Another Navionics Victim in Georgetown

[Capt Jeanne]

Shout out to the George Town boating community and Roston McGregor aka Valiant Marine Salvage for his prompt and sound expertise. They worked together to bring the cat off the rocks, pilot to safe harbor, and patch the leaking hole around the saildrive. Bravo Crew helping each other out in George Town!

[Irunbird]

Hey, Bill- I think I remember you from just a few weeks ago (from your avatar photo).. Another Bill and I were coming back from an attempted lobstering mission (however unsuccessful) and a fuel line fitting kept popping off and I waved you over for some helpful advice and you obliged (thank you, by the way).


I see that cut you're talking about on Navionics and as several comments already mention says they've turned off the "recommended route" feature, but man-- I don't think I'd go through there in anything but a canoe!


Ray

[wcapital]

Another good example of why one should always, in coastal waters especially when making passages near islands, reefs etc., use at least two sources of piloting info (charts, cruising guides etc.) as well as visual piloting methods, and not rely too heavily on GPS.

[bcn]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I also wouldn't necessarily be against a subscription system where you buy - for a reasonable price -- just one year of access to a given area, and you have to buy it again next year if you're going to be there again. I bought charts for OpenCPN of Faroes and Iceland like that, and I was pleased to have right up to date charts of those areas, for a reasonable price (less than £100 for both IIRC), and didn't mind that they disappeared in a year.

oeSENC charts will not disappear after one year. You just will not have access to updates anymore.

Iceland and Faroes are 15€ each (ex VAT).

About Bahamas: this simple comment you will find on each of the Explorer Charts - nothing to add...

[lifeofreilly57]

Originally Posted by skipmac

Same here. I see a few walking the docks but very few. As to a seminar on the beach, I would sign up. I've been looking at options on how to do this and haven't yet settled on a final plan. A lot of them involve attaching rope to the rigging wire which I'm concerned could hold moisture and promote crevice corrosion. Current thinking is to use SS or monel wire wrapped around the stay to hold some kind of bracket that supports a wood rung.

Maybe time to start a thread on this.





Not for a long, long time.

Me either, but I did have to learn to read charts and do gozintas. It seems that using traditional paper charts for route planning and familiarizing yourself with the area has declined since the affordability if good charting systems.
Most charts have visual navigation warnings in these parts
I too have to remind myself to double check.

[kapnkarl]

Don't know that it's fair to title this thread "another Navionics victim...". I haven't downloaded updated charts in that area since the fall of 2018 and that cut still shows up as a lot more than just risky. We all need to ensure we have current charts as well as maintaining a good forward watch. Just sayin.

[IslandHopper]

Originally Posted by mikedefieslife

This is zoomed out though. The ones further up in the post seem to have depths matching the Explorer chart. Seems there's a few 0.5m soundings, but most above 1m and bearing in mind the chart datum is usually from the lowest tide levels, it shouldn't be too bad for a shallow draft multihull. Saying that, I wouldn't fancy it without someone up at the bow or higher.

Interestingly people have been mentioning the 'Navionics route' surely no-one was relying on auto routing through what looks to be a tricky area?

What are you talking about? the Navionics chart i posted (you quoted) for the same area in Feb 2013 is completely different to the same chart of today, regardless of the zoom level, they have removed the "suggested route" and basically filled in the area with obstructions and new depth information.....I wasn't talking about the Explorer charts at all because apparently the latest casualty was using Navionics for the same area.... Explorer charts have got nothing to do with the incident other than they are similar to the newer Navionics version....

Zoom the new one in and out and see.....

https://webapp.navionics.com/#boatin...y=anlnC%60camM

[keithw88]

Insurance: surely third-party and pollution insurance should be globally compulsory (unless sailing a wooden boat with no engine, etc)?

[IslandHopper]

Originally Posted by kapnkarl

Don't know that it's fair to title this thread "another Navionics victim...". I haven't downloaded updated charts in that area since the fall of 2018 and that cut still shows up as a lot more than just risky. We all need to ensure we have current charts as well as maintaining a good forward watch. Just sayin.

Agreed and exactly what i'm putting across, Navionics have taken steps to rectify the situation from 6 years ago and if anyone had the updated charts they would realise going through there in anything bigger than a kayak would be risky lol.....

As i mentioned earlier, i would be very interested in learning what version Navionics the vessel was using, to many just buy these programs but don't bother to update them in the never ending chase to save a buck, i even know of one individual using a 10+ year old pirated copy of C-Maps which can't be updated, works just fine he reckons

[StuM]

FWIW, the old CM93 chart looks like this:

[Mr B]

Wow, My Cat pulls 2 feet of draught and there is no way I would attempt to go thru there,

I have Garmin C maps on my GPS which I found to be dead accurate all the time where ever I went,
But sailing along the coast just near the Burnett river heads, Qld,
The C Maps had me sailing along the beach half a mile away,
So I suppose the maps all have glitches in them in various places around the world,

But nothing beats the old eyeball,

My Paper charts were made by Capt Cook, then updated during the Second world war, A few updates were made in the 70's and 80's,
But there were no recent updates on any of my paper charts,
All the updates on my paper charts were notated on the bottom of each chart,

[Captain Bill]

I wasn't able to talk to the captain today as he was pretty busy making repair arrangements, but no one I talked to using Navionics charts had a recommended route through the Guana-Fowl cay cut. I would have to assume he was using outdated charts charts.

[kas_1611]

Electronic charts no matter who makes them or what system you run them on and only as reliable as the data they are made from and also rely on an accurate GNSS position. Which we all have stories of widely inaccurate positions, I've seen my boat placed 50m inland when I know I am definitely 20m off the beach and in 10m of water.

This isn't a case of Navionics or any other system being to blame but pure laziness and idiocy of the skipper to a) rely on a single piece of information, b) not make sure his charts are as up to date as possible c) have a look out up front or d) spend a few £/$/€ on the pilot book for the area.

Don't blame the system. As IT Engineers will tell you remember PEBKAC - Problem Exists Between Keyboard and Chair. It's not the computer but the idiot using it.

[Pelagic]

This brings up an interesting question for users of OpenCpn and other shared ECS data.

WOULD YOU RELY ON THOSE THIRD PARTY TRACKS.?...for a first time transit through a narrow safe passage?

[flyingboat]

I sail through Georgetown periodically, delivering new catamarans to the Miami boat Show, and arraived soon after the 2013 incident. At the time Navionics showed the reccomended route as described. Locals joked that they wouldn't take a ski boat through that route.

At the Miami boat show a couple of weeks later, I spoke to Navionics and warned them of the danger. The next day the charts were updated to the very rocky passage shown on later posts here.

It seems there was a lack of seamanship by the latest victim, but tired sailors looking for some shelter do make mistakes, particularly if the electronic charts have been accurate elsewhere.

I think the lesson here, as part of good seamanship is not to rely solely on one charting source.

Graham