Hard Facts on Navigation Software

I read the story on the site and I guess I don't get all the hullabaloo.

Seems these programs do the same thing as my plotter. So what's the point of going through all the frustration? I mean, 12 hours is a lot of time, man!

You could have been fishin!

BTW, 12 hours is a lot of time.

But it's like any project...I was determined! And I hate when I can't get something to work.

I agree with all of the above, Landfall.

I've become a pretty big fan of Rose Point (Coastal Explorer) since I was turned onto it at the Miami show two years ago. It is very intuitive. Of course, I have my complaints, this or that. But overall, I think it's pretty good stuff.

I'd be curious to hear your experience with Nobeltec and Maptech. One of the things I have heard about Coastal Explorer is that it is just a more efficient program, using far less code than the traditional software offerings. The way I heard it, this is because it's a relatively new player and was built from scratch, and therefore doesn't have all the backward compatability and bloat of larger, older programs. I don't know if that is true, but it sounds plausible.

I do know that Practical Sailor and other journals out there had good things to say about it. The company has a cool story too: former Microsoft guy leaves the Big Game to spend time on his boat and winds up writing nav software. You can read it here.  Here are a bunch of reviews of CE. 

I keep meaning to take the time to play more with Tiki Navigator:

http://www.tiki-navigator.com/en/us/index.htm

This looks to be another one of the "new kid on the block" with a reasonable price and the ads look good :-)

Bruce

The prices are definitely getting steep.

But competition is steeper now too - including some viable freeware - so maybe that will mitigate  things.

Interesting what you said about Maptech. They seem to have some changes afoot in their product line, but I tihnk we'll have to wait until next year to truly figure out what they are up to.

I'll have to try Tiki...that's not on my radar yet! 

I've used a few PC based tools for planning. I haven't used any of them for actual navigation, I'm a little leary of using Windows for something this important (I should point out that I'm a computer infrastructure consultant so I am very familiar with Windows).

I've used Mapsource (Garmin), Raytech Navigator (Raymarine), PC-Planner (C-Map), Navplanner (Navionics), and Maxsea (Maxsea / Furuno).  

Mapsource was really good as a planning tool.  It was easy to create routes and very easy to edit them.  Also easy to transfer them to a plottor or card.  Like most Garmin products, this one delivered in an easy to use package.

Raytech was okay.  It seems to have quite a few features that I didn't try (or maybe aren't even available in the free version, and I wasn't going to pay for the upgrade given my RM experiences this year).  It does work well for planning routes, in fact it's the same layout and functionality of the C or E series plotters.  If you have one of those plotters, then this is simple to learn.  You will need the Navionics card reader and your chart card.  My biggest complaints with this product was that it was quite complicated and the performance wasn't great (I think that I could probably turn off lots of features, etc to improve performance, but I couldn't find all of them and eventually decided it wasn't worth it).

PC-Planner.  If you have a cmap chart, the PC-Planner will read your chart card and can save to the proprietary CMAP cards so you can upload your planned routes.  That's the good part.  The bad part is that it's clunky, it works and works pretty well once you've learned it's quirks.  I learned (by calling CMAP support and having them explain all this to me) how much information is on your cmap max chart card - there is a ton of information there if you know how to unlock it.   For planning routes, it works reasonably well.  If you're creating a route, you can't stop and do something else cancelling the plan (like trying to get info on an island or zooming in/out).  Adding waypoints to the end of a route is easy.  Adding waypoints in between other waypoints is trickier - it works, but you have to get the mouse lined up just right and press and hold the button then drag to where you want the new point.  Again it works well once you get used to it's quirks.  My biggest complaint is that I cannot zoom the chart while planning the route.  Also performance isn't great (isn't bad, but not great).  

Another thing to note is that if you use a Navnet 2, you must select this format BEFORE planning any routes.  PC Planner will allow 8 character waypoint names, but the NN2 will only all 6, so if you have 8, your waypoints will not upload to the NN2.  The File Manager function, which is used to save routes , trips, waypoints and marks is quirky also.  I usually get it to work, but rarely the first time.  Part of the problem is that I don't use it every day, but I don't want to have to go to school to figure it out.

Good thing is that CMAP people are fantastic in helping you figure things out.  Very helpful and very patient.

