How changing habits of navigation affect us

[CyKlop]

Ok, regarding paper versus electronic...

First, I LOVE paper charts, and celestial navigation, and all the old traditions. It's one of the reasons I sail rather than powerboat.

On a recent trip, the chartplotter failed. I had not been marking position on my paper charts, so horrors, shock, catastrophe, right? No, not really. I picked up my iPad, started up a GPS puck (my iPad doesn't have the cellular connection in it, so no internal GPS either). 2 minutes later, I'm back on electronic navigation. If that hadn't worked, I'd have picked up my phone and used that... or connected my phone to my laptop and used that... or used one of my crew's cell phones... etc.

For me, the real question is not what happens if the GPSS system fails (answer: the part most likely to fail is the nut looking at the screen), but which system is overall contributes most to safety and this is where, unfortunately, paper charts fail. As others have noted, doing the observations, noting down bearings, then going below, doing the calculations, pulling out the dividers and parallel rules, marking up the charts, etc. all is non-optional time spent down below and NOT keeping watch. The emphasis here is "non-optional".

Sure, there are idiots that will set-and-forget their systems, but that's a case of the nut looking at the screen failing, and that same nut, I believe, is just (or more) likely to fail using charts. Those people that would be conscientious and careful in their plotting are, again in my opinion, also less likely to screw up using GNSS.

However, the GNSS (while it certainly has failure modes like multi-pathing which are subtle and annoying) will not make arithmetic errors, will not confuse deviation and variance, will not subtract the deviation when they should have added it, not added 9 and 4 and get 24 (Yes, I know that's an arithmetic error, which I mentioned earlier), won't get tired, won't let the dividers accidentally slip a bit, already accounts for slip and drift, etc. Plus it's 5 seconds to glance at the screen and then you're free to look around and make sure you're not about to hit that ferry...

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by ChrisOwens

I've heard the argument that celestial is useful to the Navy only under extremely narrow circumstances that are hard to envision in any plausible scenario: if electronic satellite navigation is unavailable, many of the weapons systems aren't going to be usable either, so fighting the ship isn't realistic.



The counter argument is that celestial is of some small benefit and the cost of celestial is extremely low: teaching it isn't all that time consuming and all that's needed are a sextant, a chronometer, and a book of tables, so the benefit per cost is still respectable.

The Navy has realized that GPS is both Hackable and jammable and that both Russia and China have Asat weapons.

In the event of hostilities with either they are prepared to do without.

[RaymondR]

the UKHO intends to withdraw from printing paper charts by 2026 and I suspect many other sources will do the same.

I suspect that because of the almost instant update capability of electronic charts their use by commercial vessels will be mandated in some jurisdictions.

[thesaltytar]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

the UKHO intends to withdraw from printing paper charts by 2026 and I suspect many other sources will do the same.

I suspect that because of the almost instant update capability of electronic charts their use by commercial vessels will be mandated in some jurisdictions.

This is already confirmed:

https://www.marinelink.com/news/revo...vigation409963

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Adelie

The Navy has realized that GPS is both Hackable and jammable and that both Russia and China have Asat weapons.

In the event of hostilities with either they are prepared to do without.

correct as they are a military and expected to carry out operations in a war zone , , we are leisure boaters and if you insist on boating in a war zone, ie seating sail into a war zone , you deserve everything you gety

[goboatingnow]

its obvious that traditional navigation amongst the vast majority of leisure sailors has withered and almost died, irrespective of the various afficanadoes that keep it alive for various reasons ( my friend did the two capes trip with Skip Novak , using a sextant !!

we can also assume that widespread use of paper charts , even if maintained in some cases as backup is not teh case anymore

practical techniques that are not practised regularly will wither and die. Hence in extremis trying to remember some lost " art" is futile

Hence we need to orient the training and teaching to instructing people as to the limitations and risks associated with electronics systems, its not sufficient to say " always use a paper backup etc "

training needs to reflect and deal with what people are really doing , not what in theory they should be doing

[requiem]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Hence we need to orient the training and teaching to instructing people as to the limitations and risks associated with electronics systems, its not sufficient to say " always use a paper backup etc "

training needs to reflect and deal with what people are really doing , not what in theory they should be doing

[Shanachie]

This debate can be extended to other items in the electronic suites that are standard on sailboats these days.


A wind instrument negates the need for a sailor to read the water, watch the yarn on the shrouds and generally develop skills to read conditions on their own.


Many sailors install beefy autopilots and expect them to steer the boat through difficult conditions, when a good helmsman could take care of the boat much more competently.


Bundle up all of these gizmos and you're operating a computer instead of sailing a boat.


No argument with depth sounders, though. The best invention ever.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Adelie

The Navy has realized that GPS is both Hackable and jammable and that both Russia and China have Asat weapons.

In the event of hostilities with either they are prepared to do without.

Note to self: Before declaring war on Russia and China, learn celestial navigation.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Note to self: Before declaring war on Russia and China, learn celestial navigation.

It’s a 2-way street, Russia or China could start a war with the US. Russia didn’t announced they were going to invade Ukraine. The US and people that depend on the US’s GPS shouldn’t expect prior warning that somebody means to destroy it.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Adelie

It’s a 2-way street, Russia or China could start a war with the US. Russia didn’t announced they were going to invade Ukraine. The US and people that depend on the US’s GPS shouldn’t expect prior warning that somebody means to destroy it.

