radar location

Lawdog

Member III
I just purchased a raymarine 2KW radome and havent yet determined where to install it, either on the mast or a stern pole. Although the pole is a more expensive install, I understand that the radar picks up bouys in the fog better, when entering a channel, but who knows. Anyone with experience is welcome to offer their opinion, so I can figure out what to do. I usually store the boat in the winter without the mast.

Neal
Enterprise
E38
 

Howard Keiper

Moderator
Neal...
A nice height above the water would be about 20-25 feet (not critical), which makes the 1st spreader location ideal. But you'll want to avoid any location that will require cutting the cable from the radome to the display. This makes the pole more ideal...though somewhat less effective. I use a Questus pole and gimbal affair on my backstay...about 12' or so above the water. It works very nicely, but I wish I had just a little more height.
Howard Keiper
Sea Quest
E-35 II
Berkeley
 

andy beach

Member II
Neal
My first choice for radar location would also be on the mast.Located on the front of the mast would lessen the chance for "shadow" areas on the viewing screen for forward areas caused by the mast itself.
Secondly,the radar puts out low levels of micro-waves and I've never been to comfortable with the fact that my head would be so close to the dome mounted on the back stay while standing at the helm for long periods of time.

Andy Beach
1990 E-34
 

Howard Keiper

Moderator
Neal / Andy

You needn't be too concerned about the radiation...being a few feet over your head. As long as the antenna is not constantly bathing your eyes or gonads you're fine. Actually, the radiation is not low-level at all. In fact, the energy is produced in extremely short bursts of power...the 2KW you mentioned. The average power however, is probably on the order of 4 or 5 watts. Anyway, it won't hurt you if it's not aimed at you for a fairly long time.

The position fore or aft of the mast isn't all that critical either, the motion of the boat being enough to let the antenna "see" around it at any given time.
 

gareth harris

Sustaining Member
Is a stern pole compatible with a hydraulic backstay?

BTW, my lower spreaders are 19ft above the water, upper 33ft, if you have not had a chance to measure yours.

Gareth
Freyja E35 #241 1972
 

mark reed

Member III
radar pole and hydraulic backstay

I installed a backstay-mounted radar (Waltz pole and swing arm) and it is compatible with our Navtec hydraulic backstay. The stay runs through a Delrin fitting on the pole. I chose this installation because it seemed easier to do myself than a mast mount. I like the way it performs and the way it looks. The only drawback was when hauling out the radar interfered with the 35-ton Travelift and had to be removed before hauling. So now I try to haul where there is a 50-ton lift :)
 

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
Stern Pole photo...

While we do not have an E-38, we do have a sloped transom and an aluminum radar pole that might install in a similar fashion on an E-38.
Ours has a slanted plate welded around the pole where it passes through the transom and then is socketed into an stub of FRP tube glassed to the bottom of the hull. It is over-built and you could probably pick up the boat with it! Bad news is that it adds about 35# of quarter-inch-wall alum. tubing to the wrong side and end of the boat.... :(
One day, when I get a "round tuit" this will get replaced with a carbon fiber pole.
Note that there is no possible conflict with the integral hydraulic adjuster. The radar unit is about 3 feet above my head, when standing up.
Cheers,
Loren in Portland, OR
 

Attachments

  • sternview,O34.jpg
    sternview,O34.jpg
    19.8 KB · Views: 403
Last edited:

jmoses

Member III
Pole vs. Mast radar install

I had a long discussion with a fellow viking, Chris Lab, about this very subject. He went the mast route and said if he were to do it again, he would put it on a pole on the stern. Happily, Chris's family is now off Costa Rico having the time of their lives on their E-34.

He said getting the wires up the mast (inside) was a monumental hassle and he eventually had to splice the wires as there was not a wire set long enough to go from the mast to the nav station, which he figured was almost 50 feet when said and done. The splicing has to follow rigid guidelines as simple butt connectors won't do. I guess one could run the wires outside the mast, but not real yachty, but to each his own.

Certainly the higher the transciever the better the range. But that comes at a price of the pendulum effect if in a sea way as the higher up the unit, the more sway induced into the return. Again, a trade off that has to be thought through and looked into as beam widths are different and the narrower the beam, the better the return, but more prone to loss of signal when the transciever is moving 20 + feet back and forth up on the mast.

After what I've read and discussed with Chris, I'm going the pole route on the transom with my Furuno, but high enough so crew on deck or reefing won't get unnecessarily iradiated, which is not good. I'm still looking for a cast off carbon fibre spinnaker pole from some racer though :)

John M.
 

gareth harris

Sustaining Member
A formula that might be useful for this discussion:

View to the horizon in nm = 1.23 X square root of height in feet.

At 19 ft (my lower spreader) that comes to 5.6 nm.
At 12 ft, 4.3 nm
At 25 ft, 6.15 nm.

