NOAA RNCs ar going away.

[bdbcat]

Hey all...


I guess NOAA was not kidding when they announced that RNC support will be ending, step-by-step, starting a few years ago.



Attached are two pictures of OCPN RNC outlines, east coast US, Region 06
First is coverage from a set loaded in roughly 2021.
Next shows coverage for a set loaded 13 October, 2023.


There are no more large scale inshore RNCs of the ICW in Region06 available for download.


The message here is:
If you like using RNCs for US inshore navigation, search your systems, and archive carefully the latest available set you have, hopefully from about 2021 or so. They are now becoming unavailable as downloads from NOAA, starting with large scale charts, generally.



Time marches on.
Dave

[bdbcat]

More...


And here is link to a NOAA publication listing charts cancelled (i.e. made unavailable), so far.


https://www.charts.noaa.gov/MCD/Dole...dByChart.shtml


Dave

[JBP]

It's a shame. The RNC's have so much more information than the ENC's.

[bcn]

That's perhaps not that correct. Actual RNCs and ENCs share the same data base.


In the case of RNCs there is still an editor who composes the chart image considering what is important at which scale etc. Direct digest. The paper equivalent.



In the case of an ENC the user (or the plotter posed to be more wise than the user) has to decide which objects and details show up on the display.

The S-57 ENC standard does define some base display option packages. One can take those "as is". Or define the view one wants to have. OpenCPN is extremely flexible here.


And by the way: there are even templates in OpenCPN to adjust what you see on the display adapted to your "theatre" or special situation with just one (or two) click.

[bcn]

For illustration - display category "All", soundings enabled - in Meters
The ENC is US6NY33M

[Chotu]

I will miss them. I prefer the raster charts visually, but abandoned them a year ago when I heard they were getting phased out. Figured it was best to get used to the vector charts ASAP so the change wouldn’t be as painful

[fourlyons]

Originally Posted by bcn

That's perhaps not that correct. Actual RNCs and ENCs share the same data base.


In the case of RNCs there is still an editor who composes the chart image considering what is important at which scale etc. Direct digest. The paper equivalent.



In the case of an ENC the user (or the plotter posed to be more wise than the user) has to decide which objects and details show up on the display.

The S-57 ENC standard does define some base display option packages. One can take those "as is". Or define the view one wants to have. OpenCPN is extremely flexible here.


And by the way: there are even templates in OpenCPN to adjust what you see on the display adapted to your "theatre" or special situation with just one (or two) click.

This isn't exactly true. The ENCs lack data about what's on land, including topographic information that I like to know about when choosing an anchorage for example.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by bcn

That's perhaps not that correct. Actual RNCs and ENCs share the same data base.


In the case of RNCs there is still an editor who composes the chart image considering what is important at which scale etc. Direct digest. The paper equivalent.



In the case of an ENC the user (or the plotter posed to be more wise than the user) has to decide which objects and details show up on the display.

The S-57 ENC standard does define some base display option packages. One can take those "as is". Or define the view one wants to have. OpenCPN is extremely flexible here.


And by the way: there are even templates in OpenCPN to adjust what you see on the display adapted to your "theatre" or special situation with just one (or two) click.

While much of the information is still available, it is massively harder to get to. I think the coast guard calls it "electronically aided accidents." Using your example, glance at the chart while also keeping aware of traffic around you and tell me the characteristics of the light on the end of that breakwater. Touching the chart plotter, scrolling, clicking buttons, and other such interactions are not allowed. Just glance at it and tell me the characteristics.

In theory, the ENC can give you that information. In theory, the charting program interface is it fault. But regardless of theory, the reality is that the data is not readily available.