You clearly weren't following the news. They telegraphed the plan pretty clearly ahead of time...just no one did anything ahead of time and then acted shocked when they did what they planned.

And it's a little different launching an invasion of the USA. Ignoring the ocean they have to cross (or go thru Siberia to Alaska), we have a bigger better equipped army than Ukraine and M.A.D. making them think twice.

Honestly, if they make a direct attack on the USA, the GPS being down is likely way down on the list of concerns for the average cruiser because it's WW3.

[thesaltytar]

Originally Posted by Shanachie

This debate can be extended to other items in the electronic suites that are standard on sailboats these days.


A wind instrument negates the need for a sailor to read the water, watch the yarn on the shrouds and generally develop skills to read conditions on their own.


Many sailors install beefy autopilots and expect them to steer the boat through difficult conditions, when a good helmsman could take care of the boat much more competently.


Bundle up all of these gizmos and you're operating a computer instead of sailing a boat.


No argument with depth sounders, though. The best invention ever.

I agree completely. This conversation can and should extend beyond GPS and paper charts, and again this was never intended to be a debate about which is better, although it is a natural course of topic.

You mention depth sounders; couldn't agree more. They really changed the landscape of navigation in quite a literal sense.

Lead lines are a PITA. I have a small one and always keep it handy, but it's still a pain and can be wildly inaccurate at anything but the slowest speeds. Partly this is because I'm using the wrong lead. As an extreme example, for really great depths, I should be using a dipsie or "deep sea" lead weighing 50 pounds. No I'm not going to use that. But why would you need to know the depth if you're in greater than a hundred fathoms?

If you look on the old charts there used to be a lot more information of the seabed than there is now. Not just the depth but also the bottom composition. To an extent this still exists but hardly to the same level of detail; it would tell you the color of mud for example. With an old lead you can "arm" the bottom hollow with tallow or Crisco or whatever and pull up seabed samples.

I was sailing off Gloucester running an Outward Bound expedition (minimal tech... No smart phones in those days) and got completely surrounded by fog. I could hear one bell buoy. Knowing my rough orientation to that buoy and swinging the lead allowed me to triangulate my position using the bathymetric curve fairly accurately with a given depth. If the charts had more seabed detail I could have narrowed it further but was good enough.

As technology progressed and depth sounders lost the ability to differentiate seabed composition (you can tell a bit from false return echos and how much scatter you get for rock vs. mud) these charting details gradually fell away. Unless you're fishing you don't really need to know much about the bottom contours, just if you can go there or if you can't, and as a result we stop thinking about the seabed as a navigation resource because we no longer need it given other options available to us.

But it's still there. I still carry my lead. I hope I don't need to use it and get my hands wet; not all old school navigation is as romantic as the officer silhouetted against the sky with a sextant, bringing the heavens down to the horizon.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

You clearly weren't following the news. They telegraphed the plan pretty clearly ahead of time...just no one did anything ahead of time and then acted shocked when they did what they planned.

And it's a little different launching an invasion of the USA. Ignoring the ocean they have to cross (or go thru Siberia to Alaska), we have a bigger better equipped army than Ukraine and M.A.D. making them think twice.

Honestly, if they make a direct attack on the USA, the GPS being down is likely way down on the list of concerns for the average cruiser because it's WW3.

They didn’t announce that they were going to invade, the security services of the US announced that Russia was going to invade. This was the same security service that indicated there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Security is always a smoke and shadows and mirrors affair.

Trying to put words in my mouth, I didn’t say Russia or China might invade the US, that’s a non starter, I indicated they might start a war with the US, ie attack it’s interests, possessions, vessels or allies. There are a lot of ways to start a war with another country without directly invading it.
Shooting down the GPS constellation would be a good opener for that.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Adelie

They didn’t announce that they were going to invade, the security services of the US announced that Russia was going to invade. This was the same security service that indicated there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Security is always a smoke and shadows and mirrors affair.

Trying to put words in my mouth, I didn’t say Russia or China might invade the US, that’s a non starter, I indicated they might start a war with the US, ie attack it’s interests, possessions, vessels or allies. There are a lot of ways to start a war with another country without directly invading it.
Shooting down the GPS constellation would be a good opener for that.

Tomato/Tomato...they massed huge numbers on the Ukraine border and indicated they were going to upgrade their moves into Ukraine. This was clearly reported and well known. Only a fool didn't see a high likelihood they were going to attack.

Starting a war by attacking an ally...like Russia attacking Ukraine is starting a war with the US?

Shooting down the GPS constellation goes a little beyond causing some grief with our "interests" via 3rd party participants. That's a direct attack that likely would motivate our leaders to move beyond strong language and funding to full on war.

So I'm still back to my original point:

Note to self: Learn celestial navigation before starting a personal war with China or Russia.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Adelie

It’s a 2-way street, Russia or China could start a war with the US. Russia didn’t announced they were going to invade Ukraine. The US and people that depend on the US’s GPS shouldn’t expect prior warning that somebody means to destroy it.

There are 4 systems up there we can always use the Russian one !