Leopard 46 lost in French Polynesia - stunning rescue pictures

[taxwizz]

Originally Posted by smj

On the chart plotters I've owned you have to press "I Agree" on the warning page to get to the chart page. I'm pretty sure at that point you are releasing the company of liability.
I can't imagine what the cost of charts would be if the companies were held liable. Can you imagine the amount of hours and money spent keeping all charts worldwide absolutely up to date? Seems like it would be an impossible task.

Nope.
Easy with the internet. My computer software updates all the time.
The charts don't have to be PERFECT, they just have to contain the latest data available. If you are selling charts, then staying up to date is your business and your responsibility..

[smj]

Originally Posted by taxwizz

Nope.

Easy with the internet. My computer software updates all the time.

The charts don't have to be PERFECT, they just have to contain the latest data available. If you are selling charts, then staying up to date is your business and your responsibility..

And I'm sure they used the latest data available. How often should they survey the South Pacific to the point you would consider them to be responsible? Daily, weekly, monthly? Sometimes one must take responsibility for their actions or lack of.

[taxwizz]

Originally Posted by smj

And I'm sure they used the latest data available. How often should they survey the South Pacific to the point you would consider them to be responsible? Daily, weekly, monthly? Sometimes one must take responsibility for their actions or lack of.

I am not saying that they need to do new surveys weekly. Just that if the data exists, it should be incorporated in their map chips, and be able to be updated over the internet, if their GPS hardware allows it.

Technology is leaping ahead, and we need to embrace it. And the data should be public as likely public funds were used to obtain it.

[LeaseOnLife]

Originally Posted by svrodeorm

...snip...
I am gutted for these people and their significant loss,but glad they came out of it unscathed physically at least. Again sailing close - apparently very close, as 180'- to a fringing reef is akin to driving your car without headlight throttle down on a highway.

Sorry, but total madness.
.../snip...

Agreed. Look at the navionics chartlet attached, the depth is shown in meters. When rounding these islands one usually doesn't get a depth reading, it is too damn deep. At 180feet, they should have been able to hear the waves hitting the reef, but had engines running...

I traced the reef ring around Avea Bay as shown on Navionics (using sasplanet), then switched to display google earth as well as bing-arial. The reef line matches very well.

Maybe some boaters mistake the blue 'water' on navionics for 'deep enough' while it actually highlights a shallow area?

[smj]

Originally Posted by taxwizz

I am not saying that they need to do new surveys weekly. Just that if the data exists, it should be incorporated in their map chips, and be able to be updated over the internet, if their GPS hardware allows it.



Technology is leaping ahead, and we need to embrace it. And the data should be public as likely public funds were used to obtain it.

I agree


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[rallyman1122]

Yes, I respect that the crew posted the reef is uncharted but is it really or simply misread on the charts? As shown by the above post, looks pretty accurate to my eyes.

Either way, its a shame this had to happen and I hope the crew and family are able to get back on there feet.

[barnakiel]

No lawsuits coming. Not Navionics problem. Navigator problem.

b.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by rallyman1122

Yes, I respect that the crew posted the reef is uncharted but is it really or simply misread on the charts? As shown by the above post, looks pretty accurate to my eyes.

Either way, its a shame this had to happen and I hope the crew and family are able to get back on there feet.

The quality of the chart in use in this case seems to only have been a possibly small contribution to the accident. Trip planning (day trip instead of overnight), evening arrival in reef surrounded island, inadequate clearance of known dangers are all much greater contributors.

Hopefully the family will regroup, re-asset up and be able to head out cruising again.

[Jim Cate]

I join all in expressing sympathy to the family for their misadventure and loss. However, until we know the exact coordinates of the stranding, and can check the relevant charts, I think blaming Navionics is wrong. All we have at this point is hearsay, not facts.

In general, trusting any chart to be totally correct in those waters is bad practice. Sailing at speed in the dark near the fringing reef, relying on an electronic chart to keep you off the coral is risky at best. If they were in 180 feet they were not far from the fringing reef to start with, and should have been on high alert, not sitting down to dine. And for that matter, there has been no mention of anyone being on deck, on watch, when they hit.

I still feel sad for them, but blaming Navionics is unwarranted IMO. The thread about video game navigators comes to mind.

And BTW, I've done this passage sans GPS a couple of times... perhaps that influences my opinions.

Jim

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Cormorant

Does anyone cruising there use Google Earth -> KAP imagery to double-check things like this?

You've been sitting on front of your desktop too long. Google Earth out in the middle of the pacific? I doubt the reef had a cell tower.

Their former insurance company got this one right, however unexpected stuff does happen even to people well prepared. They sound very resilient, hopefully, this will just be a setback.

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by Cormorant

Does anyone cruising there use Google Earth -> KAP imagery to double-check things like this?

Yes, I use FUGAWI to make overlays, but some of Googles imagery offshore is not so good.

[Seaslug Caravan]

Originally Posted by taxwizz

Nope.
Easy with the internet. My computer software updates all the time.
The charts don't have to be PERFECT, they just have to contain the latest data available. If you are selling charts, then staying up to date is your business and your responsibility..

NO. its the navigators.

Please Mr taxwizz, do tell us all what the 'ZOC' is for the area of the chart under discussion here.

I'm thinking you don't understand what you are looking at.

[DumnMad]

Originally Posted by taxwizz

They can disclaim whatever they want, but I suspect that the courts will see through their nonsense and realize that Navionics knew or ought to know that navigation is exactly what they will be used for. Ka-ching.

These guys are already getting on with life and look to be making the best of things - kudos to them - too intelligent to get entangled in bitterness and with lawyers on a hopeless cause.

I love Navionics but wouldn't afford it if the world's litigants had their way, obsessing over money and looking for ways to screw whoever.

[basssears]

IIRC that pass was a definite NO NO NO in our Sunsail chart briefing in 2013. -- Bass

[bluewatervet]

Anyone navigating in not-well-charted waters should seriously consider investing in 'forward looking sonar' ....read that as having a 'depth finder / fish finder' with the forward-looking capability transducer. Same for having the now extremely cost effective 'broadband' radars that have wonderful continous close-in (~200 foot) 'resolution' yet with no personal radiation hazards & drawing less power than a couple incandescent lights. No matter the cost or size of your craft, depth and/or surface radar target alarms set for alerting shallows are priceless tools, day or nighttime. And in this MAYDAY case, having a deep cycle battery dedicated (...hardwired... 'float') to the VHF, and the critical lighting in particular, is always strongly advised. Sure, using 'charts' with data dating back to the 1800's is risky at best, and of course, it also helps to even realize that inaccuracy. A little pre-trip research goes a long way. Be aware even USA coastal waters have geodetic survey bottom contour data dating pretty far back. Many decades of heavy weather & shifting sands can really distort that 'dated' bottom picture (...and is not always highlighted by NOTAM's BTW). Another good example of why standing-off until higher tide, especially after viewing the intended passage situation during low tide, is a darn good way to go. While I feel terrible for what this so serving family went through, being totally blunt, "complacency can kill." Fortunately they were experienced, strong & clever enough to cope, especially emotionally to hold together under great stress. Kudos folks, plus to all those assisting.....