I just had a discussion and multiplatform test at the boat show today to find the width and height of the Naval Academy bridge in Annapolis. In RNC, it was readily available. Using both Furuno and Garmin, the rep was unable to find the width. And if doing that while trying to also pilot the boat, well it goes without saying that that is not safe.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

I just had a discussion and multiplatform test at the boat show today to find the width and height of the Naval Academy bridge in Annapolis. In RNC, it was readily available. Using both Furuno and Garmin, the rep was unable to find the width. And if doing that while trying to also pilot the boat, well it goes without saying that that is not safe.

I'd like to throw out a reminder that recreational plotters aren't using ENCs; they're using a private collection of data that may be largely drawn from ENCs, but about all you can say for certain is that both happen to be electronic and vector-based.

In addition, the software isn't based on common performance standards, so any functionality present is largely based on what the maker assumed an untrained boater might be interested in.

Looking at the actual NOAA ENCs, here's the data:

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by requiem

I'd like to throw out a reminder that recreational plotters aren't using ENCs; they're using a private collection of data that may be largely drawn from ENCs, but about all you can say for certain is that both happen to be electronic and vector-based.



In addition, the software isn't based on common performance standards, so any functionality present is largely based on what the maker assumed an untrained boater might be interested in.



Looking at the actual NOAA ENCs, here's the data:

Attachment 282112

My concern that I was raising in my post is not that the data just not exist on the device. Rather, it is the implementation done by the software. The example that you showed normally requires considerable interaction with the device. I have looked at the NOAA ENC viewer, Garmin, Furuno, OpenCPN, and Navionics on a cell phone. I have yet to see a single implementation that presents details such as light characteristics without user interaction.
My chart plotter is a Furuno. Here in the US, they provide regular updates of the actual NOAA charts at no cost. There is a small amount of repackaging, but they are essentially the NOAA charts. I can get them in both RNC and ENC. In RNC, I can immediately see light characteristics. In ENC, I have to interact with the device.
There is no question this is a programming failure, and not a data failure. But it is a universal programming failure.

[Kettlewell]

I have personally observed examples where the ENC and RNC rendering of features is not the same, and I have even reported a few to NOAA. In one case I know of they did improve the ENC eventually, but it is still not as easy to spot the hazard. And, yes, I hard agree that the chart plotting software I have seen and used often fails to provide default views that are anywhere near as good as the raster charts. We're talking like dangerously bad default rendering in some cases.

[sailingharry]

As an example of the problems that this creates, imagine entering Annapolis harbor. Up ahead, you see a quick flashing green. Which buoy is that. On the attached ENC from Navionics, it will probably take you a while to find it. On the attached RNC from OpenCPN, it is shown on the image.
Even more amazing, at this scale the ENC doesn't even show buoy numbers!

[Kettlewell]

I suspect ENCs could contribute to people missing important stuff, like the submerged jetties at Winyah Bay that seemed to have claimed another victim: https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...at-280519.html

[Chotu]

It’s interesting. With the last two posts, if you have a lot of experience already navigating on the water it’s not that big of a deal. But if you are just starting out with boats, I can’t even imagine how you would use these charts safely.

In the case of the jetties, if those people were kind of new and didn’t have the experience to know you should start a channel like that at the safe water mark, then shortcutted the channel markers without visibility of the jetties (all wild assumptions, then these charts really present a problem.

It’s quite possible that the ENC charts should give up some clarity for the sake of having another layer that is always displayed called a “danger layer.”

[Kettlewell]

In the case of the jetties, if those people were kind of new and didn’t have the experience to know you should start a channel like that at the safe water mark, then shortcutted the channel markers without visibility of the jetties (all wild assumptions, then these charts really present a problem.

Apparently they were experienced, and I'm not saying for sure that ENCs were the problem. I've just noted in my own use of ENCs how they take longer to interpret even when I know the waters well, and it is very easy to have the critical layer you need turned off. They are just harder to use by everyone, experienced or not. For example, take a look at these two renderings. The one with the labels is the Navionics online chart viewer, the one without the labels is what you get using the NOAA online ENC viewer. https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZdnV5M9dnMtWpgVk7