How changing habits of navigation affect us

[requiem]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I prefer both in the same place. Admittedly some boats are poorly laid out to accomplish that but if I have a navigational question, a quick look down at the chart plotter is much better than having to leave the helm and go down below giving up keeping a proper watch.

My two desires are 1) complete situational awareness from the helm, and 2) not using a touch screen for data entry.

Perhaps it's due to being from an older time, but I'm much faster (and more precise) with keyboard and trackpad compared to typing on screen, especially if copy-and-paste is involved. I find the MFDs far too laggy for my taste, and excessive lagginess can lead to error. It's also more comfortable if one can work at a desk rather than standing or crouched to reach a cockpit display.

Thus, my preference is to plan and annotate charts at the laptop and then export the routes, notes, etc. to devices that I can use at the helm.

Having to go below also carries the risk of the "oh, and while I'm down here" problem; where large gaps of time can pass unnoticed. Being able to visually relate what's on screen with what's in view is also important.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Goboatingnow, Where one navigates can be a matter of preference (or maybe navigation has gotten so easy that people get casual about it) but in my view, placing waypoints with a fingers poked between spokes of the helm, and add the difficulty of entering lon/lat, on a 8" or 10" screen, in dark and stormy conditions, just seems dodgy to me. If boat without navigation stations below deck are the trend these days it is just a sign that buyers don't place any importance on the navigation task. Maybe it's the smart phone generation.

Why would you be entering lat Lon , you just setup the waypoint visually

Boats don’t have large dedicated nav areas below decks , not because navigation isn’t important , it’s because it’s largely moved to the helm, or via Wi-Fi to a handheld device like a tablet. So the nav area could be the cockpit , the bunk or even whilst on the head !

This is the point, train the smartphone generation , not demonise them.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Why would you be entering lat Lon , you just setup the waypoint visually

This probably isn't everyone, but as part of reviewing NTMs / LNMs I'll sometimes want to mark off areas on the chart. Here are two examples:

"The Coast Guard received a report of a sunken towing vessel in the Pillar Point Harbor at position 37-29-42N 122-29-35W."

or

"Hazardous operations will be conducted from Vandenberg AFB, CA starting at 11:31pm on 15 August, 2022 until 7:25pm on 16 August, 2022. Hazardous operation areas are bounded by the following coordinates:
Hazard Area 1:
34-56-00N 121-24-00W
34-56-00N 120-38-00W
34-51-00N 120-36-00W
34-49-00N 120-42-00W
34-44-00N 121-24-00W
Mariners are advised to remain clear of these areas for the duration of operations."

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Why would you be entering lat Lon , you just setup the waypoint visually

Pretty sloppy navigation in my view if you do this by looking at your chart plotter screen and deciding where is the next place you want to go to (on the fly?). How do you know what is between yourself and that waypoint without close examination?. Ask Vestas. How good is your access to the screen and the zoom, pan controls when you are sitting at the helm station? Do you want to do this on a rough night with rain and noise and distraction of the operation of the boat all around you? Or do you simply pick a point and trust that the chart plotter software will tell you if it is OK?

If this is how you wish to navigate, fine. I don't do it that way.

To answer your question we commonly use waypoint coordinates provided to us or ones we've used before. These we enter by lat/lon. We get precision. And even more commonly, if we've placed a waypoint on an electronic chart with the touch screen or the mouse (preferred) then verifying it, or moving it, by lon/lat is by far the most professional way of navigating. And we get close route planning to avoid dangers which might be missed with a small screen at the helm.

And who sits at the helm anyway?

But, like I said, it's up to you.

Originally Posted by requiem

...Perhaps it's due to being from an older time, but I'm much faster (and more precise) with keyboard and trackpad compared to typing on screen, especially if copy-and-paste is involved. I find the MFDs far too laggy for my taste, and excessive lagginess can lead to error. It's also more comfortable if one can work at a desk rather than standing or crouched to reach a cockpit display.

Thus, my preference is to plan and annotate charts at the laptop and then export the routes, notes, etc. to devices that I can use at the helm...

This is exactly how I feel.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by requiem

My two desires are 1) complete situational awareness from the helm, and 2) not using a touch screen for data entry.

