Does Anyone Still Use Paper Charts ?

[SaucySailoress]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

I took a navigation course last year and it is pretty wild all the bad habits I have developed because of the chartplotter.

That's like saying using informal language on a blog is a bad habit. You use whatever is appropriate for the situation. If you're writing an academic report, you use concise language, if you're scribing a letter to grandma you use flowery language, if you're blogging you can use whatever makes you comfortable.

So who is to say which is right (except the mods, of course)?

And who is to say your habits are bad? Perhaps they're not uppity enough for the toffs in the yacht club, but do you really care?

[timbenner]

No charts, relying on a chart plotter 100% - it's just a matter of time before that policy leads you to disaster. HERE'S PROOF: November, 2010 "Soundings" magazine article reads: "relying too heavily on electronic navigation was a significant factor in the hard grounding of a maxi-yacht off southeast Australia that killed two people." Another quote from the same article: "Based on detailed satellite data from Oct. 10, the dilution of precision - a measure of the quality of a GPS position - was very degraded between 2 and 3:30 a.m. and could have resulted in an "error possibly in excess of 100 meters (328 feet)", the report says.

Hope that answers your question!

[ActiveCaptain]

Originally Posted by timbenner

...and could have resulted in an "error possibly in excess of 100 meters (328 feet)", the report says.

I'm just curious...if not using a GPS, how much closer than 100 meters do you think you'd get by other position-generating techniques when offshore the coast of southeast Australia?

Using a GPS doesn't mean you get to close your eyes. I'd surely hope that ATON's would be used in any piloting situation.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

The paper charts of the Chilean canals are useless, always have been and never been updated. So your analogy falls down... To BS the folks like me you need your facts right

Also if you look at people with more than 2 IQ points you will notice they have redundancy in their GPS and plotters. So the 'all the electrics failed' is an infantile argument.

Now, just imagine, Barnie, you are on Sea Life as my honoured guest and we are floating around the fijords of Chile...... its nice, scenic, cold.... now what would you prefer to be doing ---> Have your snout up a sextant or your eyes on those Chilean girls?

Mate!

I understand your arguments and I accept the fact that you like to have things your way.

You claim no charts is a better proposition than a paper chart.

You claim that sextant is useless when ladies are present.

But my way is to have the paper charts (and the two GPS units and the 2 netbooks with 2 different sorts of plotting software and three different sorts of electronic charts ...) and then the sextant on top of it.

If the electronics works fine for me, I use it. If it fails, I have no problem finding my way to Chile ;-)))

I will tell you honestly - I have met very many sailors who knew how to use the sextant and the paper chart and at the same time were very fluent with electronic aids but I have met even more sailors who claim they go by the GPS and then it becomes obvious they do not know a WPT from XTE. Sad, but true.

Next step will be the plotters will have voice guidance built in. I fear to think what happens when the voice function fails. Sure thing the gadget sailors will have no clue what all the blinking mess on the screen can stand for.

PS Indeed, you caught me out with Chile - I used Chile because I wanted a vivid example readable for all, my home water of Swedish West coast, much difficult to navigate as they are, are not known to too many posters.

Cheers,
barnie

[barnakiel]

An afterthought:

If paper charts of say Chile have never been updated by their HO, how good are their electronic charts?

After all, they are only digital copies of formerly paper-based information, are they not?

b.

[fishwife]

It's somewhat ironic that the Chilean Armada will not let you cruise the fjords without at least a chart book. On C map electronic charts, there are many areas where even the coast line is poorly represented. It's been said that the Armada deliberately introduced errors in their charts at a time when there was considerable tension with Argentina. Don't know about the truth of that, but radar and the number one eyeball are essential navigation tools down there.

P.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

If paper charts of say Chile have never been updated by their HO, how good are their electronic charts?


b.

I only know because I bumped into a guy with a huge cat who lived there, plus read a book about the first cruiser who did a pilot for the area.

The computer chart snippet below shows you the measure tool about 1 NM so we are talkng about a large area, a lot of rocks and not to many depths!

Might be one area to use Google Earth....

Mark
PS I just found a 20NM streatch without 1 depth North from 044 32.9 S 074 05.5 W

I guess you just stick to the main channels

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Saucy Sailoress

nd who is to say your habits are bad? Perhaps they're not uppity enough for the toffs in the yacht club, but do you really care?

I say they are bad. Doesnt mean I don't do them. Never been to a yatch club but would guess most are using chartplotters like most others. I without a doubt will cut closer to something using the GPS than I would ever dream doing with just a chart and my depth gage.

[barnakiel]

And now Ladies and Gents:

Let's go from the cold fjords of Chile to the more sunny climes of Torres Strait.

How good are charts there? Made by Her Majesty Hydrographers, except that mostly back in Cook's times, where coral grows, bottom dunes get shifted, and one Mark J has his pirate den...

