Check the stats! They indicate that at one moment earlier today one particular network of AIS coastal receivers was seeing 763 AIS Class A transponders from towers scattered around the U.S. And one Class B. Guess whose 5 meter pleasure (and electronics testing) vessel that was?
Wow, the Class B AIS story is moving fast. If I’m understanding the FCC Equipment Authorization database correctly (select “AIS” from the “Equipment Class” drop-down list), last Friday Navico added one last submission to its NAIS-300 application—the photo above—and the unit was certified that very day, along with the Simrad AI50. The photo, full size here, not only shows a new warning label that’s apparently acceptable to the FCC (remember, it has changed its mind before), but also a Class B transponder I’ve never seen before. So we have two new questions: can an American buy either of these Navico transponders today, and what the heck is a NAIS-300?
The one-day product exhibit at the NMEA Conference is never long enough for me, and I hope the manufacturers I missed—often the ones I know the best—took no offense (you know where to find me!). I put particular focus on companies appearing at NMEA for the first time, like Digital Yacht above. This U.K. firm has been operating in Europe for some time, and is larger and more diversified than even its extensive Web site indicates. For instance, principal Nick Heyes seen above, and bigger here, is also a principal at Marine Electronic Services LTD. At any rate, Digital Yacht is not only setting up a U.S. distribution and service branch, but also introducing an interesting new navigation system called Touch…
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…
Shine Micro is not the only company offering a Class B workaround, i.e. a high-end AIS receiver that can later be turned easily into a full Class B transponder. The same is true of the SeaVieweR above, and bigger here, which is built in the U.K. by SevenStar and distributed to technical dealers in the U.S. by Whiffletree. The SeaViewR costs $995 in receive-only mode, which includes a purportedly high precision GPS, and another $400 plus tech time to make it into a transponder. Why would you want a workaround when the FCC has finally approved Class B? Well, it’s still going to take some time to get complete transponders to market. And besides you may need a technical dealer to install a Class B, whether it’s from SevenStar or another manufacturer:
The above (bigger here) is clipped from an interesting report on MMSI “anomalies” that dropped into my e-mail box. It makes a good case for why the FCC decided that Class B AIS devices should have their MMSI numbers input in a controlled way, and why, as noted in the new Report and Order (page 20), it may extent those controls to Class A. As I understand it, invalid MMSIs don’t affect AIS’s primary collision avoidance function—unless there are duplicates in the same target area—but they can mess up advanced functions like DSC calling (and security monitoring). Here’s more detail on the report:
My Class B AIS sources were right! Though it’s not yet in the FCC Daily Digest (Monday, probably), the new AIS Order was released yesterday and is posted as a PDF. And it looks good. If you recall, the FCC could have just granted waivers for the Class B devices already approved by the Coast Guard, but instead the Commissioners have fully approved Class B and dealt with side issues like frequency allocation. The major bit of news I see in the Order is that users will not be permitted to input their own MMSI numbers. However, the new Rule is nicely flexible about who can:
Today two reliable sources told me that all five FCC commissioners have now signed off on Class B AIS for US waters, though neither knows when the Order will become effective. The final step should be an announcement in the FCC Daily Digest. Having been wrong about the timing so many times in the past, I certainly won’t venture a guess. But it does seem like a good time to discuss an e-mail I recently received from a marine electronics industry veteran and Class B AIS skeptic who would like to remain anonymous. Based on his own “on-the-water analysis” he thinks it’s “completely worthless”! His points, in italics, along with my comments:
It’s wonderful that the marine electronics world is still small enough that a tiny company with a good idea can get somewhere. But I’m not sure that having your Icom M504 VHF modified by Marine Werke so it can output AIS audio signals is a good idea. For one thing, I believe only the included Shipplotter software can demodulate AIS audio, so a user can’t use this AIS target data with other software or plotters. Furthermore, to get AIS, you’ll have to tune the Icom to Channel 87 and I dare say that also scanning safety channels might significantly reduce AIS performance.
Flash of Beauty sailed from Camden three Wednesdays ago and is now passing over the top of Scotland, as you can see live on its Spot track sharing page. Tom and crew are planning to stop in Stormness, and I bet they can already smell the heather and taste the peaty scotch. Aside from sailing almost 3,000 miles, Tom did manage an underway install of his Simrad Class B AIS, but—whereas FOB took the cool, damp, and seldom-used northern route—wasn’t sure it worked until early this morning:
