[CA11] integrate e165 & RD424HD w. older Raytheon electronics

[Kevin McIntosh]

Raymarine Moderators ... would someone mind commenting on how I might integrate (by naming the required SeaTalk networking components, ect.) the following:

e165 MFD (E70025) (not yet installed, will be mounted overhead at the lower helm. I do have concerns about the weight of the unit being excessive mounted in this way - essentially hanging from the trunnion mount and an overhead 5/8~" thick teak-veneered plywood panel - are there any case studies of this mounting method being a problem for the e165?)
RD424HD (E92143) (not yet installed, will take the place of the existing SL70 radome [see more below] on flybridge radar arch)

and, pre-existing Raytheon navigation electronics, consisting of:

(flybridge) radar arch installed:
RAYSTAR 120
PATHFINDER SL70 RADAR radome (18", 2kW, FCC ID: ASLMTX2, CANADA: 149 B404, CE 0191 - radome unit may be moved back to sun visor over house windshield[s][, ahead of flybridge surround], where it was mounted some time ago [badly-filled holes still exist])

at flybridge helm position:
ST60 TRIDATA Autohelm Series (more details to follow?, photos of unit's rear pending)
CHARTPLOTTER RC520 (monochrome, = 'hsb1'?) 7" LCD DISPLAY (R32005, 0800030)(s/w version) V6.05
PATHFINDER SL70 RADAR (monochrome, = 'hsb1'?) 7" LCD DISPLAY (M92678, 0510345)(s/w version) V2.18

there are also pre-existing:

GARMIN GPS 17 ([flybridge] radar arch installed) --> purpose? likely was only to feed GPS NMEA data to a Smart Radio SR161 AIS Receiver for signal integration and output to a PC running Rose Point Coastal Explorer 1.1.61 software
GARMIN Fishfinder 240 Blue (011-00645-00, 53329468)(Lower Helm overhead installed, no NMEA input [GPS] capability)

So, in conclusion, to the extent that it is possible to integrate the older RAYSTAR 120, ST60, RC520 & SL70 system with the newer e165 & RD424HD, it otherwise does not make sense to me to do away with the older electronics (the radome redundancy that that would entail kind of bothers me, cosmetically-speaking, however, I could probably live with it), as the ST60/RC520/SL70 displays can simply remain at the upper flybridge helm (and provide a navigational backup) while the e165 will be mounted overhead at the lower helm (and offer display expandability to the f/b via monitor [hard-wired] and display/control via tablet/smartphone [Wi-Fi, Bluetooth]) ... what do you all think?

Thank you, Kevin Mc

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

Welcome back to the Raymarine Forum Kevin,

Q1. hanging from the trunnion mount and an overhead 5/8~" thick teak-veneered plywood panel - are there any case studies of this mounting method being a problem for the e165?
A1. Unfortunately, no such case studies are available. The bracket produced by Raymarine for the e165 is designed to be sufficiently strong enough to permit the MFD to be mounted above a horizontal surface or from an overhead surface. Rather than using wood screws, it would certainly recommend through-bolting the bracket to the overhead surface and use fender washers on to disperse the weight over the plywood.

Q2. To the extent that it is possible to integrate the older RAYSTAR 120, ST60, RC520 & SL70 system with the newer e165 & RD424HD
A2. Communications between the e165 and the generation of Raymarine equipment which is presently installed onboard the vessel would be quite limited, as these products are separated by four generations of Raymarine MFDs. It would be recommended the hsb/hsb2/SL Pathfinder Series Displays, ST60 instrument (model not specified), and Raystar 120 GPS Sensor (SeaTalk variant assumed, although a NMEA 0183 variant was also produced ... you should verify). The hsb/hsb2/SL Pathfinder Series displays, ST60 instrument, and Raystar 120 GPS Sensor, should each be interfaced to one another via a powered SeaTalk bus. Examples of SeaTalk interfacing may be found within the owners manuals of the hsb/hsb2/SL Pathfinder Series Displays. The SeaTalk bus will not support communications of data requiring high communications bandwidth. Accordingly, communications between these products will be limited to alphanumeric data such as GPS, instrument, navigational, and system state data. No radar or cartography sharing will be possible between the hsb/hsb2/SL Pathfinder Series Displays, nor will it be possible between these displays and the e165 MFD or RD424HD radome.