I do not think it is anything about Chilean Navy, HM Queen, God or GPS - simply - some areas were of commercial interest and got surveyed while others not.

You look at Svalbard chart and you find the same.

Perhaps when the area I want to sail is clearly indicated on the chart as Unsurveyed (or is it rather Not Surveyed?) THEN I will not take the paper chart. Nor the GPS mind you ;-)))

barnie

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Would you like to have the paper chart or you simply do not give a hoot?

b.

While that not giving a hoot option is awfully attractive I have had a love affair with charts since ah twas wee lad reading me adventure stories and even though I use software and rely heavily on it I love having a chart beside me too. Nice and big, good overview and gives more info without becoming cluttered.

[timbenner]

Back to the original question - Does anyone still use paper charts? Someone up above said it best - use it all + some. The "Soundings" article I quoted from above, makes me think "What would I do in the same situation?" Answer is - I would have wanted a visual on that Island, before rounding it. The only thing I trust 100% is what I see. I would have had someone with a spot light on the bow trying to spot it, after all they had 18 people on board. Why didn't he see it on the radar? A careless tragedy, because the captain trusted his GPS and Garmin chart plotter 100% (no offense to Garmin).

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by timbenner

The only thing I trust 100% is what I see.

Goodness, I certainly don't trust what I see! Most pilots in a simulator doing a exercise white out without using instruments crashed.... they can't even tell if they are upside down in real life accidents...

I remember many many times navigating in the bush thinking I am walking in a staright line and not. I have many times at sea and on land been disoriented and my eye and brain tries to justify what it sees.
The last time this happened was yesterday on a bus when I must have looked down and felt the bus turning and when looking up thought he had turned right but he had turned left. I thought it was the bus to nowhere....
I know when I look at a rock and think its close - or far away- I can be totally incorrect in my judging distances.
At night a light can seem miles off but as its dim it may be just 100 meters way.

Looking and seeing and studying is very important. But I know not to rely of the viagra of a mirage....






Mark

[rgscpat]

Transport Canada seems a bit ambivalent about the chart requirement. It may be a case of "If you get in trouble and a chart could have helped you, it's your fault."...

Before You Go - Safe Boating Guide - TP 511 E - Marine Safety Publications - Marine Safety - Marine Transportation - Transport Canada

<<
...you must carry the following for each area you plan to boat in:

the latest edition of the largest scale chart (when available); and
the latest edition of related documents and publications, including Notices to Mariners, Sailing Directions, tide and current tables, and the List of Lights, Buoys and Fog Signals.


If you are operating a boat under 100 gross tons, you do not have to carry these charts, documents and publications on board as long as you know:

the location and type of charted:
shipping routes;
lights, buoys and marks; and
boating hazards; and
the area’s usual boating conditions such as tides, currents, ice and weather patterns.
>>

So, a small boat doesn't have to have the paper chart but the operator MUST know everything important that was in the chart... grin.

[goboatingnow]

No charts, relying on a chart plotter 100% - it's just a matter of time before that policy leads you to disaster. HERE'S PROOF: November, 2010 "Soundings" magazine article reads: "relying too heavily on electronic navigation was a significant factor in the hard grounding of a maxi-yacht off southeast Australia that killed two people." Another quote from the same article: "Based on detailed satellite data from Oct. 10, the dilution of precision - a measure of the quality of a GPS position - was very degraded between 2 and 3:30 a.m. and could have resulted in an "error possibly in excess of 100 meters (328 feet)", the report says.

Sorry this is typical of these overly simple justiofications.

Using a paper chart or a plotter can both lead to massive position errors, depending on the chart source, fix relaibility etc.

This argument is not about paper versus GPS, its more about navigate or cant navigate. The prudent navigator remains cautious and skeptical irrespective of using a gps chart plooter, a GPS fix and a paper chart or a sextant fix and a paper chart ( which can have a 5 mile error).

What lulls people into a false sense of security is relying on your chartplooter for close inshore work, to the detriment of using ones eyes or radar or fixes or all three. Thats more a function of bad navigagtion then GPS v paper

Dave

[iggy]

This argument is not about paper versus GPS, its more about navigate or cant navigate. The prudent navigator remains cautious and skeptical irrespective of using a gps chart plooter, a GPS fix and a paper chart or a sextant fix and a paper chart ( which can have a 5 mile error).

Well said Dave. As an ex military navigator who spent a lot of time training ab-initio students this was the core of the problem.

A lot of the students nowadays completely believe the information given to them by the 'gps/nav system/computer' even when visually they were not where the 'computer' said there were. The mindset seems to be: 'The computer is always right.' which we all know to to be absolutely true

GPS is just another box full of electrons albeit sometimes an extremely accurate box full of electrons that is still subject to a lot of errors which may not be immediately apparent. No single system should be soley relied upon for position...all available information should should be used to verfiy your position.