Perhaps it's due to being from an older time, but I'm much faster (and more precise) with keyboard and trackpad compared to typing on screen, especially if copy-and-paste is involved. I find the MFDs far too laggy for my taste, and excessive lagginess can lead to error. It's also more comfortable if one can work at a desk rather than standing or crouched to reach a cockpit display.

Thus, my preference is to plan and annotate charts at the laptop and then export the routes, notes, etc. to devices that I can use at the helm.

Having to go below also carries the risk of the "oh, and while I'm down here" problem; where large gaps of time can pass unnoticed. Being able to visually relate what's on screen with what's in view is also important.

How it pointing to a spot on the map not easier than typing in a bunch of numbers where it's easy to transpose them?

Maybe 10-15yrs ago, laggy was an issue but it's just not an issue today.

Of course, if you want to sit with the laptop and then export the day's route to a tablet...sure. But when something happens and you need to modify your route, do you drop anchor, go below, pull out the laptop,...etc...etc...etc... before getting back under way. I just do it on the fly from the helm. Faster and easier.

Really the route with waypoints is more of a guide. Handy if you come up on a tricky confluence of channels but mostly just for keeping track of how far along you are. If the chart shows it safe to do so, I'll often cut corners over going directly to a waypoint and then making a hard turn and running directly to the next waypoint.

Also, I was a skeptic a long time but it's really amazing how well recent verbal entry works. You could trigger it and set it next to the VHF and let the CG literally enter the way point data for you if there is a local hazard.

[RaymondR]

When I used OpenCPN on a dedicated computer at the nav station, which was connected to the autopilot via nmea0183, I tended to compose routes for the full days sailing. This required going below if I wanted to make changes. Now that I navigate from the helm I practically never use routes, much preferring just to use the goto function for one leg at a time on the MFD.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

How it pointing to a spot on the map not easier than typing in a bunch of numbers where it's easy to transpose them?

We are not choosing our navigation technics by which is "easier" but by which is better. It is the precision that counts. But also if you transpose the digits you know instantly because the waypoint disappears into some distant location. It is a way of double checking.

Maybe 10-15yrs ago, laggy was an issue but it's just not an issue today.

Of course, if you want to sit with the laptop and then export the day's route to a tablet...sure. But when something happens and you need to modify your route, do you drop anchor, go below, pull out the laptop,...etc...etc...etc... before getting back under way. I just do it on the fly from the helm. Faster and easier.

It's not about pulling out the laptop, it's already out and running and showing the route and track. So what is happening that makes you modify your route without verifying that it is a safe modification? You can do it on the fly. I look first.

Really the route with waypoints is more of a guide.

The route with waypoints is more than just a guide. It is the only way to be sure you have a safe path to follow. I mentioned above that several shipwrecks I studied (in fact ALL shipwrecks of cruising boats I studied) ALL occurred in the exact same way: The operator struck a hazard which was clearly present on his electronic charts but they had failed to plot a safe route and instead were steering on the fly, by eyeball. If you have been safe with your approach to navigation, and many people have been, you are simply lucky.

Handy if you come up on a tricky confluence of channels but mostly just for keeping track of how far along you are. If the chart shows it safe to do so, I'll often cut corners over going directly to a waypoint and then making a hard turn and running directly to the next waypoint.

Cut any corners you want to, navigate however you prefer. And I wish you good fortune. I've sailed safely for many years and while I embrace technology, I will continue my safe practices.

Also, I was a skeptic a long time but it's really amazing how well recent verbal entry works. You could trigger it and set it next to the VHF and let the CG literally enter the way point data for you if there is a local hazard.

By The Way, I do not leave the watch unattended to go below. As required by
Colregs a safe watch is maintained on my vessel at all times, another crew member will be on deck if I am not.

[SeanPatrick]

It occurs to me that a sextant would seem just as magical to the ancient Polynesian navigators as a GPS would have seemed to Captain Cook.

A wise man once said "There's nothing new under the Sun."

[AKA-None]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

If you are typing in numeric coordinates, I could buy that. While most systems still have that capability (if you can find the right mene), most use graphical interfaces, so when poking a spot on the map, you never have the opportunity to type the wrong number.



Even if you do somehow poke the wrong spot, most modern chart plotters include checks, so if a new route would run you aground, it issues a warning. Plus with the chart at the helm, you can check every few seconds/minutes where you are and if you are going to run aground, it's pretty obvious.