Gareth
Freyja E35 #241 1972
 

Howard Keiper

Moderator
Nothing about a radar installation is without compromise(s).
It's a popular misconception...as John has noted, that the higher the R/T is mounted the better. I thought long and hard about where to put my antenna (backstay with Questus "lateral gimbal") and put it where I did for the following reasons: when you're talking about a 2KW system in the 1st place, usually expressed as 24mi, 32mi, etc., you don't increase the maximum range signifigantly by merely raising the height. What you look for is a height above the water just high enough to fit your maximun observable distance into the distance your display can show you in the first place...in other words, if you've got a 2KW, 24mi. radar, you won't improve it's performance (and why would you want to?) by putting the antenna at, let's say, at the 2nd spreader. If 24 miles is what the system is capable of, then that's what you get...and that's a nice figure for any sailboat on the Bay.
The 1st spreader height on Sea Quest is 19 ft, as Garth has previously noted, and I suspect that my 30' cable would still be shy by about 5' or so to my display. Just a guess, I didn't measure the distance...but it's critical. The height would have worked for me, but the cable is a bear...also as you have noted and, since the mast is stepped on the roof, I would have had to cut the cable and insert a connector(s) at the base. I am licensed and certified to do that sort of thing commercially (it's my nite job) and I say that it is NOT as trivial as splicing wires. It can be done, but it's a son-of-a-gun and very expensive.
The pole mount appealed to me at first, but then I got to thinking that both the backstay and pole would put the height about the same (about 12' or thereabouts) and that height diminishes considerably as the boat heels; the cable length would be about the same (you coil up the excess, if any, and stuff it somewhere); but the Questus at least keeps the antenna level. I'm not sure what benefit there is to that if the boat is heeled and the actual height at that point is reduced to about 7-8'. A disadvantage of the Questus is that the combined weight of the assembly, Questus + Sitex, about 17 lbs., although partially borne by the backstay pole when vertical, causes noticeable sag when off vertical. Not an issue, probably, but I've learned to pay attention to words like probably, almost, virtually, etc.
Anyway, the installation is aesthetcially pleasing, functionally perfect(except for height) and has been problem free for several years. I've got pics if anyone is interested.
 

CaptDan

Member III
I bit the bullet and tried my hand at making a home made pole using off-the shelf threaded plumbing pipe and floor flanges. The radome's base is epoxy/plywood composite, and the only 'custom' piece is a $30 Garhauer pulpit brace made for their $700 tower. The pole is painted with 7 coats of white rustoleum

The downside is it adds about 40# to the portside just off centerline. The upside is it cost me about $100, and provides about 8feet of height from my transome.

Hopefully I'll have pix soon.

Capt Dan G>E35II "Kunu"
 

Brisdon

Inactive Member
I suspect I'm a little late for this thread, but I have my radar on the backstay on a Waltz backstay gimble. Did it three years ago and the gimble still works perfectly. The radar still rides level no matter how the boat is heeling. The tube that runs up in front of the stay is also great to lean in against when I'm at the helm. A lot more comfortable than the bare stay was.
 

jmoses

Member III
Radar Mounts

I just have heart burn paying for a radar mount that costs as much, no, twice as much as my radar unit itself. I'm not familiar with the Waltz mount, but the Questus gimbled unit, once all the bits and pieces are added up, is close to 1,200 bucks. Geez, I paid $500.00 for a heavily discounted Furuno 1623 unit that was missing a cable......I was out 30.00 for that piece, then to plunk down $1,200 (backstay gimble mount) for a 500.00 radar set seems a bit of inverse logic to me.

But whatever works. I'm currently working on fabricating a pole mount for under 150.00 (acquired a free cast off Al. spinnaker pole to be powder coated for about 30.00, transom pad with pivoting base fabricated for about 25.00, secured to pulpit rail for about 30.00 and Al. fabricated radome mount for about 30.00 + misc nuts, bolts, etc.).

Even a radome mount goes for 150 (pole) - 300 (mast) depending on style and manufacturer. A plate 3' x 3' x 1/4" of Al. is about $5.00 and powder coating adds about $25 at most. 30 minutes of my time cutting and drilling and I've saved 120 bucks on the radome mount.

Just checked out the Waltz unit...... a discount marine E-shop has one @ $775 for the Furuno unit 2 kw radome then add in the optional sail gaurd @ $335 and we're at $1,100 bucks. Not to mention dropping stick to run cables and more than likely having to splice the cable and use a Cannon type plug (so mast can be removed later with out discombobulating the radar set) is more than I'm willing to spend or put effort into with the stick.

But to each his own....we all have varying bank acounts, abilities and areas of focus, but I just disdain paying premium prices for "marine" products that I KNOW are marked up 100% - 200% from their manufacturing costs, not to metion, I can fabricate myself at 1/10 the cost. Maybe not the perfect gimbled mount, but I'm more concerned with close in traffic (say 2-5 miles) then 15 - 10 miles - wondering waht's 20 - 25 miles out is rarely of concern.

Regardless, in my 25 years of using radars and marine experience, large ships show up pretty well on almost all radars set (gimbled or not) and THAT'S my biggest concern!