To interface the e165 MFD to the currently installed equipment, it would typically be recommended that the NMEA 0183 output of one of the hsb/hsb2/SL Pathfinder Series Displays be interfaced to one of the sets of NMEA 0183 input leads found on the e165 MFD's Power/NMEA 0183/Video Input Cable. It would further be recommended that the NMEA 0183 Output settings of the corresponding hsb/hsb2/SL Pathfinder Series Display be configured to only transmit NMEA 0183 sentences featuring GPS (not navigational data) and instrument data. Failure to head this recommendation may create a situation where the navigation which has been commanded on the old system may not be cancelled automatically on the new system (and vice versa). Commonly available marine grade twisted pair signal cable would be used for extending NMEA 0183 leads. When interfaced in this manner, and should a chart card for the waters to be navigated be present within the e165 MFD's memory card reader, and should the MFD be properly interfaced to the RD424HD radome, the e165 MFD may then function as a radar/chartplotter and additionally be capable of displaying GPS and instrument data.

Should the currently installed radome be operational an interfaced to the SL70, then it would be able to function as a radar display.

Q3. While the e165 will be mounted overhead at the lower helm (and offer display expandability to the f/b via monitor [hard-wired] and display/control via tablet/smartphone [Wi-Fi, Bluetooth]) ... what do you all think?
A3. See my response to Q2 regarding what one may expect from the system you have described. As you have suggested, a tablet running the RayControl app may be able to remotely monitor and remotely control the e165 MFD.

[Kevin McIntosh]

Thank you Chuck ... your recommendations have given me a fair bit to consider ... I appreciate the succinct assessment of a shared systems' capabilities, and, the configuration caveat. The physical installation advice for the e165 is also well taken.

One remaining puzzling aspect to my older RC520 & SL70 displays is whether they belong to the hsb1 or hsb2 category/generation, or, if that distinction even matters, practically-speaking. Based on my reading to date, I became fairly certain they were 'hsb' (HighSpeedBus), aka 'hsb1' ... and I can understand why Raytheon/Raymarine would downplay the acronym's underlying long form description (, seeing as the immediate next generation ['hsb2'] needed to be differentiated from 'hsb', therefore retroactively making 'hsb' = 'hsb1',) and, how still later generations of higher bandwidth system busses made the 'HighSpeed ... ' descriptor antiquated.

Am I correct in assuming I have 'hsb' / 'hsb1' displays based on them being mono-chromatic? Or ?

Thanks, Kevin Mc

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

Kevin,

Q1. One remaining puzzling aspect to my older RC520 & SL70 displays is whether they belong to the hsb1 or hsb2 category/generation, or, if that distinction even matters, practically-speaking. Based on my reading to date, I became fairly certain they were 'hsb' (HighSpeedBus), aka 'hsb1' ... and I can understand why Raytheon/Raymarine would downplay the acronym's underlying long form description (, seeing as the immediate next generation ['hsb2'] needed to be differentiated from 'hsb', therefore retroactively making 'hsb' = 'hsb1',) and, how still later generations of higher bandwidth system busses made the 'HighSpeed ... ' descriptor antiquated.

Am I correct in assuming I have 'hsb' / 'hsb1' displays based on them being mono-chromatic? Or ?

A1. Whether the display has no high speed communications circuitry or have hsb/hsb2 communications circuitry has no bearing on this installation. SL displays do not feature a high speed communications interface (hsb or hsb1). Accordingly, these displays are not designed to share cartography, radar, or fishfinder imagery with other displays. Per the FAQ found here, you can determine whether the display features hsb or hsb2 communications circuitry. Whether a display features monochrome or color LCD is no indication of the type of high speed communications circuitry (if any) which is installed within a hsb/hsb/SL Pathfinder Series Display. The referenced FAQ also indicates the capabilities of a hsb display which had been interfaced to another hsb display. It likewise indicates the capabilities of a hsb2 display which had been interfaced to another hsb2 display.

[Kevin McIntosh]

I see ... thank you Chuck for the clarifications and for pointing me to your previously-authored FAQ article ... I only have 1 reference photo of my RC520 booting up (attached) ... it makes reference to 'RAYCHART's, but not Raytheon or Raymarine specifically.

Kevin Mc

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

Kevin,

The splash screen referenced within the FAQ will appear during the boot cycle, not upon the completion as show. I suspect that you will find that it references Raytheon, as Raytheon is printed on the display's fascia. If the splash screen references Raymarine then the display was later upgraded with hsb2 hardware and software by Raymarine's Product Repair Center. Again, it's kind of a moot point as the displays which you have listed do not posses compatible high speed communications circuitry. More specifically, the SL70 Radar Display has no high speed communications circuitry.

[Kevin McIntosh]

Understood Chuck ... thanks for the clarification ... I can check for that boot screen next time I have the RC520 hooked up and powered up ... meantime, thank you very much for all of your assistance with this project of mine.

Kevin Mc

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

You're welcome.