Do You Have a Chartplotter?

[mbianka]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

Do you have a chart plotter on your boat?

Yes, I have a Standard Horizon 180i and really like it. Sits on top of the housing that holds my electric propulsion control pot right at the helm position where i need it most:
THE BIANKA LOG BLOG: WHAT THE HELM?: Part 2
But, I also have an area chart book nearby as well as a large scale chart on the dining table down below. What can I say I'm a sailor who likes backups whenever possible.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

I love my Garmin touch screen as much as the next guy but that said, with the general drift of this thread a lot of us will be in deep doo doo if we get an EMP attack.

EMP? You mean sun spots? Loss of signal and all that? Who here would be in a lot of trouble?

What topic drift? We don't have to all think in absolute lockstep, do we? It started with a survey of what navigational aids we use. It was bound to lead to this.

[sidmon]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

I do not agree that there is a "human risk factor" to bringing electronics aboard. In fact I think that's pretty silly, sorry. Use all the tools you have.

Ok...

Believe what you want to

The spate of groundings in the commercial and naval maritime worlds attributed to human factors and automation-including the near loss of a nuclear submarine- certainly haven't been silly.

Nor was the loss of the Aegean for the matter.

And while we are on the subject...Another case to ponder...

215. Another concern expressed was that chart plotters lead to casual passage planning. At best the passage plan is done by placing a few way points on, at times a small screen, with a cursory glance at the compressed detail available on the plotter. Close reference to the more detailed paper hydrographic charts, as directed by the chart plotter warning, is not being practised. This may be reasonable in local waters that are well known and especially around Sydney where there are few unmarked navigation dangers. But it is a poor practice when venturing further afield and potentially unsafe.

216. The chart plotters are a great navigation aid but need to be used with caution. They have created a situation where people can put to sea with little understanding of navigation and the associated seamanship

This trend will continue as long as folks dismiss this all as "pretty silly."

And of course you use all the tools you have.

But you'd better make darned sure you understand how to use them too.

And not just let them "plot your course so you don't have to enroll in one."

Otherwise, you could end up being discussed here as being "stupid"...

[noelex 77]

Most vessels are using chartplotters as their main navigational tool. It follows from this that most navigational mistakes involve mistakes using chartplotters.

In the old days navigational mistakes were due mistakes with traditional navigational methods. There were lots of silly mistakes. There were also a lot of " understandable" mistakes. I think the latter are far more worrying.

I would much prefer a technique that means I have to make a stupid mistake to get into trouble.

[sidmon]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Most vessels are using chartplotters as their main navigational tool. It follows from this that most navigational mistakes involve mistakes using chartplotters.

In the old days navigational mistakes were due mistakes with traditional navigational methods. There were lots of silly mistakes. There were also a lot of " understandable" mistakes. I think the latter are far more worrying.

I would much prefer a technique that means I have to make a stupid mistake to get into trouble.

Nobody is saying don't use a chart plotter noelex...

Just understand that the automation can lull you...its a known human risk hazard...and prepare for it.

Keep your head in the game.

[sailorboy1]

Yes we all understand that stupid is just stupid, and I wonder what "point" is trying to be won with the continued statement of such. And i don't need any more statics or examples to believe.

I also personally wonder why it is so "popular" to make blanket statements on nav type threads that basically suggest those that use chart plotters don't know to read a paper chart etc. Which according to the poll means ...

[sidmon]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

I also personally wonder why it is so "popular" to make blanket statements on nav type threads that basically suggest those that use chart plotters don't know to read a paper chart etc. Which according to the poll means ...

Picture says a thousand words...




Condolences to the families....

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by sidmon

Nobody is saying don't use a chart plotter noelex...

Just understand that the automation can lull you...its a known human risk hazard...and prepare for it.

Keep your head in the game.

Nobody is saying don't use tradition methods Sidmon

Just understand that the measurments and maths can mean there is plenty of room for mistakes...its a known human risk hazard...and prepare for it.

Keep your head in the game

Sorry I couldn't resist

[sidmon]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Nobody is saying don't use tradition methods Sidmon

Just understand that the measurments and maths can mean there is plenty of room for mistakes...its a known human risk hazard...and prepare for it.

Keep your head in the game

Sorry I couldn't resist

I'm sure thats what an ancient Polynesian would say noelex...

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by sidmon

Ok...

Believe what you want to

The spate of groundings in the commercial and naval maritime worlds attributed to human factors and automation-including the near loss of a nuclear submarine- certainly haven't been silly.

Nor was the loss of the Aegean for the matter.

And while we are on the subject...Another case to ponder...

