Icom AIS receiver, and more on Class B
What with Class B AIS transponders finally coming to market, a new AIS receiver may seem irrelevant. But it’s from Icom, it seems to be designed and priced right, and I suspect that it will be a winner. The $500 MXA-5000 is a true dual channel receiver—especially important when Class B proliferates—with a built-in antenna splitter, dual outputs (plotter and PC), and the ability to mix GPS input into the AIS target stream. This sample unit had just arrived from Japan but the Icom rep here at the NMEA conference said that it seemed to be very sensitive in initial testing. While Class B transponders are also true dual channel receivers, they will cost significantly more, especially when a separate antenna is figured in. The MXA-5000 will be available in December, and maybe so will Class B…
Yesterday afternoon the Coast Guard’s Jorge Arroyo and the FCC’s Ghassan Khalek led a special meeting that was mostly about Class B. It was packed and sometimes raucous. My impressions:
* Manufacturers looking for clear guidelines about how to implement the FCC’s demand that MMSI data be input by vendors, dealers, or installers—not users—did not get them. The USCG and FCC feel that there are multiple ways to fulfill the requirement and are asking manufacturers to submit plans for approval. It sounds like it could be some sort of paper trail guaranteeing that the end installer inputs the data or an online scheme that accomplishes the same goal.
* Technical installers hoping that some sort of certification will be required to install Class B were disappointed. The FCC is concerned about data input, not installation, and its vague language about qualifications is purposeful. There’s a good opportunity here for installers, I think, but the FCC wants the market place to be competitive.
* The really new, and surprising, info about Class B is illustrated in the slide below. The USCG has decided that B transponders should not transmit boat names, as in many cases they are not official or data-based. Instead of a name, that field will be filled with “US#” and the boat’s state registration or federal documentation number. This idea wasn’t discussed much in the meeting, but later on a number of people were grumbling about it. A lot of AIS users really appreciate the ability to hail other vessels by name, or just see who else it out there. I can see how the scheme is more orderly, and will distinguish Class A and B transponders well. But will it reduce the usefulness of AIS, or will we adapt to it? What do you think? {Don’t miss this update.}
Arroyo and Khalek seem confident that Class B transponders will be on the market soon, but there also seem to be lots of details yet to work out. At least now Icom has attached its brand name to this whole safety technology. No doubt there will be lots more talk about AIS here and elsewhere in the coming months.
What, no NMEA 2000?
Seems like a nice unit, I eagerly await the test results and a transceiver variant.
As for the USCG not wanting names on the AIS stream, I find them completely out of touch with how AIS is used in the real world.