So yes, it's both more casual and better than the old ways. Transposing numbers during hand calculations seems a lot more likely.

Issue a warning like vendee a few years back and a well marked reef?

[RaymondR]

If I was doing the OpenCPN, computer navigation thing today I would not buy a computer I'd buy a Panasonic Toughpad, install the Android version of OpenCPN and make a mount for it at the helm. I'd also buy an RS422 to wifi converter do that I could connect the Toughpad to the nmea 0183 port on the autopilot to provide the nav data to the autopilot.

That way I could both use it at the wheel like the MFDs or take it below and sit it on the chart table to navigate the traditional way.

Since I'm installing a new autopilot head and computer and the computer has multiple nmea0183 ports available and the converters are cheap I might do it anyway.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Pretty sloppy navigation in my view if you do this by looking at your chart plotter screen and deciding where is the next place you want to go to (on the fly?). How do you know what is between yourself and that waypoint without close examination?. Ask Vestas. How good is your access to the screen and the zoom, pan controls when you are sitting at the helm station? Do you want to do this on a rough night with rain and noise and distraction of the operation of the boat all around you? Or do you simply pick a point and trust that the chart plotter software will tell you if it is OK?



If this is how you wish to navigate, fine. I don't do it that way.



To answer your question we commonly use waypoint coordinates provided to us or ones we've used before. These we enter by lat/lon. We get precision. And even more commonly, if we've placed a waypoint on an electronic chart with the touch screen or the mouse (preferred) then verifying it, or moving it, by lon/lat is by far the most professional way of navigating. And we get close route planning to avoid dangers which might be missed with a small screen at the helm.



And who sits at the helm anyway?



But, like I said, it's up to you.







This is exactly how I feel.

My experience in teaching navigation has shown me the most common form of errors comes in LAT LON entries , transpositions etc. any nav techniques that remove this need are a huge benefit to accuracy and reliability in my experience

My mfd screen is fast and responsive that’s no issue. I also often recall commonly used routes I know are safe etc.

I favour the “ drop a waypoint ahead “ method. In deep sea environments straight line sailing may have durations of days, nor is the accuracy of waypoint position that important. This method therefore is good.

Inshore , I will zoom in to examine the route to the proposed waypoint then visually pick the next waypoint ahead , I will have reviewed the whole route on the mfd

In fact the trend these days is for people to use connected tablets will sitting at the helm my forthcoming nav upgrade will fully support mirroring and controlling my mfd from an android tablet including dropping waypoints ahead while sitting comfortably in my stern quarter seats

I don’t know about you but I sit at my sailing boat helm 90 percent of the time. The only standing at the wheel is done while docking , mostly underway I’m on autopilot , and I have remote wireless control of the helm to effect small changes of course under sail or larger changes under power.

I have no need to go below to “ navigate “ unless driven below by the weather. Everything I need is available in the cockpit or behind the wheel. I can happily navigate from my bunk too. !! ( and I have a lovely proper full sized chart table below as well but mostly that’s empty )

The “ tyranny of the wheel “ is just that.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

If I was doing the OpenCPN, computer navigation thing today I would not buy a computer I'd buy a Panasonic Toughpad, install the Android version of OpenCPN and make a mount for it at the helm. I'd also buy an RS422 to wifi converter do that I could connect the Toughpad to the nmea 0183 port on the autopilot to provide the nav data to the autopilot.

That way I could both use it at the wheel like the MFDs or take it below and sit it on the chart table to navigate the traditional way.

Since I'm installing a new autopilot head and computer and the computer has multiple nmea0183 ports available and the converters are cheap I might do it anyway.

Really it’s all NMEA 2000 these days. I have no remaining 0183 connections these days , and I never will have in the future. All CAN bus these days.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

Issue a warning like vendee a few years back and a well marked reef?

I doubt manually typing in numbers would have solved that issue. If anything, it would probably make it more likely as the map jumps to the new waypoint and they never have the opportunity to see what is along the route without going back and double checking the route (which you can do when entering waypoints graphically).

