implications of MFD "master" when using multiple MFDS

[Kensny]

Hello,

My question pertains to a Lighthouse II (and III) system using E, Es and Axiom equipment, where there may be as many as 3 MFDSs. This is on a sailboat. My plan is to have:

1. a smaller (probably an E97 or ES98) at the helm - can't fit anything larger

2. a large display (Es128) inside the cabin, close to the cockpit / helm, with the advantage of being able to view the larger display close to the helm

3. An additional smaller display ( E97 or ES98) at the nav station, which is further in the boat.

Since I am a typical sailboat, reducing power usage is important, so I may at times have only one MFD powered on, and turn the others on as needed. While the mfd at the helm is most likely to be on most often, there may be times when that is switched off and I use one of the others as master.

Given this, what implications - hardware and software - are there for selecting the master MFD ? How can one obtain maximum flexibility and robustness?

My understanding is that if the master is powered off, one of the other mfds can be selected as the new master (does this happen automatically)?
However there may be certain hardware limitations. For instance if I am using downvision sonar, and the sonar component is built into one of the mfds and the transducer connected to it, then I suppose I couldn't switch off that mfd and still use the sonar (?). Would I be better off with an external sonar "box" that sits on the network instead of within an mfd ? Similar question regarding radar - digital or quantum.

Also when using components such as radar, transducer, that may be either connected directly to an MFD , or connected through the network, is it more robust to have them going to the network, or able to switch to another mfd, than directly into one of the mfds ? I'm asking this in case one of the mfds has a problem and stops functioning.

Thank you !

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

Welcome to the Raymarine Forum Kensny,

Q1. Given this, what implications - hardware and software - are there for selecting the master MFD? How can one obtain maximum flexibility and robustness?

A1. Please note that Raymarine has not yet identified which, if any, of the MFD previously designed to run LightHouse II software will be capable of running LightHouse 3 software. This information will become available as soon as LightHouse 3 software for the generation of MFDs preceding the Axiom MFDs is released. With respect to the scenarios where all MFDs may not always be switched ON, it is recommended that that all compatible Raymarine and FLIR devices having an Ethernet Network communications interface be interfaced to a HS5 RayNet Network Switch(es), rather than be interfaced directly to MFDs which in turn are daisy chained to one another. Additionally, each MFD would need to be interfaced a a spur to the system's powered and properly terminated SeaTalkng / NMEA 2000 backbone. Finally, should a fishfinder transducer be interfaced to one of the MFDs, then that MFD would need to be switched ON whenever the other MFDs were seeking to display fishfinder imagery or report depth information produced by the MFD having the fishfinder transducer interfaced it. This method is of interfacing the products is recommended for maximum system robustness and redundancy.

Q2. My understanding is that if the master is powered off, one of the other mfds can be selected as the new master (does this happen automatically)?
A2. While this is certainly possible, it does not happen automatically. Should the Data Master be switched OFF, then the other MFDs will report the situation and provide an option to select one of the other MFDs as the systems Data Master MFD.

Q3. However there may be certain hardware limitations. For instance if I am using downvision sonar, and the sonar component is built into one of the mfds and the transducer connected to it, then I suppose I couldn't switch off that mfd and still use the sonar (?).
A3. Correct ... see the response to Q1.

Q4. Would I be better off with an external sonar "box" that sits on the network instead of within an mfd?
A4. If operating under the aforementioned scenarios, then you may be better served by installing a separate sonar module, which in turn would be interfaced to the aforementioned HS5 RayNet Network Switch.

Q5. Similar question regarding radar - digital or quantum.
A5. See the response to Q1 and Q4. If seeking a Quantum radome, then it would be recommended that the Quantum radome be installed with a Quantum Data Cable, which in turn would be interfaced to a HS5 RayNet Network Switch.

Q6Also when using components such as radar, transducer, that may be either connected directly to an MFD , or connected through the network, is it more robust to have them going to the network, or able to switch to another mfd, than directly into one of the mfds ? I'm asking this in case one of the mfds has a problem and stops functioning.
A6. See the response to Q1. If seeking greatest level of robustness / redundancy, then a HS5 RayNet Network Switch(es) would be installed.