web analytics

New B&G WS300 wired & wireless NMEA 2000 wind sensors, no N2K mast cable needed

B&G just announced the WS300 range “of wireless and wired wind sensors designed for cruising and club racing sailors” and the first two models seem like smart designs at reasonable prices. I also appreciate the emphasis on reliability, as in:

“As the most exposed sensor on a yacht, the wind sensor is critical for instruments and autopilot steering. Reliability of these sensors is key and to address this the WS310 and WS320 have undergone rigorous validation. We have conducted benchmarking tests against multiple different sensors in over 500 individual wind tunnel tests and conducted over 200,000 hours of field tests without failure.”

The wireless WS320 model is said to work with masts up to about 25m (82 feet) and retails at $699 complete, while the wired WS310 Wind Pack is $599. What’s not obvious unless you dig into the manuals is how both can deliver NMEA 2000 wind information to a boat without having to run an N2K backbone up its mast

Note in these WS310 parts and wiring diagrams that the mast cable is not part of the boat’s NMEA 2000 network. Instead, there’s a short Network Interface cable that presumably converts an analog signal coming down the mast into N2K wind PGNs (messages) while also sending a little N2K 12v power up to the sensor. Why did B&G go to such trouble?



Over the years it’s become clear that a NMEA 2000 masthead sensor can be awkward to install and also a potential point of failure. That’s because standard N2K cabling is bulky to fish up a mast — with exceptions like BB Wire & Cable’s, and now defunct SimNet — and because it has to serve as part of the network’s backbone, with masthead termination included (unless your mast run is under 20 feet, the max for an N2K drop). Many boats with masthead N2K sensors have done fine, but they’re also a fairly common source of problems (like maybe this current one on the Forum).

NMEA 2000 network backbones can be fairly long — 100m (328 feet) for the typical micro size cables — but the bigger they get, the more care must be taken about voltage drops, dirty connectors, and so forth. And there’s no real point in sending all your precious data up to the masthead anyway, especially when a lighter, simpler cable can handle the sensor data and 12v power like the WS310 seems to.  (And see the LCJ Capteurs CV7 ultrasonic wind sensor I’m testing for a similar networking architecture.)

While the B&G WS320 uses Bluetooth and solar power to eliminate the mast cable completely, the wireless base station again includes an interface into a boat’s NMEA 2000 network, and is also quite like Navico’s BT-1/WR10 Wireless Pilot Controller. I can’t think of another manufacturer who makes it so easy for an installer to optimally position a wireless gateway, but then again I also know boaters who bridle at the proliferation of little mushroom antennas.

Should the WS320 fail despite those 200,000 hours of problem-free field testing, it looks easy to remove without tools, as shown in the manual snip at upper right (and the same is true of the WS210, whose cabling is also easily detached when the mast is pulled). I’ll add that Garmin’s gWind Wireless 2 has a similar snap-on base and has tested well on Gizmo with a direct ANT connection to Garmin MFD’s, and that I’ll soon be telling you about the wonders of the Calypso Ultrasonic Portable.

Similar Posts:


Sailing with an Airmar PB200
February 3, 2009

Mast rotation, a multi-manufacturer solution?
February 3, 2011

Wireless N2K wind & more, Tacktick style
June 30, 2009

Maretron ultrasonic wind sensor, the plot thickens
November 14, 2005

Ben Ellison

Ben Ellison

Panbo editor, publisher & chief bottlewasher since 4/12/2005, and now excited to have Ben Stein as a very able colleague. Panbo is going to the next level in 2018 and beyond.

4 Responses

  1. “…over 500 individual wind tunnel tests…” Did any of them involve fat-assed seagulls? In my experience, THAT is what kills wind sensors, not wind. This DOES look reasonable as a wind system, however – I don’t see any data on that cable: diameter, strength, etc. Given the hassles of pulling wire in the mast, wireless is looking more and more attractive 🙂

  2. Valid points, Hartley. And did you encounter the Camden Harbor ospreys that seem to favor high whirlygig sensors? It seems like the birds would learn what poor perches they are, but some think the boatyard trains them.

    I’ve gotten less skeptical about wireless now that I’ve seen longterm reliability with Garmin gWind, Raymarine Quantum radar, and FloatHub, but they use Ant and WiFi protocols, not Bluetooth. Also, to pair the B&G WS320, the manual recommends having it within 2m of the base station, and apparently it loses pairing if the sensor battery goes flat.

    • Matt says:

      The 2m limitation on pairing is to stop the possibility of the WS320 base station pairing to another sensor at power on. This was a consideration for marinas or boat builders and commissioning. The pairing process is automatic and does not require a consumer to put the device into a pairing mode. Therefore, the power is reduced at startup when the base station is in pairing mode initially. In addition, it allows you to check all is working before climbing the mast an attaching the wind sensor, which was a consideration for boat builders and commissioning.

      To reset the pairing, a consumer will need to remove the battery. This eliminated the need to design and build in external buttons for reliability or provide access to the PCB. And in the event of the N2k network being powered down, the wind sensor will go to sleep to conserve battery power.

      A validation boat in Holland with a 27m mast, never saw the battery status go below 95% throughout the winter whilst maintaining a 5 Hz data output over Bluetooth. Charging to 100% during the day and dropping overnight.

  3. The “validation boat in Holland” happens to be Merrimac, and I am very pleased with the performance of the WS320. It hasn’t lost a beat in over 6 months of testing.

    The solar panel is so oversized that it seems completely fine even in winter when we have less than 6 hours of daylight.

    I’m told this sensor is more precise compared to its wired predecessors in both wind speed and angle, and it certainly seems better behaved with more stable direction and believable wind speeds.

Join the conversation

Your email address will not be published.