Navplanner:  Sucked.  I used the original release that was subsequently pulled from stores.  Never used it again.  I originally thought it would be better than PC-Planner and it definitely had a better (or more logical to me) interface, it just didn't work.  I understand that the version available today works (I have downloaded the upgrade, but never installed it).

Maxsea:  This is the cat's ass of navigation software, especially if you have a Furuno Navnet.  My version is older and doesn't fully integrate with the Navnet equipment, but as a planning tool it is easy to use and FAST!  It reads my CMAP chart right from the card reader along with virtually any other chart you can give it.  Planning routes is easy, editing routes is easy, and when I say easy I mean a 5 year old could do it.  After using this, all the others are really pathetic (of course this is by far the priciest solution of the ones I've mentioned).  You can zoom while creating a route, edit it, delete a waypoint in the middle, add another one, all very simply.  There are online tutorials showing how to do it on Furuno and Maxsea's website if you want to know how.

Maxsea is much mor than a planning tool, though.  If you have the Navnet version, it can be interfaced through the Ethernet  directly to all the hardware and charts on your Navnet.  This means that your Maxsea computer would get GPS info, radar info, depth and FF info, weather, even AIS info right from the Navnet unit.  It will even share the chart information!!  You can create a route on Maxsea and have your navnet follow it, or have your autopilot controlled directly from the Maxsea machine.  Another cool thing is that Maxsea offers ARPA for your radar, even if you don't have the option on your NN2 unit (Cool, huh?).

I was going to buy the newest Maxsea and use it on my boat for next year, but then heard about the upcoming NN3 then decided to wait and see what it's like.  I will say that if NN3 isn't incredible, the NN2 and Maxsea solution is still on the table for me. 

Hey Landfall, RE mouse in bad weather, you might try a gyroscopic mouse. It's wireless, which I consider both a plus and a minus, and it is shaped like a hand grip. You move it in the air and the cursor moves. I can't say I've braved Nature's Best with it--my in-dash stuff navigates for the autopilot anyway--but it has worked really well as a tool to page around the computer in average conditions. 

That's pretty interesting. I have enough machines laying around that a dedicated box would not be out of the question. That -- and only that -- would allow me to "leave Windows alone."  Running Windows via Linux is interesting, but I'm very new to Linux.  I have one box, configured for me to do one very specific thing (run this site locally at boat shows, so I'm not Internet dependent).  But I do want to  learn more, so I'll  be goofing around with it a lot. Stable. Small footprint. What's not to like...

VMWare is a GREAT solution to a lot of problems, but sometimes interfacing with external devices can be a problem. VMWare supports only certain interfaces and devices (basic stuff), so if the things you want to do don't fit in that realm, might not work.

But it is an interesting idea. Fits with your other comment about not messing with Windows on a "dedicated" box... with one VMWare session running your NAV system, you could have another for "fiddling with"... without messing up your nav session.

Having your base Linux server with these sessions on it might be a very good way to go. 

More things to play with and experiment on. 

So, after a bit of reading, I want to see if I understand this correctly.

VMWare let's you run multiple operating systems at the same time from a single machine. The idea would be to live in a Linux world and use Windows on an isolated basis, only when you have to. Do I have that right?

Might be fun to play around with (I'm sure it has been around for years and I'm coming late to the party). Seems like they have a good site, with some tutorials and white papers. They also appear to have a trial version and some freeware, though I'm guessing the enterprise stuff costs money.

I'll check it out... 

I'm going to have questions!

I'll be hollering... 

I wonder if you couldn't talk one of their guys out of a demo version at a boat show... 

What are you hearing on NavNet 3?

Furuno just released a Black Box AIS, FYI. 

Very cool. Some amazing stuff, especially the Ethernet connection and redraw speeds (that's one of my gripes about the E Series). Any sense of prices?

Good question on Canadian charts. I'm guessing there will be some, because I believe Great Loopers need them. But I could be wrong.

I have to say, that is appalling about the support up North. Good thing the company steps in. 

That was one of my main gripes of the E series also - very slow.

There are Canadian charts available, but will they be preloaded? CHS charges for the charts, so I'm not sure it would make sense to include them on every NN3 unit. Maybe everything is included and you have to unlock what you want?

As for cost, I was told about 20% more than NN2 equipment. Which would put the prices right around the E series units. I think this might take a chunk out of the RM market!

Now the question is how will RM respond in pricing the E and G series?

