ENC vs RNC and no more RNC

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by Coquina

Bottom line is it looks pretty bad and I doubt people will be happy with OpenCPN on ENCs

Seems like a bazillion people use OpenCPN, and I'd guess many have ENCs loaded. It's not like a new thing...

Anyway, just turn on everything, then gradually eliminate clutter later?

-Chris

[bcn]

Originally Posted by Coquina

On ENC?

Look at o-charts.org for coverages.



Australia has already stopped raster. NZ will follow. SHOM (France) is debating it. Update frequencies of ENCs are weekly - or even daily - in the case of most HOs. Raster much less frequent.


Hubert

[Coquina]

There are a lot of benefits to ENCs too especially course-up mode and object query. What is frustrating to me is that while the charts work well enough for places *I have been before*, some of the trickier out of the way entrances would be terrible at night for the firs time. I'll post some samples when I get a chance. This is not the fault of OpenCPN, it is the fault of NOAA.
One very cool thing is the T hot key to toggle text off and on and not having text turn inverted when southbound, so it isn't ALL bad. I just wish they had used a bit more care.

[hpeer]

We here happen to be a population of boating enthusiasts, and are probably a good bit more knowledgeable than the average boater.

The average halter is doing it occasionally and doesn’t have a deep knowledge of OpenCPN or other display platforms. He is not in a great position to decide what he wants to see and what he should not.

And that’s where RNC displays really shine is that they provide a standard level of detail, selected by experts, to provide the most likely relevant information in a way that is easily digestible.

ENC’s have their place, but for the vast majority of American boaters it’s not their cockpit. They should be encouraged on how to read a chart. And how do you do that if the format and presentation are ushered variable? Suppose the boater decides to turn off, or inadvertently turns off, the layer with channel markers, or depth? Or changes the presentation and forgets what he did? Or doesn’t tell the next guy driving?

[requiem]

Originally Posted by hpeer

We here happen to be a population of boating enthusiasts, and are probably a good bit more knowledgeable than the average boater.

Of course, the average boater is likely using something like Navionics and has no idea about the ENCs to start with, which hopefully lessens the damage...

Originally Posted by hpeer

ENC’s have their place, but for the vast majority of American boaters it’s not their cockpit. They should be encouraged to learn how to read a chart. And how do you do that if the format and presentation are ushered variable? Suppose the boater decides to turn off, or inadvertently turns off, the layer with channel markers, or depth? Or changes the presentation and forgets what he did? Or doesn’t tell the next guy driving?

It sounds like NOAA plans to improve some details (hopefully) as well as creating a rendition that can be treated like a paper chart where "what you see is what you get".

The other day someone was looking for a training sim for a VHF radio to prep for their radio certification (German UBI/SRC), and of course a few people responded with variations on "it's a radio, you just push to talk, all there is to it". If people are using charts without learning about them first it's also asking for trouble. The format being variable certainly adds a level of detail, but even paper charts can hold surprises (e.g. controlling depths versus project depths, or zones of confidence) for the unwary. TBF, most are less likely to affect the average recreational boater, but technology changes.

[Ben S]

Navionics i a disaster in my area, run aground once where it was 3 meters deep...


Im so happy with the oeSENC charts, best detail, and better for fishing than navionics

[Bycrick]

Once upon a time, I heard a story that sometime in the 1920s, someone said "If telephone usage keeps growing, pretty soon everybody will have to be a telephone operator." And, lo, it has come to pass.

The issue isn’t about whether you can have "paper charts," because you can always find somebody with a printer. The question is will the Geographic Data Base that contains all the information be "curated" and displayed/drawn by a knowledgeable human being or by software, written by people who have never been on a boat, with parameters chosen by the end-user who wants everything spoon fed to them.

We may not like the answer, but we know what it is. Very soon, you’ll have a thousand sources of weather data, but you’ll end up making your own predictions unless you’re willing to pay somebody to do it for you.

OpenCPN is a good program, but when it displays RNC, whoever published the chart is responsible for the contents. When it displays an ENC "chart" it’s dependent on who provided the original geographic data, who wrote the rendering engine that puts the data where you can see it, and you/somebody else deciding which of the display options you choose. The same is true when they print-on-demand.

[SCarns]

Originally Posted by Bycrick

Once upon a time, I heard a story that sometime in the 1920s, someone said "If telephone usage keeps growing, pretty soon everybody will have to be a telephone operator." And, lo, it has come to pass.

The issue isn’t about whether you can have "paper charts," because you can always find somebody with a printer. The question is will the Geographic Data Base that contains all the information be "curated" and displayed/drawn by a knowledgeable human being or by software, written by people who have never been on a boat, with parameters chosen by the end-user who wants everything spoon fed to them.

We may not like the answer, but we know what it is. Very soon, you’ll have a thousand sources of weather data, but you’ll end up making your own predictions unless you’re willing to pay somebody to do it for you.

OpenCPN is a good program, but when it displays RNC, whoever published the chart is responsible for the contents. When it displays an ENC "chart" it’s dependent on who provided the original geographic data, who wrote the rendering engine that puts the data where you can see it, and you/somebody else deciding which of the display options you choose. The same is true when they print-on-demand.

Yep. Well said Bycrick.

I have always used ENC charts since my first chart plotter - a standard horizon CP150 - anybody remember those? - in 1999.

Like chart technology, I’ve grown a lot since then and still prefer the flexibility of ENC charts. It’s a personal preference, but I like seeing the data I want to see, not a static graphic representation that someone else has drawn that I have to look at.

