Also, maybe you should have addressed the antenna situation. If you install a separate VHF and black-box AIS transponder, you'll need to install a second antenna (i.e. for the AIS), usually if you're talking about a sailboat you'll have the VHF antenna in the top of the pole and installing another one up there is not feasible, so you'll have to find a place to install the AIS antenna lower, and maybe that'll affect the range. To avoid that you might install a splitter to use the same antenna for both VHF and AIS, and in that point, wouldn't it make more sense to have a combined VHF/AIS device, than having the complexity of separate VHF radio and AIS transponder, and then the antenna splitter, going to the same antenna?
Many of the contemporary black box AIS units have built-in splitters, thus allowing the use of an existing VHF antenna for both VHF and AIS. I, however, subscribe to Jeff’s view that separate units are the preferred configuration, if you have the space, for the reasons he mentions. In my case, I installed a stand alone AIS with a dedicated antenna, which insures that there will be no interruption of signal because of a conflict of using AIS and the VHF simultaneously, or failure/degradation of the VHF antenna. The built in splitter in the AIS is not used when there is a dedicated AIS antenna, however it offers a short term solution if there is a future failure of either the VHF antenna or the AIS antenna. That solution is to disconnect the failed antenna and put the splitter into service in feeding both the AIS and VHF signals thru the remaining functional antenna. This assumes, of course, that the AIS box and VHF head units are in close enough proximity that you can use a short coax cable with couplings to jumper the vhf head unit to the splitter connection on the AIS, and that you have such a cable aboard, or can fabricate one . A bit of redundancy in antennas, at least.
If a combined device makes installation easier and/or avoids the splitter, you can have a handheld vhf as a backup. Then you have kind of best of both worlds.
I've had that same question myself, but have decided to have separate systems, even if the VHF radio has AIS receive only as well. Though antennas, wasn't mentioned here, I'm running separate antenna cables to the masthead. I've viewed a lot of your great videos as well as your company channel and looking into making a couple of purchases to help out. Thank you.
I went with a separate Vesper AIS box with separate AIS antenna. I do not like the antenna multiplexers because of the signal loss. Give me maximum signal strength! Not a concern when using a combination VHF & AIS unit?
I would go with the new Vesper Cortex personally. Seems like the best of both worlds especially considering the safety benefits of the on screen touch DSC calling right from the VHF!
Because AIS devices are currently using universal electronic language across the different brands, separate devices should be an excellent choice. When manufacturers starts making devices that operate proprietarily, the trust is broken and you should strongly avoid that brand.
Jeff, I think you have the definition of redundancy wrong: re·dun·dan·cy the inclusion of extra components which are not strictly necessary to functioning, in case of failure in other components. It would be redundant to have two VHF and two AIS. It is not redundant to split them up. I disagree that your approach is going to make boaters significantly safer and save them money. We have all(okay 99% of us) migrated to multifunction displays. Why? Simply put integration and the resulting advantages like cost savings and interoperability far outweigh the added reliability of having everything broken out. If you want redundancy in a GPS/Radar/Sonar system you add an extra MFD not split everything out. Garmin/Navico/Raymarine/Furuno barely sell individual components anymore. Simrad and Furuno do but not much in the recreational space and even for the commercial side options are limited. I think you lost your way a bit on this video man.
Sure, but the VHF could serve as a redundant AIS receiver, even if it's not capable of transmitting AIS data. It'd be safer to have full redundancy (AIS rx and tx), but at least having AIS rx is a benefit over not having that at all. Sometimes redundancy isn't a perfect seamless replacement, but at least some form of limp-home better than nothing.
![How to use a Marine VHF RADIO [Capable Cruising Guides]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Y6yn0Bmr748/mqdefault.jpg)
Also, maybe you should have addressed the antenna situation. If you install a separate VHF and black-box AIS transponder, you'll need to install a second antenna (i.e. for the AIS), usually if you're talking about a sailboat you'll have the VHF antenna in the top of the pole and installing another one up there is not feasible, so you'll have to find a place to install the AIS antenna lower, and maybe that'll affect the range. To avoid that you might install a splitter to use the same antenna for both VHF and AIS, and in that point, wouldn't it make more sense to have a combined VHF/AIS device, than having the complexity of separate VHF radio and AIS transponder, and then the antenna splitter, going to the same antenna?