215. Another concern expressed was that chart plotters lead to casual passage planning. At best the passage plan is done by placing a few way points on, at times a small screen, with a cursory glance at the compressed detail available on the plotter. Close reference to the more detailed paper hydrographic charts, as directed by the chart plotter warning, is not being practised. This may be reasonable in local waters that are well known and especially around Sydney where there are few unmarked navigation dangers. But it is a poor practice when venturing further afield and potentially unsafe.

216. The chart plotters are a great navigation aid but need to be used with caution. They have created a situation where people can put to sea with little understanding of navigation and the associated seamanship

This trend will continue as long as folks dismiss this all as "pretty silly."

And of course you use all the tools you have.

But you'd better make darned sure you understand how to use them too.

And not just let them "plot your course so you don't have to enroll in one."

Otherwise, you could end up being discussed here as being "stupid"...

"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakuflames
I do not agree that there is a "human risk factor" to bringing electronics aboard. In fact I think that's pretty silly, sorry. Use all the tools you have.

Ok...

Believe what you want to"

This is not a "believe what you want to situation. Before I had a chart plotter, I sailed without one. I have explained several times how a chart plotter can enhance the use of paper charts.

YOU are the one believing what YOU want to, You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to assume that anyone who does not agree with every fold and crease of your opinion is naive, or foolish or anything else. And, being insulting is not a persuasive tactic.

[Rakuflames]

PS -- not only have I made 'damned sure' I know how to use it, but I make "damned sure' I don't let other people boss me around, That's not "skipper-like." I really didn't read past the first dismissive response to my post.

You have a nice day, but ... stay off my boat.

[sidmon]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

"
Quote:
Originally Posted by R
This is not a "believe what you want to situation. Before I had a chart plotter, I sailed without one. I have explained several times how a chart plotter can enhance the use of paper charts.

YOU are the one believing what YOU want to, You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to assume that anyone who does not agree with every fold and crease of your opinion is naive, or foolish or anything else. And, being insulting is not a persuasive tactic.

Now who is taking it too personal raku?

I am "damned" glad you are making "damned sure" you know how to use the nav tools at your disposal...

I wasn't directing those statements at you

But anyway, to the legitimacy of automation being a human factors problem.

Excellent article here:

Even in a digital age, nav skills and judgment matter
Lt. Craig Allen

“Innovations in technology have led to the use of advanced automated systems on modern maritime vessels,” the National Transportation Safety Board stated in its report on the accident. “However, bridge automation has also changed the role of the watch officer on the ship. The watch officer, who previously was active in obtaining information about the environment and used this information for controlling the ship, is now ‘out of the control loop.’ The watch officer is relegated to passively monitoring the status and performance of the automated systems. As a result of passive monitoring, the crewmembers of the Royal Majesty missed numerous opportunities to recognize that the GPS was transmitting in (dead reckoning) mode and that the ship had deviated from its intended track.”

The investigation lamented the poor watch-keeping of the master and officers, but a follow-up study by the American Psychological Association (APA) concluded that their actions were not altogether surprising. In fact, their actions reflected normal human behavior patterns, and the complacency they exhibited resulted largely from their implicit trust of their e-Nav systems and lack of stimulation caused by the automation of too many tasks.

“People who over-rely on automated systems tend to use them as shortcuts for decision making — like the crew of the Royal Majesty, they trust the computer to keep them out of danger, rather than double-check against other indicators such as a compass or visual cues,” stated the authors of an article titled “Danger of Automation — It Makes Us Complacent” in the July 1998 issue of the APA’s Monitor on Psychology. “(Researchers have) termed this phenomenon ‘automation bias’ and in several studies of college students and professional pilots they find that pilots tend to rely even more on automation than students, perhaps because they’ve grown to trust automation more.”

As the APA article points out, e-Nav creates a strong human impulse to delegate many cognitive faculties to technology and implicitly believe whatever is displayed. Overcoming that instinct requires both education and training. Education equips the watch officer with an intuitive understanding of the navigation process and allows him or her to recognize information that does not make sense and surmise possible reasons for the error. Training builds good habits and instincts for recognizing instrument malfunctions quickly and overcoming them.

----------

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by sidmon

Now who is taking it too personal raku?

I am "damned" glad you are making "damned sure" you know how to use the nav tools at your disposal...

I wasn't directing those statements at you

But anyway, to the legitimacy of automation being a human factors problem.

Excellent article here:

Even in a digital age, nav skills and judgment matter
Lt. Craig Allen

“Innovations in technology have led to the use of advanced automated systems on modern maritime vessels,” the National Transportation Safety Board stated in its report on the accident. “However, bridge automation has also changed the role of the watch officer on the ship. The watch officer, who previously was active in obtaining information about the environment and used this information for controlling the ship, is now ‘out of the control loop.’ The watch officer is relegated to passively monitoring the status and performance of the automated systems. As a result of passive monitoring, the crewmembers of the Royal Majesty missed numerous opportunities to recognize that the GPS was transmitting in (dead reckoning) mode and that the ship had deviated from its intended track.”

