maximum user-friendliness; the idea is you don’t have to do a whole new radar training course to get up to scratch with how to use solid state if you are used to magnetron.” Its S-Band has an output power of 250w, with different models of the X-Band transmitting at 20w.
Whilst Conway says there will be bigger X-Band models coming from Furuno that can legally cater for superyachts and bigger vessels, currently the company is awaiting IMO requirement change, meaning its development (or at least the release) of this is on pause for the time being. Prices are on request. The IMO ruling will be covered in more detail further on.
Simrad
It currently offers a range of X-Band HALO open array solid state radars, which come with either a 3ft, 4ft or 6ft antenna. Simrad product line director for Navico Steve Thomas advises that generally the larger the array, the better distance performance you get, meaning that for a superyacht the HALO-6 would be preferable. Simrad’s largest antenna offers a range of up to 72 nautical miles radius, and the HALO range has a transmit power of 25w. Its website advises that though the HALO-6 Radar meets tough IEC 62388 Annex D target detection specifications, this excludes the beacon and RACON triggering requirement.
The company currently doesn’t use doppler effect technology in its solid state products. It will however be introducing this into their open arrays very soon, with the aim of having this updated product ready to promo at Fort Lauderdale this year. The HALO-6 has an SRP of £6090,00.
Garmin
Its X-Band open array Fantom offering comes with either a four or six-foot antenna, and reaches up to a 70 nautical mile range. However, Garmin’s Marine OEM Product Support Manager Bob Fry pointed out that maximum range is not always that critical. “It is seldom for the need to switch up to a 70nm range, however power is important to detect those weaker targets at the max range possible, typically 12 to 13 nm to the radar horizon,” he said. He advises that the maximum range a superyacht would commonly use is 24 to 36 nm ranges, unless they were tracking rain storms.
The Fantom range have a transmit power of 40w – equal to 5kw traditional pulse radar – and use the doppler effect through Garmin’s MotionScope technology. The Fantom-6 is currently retailing at $7,999.99 USD.
Standalone product?
When solid state radars for the marine industry were discussed in 2016, there was a consensus amongst manufacturers that their magnetron radars would by no means go obsolete as a result of solid state. Producers instead saw them as a compliment to traditional systems, which until the next technology leap should not act as replacement. However, one year on the mood has begun to change, at least for some.
Furuno’s Conway maintains that most boats will still end up with both, as currently the IMO require larger boats to have a function that triggers racons and beacons, which solid state radars cannot do effectively. However, he believes a lot of superyacht owners will still want to invest in the new tech to stay ahead of the curve. “It’s a fair way down the line that magnetron would be completely obsolete, not in at least the next ten years,” he said. He also pointed out that currently solid state radars are more expensive than magnetron as the technology in marine usage is still relatively new, though the prices will fall as the tech ages.
Speaking to Thomas, there was less hope for magnetron’s future. He thinks that eventually we will have to leave it behind because, especially from a recreational point of view, solid state has so many advantages. “At some point the IMO will be forced to take a look at their [carriage] requirements,” he said.
Thomas agreed that there is a slight premium for solid state radars, but thought that it was still very much affordable for the target market, and so wouldn’t be an issue for superyacht owners.
Garmin’s Fry was the most pessimistic about magnetron. He said that relatively soon we would see the death of the traditional radars, drawing from the example of the avionics industry which switched to solely solid state about 5/6 years ago. Indeed, he said that the only reason companies had not been building solid state into marine radars was because the prices were so high for the technology that most owners would not have bought them. However, now that prices have come down enough to make the products viable he imagines boats may well only use solid state radars in the future. “Magnetron radars generally warrant up to 3000 hours, but they are under a lot of pressure as they are constantly working hard. This makes them unreliable and their longevity questionable. Solid state should be a lot more reliable,” he said.
An IMO review of the performance standards for radar equipment in 2004 proposed that magnetron radar technology was reaching its limits at the time, now 13 years ago.
Biggest advantages for superyachts
All three of our experts agreed that there were really no disadvantages of replacing magnetron with solid state (other than uncertainty around the current IMO ruling).
