The ICWW is my test case for switching to ENC.
There appears to be some inconsistencies in bridge data in different areas.
I'm most interested in opening bridges as my mast
is less than 65'.
So far, it seems to me that opening bridges have 2 data areas; the important one being the opening area. You must double click this area to get the bridge name(except S FL) the bridge type and the opened clearance (if applicable). If you double click on either side of the opening you will get fixed bridge information.
Where the bridges are very short (like most of Florida
where, I'm guessing, a short bridge might be 20 car lengths and the opening 2-3 car lengths) with a route you must zoom way in, in order double click the bridge data. Right clicking doesn't help you still have to miss the route area.
As viewed from my armchair, I believe that for the ICWW:
1. ENC's are usable (probably desirable if for no other reason than a better course up display. They are also said to be updated before RNC's) They do, however, require more operator interaction. This is meaningful to single-handers and nervous skippers.
2. Whether you use ENC or RNC charts, to safely and efficiently travel the ICWW, you will need additional information like Skipper
Bobs(paper) or ActiveCaptain (electronic).