For sailboats, most of the time we install a digital VHF splitter and share the VHF/AIS antenna with the VHF radio and AIS.
@@PacificYachtSystems thanks for taking the time to comment and reply here. I Learned a lot with your videos
Many of the contemporary black box AIS units have built-in splitters, thus allowing the use of an existing VHF antenna for both VHF and AIS.
I, however, subscribe to Jeff’s view that separate units are the preferred configuration, if you have the space, for the reasons he mentions.
In my case, I installed a stand alone AIS with a dedicated antenna, which insures that there will be no interruption of signal because of a conflict of using AIS and the VHF simultaneously, or failure/degradation of the VHF antenna.
The built in splitter in the AIS is not used when there is a dedicated AIS antenna, however it offers a short term solution if there is a future failure of either the VHF antenna or the AIS antenna. That solution is to disconnect the failed antenna and put the splitter into service in feeding both the AIS and VHF signals thru the remaining functional antenna. This assumes, of course, that the AIS box and VHF head units are in close enough proximity that you can use a short coax cable with couplings to jumper the vhf head unit to the splitter connection on the AIS, and that you have such a cable aboard, or can fabricate one . A bit of redundancy in antennas, at least.
Thanks for contributing Steve, appreciate it.
If a combined device makes installation easier and/or avoids the splitter, you can have a handheld vhf as a backup. Then you have kind of best of both worlds.
Yep, some boaters are doing that. Handheld VHF is a good idea.
I've had that same question myself, but have decided to have separate systems, even if the VHF radio has AIS receive only as well. Though antennas, wasn't mentioned here, I'm running separate antenna cables to the masthead. I've viewed a lot of your great videos as well as your company channel and looking into making a couple of purchases to help out. Thank you.
Thanks Mo for sharing, and good reminder on seperate antennas for VHF and AIS.
Could you do a video of how to properly solder the VHF antenna connector?
Good suggestion.
@@PacificYachtSystems yes please! I need a how to guidance on preparing the cables/wires for sailboat vhf and ais wiring
I have both. Redundency and I can turn of the transponder when I want privacy.
I went with a separate Vesper AIS box with separate AIS antenna. I do not like the antenna multiplexers because of the signal loss. Give me maximum signal strength! Not a concern when using a combination VHF & AIS unit?
Good point David, definitely an advantage of the Vesper Cortex.
The Vesper splitter is amplified when powered to eliminate signal loss, it also has a passive pass through if power is lost.
I would go with the new Vesper Cortex personally. Seems like the best of both worlds especially considering the safety benefits of the on screen touch DSC calling right from the VHF!
Yep, it's a good combo: AIS and VHF.
Because AIS devices are currently using universal electronic language across the different brands, separate devices should be an excellent choice. When manufacturers starts making devices that operate proprietarily, the trust is broken and you should strongly avoid that brand.
💯
Thanks Javier.
Jeff,
I think you have the definition of redundancy wrong: re·dun·dan·cy the inclusion of extra components which are not strictly necessary to functioning, in case of failure in other components. It would be redundant to have two VHF and two AIS. It is not redundant to split them up. I disagree that your approach is going to make boaters significantly safer and save them money. We have all(okay 99% of us) migrated to multifunction displays. Why? Simply put integration and the resulting advantages like cost savings and interoperability far outweigh the added reliability of having everything broken out. If you want redundancy in a GPS/Radar/Sonar system you add an extra MFD not split everything out. Garmin/Navico/Raymarine/Furuno barely sell individual components anymore. Simrad and Furuno do but not much in the recreational space and even for the commercial side options are limited. I think you lost your way a bit on this video man.
Hmmm, thanks Damien for the explanation. Appreciate it.
Sure, but the VHF could serve as a redundant AIS receiver, even if it's not capable of transmitting AIS data. It'd be safer to have full redundancy (AIS rx and tx), but at least having AIS rx is a benefit over not having that at all. Sometimes redundancy isn't a perfect seamless replacement, but at least some form of limp-home better than nothing.
Flo Rest
speak and no speak... crazy