One more thing, I did hear that the NN3 black box would be more powerful and maybe have more features than the 8/12" version. I read that on askjackrabbit.com, but the Furuno rep didn't confirm that one.

I think the dual radar function updating half the time can be addressed by speeding up the antenna, no?  Will we have faster turning open arrays?

I suspect Simrad's NavStation replacement will be Northstar products and the GB60 will be the high end still branded Simrad.

So you had Ray-E120, Furuno NN2 and the Simrad Navstation all on your boat?  Or is this over several boats?  You're like the ultimate test consumer.

I'm sorry you're so down on the E-120, I think it blew away NN2.  Garmin's 5000-series should be in the discussion from now on also, it's pretty good.  Especially for sailboats.

Jeff

Here's s a reprint of a mini review I did comparing the NN2 and E120:

I have an E120 and a Navnet 2 on board. I'm selling the E120 (anyone want to buy it?) on ebay right now because I don't like it.

Upon first using both units, the RM is easier to use. You can figure out how to perform most functions without looking at the manual (with a bit of playing around). The Navnet requires a bit more learning (not a lot, but a bit). After spending time with both units, I find the Navnet more efficient to use. I can navigate to whatever menu or screen quicker (less keypresses) on the navnet (especially when following a route and using radar overlay) now that I know what to do.

I can also customize the softkeys on the navnet, so even if it doesn't have a function easily available that I use often, I can add it. One place this is useful is with radar overlay and ARPA. The RM MARPA isn't as good, simple as that (I have 2 domes on the boat a 2kw Furuno and 2kw RM). The Furuno ARPA can automatically target objects (basically you setup a zone similar to a guardzone and anything that crosses it gets tracked), the RM needs to be manually targetted. Downside is that the Furuno ARPA will cost you $600 and the RM is built it.

One function I use the ARPA for is tracking other I travel with, and the occasional other boat I want to keep an eye on. With the RM I have to go to the radar function menu, target tracking, then track the target. If I'm in the follow route menu, that means I have to go up 2-3 menus before I can get to the radar menu. On my navnet I can manually track a target with 2-3 button presses from my chart screen.

Waypoint arrival alarms cannot be turned off on the RM, but can on the Navnet.

The databar setup on the RM isn't bad but it isn't great. When comparing the Navnet options, the RM is limited. When I had the databar across the top of the screen, I had very limited combinations of options that I could choose, putting the bar on the side made it more flexible. the Navnet databar could be made to do anything I wanted. If I want to fill the screen with databoxes I can and I can put them in any order I prefer.

Navigating a route is better on the navnet (unless I'm missing something). I can only get time to next waypoint on the RM, it will not show me time to destination which is available on the navnet. the databars on the navnet change based on the function being performed and can be customized for each function. when I'm scrolling around with the trackball, I can always see the distance my cursor from my boat - this is useful to me, but only when I'm doing this, other times it would just take up room.

Trackball vs pad: I prefer the trackball. I originally thought I wouldn't like it because I hated them on computers, but it's great in this case. It's more accurate than the pad for me and quicker. I can scroll slow or fast depending on what I'm doing. It doesn't take long to get proficient so when I'm plotting a route, I can roll the trackball the right amount and stop then wait for the plotter to redraw the screen and be in the right place, the pad is more finicky for me. I always end up going to far.

Speed. Now many people may disagree with me on this one, but the Navnet screen updates are faster. I thought the RM would be faster, but when you turn on all the detail, it's very slow. Zooming can be extremely slow. On the RM if I zoom 3-5 levels quickly, it can take 30+ seconds to redraw the screen. the navnet allows only 1 button press at a time, but its redraw speed is consistent each time and it's quicker.

Heading updates. I find the COG line on the RM and the highway page don't update as quick. This annoyed me and actually was the problem that started me thinking of chucking it. Side by side, the Navnet's COG line is accurate and updates quickly. The RM has a bit of a delay at times that makes navigating more annoying (you adjust heading to get back on course, it updates so slowly that you oversteer and have to go back). I found it was easier using the navnet for this.

Navigating using my Simrad autopilot seems better on the navnet, it just seems to correct quicker and so requires smaller adjustments. Maybe that one is just in my head, though.