Plus, ENCs are much smaller, easier to update, and require less bandwidth than tradition RNC charts. Presumably they are easier to create and edit, also, due to the simple volume of new/updated charts I d/l every week from NOAA.

It’s a matter of preference. I still know guys who carry paper charts a back up. It’s smart and makes sense for them. For me, I have all manner of digital devices (hand held gps, water proof iPhone, iPad, multiple laptops, Etc.) that redundancies are not really an issue for me. I’m never far enough away from anywhere that I don’t know where I am... or where I’m going... that I can’t just dead recon to it should there be a catastrophic failure.

Two sides to every story.

Personally, I’ll not miss RNC charts, as I don’t like them. However, just like religion or politics, I’d lobby to keep them around because you, my friends, find them important, even though I personally do not.

[transmitterdan]

If anything ENC charts have more than enough information. So it’s necessary to turn some of it off else the display is unusable.

But I want to address something else regarding good seamanship. It’s not reasonable to expect to learn how to use either an RNC or ENC based chart plotter for the first time when your ship is about to go on the rocks in a tight channel. That’s just silly IMO.

Good seamanship requires dedication to learning and yes, reading the manual, so that you know what the heck you are doing. If the user interface can be improved by all means speak up. But complaining that reading a manual is too much bother is a bit of a stretch I think.

[Bycrick]

I’m afraid that I’m an RNC chart man be preference. Lots of cruising grounds in Central America don’t have any recent charts. Turtle Bay, Mexico, Bahia Tenacatita, El Salvador, Islas Perlas, Panama. The old paper charts published 50 years and more ago have far more information than any of the ENC. For route planning, the big picture from Panama to Ecuador on the coastal chart is easier than doing it on a chart plotter. For a long passage, you can do almost as well by turning the plotter off and putting a piece of blue paper over the screen. Set the options or the zoom wrong and you’ll join Vesta.

Do I have and use ENC systems? You bet. But you need to actually spend the time and effort to learn their limitations and, perhaps more importantly, have enough other sources of Nav information to know when the picture they present is wrong. Ask the Boeing Max pilots about your instruments being wrong.

Don’t get me wrong. Electronic navigation is wonderful. It can save one from making a lot of mistakes. But the map isn’t the world. When one depends to much on any single nav system, someday they’ll turn down a snowy road in the mountains and get trapped, or drive off a pier into the water because their nav device told them to.

[hpeer]

^ Yes to all the above.

I’m recalling a friend who was showing me Navionics “sonar” mode and was deeply impressed at all the data. But then I was looking at sonar mode for Greenland. And I realized it’s just phoney extrapolation of data, not real soundings. It gives the false impression of truth. Not that “we dropped a line here, and another one there.”

And there was the chap in this board some years ago who, when being warned about chart inaccuracies said something to the effect of “Well if I bought charts that were not right up to date with soundings I would just return them.” He had no clue of the Provence of the charts or the data.

There is far too much infatuation with pretty presentation vs facts.

[Bycrick]

A good PowerPoint presentation of lousy data will sell better than the correct data written by hand on a whiteboard.

[Snore]

Originally Posted by Bycrick

A good PowerPoint presentation of lousy data will sell better than the correct data written by hand on a whiteboard.

That sir should be addressed in EVERY MBA program.

[emoji122]

[Coquina]

I decided to really dive into this and found out that:
1. OpenCPN is amazingly powerful and has a lot of adjustments and options you would hardly ever notice with RNCs.
2. There are numerous ways to make ENCs look bad, or even worse, not display solid objects in your path.
3. One really annoying thing I found was with the detail vs. zoom level set below 4, there are situations where as you zoom in from seeing 20 miles around you to 1 mile, as you change charts some objects will appear, vanish, and appear again!
4. If there is some glitch in prepping the ENCs, you can not have the smaller scale chart you think you have and thus not get details you are expecting.
Solutions:
1. This is like learning a new glass cockpit layout more than an easy consumer product. You really need to study it before you need it.

2. I have screwed around with it a lot and got it to where I like it. I saved a template once I got it to my liking. I'll post it here if I can or someplace else so others can download it and give it a try.

3. You need to turn the zoom detail control up to at least 4. That way you keep detail as you zoom in. Otherwise it seems to see the jump to the smaller scale chart that is zoomed out from the bigger scale that was zoomed in as a reason to not display some objects until the smaller scale chart is also zoomed in.

4. Turn off chart quilting and look around zooming in and out a bit. The missing charts, if any, will be obvious, they are blank squares.

[bcn]

Originally Posted by Coquina

3. One really annoying thing I found was with the detail vs. zoom level set below 4, there are situations where as you zoom in from seeing 20 miles around you to 1 mile, as you change charts some objects will appear, vanish, and appear again!

This will depend from the chart sources you are using - the manner how the editing HO is defining the content. As there is no "setting that fits all", the detail slider got invented..
HO's have there own philosophy about the SCAMIN attribute of ENC objects.


SCAMIN defines the minimum scale required to show an object.
Soundings are a nice example. Canadian CHS and US NOAA are two completely different worlds in this context.


When mixing InlandENCs coming often with a scale of 1:1000 with the rest, sometimes no really satisfying result can be achieved due to the extreme spread of the scales.
Then chart groups are one tool. And the split canvas. The split canvas is very helpful to get overview and detail at the same time. Templates do cover settings for split canvas.

One more idea in our context: hot keys to toggle information

"T" texts, "S" soundings, "L" lights, "A" anchorage....
More in the manual.