[valhalla360]

Quote:
We are not choosing our navigation technics by which is "easier" but by which is better. It is the precision that counts. But also if you transpose the digits you know instantly because the waypoint disappears into some distant location. It is a way of double checking.
Easier is usually better as it eliminates most points where mistakes can be made and is more likely to be done consistently. Doubly so in this case. As far as precision, depends on what you are doing. If I'm crossing a large bay and I put a waypoint a 1/4 mile off a channel, I don't really care if it's precise down to the nearest foot. Even if it's off by a 100yds, who cares so long as it's in open water. A transposed number may not send it of the screen and more importantly, may result in the route that is off the screen leaving safe waters.

It's not about pulling out the laptop, it's already out and running and showing the route and track. So what is happening that makes you modify your route without verifying that it is a safe modification? You can do it on the fly. I look first.

It may be running down below but it still requires you to leave the helm or call on another crew member. Both take time and realistically, most people in the old days would duck below. By having everything at the helm, there is never the need.

Who said, updating the route on the fly is changing it to an unsafe route? How did you come up with that idea?

The route with waypoints is more than just a guide. It is the only way to be sure you have a safe path to follow. I mentioned above that several shipwrecks I studied (in fact ALL shipwrecks of cruising boats I studied) ALL occurred in the exact same way: The operator struck a hazard which was clearly present on his electronic charts but they had failed to plot a safe route and instead were steering on the fly, by eyeball. If you have been safe with your approach to navigation, and many people have been, you are simply lucky.

If you are talking about a 30yr old handheld GPS that only gives you course to your next waypoint and no charting capability, I would agree. With modern chart plotters at the helm, I can see both the plotted route laid over the chart. If there's an obstruction, it's right there to see.

Cut any corners you want to, navigate however you prefer. And I wish you good fortune. I've sailed safely for many years and while I embrace technology, I will continue my safe practices.

I was suggesting cutting corners in the literal not figurative sense. When on a twisty turny channel, you often wind up with a waypoint towards the outside of a curve in the channel while there is plenty of safe water towards the inside of the curve. It's silly to cross a 1/4-1/2 mile wide channel only to cross back again on the next leg when you can follow the inside of the curve perfectly safely by looking on the chart. Of course, you can get silly and build a route with a thousand way points, so it follows curves perfectly but this goes back to the point about keeping things simple and easy and people are more likely to do it consistently.

By The Way, I do not leave the watch unattended to go below. As required by
Colregs a safe watch is maintained on my vessel at all times, another crew member will be on deck if I am not.

Maybe if you are obsessive but back in the real world, human nature is the helmsman thinks it will just take a second...next thing you know it's been 4-5 min. Much better to just glance down at the chartplotter.

And before you say your crew are special, back in the days of the square riggers, they enforced iron discipline with the lash and crew would still not follow procedure.

It's your boat, you sail it the way you want but when it comes to best practice, chartplotter at the helm makes far more sense.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

How it pointing to a spot on the map not easier than typing in a bunch of numbers where it's easy to transpose them?

It is, and that's how I set up a route if starting from the chart. But, if starting from other information (i.e. coordinates) it's simpler to type rather than drag a point around until the numbers are "close enough".

As for edits; that would depend on how I'm using the route. My preference is to treat the laptop as source-of-truth when planning, but there's nothing stopping me from editing and reviewing a route on the tablet and sharing that back to the laptop. Same if I'm adding other notes and fixes to the chart. The software and charts are the same on both.

Here my two motivations are 1) avoiding collecting edits on separate systems and having to merge the changes and 2) ensuring an appropriate amount of time can be devoted to the task. Head down at the helm can be just as distracting as head-down at the nav table. Minor tweaks can be quickly assessed, but more significant changes may require reviewing tidal currents, etc.

One feature some nav apps have that I like is adjustable cross track error; legs in open ocean can be set with a large amount of leeway, and it can be tightened up in more confined areas. You then have a visual indicator of what water has been reviewed to be "safe", which allows for minor deviations and even corner-cutting without altering the route.

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Also, I was a skeptic a long time but it's really amazing how well recent verbal entry works. You could trigger it and set it next to the VHF and let the CG literally enter the way point data for you if there is a local hazard.

Ok, I'm mildly curious what products feature this. Sounds interesting, but how does it work; you just tell it to listen and it auto-parses anything that sounds like a coordinate?