Now before you ask, I have talked to RM tech support and even sent the unit in. They found nothing wrong with it. RM tryed to blame navionics for the problem saying it was a bad chart card. Navionics wasn't extremely helpful with resolving this either (they didn't believe it was their fault, and frankly neither did I). They wanted me to buy another card! After getting angry on the phone a supervisor called me back and said they'd credit me for the new card if they found a problem. That pretty much made me decide I wouldn't be using Navionics again. I use the Club c-map each year and am never without a chart. I used a buddy's navionics gold card to try it and found no difference, so ruled that out.

Pluses on the E series over the Navnet - video input/output. The E120 has 4 video inputs which I use for revese cameras and a black box echopilot fls. The Navnet has only 1 video input and even that's an option. I am trying to figure out some external video switch that will allow 3 inputs, but haven't figured it out yet. (my current thought is putting video input on bot navnets and having the port navnet display only the port side camera and then the stbd navnet switch between the stdb side camera and the echopilot. I figured I could use a waterproof DPDT switch for 2 video input switching). Planning routes on your PC is easier on the RM. The Raytech navigator free software is pretty cool and works well. The PC-Planner from Cmap is less friendly and is even more a pain when you're using a navnet2 unit.

Radar on the Navnet is much better also. I'm not an expert radar user by any means. Many people told me that the Raymarine radar was much easier to use and it's auto modes were better than Furuno's. I can't really comment on that, but I can say that in 1 really strong rain, where I had no visibility, I could not get the RM radar to return small or weak objects (markers or other small rocks). There was little wind and wave height was about a foot. I switched to the Furuno dome (which I had put on the boat as a backup), and the markers appeared clearly. I won't say it was the easiest thing to read, but they were there and I was able to see them. The true color radar made this easy because the rain came back mostly in green, but the markers and rocks were in red. I played with gain and A/C Rain functions only on both units. After that, the RM radar was removed from the boat, and the E120 went onto ebay. One note: You can use radar overlay on the E120 without a heading sensor (they say it's not accurate, but you can do it, the Navnet requires a heading sensor sending AD10 format - so either Furuno or Simrad).

RM techs seems to know their stuff. They can help you with most any problem you might have. Furuno techs are still a good step above them. the Furuno techs know their stuff so well they understand the problems you're describing, even when you don't and aren't describing them well. An example: when I looked into purchasing my autopilot (Simrad AP26), I called RM to ask about their autopilot and to see if it had this 'no drift mode' like the simrad. They didn't understand how a pilot could follow a straight line without a waypoint, he said it couldn't be done. I called Simrad back and asked how they do it, and the tech told me exactly how it worked and what nmea sentences it required to work. I called RM back and the guys (he asked around) didn't seem to understand it really. They weren't sure if it would work when interfaced with an RM plotter. I called Furuno, explained what I wanted to do and what nmea sentences I needed. I actually forgot to mention one of them and the Furuno tech told me I'd also need this one (I was impressed right there). On the navnet I can turn on or off any nmea sentence I want. I can even monitor the data it's recieving in raw format. This is a cool feature that is really beyond me, but when I need it, I can do it. the RM has none of this, it just transmits what it transmits, no customization is possible (I'm told this customization is useful when connecting multiple nmea sources).

(Simrad tech's are also really good in this respect).

Before anybody asks why I didn't go Simrad, I looked at them seriously. After installing and using their autopilot I was a real Simrad fan. The problem is the chartplotter redraw is really slow. That was really the big tipping point. That and I already have a navnet unit so I can make a network of them.

As to price, the Furuno is less money. The display alone is over $1000 less in the base configuration. The radar/ff are about the same prices. There are addon's to the Furuno to get functionality that the E120 includes by default. Video interface kit - $270, ARPA (radar tracking) ~ $400. If you don't need those options then you save a ton on the Navnet. The C series unit about the same price.

Also, as I mentioned previously you need AD10 heading input in order to do radar overlay, ARPA, and echo averaging. Echo averaging is a really cool function (at least I think it is, and I don't think RM does this). It basically compares each scan to the one previously and eliminates almost all the interference from waves, rain, etc. because those returns change each scan and 'real' targets stay the same. It may sound gimmicky, but it works extremely well, really extremely well. In my usage it cleans up lots of crap but has never removed a 'real' target. As with almost all Navnet functions, it's within 2 key presses to disable it if you want.

