Paper Charts or Just Electronic

[CassidyNZ]

Sailing locally I use Navionics on iPad which is pretty good in our area. Also sail much in the same area and over time have built up sound knowledge of the obstacles. They don’t change much.

In the islands (Fiji, Tonga, etc.) Navionics is not good so we still use it but augment it with Mark I Eyeball. Paper charts for Fiji are hard to get and also not that great.

For passages, a detailed look at the space between leaving and arriving confirms any hard stuff en-route and if there is something, a waypoint is logged at that area and it becomes part of the “route”. If there are no obstacles, two waypoints are all we need, one at the start and another at the destination. On the trip I run just a GPS with a screen that has an arrow pointing at the destination (or a waypoint of any notable obstacle) and I sail to the weather with one eye on that arrow. I’m always amused by voyagers who keep chart plotters running over 1200nm of open sea.

I have a small scale chart of the South Pacific. On route, I log away a waypoint on the GPS twice a day then when I get home, I plot the route onto the chart for interest only. Now have several passages on the same chart. It’s interesting to see how close one trip is to another, irrespective of weather.

In NZ, for a local boat to achieve CAT1 clearance to leave, you are required to have all the paper charts aboard to cover your intended trip. As it happens, my insurers require that also. So I have them all, they’re all still brand new, as I got them in the folders from the chart shop.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by A CheeseHead

As we approached Barbados in the night in a passage from Las Palmas and bound for Bridgetown, we held off until dawn, even though the electronic chart showed us to be well offshore. Why? Because the charted positions for many (most?) islands were 'located' using 19thC methods, and they may not be where the GPS says they are supposed to be (even though the boat IS where the GPS says it is). Reliance on e-charts to tell you where the water isn't is a sure & certain way to have your voyage end unpleasantly.

Download ovital map , this will allow you to confirm charts on a macro level.

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by CassidyNZ

....................
............................
I’m always amused by voyagers who keep chart plotters running over 1200nm of open sea........................
.....................

Some people like a track of where they've been. I traveled from SF to BC and saved those tracks. 1500 nm


I use both.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Download ovital map , this will allow you to confirm charts on a macro level.

Arguably better is all in one offline maps, at least it has instructions.

Good explanation of features here

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fNVzrp1LYCY

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Simi 60

Arguably better is all in one offline maps, at least it has instructions.

Good explanation of features here

I've never heard of them ,I'll have a look.

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by A CheeseHead

As we approached Barbados in the night in a passage from Las Palmas and bound for Bridgetown, we held off until dawn, even though the electronic chart showed us to be well offshore. Why? Because the charted positions for many (most?) islands were 'located' using 19thC methods, and they may not be where the GPS says they are supposed to be (even though the boat IS where the GPS says it is). Reliance on e-charts to tell you where the water isn't is a sure & certain way to have your voyage end unpleasantly.

The first thing you do when you come in range of where the water isn't is to verify your electronic charts with the radar, the depth sounder, your eyeballs and compass, and your ears. A real navigator uses all information available. If the inputs don't all agree, its time to figure out why before you drive on.

[MV Alchemy]

For those worried about the limitations of vector chart zooming etc., it’s worth trying Timezero Navigator software. It can be set to automatically check any route for safety and also to continuously check in front of the boat for potential hazards. In both cases, the user can define parameters for the checks (e.g. minimum depth, minimum distance from charted hazards etc.). Using that (or other similar software) would have prevented the team vestas issue. We still do a manual check when plotting a route but the software provides good brain fart insurance.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by CassidyNZ

S...... I’m always amused by voyagers who keep chart plotters running over 1200nm of open sea.

.....:

We do, in Sleep mode. Our chartplotter is also our radar display. I don't want the system boot time when I want to take a look with the radar at a possible target or a storm cell. Also like the track.

[Yachticus]

I think you will find electronic charts are only ever an aid to navigation. Should you end up on the bricks - or any other matter that involves the "safe Navigation of the vessel" you will most certainly bounce your insurance in that your vessel was not adequated "found" ie you did not have the minimum equipment onboard.

[Epikur]

I always have up to date paper charts available.

I don't want to depend on a rotten apple.

[a64pilot]

People need to realize that a chart plotter is nothing more or less than an electronic presentation of chart datum, if the chart datum is incorrect, your position will be displayed incorrectly.
The same is true for paper, if the datum is incorrect and you plot your position, it won’t be correct either.
Unfortunately this happens more often than it should I would expect a note on the chart that say something along the lines of positions my be incorrect due to old datum or something.

By far my biggest use and need of a chart or plotter is navigation along the coast, the ICW etc. for that sources like Active Capt just can’t be under emphasized, the notes from crowd sourced data is very often concise and very good, you know hug the green side, shoaling on the red side etc.


However I don’t know what the chart update cycle is, but it’s slow, way slower than it ought to be, channels change, drastically due to new dredging etc., and a year or two later that still isn’t shown on the charts.
Intersection of the South side St John’s river and the ICW is s good example, follow the charts either paper or electronic and you will be firmly aground, a mile or so of the channel was completely changed a couple of years ago and the charts still show the old channel, that is when the crowd sourced notes you only get on electronic charting saves the day.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

People need to realize that a chart plotter is nothing more or less than an electronic presentation of chart datum, if the chart datum is incorrect, your position will be displayed incorrectly.
The same is true for paper, if the datum is incorrect and you plot your position, it won’t be correct either.
Unfortunately this happens more often than it should I would expect a note on the chart that say something along the lines of positions my be incorrect due to old datum or something.

By far my biggest use and need of a chart or plotter is navigation along the coast, the ICW etc. for that sources like Active Capt just can’t be under emphasized, the notes from crowd sourced data is very often concise and very good, you know hug the green side, shoaling on the red side etc.


However I don’t know what the chart update cycle is, but it’s slow, way slower than it ought to be, channels change, drastically due to new dredging etc., and a year or two later that still isn’t shown on the charts.
Intersection of the South side St John’s river and the ICW is s good example, follow the charts either paper or electronic and you will be firmly aground, a mile or so of the channel was completely changed a couple of years ago and the charts still show the old channel, that is when the crowd sourced notes you only get on electronic charting saves the day.

I believe you are conflating datum errors with cartography errors.

If the datum is off then GPS will incorrectly indicate your location relative to real world hazards but visual navigation will correctly indicate your location relative to the same hazards.

If the cartography is in error then the positions of hazards may be incorrectly located. In that case GPS will not accurately locate you relative to the hazards and visual navigation may or may not depending on whether the hazards are visible or not.

[donradcliffe]

If I was writing a chart plotter program, I would have the program go to flashing screens and audible alarms 10 minutes before my projected course ran into an obstacle, and get more obnoxious as time went on. I remember that the old Russian program for CM93 charts had this feature, but it was way more subdued than I would make it.

[barnakiel]

But gps is no longer required. You can use glonass or baidou.


Galileo is said to be operational too (as much as it does not work on our devices).


Also a plotter (dedicated device) is no longer required, a smartphone or cheap tablet will do.


But I am not switching. I am getting older and can see no (bad bad word self-censored here) on a 6 inch smartphone screen in the cockpit. Somehow, with my ageing sight, I can see everything quite clear on a paper chart. So I am not switching, I am using both as I find fit.


b.

[Don C L]

what's Webb Chiles use? he's been pretty successful...