Electronic Admiralty Charts

[Oceanride007]

Its been a few years since I was on a bridge of a commercial ship, one of the Officers had his own set of electronic charts that were ECDIS, these were not Raster. They looked like scanned Admiralty charts. I'd be very surprised if anybody like Jeppersen, updated any Raster charts and called them ECDIS. I've heard Ships captains seriously reprimanded, for allowing non-ECDIS electronic charts on the bridge.
As far as I am concerned old CM93, new CM93, any scanned charts are just useful toys to help us feel better. Last I heard a full set of charts was a five figure sum. I keep oldest set of CM93 because a lot of detail they had disappeared on later version.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Oceanride007

Its been a few years since I was on a bridge of a commercial ship, one of the Officers had his own set of electronic charts that were ECDIS, these were not Raster. They looked like scanned Admiralty charts. I'd be very surprised if anybody like Jeppersen, updated any Raster charts and called them ECDIS. I've heard Ships captains seriously reprimanded, for allowing non-ECDIS electronic charts on the bridge.
As far as I am concerned old CM93, new CM93, any scanned charts are just useful toys to help us feel better. Last I heard a full set of charts was a five figure sum. I keep oldest set of CM93 because a lot of detail they had disappeared on later version.

Lots of misinformation.

CM93 is a vector format. In particular cm93/3 is a new format to support charts to ECDIS standards. However to my knowledge only charts in S-57 formats are actually IMO ECDIS approved and jeppersen have a series called " primar"

Currently cm93/3 is to ECDIS standards but not certified to it.

Your statement about " toys" is entirely misguided. Cm93/3 while not being ECDIS approved still are very high quality updateable vector charts to full commercial standards. Many parts of the world are still not available on S-57 format.


The price of electronic charts has nothing to do with quality. Garmins blue charts are derived from TRANSAS charts which are commercial. ECDIS charts are expensive because of all the features the IMO requires. It also reflects the premium licensing chests that HOs apply to commercial licenses.

Dave


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Alexey_R]

Originally Posted by Helix

that depend on where you are looking.

and regarding updates...just few,there is a lot. I am using notices to mariners and this cm93 is updated up to 07/30/12

this is from december 2011, thames estuary

Thanks you for destroying any of my doubts . That is great that CM93/2 is been updated.


The version I had was from 2010 and many files dated 2008 and earlier. I will find the update and compare later.



I recently reviewed my last trip as I remember. The tricky shoals off Selsey Bill (East from Solent on South Cost of UK) the buoy and shoals are marked clear enough for safe passage. But Navionics app has slightly more details on soundings around buoyed passageway. But still comparable to paper chart (Imray) that been used.

[dacust]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Lots of misinformation.

...

Currently cm93/3 is to ECDIS standards but not certified to it.

...

Dave


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thanks for correcting me on that.

-dan

[Oceanride007]

Gobo. apologies I think I got my vectors mixed up with rastor. I think the charts I saw were Endeavour (Raster), I was trying to encourage more names of other ECDIS approved chart suppliers.
However this is not important to me, older scanned charts are. I would love to have them as backup to my CM93 that, I called them a toy because in some areas they are woeful (cloud shaped blobs), still they are calibrated to WGS 84, certainly more accurate than the Admiralty charts I scanned and geo referenced. But my bugbear is so much information is missing from CM93 compared to older Admiralty charts.
That aside I do believe that the word ECDIS has a legal connotation that is important to our Commercial brethren, not us. I do not know much about S57 other than its to a IMO standard. Great more is more. maybe a economic version will filter down and give me more accurate coastal detail that our commercial cousins are not so interested in (even if it was surveyed 100 tears ago), with semi-regular updating of corrections.