Although the ARPA option is a cost addon to the navnet, it is a full ARPA module, not a mini-ARPA that the RM has. It has more functionality, and it simply works better. I find the RM MARPA sort of cool, but it doesn't track well. I liked it so I bought the ARPA module for the Navnet and once again the difference is like a toy and the real thing. The Furuno display shows a lollipop with direction info for each target. It doesn't set a danger alarm when no danger is really there, when the Furuno collision alarm goes off, it means it - you're going to hit something (even if it is an hour away). I use it all the time now (again because it will automatically target anything that enters my guard zone).

Put all these radar features together, call Furuno when you're installing it and they'll walk you through tuning it to perfection, and almost anybody can use the radar effectively with much less experience than other radars. I recommend reading "The Radar Book" by Kevin Monahan, I found it better than "Radar for Mariners" in its explanation of how radar works, what the difference between different sizes are, how to tune the radar and how to use radar for navigation. I got it at West Marine and learned so much in a few hours from reading it.

By the way, nice boat Hewessfisher. I think the single 12" RM is a great size for your boat since 2 10" displays might be too crowded. Your radar looks extremely well placed.

There is one other point I didn't mention - dealer support. I live in Ontario, Canada and Raymarine really dominates the market here. It's on most boats. Furuno had almost no presence here until this summer, now we have some, but still not as much. I haven't had a problem because Furuno takes such good care of customers. My brothers unit failed last year 2 days before a trip. Furuno Fedex'd a replacement unit overnight even before he sent in the original. We couldn't have possibly got better service from anyone.

Simrad has virtually no presence in Canada anymore, and they won't let retailers buy their product unless they purchase $10,000 worth of product.

It's much better to purchase your Furuno or Simrad products from US retailers, and neither company cares where you bought it for support.

PS. do you ever use the 3D functionality of the Platinum charts (if you have them)? I find them so slow I can't use them, but maybe it's me.

This is awesome, man.

There a lot of great information in here, but perhaps the most interesting is your points about price. I always think of Furuno as much more expensive than Raymarine (and let's face it, neither are cheap). But maybe it's time to re-evaluate all that. Frankly, I haven't looked in awhile. Having bought my E-Series gear, I have spent my time treeing it up with add ons like SeaCas and the like.

RE cameras, you might look at configuring a system through a PC. You can get cards that have 4, 8 or even 16 video inputs. With a micro tower stashed someplace below and an aftermarket, daylight-viewable screen in dash (assuming your dash has the real estate), you could have cameras and a PC -- with your planning software -- right at the helm. Just a thought.

I'll be eager to hear.

RE PC-based cameras, I hear you. In that situation, I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with a PC solution either.

You need thrusters! Or at least, thruster. I have a 40-foot trawler and a terrible slip that requires me to turn and back all the way up a narrow channel to the harbor, about 100 yards. It can't be done moving forward. Thankfully, I have a bow thruster, which allows me a margin of error. Without the thruster, I'd have to hit it spot on every time -- not realistic.

So, next time for have $10K burning a hole in your pocket... 

I hear that...

The list is always long. Reaserch that remote heavily. I have a Raymarine unit and I had a bad experience (though I realize you won't be shopping Raymarine). The thing had about an hour's worth of battery life. It was really pretty thin. It worked well - when it worked. But there's no use for a remote that dies by the time you are out of the channel.

You also have to watch what you do with them. I had mine n my back pocket once, sat on it and veered the boat to starboard. Thanksfully, I was in open water...

I agree with the assessment of the E-Series and Navionics Platinum.

The re-draw times are way too long. The sat pics are helpful -- nice for coming into new marinas -- but the rest didn't do much for me.

I can't verify that with absolute certainty but I believe there is some proprietary MaxSea/C-Map Max Pro charts built into the system based on the area you will be boating, or you will be able to unlock them for that area.  It's been awhile since I was prying into this but I believe this to be the case and I can't even remember what's supposed to be a secret and what Furuno has released yet in regards to charting on NN3D. 

As for G-Series, you will buy the G-Series Processor Module ($5400 List) preloaded (no unlock codes) with North American Platinum Charts for the entire country and Caribbean Gold charts.  I have to believe the processing power in the new equipment will be significantly faster and will take better advantage of Platinum's capabilities.  There is another processor available with Europe Platinum and World Gold as well as one with Australia/New Zealand Platinum and World Gold.

The whole system is based on a Seatalk NG (Next Generation) backbone so there will be hundreds of dollars in cables needed to put a robust system together, but the cables are all the same so it won't be too confusing.