Safer and longer-lasting
Solid state is safer than magnetron. Simrad’s Thomas explained how with the traditional radars, standing directly in front of them is dangerous because of the high levels of radiation they give off. However, because solid state gives off so much less power and targets radiation more efficiently, this is no longer a problem. Thomas said: “From an RF perspective solid state technology is also better, because magnetron radars tend to burn out quicker because of the power usage so it means less maintenance.”
Lower energy output
Even Conway, the most pro-magnetron of our experts, firmly believed in the significant transmitted output energy reductions advantages of solid state radars. “Our X–Bands have up to a 96 nautical mile range, which magnetrons can do but would require much more transmitted output energy – and this is transmit power, not usage power, so essentially wasted energy. Solid state is much more efficient,” he said.
Better target separation/tracking
Our experts all agreed that the new technology allowed for improved tracking and clarity in the display of other vessels, meaning that real targets are distinguished above clutter.
Collision reduction?
This was the only slight area of contention. Simrad’s Steve Thomas thought that when it came to preventing collisions and storm recognition, all radar technology was equal. He said: “Radars in general reduce collisions, but I don’t know that there is anything specific around solid state.” Fry agreed that at the time of writing it was too early to tell. However, he did say that in theory, with doppler technology showing different colours for approaching vessels, it should further aid prevention. “We only brought it out 18 months ago so we really can’t comment, but the technology certainly should help [reduce collisions],” he said. However, he pointed out that even the best tech doesn’t prevent user error.
IMO rulings
The key issue is that solid state radars don’t trigger racons (radar beacons) effectively enough to meet IMO requirements for X-Bands on larger boats such as superyachts. These racons are typically on buoys outside harbours and vessels use the racon to identify the harbour they are arriving at. Solid state radars use one long low energy pulse rather than a short large energy pulse radar, and transmit a lot less power, so although the technology can sometimes trigger them the radar would have to be very close to the target and it is not guaranteed.
The last set of performance standards for radar were adopted in 2004, in response to the earlier mentioned proposal which argued that the requirement for future S-Band radars to trigger and display radar beacons should be discontinued, to allow for the development of new and improved radar technologies. However, it was agreed that X-Bands should continue to be required to trigger these racons. This was to ensure development was spread out over a few years, as it was thought radar manufacturers would need the freedom to develop new technology, but beacon manufacturers would then need some years to develop new beacons capable of responding.
Navigators can recognise harbours, just in different ways. For example, they can use an AIS (Automatic Identification System) as the signal to do this. Furuno’s Conway therefore pointed to the need to reconsider these requirements. He said: “Essentially, the legislation hasn’t kept pace with radar technology. It’s not for me to say whether [solid state is] as safe or whether the laws should change, but they do seem slightly behind with current technology.”
Fry believes that despite requirements a lot of larger vessels will have already made the switch to solid state, and that magnetron won’t be around for much longer. “There’s enough alternative Nav-Aids out there now. AIS is much more reliable anyway, so why not just use it?” he said.
Simrad is currently trying to adapt its solid state products to fit these rulings. The company is trying several – currently confidential – approaches to make its radars trigger racons, in order to overcome this issue in future models.
Thomas also agreed though that as tech evolves regulatory committees should make sure their legislation still make sense.
We asked an IMO representative to explain to us the reason behind the current requirements, as seen below:
“The radar, combined with other sensor or reported information (e.g. AIS), should improve the safety of navigation by assisting in the efficient navigation of ships and protection of the environment by satisfying the following functional requirements: – in coastal navigation and harbour approaches, by giving a clear indication of land and other fixed hazards; – as a means to provide an enhanced traffic image and improved situation awareness; – in a ship-to-ship mode for aiding collision avoidance of both detected and reported hazards; – in the detection of small floating and fixed hazards, for collision avoidance and the safety of own ship; and – in the detection of floating and fixed aids to navigation.
The carriage requirements for radar are set out in SOLAS Chapter V.? They don’t specify?solid state or magnetron, so it would be down to the flag State to decide if the radar is acceptable and meets the standards.
If Member States Parties to SOLAS want to amend or change the regulation or performance standards, they would need to bring the proposal to IMO.”
Summary
We hope this paper has been helpful in breaking down some of the basics of solid state radar technology, and how it can work for superyachts. If you require any further information, please feel free to contact the author at news@superyachtechnology.com, who will do her best to try and answer your questions.