Auto routing anyone?

[Randomandy]

Does anybody have experience using auto routing of a chart plotter? Garmin calls this "Guidance". I'm referring to an algorithm that can find a path between two points but automatically detour around the shallows, as opposed to the typical setup that draws a straight line even if it crosses land or rocks.

All of you who don't trust electronics, I get it. Please do not hijack this thread to say so unless you have actually tried to use autoguidance. Thank you.

What were you results? Did it succeed? fail? somewhere in between?

[swagman]

Hi Matey,
I was not even aware our Raymarine kit might have such an option, but even if it did I am not sure how truly effective it might be.
Sure - I'm sure it might have the data to route you around shallow areas on the assumed 'shortest' route - but doubt it would take into account wind / water conditions which IMHO would also effect your passage plan.
By the way - I am one who does trust electronics.
Cheers
JOHN

[GordMay]

Garmin’s “Guide To” option uses the card’s bathymetric detail to figure out a “reasonable” (usually) route to the destination, which it lays down as a purple road.
“Guide To” does NOT create a route that can be steered by an auto pilot. There are no waypoints in it. It is just a suggested path.

I’ve heard that the function often creates noticeably different routes, between the same two points. This would not be reassuring, at all.

[Randomandy]

Originally Posted by swagman

but doubt it would take into account wind / water conditions

Good point. I guess my hope was it would give me a starting route that I could improve upon rather than starting with an impossible route to begin with where I have to do it all by hand instead of just partly.

[Randomandy]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I’ve heard that the function often creates noticeably different routes, between the same two points. This would not be reassuring, at all.

Is there only one safe path between two points? That wouldn't be my biggest concern.

[AnchorageGuy]

Originally Posted by Randomandy

Good point. I guess my hope was it would give me a starting route that I could improve upon rather than starting with an impossible route to begin with where I have to do it all by hand instead of just partly.

Only by plotting any route manually can you be assured a safe passage and know where you are going and where you probably are during the passage so do the extra work.

[Randomandy]

Originally Posted by Chuck Baier

Only by plotting any route manually can you be assured a safe passage and know where you are going and where you probably are during the passage so do the extra work.

You don't have to create the route manually in order to check it by hand. It's like asking a computer to unscramble an anagram. You may still want to check that the result is a real word, but that's an aweful lot easier than unscrambling the word on your own from scratch.

[AnchorageGuy]

Originally Posted by Randomandy

You don't have to create the route manually in order to check it by hand. It's like asking a computer to unscramble an anagram. You may still want to check that the result is a real word, but that's an aweful lot easier than unscrambling the word on your own from scratch.

I understand what you are saying but I have never considered planning a route to be anywhere like unscrambling a word or anagram. It is simply laying out a series of waypoints that will be connected to determine a vessels safe passage. This is just simple navigation and some of us prefer to have that done by the Captain or navigator rather than a computer. Yes it is much simpler but on Sea Trek we don't always like the easy way, but rather the tried and true and safer way and we have less stress while under way. We have 2 GPS, a chartplotter and a computer interfaced with the GPS on board. And in over 17 years this has never got us into trouble or let us down. But each of us must run our ship as we see fit. You ask for input and getting input from all sides is what you will usually get.