The investigation lamented the poor watch-keeping of the master and officers, but a follow-up study by the American Psychological Association (APA) concluded that their actions were not altogether surprising. In fact, their actions reflected normal human behavior patterns, and the complacency they exhibited resulted largely from their implicit trust of their e-Nav systems and lack of stimulation caused by the automation of too many tasks.

“People who over-rely on automated systems tend to use them as shortcuts for decision making — like the crew of the Royal Majesty, they trust the computer to keep them out of danger, rather than double-check against other indicators such as a compass or visual cues,” stated the authors of an article titled “Danger of Automation — It Makes Us Complacent” in the July 1998 issue of the APA’s Monitor on Psychology. “(Researchers have) termed this phenomenon ‘automation bias’ and in several studies of college students and professional pilots they find that pilots tend to rely even more on automation than students, perhaps because they’ve grown to trust automation more.”

As the APA article points out, e-Nav creates a strong human impulse to delegate many cognitive faculties to technology and implicitly believe whatever is displayed. Overcoming that instinct requires both education and training. Education equips the watch officer with an intuitive understanding of the navigation process and allows him or her to recognize information that does not make sense and surmise possible reasons for the error. Training builds good habits and instincts for recognizing instrument malfunctions quickly and overcoming them.

----------

"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakuflames
"
Quote:
Originally Posted by R
This is not a "believe what you want to situation. Before I had a chart plotter, I sailed without one. I have explained several times how a chart plotter can enhance the use of paper charts.

YOU are the one believing what YOU want to, You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to assume that anyone who does not agree with every fold and crease of your opinion is naive, or foolish or anything else. And, being insulting is not a persuasive tactic.

Now who is taking it too personal raku?"


When someone starts getting insulting, they are taking it too personally. You are the one who started getting insulting.

Of course you can find instances where stupidity led to disaster. It has always been that way and always will be that way.

But cases where people used all the navigational tools they had together and AVOIDED a major problem won't make the news -- will it?

So you hear about technology being used badly. Of course that will make the news. A story about it being used well will not. It's not news. It's not even worth repeating to someone else unless you're teaching how to combine navigational tactics.

I've given you a good example over and over of using it well: it will give you your latitude and longitude very accurately. There is no accounting for someone so determined to move across the water "as the crow flies" that they fail to notice obstacles in their paths. Even an 8 year old on a bicycle knows not to do that. Technology certainly contributes to such foolishness.

What I'm saying is that just because a terrible instance makes it into the news DOES NOT MAKE IT COMMON OR THE NORM (caps for emphasis, not yelling).

So yeah, I think you are taking it personally. I think you're taking it so personally that you aren't realizing that a news report is not truly going to be a balanced report. Those weren't articles on how to use electronics well. They were news reports of accidents. All the non-accidents aren't news, and reading the newspaper isn't doing balanced research on a topic.

Seaarching out examples to prove one's point isn't balanced research.

Believe me, I know how badly electronics can be used. My boat actually got hit by some yahoo who had his sailbot on auto pilot. He was sitting away from the wheel, making no effort to see around his decksweeper Genny, off to the side by the cabin. His wife was below making lunch. His autopilot lurched and suddenly turned 90 degrees to port when he was very close to me and actually left bottom paint on my stern. Technology used stupidly.

I saw him almost do the same thing -- to me -- two weeks later. Coming out of a private channel in a crowded boating area, he was already on autopilot, standing on top of his cockpit, untangling lines he should have untangled before he left He never looked up and was gaining on me. Needless to say we moved aside. He passed me and I don't think ever saw me.

But he's not *representative* of how most people use autopilot. He's an idiot who happens to have autopilot. He uses it stupidly ad recklessly, but I think that's how he does most things. It's snot the electronics at fault -- it's him, no matter what his approach.

Don't draw sweeping conclusions from news report. Incidents make the news because they are dramatic and NOT the norm.

[sidmon]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

"
When someone starts getting insulting, they are taking it too personally. You are the one who started getting insulting.

Don't draw sweeping conclusions from news report. Incidents make the news because they are dramatic and NOT the norm.

First off...

I wasn't insulting anyone. Making general statements with the "you" pronoun.

You took it that way because you wanted to (I guess). When in reality we agree: Know and use all your tools.

Anyway, thats your problem.

Second.

More accidents like that which happened to the Aegean will befall others if the same lack of regard that is prevalent throughout the community to the needs of learning the navigation fundamentals and training the specifics of electronic nav systems -in particular, how to watch for automation bias- in pleasure boats is not addressed.

You can plan on it.

[sailorboy1]

fight fight