John M.
 

Brisdon

Inactive Member
With the waltz you don't have to pull the stick. It simply clamps on to the cable with a two sided delrin pad. The radar wire runs down the middle of the Waltz pole. If you have to pull the stick for maintenance or what not, you can just swing the whole Waltz unit down and forward against the binacle, you don't have to disconnect the radar or anything. My radome doesn't come in contact with the leach of my sail, so I don't understand the sail guard. What you mount the radar on isn't an accessory to the radar unit, it's a component of the radar system. Which component costs more is sort of irrelevant. A couple of my friends have poles that they bought from Garhuer (spelling) with manual leveling deviced on top and outboard hoists to boot. The Garhuer setup is more expensive than the back stay gimble, and frankly I find it kind of big and clumbsy. It's a massive sort of thing sitting out on one stern quarter of the boat. If the radar isn't gimbled, it won't see anything on either side when your heeling, except for the fish beneath you and the stars above you. I personally don't like to have to remember to manually re-ajust the radar when the boat changes heel. I'd just a soon it take care of itself.
 

Kristoria

New Member
A formula that might be useful for this discussion:

View to the horizon in nm = 1.23 X square root of height in feet.

At 19 ft (my lower spreader) that comes to 5.6 nm.
At 12 ft, 4.3 nm
At 25 ft, 6.15 nm.

Gareth
Freyja E35 #241 1972

CORECTION TO ABOVE:

Formulee for horizon is = 1.17 * the square root of the height of object or eye.

Cheers,
Kristoria
 

Brisdon

Inactive Member
One of my neighbors at the marina has his radar above where the second stay attaches. It's got to be about 35 ft up. It's not gimbled either, so he sees nothing on his windward side because he's shooting up in the air, and nothing on the leward side because he's shooting down into the water, and in front of him he has this huge blind spot that includes anything he might hit sooner than next Tuesday. I think that setting the radar gimbled on the backstay is still the best solution. It's easy to service at sea, it's high enough to get a good picture for safety (at sail boat speeds), and it's always level. I don't understand non-gimbled mast mounted radar on sailboats. I wish someone could explain to me why people keep making that sort of installation. I guess it's good for motoring in fog on a flat sea, but that is the end of it's usefulness.
 

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
"Winning the Pole Position"

On the question of why a fixed mount...
Conditions vary, but in the NW we commonly get thick fog with light (or no) wind and flat seas. Motoring conditions. :p
As the boat rolls some in the swells, the radar beam will pick up and average out returns. The regular and random movement of the boat is also how the "theoretical shadow" caused by the mast (whether many feet forward of the sterm-mounted dome-on-a-pole, or the rear view of the mast-mount dome will get filled in. The later is a *much* larger arc of blocked signal, by far, and, absent some boat movement, a lot harder to fill in the blocked targets.

Installation chapters in boating books like to always mention the extreme example of the boat on one tack for a significant period of time as the reason for want an adjustable dome angle, or going further, a gimbled dome. Even with a wind steady enough to maintain an averaged amount of heel, in thick fog or at night... there will also be wave action caused by that same breeze that will change that heel angle a lot. I always figure that the horizontal beam angle will help with that problem to a certain degree (pun alert). But then I am not crossing sea lanes under sail in low visibility in the ocean. YMMV.

Even if our boat had not come with a stern pole, I would have installed one.

Not asked and not relevant to the exact radar question, but when we replaced the old Apelco unit this year with a new Furuno 1715, we also moved the sternlight up to the stern pole from the factory location on the aft pulpit. Quite a nice safety upgrade, IMO. The new GPS antenna is now up there, too.

Cheers,
Loren in PDX
 
Last edited:

Kristoria

New Member
Radar Location and Gimbled Backstay riggs.

One of my neighbors at the marina has his radar above where the second stay attaches. It's got to be about 35 ft up. It's not gimbled either, so he sees nothing on his windward side because he's shooting up in the air, and nothing on the leward side because he's shooting down into the water, and in front of him he has this huge blind spot that includes anything he might hit sooner than next Tuesday. I think that setting the radar gimbled on the backstay is still the best solution. It's easy to service at sea, it's high enough to get a good picture for safety (at sail boat speeds), and it's always level. I don't understand non-gimbled mast mounted radar on sailboats. I wish someone could explain to me why people keep making that sort of installation. I guess it's good for motoring in fog on a flat sea, but that is the end of it's usefulness.
Hi couldn't agree more. Never seen the setup in the UK but they seem to be fitted to a goodly number of boats on the secondhand market in the States. What makes me shudder a little is West Marines $979 dollars for the gimbling as against just $999.99 for the Raydome and cable.
 

Brisdon

Inactive Member
I think West Marine's prices are set by a drug lord. I have to say though, that it's a good piece of hardware. Mine has been up about 5 years and it still gimbles perfectly with the same dampened motion that it did new. I also like the way you can pull one screw and swing the whole radar down into the cockpit for servicing without disconnecting any wires.
 
Top