Each processor has two DVI/VGA ports so you can control two screens independently with one processor.

There are also wired and wireless keyboard that look the same,  It appears you will have one wired controller required and then you add wireless base stations for additional wireless keyboards.

It also looks like the new HD and Super HD radars are backwards compatible with E-Series displays.  They are dual range capable and the cables are thinner, although I can't tell if it's a network cable with power or a proprietary Raymarine cable.

 Jeff 

You won't have to buy any charts for G-Series so that's not an issue.  They are all built in.  And it's not the charts that are the problem as far as speed, it's the machine running them.  If all the charts are already built in to the G-Series processor, it would be a huge mistake to not have the proccessing power to make them fly.  We'll see.

About the screens, I'm not so sure you have to use Raymarine's.  If the proccessor has DVI and VGA output I can't imagine how they would make it proprietary to their own screens.  I'm sure it's not.  And it will likely be cheaper to buy two NN3D 12" displays than two Black Box NN3D systems with seperate displays, but why would you buy two BB NN3D's instead of buying one and running two monitors just like the Raymarine system you described?

Jeff

There was one thing that the Navionics rep told me during our conversation that has bothered me.  I forgot about it, but remembered some of the things he said didn't make sense.  Now I remember.

During our discussion on the NN3, he said that if Furuno uses raster or S57 charts from hyrdrographic services they wouldn't as accurate as those from CMAP or Navionics because they've updated positions of markers, etc. when errors in the charts were recorded, and they've been doing this for years.

Earlier in our conversation he took issue with my comments that the position of nav aids on Navionics charts were not as accurate as the CMAP in my area.  He said that my understanding of how Navionics had stitched the charts was incorrect and that they resulted in no errors at any zoom level (contrary to what CMAP technicians had told me and my own tests verified).  The reason that no errors in the nav aids were possible were because they got the positions of the nav aids directly from the government who put them there.

What's bothering me is that he seems to want it both ways.  Either the hydrographc service charts are accurate (and they have the same nav aid positions that Navionics is using) OR they aren't accurate and the Navionics chips can't be accurate either!

Am I missing something?

I don't actually claim to be an expert navigator, really.  I've been boating for over 20 years, but up until the last 6, I raced Tornados (beach catamarans).  Navigating to me was only as difficult as looking toward the next race marker.  I did have to learn lots of navigation (including star charting) for my sailing certifications, but I only started really using it in the last 6 or 7 years.

I understand that electronic (or paper) charts are not always completely accurate, but I am I wrong to want my charts to be as accurate as possible? If they aren't going to be totally accurate I feel that I'm better of understanding how they may be inaccurate so that I can plan around 'potential inaccuracies'.

There is one area in Georgian Bay (actually there are many), just northeast of Minicogneshene Island, where the Navionics chart shows open water and a single marker.  The CMAP chart shows the same marker but the area is in grey.  I called CMAP about this, trying to understand what this meant, and they told me it means that there is NO chart for that area at that scale or close to that scale.  I checked the paper charts and it's true, there is no chart.  My problem is that this area has lots of rocks, both above and just below the surface.  When navigating to this area for the first time, I was upset with the CMAP for not having any detail, but I slowed down because I didn't know what was around the corner.  Lucky I did.  If I'd been using the Navionics chart zoomed in for detail instead of the CMAP, I would have gone around quicker and possibly got into trouble.  I think the Navionics gives me a false sense of security sometimes (but I never know when).

PS. there's a new clip on Navnet.com that shows the most detail on the charts and how they display.  Has anybody seen the CMAP Max Pro charts to know if that is them on the clip? 

I agree that there will always be inaccuracies in both paper and electronic charts, but I do prefer CMAP's way of showing an area they don't have data for.  I'm uncomfortable with the Navionics charts right now because I really don't know that if an area appears clear, whether it really is. 

I think that the problem with my conversation with Navionics was that I don't trust what was said.  It didn't make complete sense, so I feel like I was being sold not informed.  

Did you check out the latest navnet.com video clip?  It looks pretty cool and it will be fast (a real pet peeve of mine).  I really hope it uses somebody's navigation chart instead of just direct charts from hydrographic services.  I don't know the quality of the CHS charts up here in Canada.  Next week we'll know for sure what it's all about!

We should know a lot more about the G very soon!