why not all chart is free

[Island Time O25]

I solved the cost problem by downloading a free app, Polaris GPS, which works with NOAA free charts. Not a perfect solution (the free version does not have speed indicator and some other goodies which come with pay version) but it's free so can't complain.

PS It is also great for hiking.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

I solved the cost problem by downloading a free app, Polaris GPS, which works with NOAA free charts. Not a perfect solution (the free version does not have speed indicator and some other goodies which come with pay version) but it's free so can't complain.

PS It is also great for hiking.

Hiking on water? At what sea state does it become too hard to walk on water?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYHjCcsndWc

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

Hiking on water? At what sea state does it become too hard to walk on water?

Here you go!

[SeanPatrick]

Originally Posted by capn_billl

US NOAA charts are now free to download.

The downside is you need to enter the chard ID number, and download each individual chart, which can mean hours of looking up ID, typing them in, and using a utility to combine them together, and convert to a format you can view.

???


You can locate charts by simply clicking on the map here.

You can also download batches of charts by state, region, Coast Guard district or even all charts here.

Don't know about other programs, but OpenCPN [desktop and mobile] can use these [S57 charts] directly - no converting required.

[SeanPatrick]

Correction:


The RNC charts that OpenCPN uses can be downloaded in bulk here.

[moseriw]

Uughh why can't I buy a ticket to mars?

[waterman46]

Originally Posted by PaulCrawhorn

Neo-conservative idea "user pays" basically reducing taxes on the wealthy by extracting more from the common people.

Not at all sure of what you are saying. "Common people" don't need or use nautical charts. In countries that provide the data for free, the common people will pay for that government service, in their taxes, so the more wealthy folks (boat owners) can get the data for free.



It's not unreasonable that users should pay for luxury services like pleasure boating information. Now someone will say this information should be free since it is needed for public safety. If that's the case, then other basic safety equipment like life preservers, etc. should be free. Where would you draw the line?



Now off my soapbox and back to fixing that *&^mn generator!

[Boatyarddog]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Vs the neo-liberal idea that everything is free and we'll just tax those evil wealthy people into oblivion...along with the jobs and taxes they create.

The fact is it costs money to generate charts and it's way down on the list of things people consider when deciding if they will visit a country.

Also, pretty tough sell in a lot of countries where the locals can't afford cruising boats in the first place that we should give expensive charts away to rich foreigners.

You will also find that small poor countries tend to be very strict about appropriate flying of their flag...conveniently, they sell said flags, so you can be compliant.

Ha, they got you fooled into thinking their taking a hit?
Those wealthy enough to forward such ventures enjoy so many tax breaks in the USA, they NEVER miss the tax collected.

The Trickle Down Theory, is Bu******.
You have to be in the $250,000 annual personal income area to not pay income taxes in the USA.

No one but the very wealthy prosper in America.
And, thus also get NO Healthcare and other benefits associated with living in a Modern, wealthy Nation.

If The Wealthy paid properly their tax burdens, we'd all be So much better off.
Including the very rich, because they have more than they can use.
Boatyarddog

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by moseriw

Uughh why can't I buy a ticket to mars?

Perhaps you can! I hope this help!!
https://www.spacex.com/rideshare/

Please note this is not available before April of 2022. I suspect there may a delay of at least a few days.

[goboatingnow]

Most European state issued charts are not free and hence navionics and others have to pay royalties

[Island Time O25]

We are talking here about two somewhat different issues.

One is providing initial basic charts made by the government. And that is free to end users, at least here in US - free NOAA charts online, courtesy of the US taxpayer.

The other issue is the fact that most re-sellers are taking that taxpayer funded resource, NOAA charts, and turning a tidy profit from it. Sure they add superficial bells and whistles but the fact remains - they sell the equivalent of tap water bottled as "spring municipal water supply" (which btw many companies do just that). And if in defence of water bottlers it can be said that their profit is marginal and commesurate with provided convenience, the chart re-sellers get away with an arm and a leg. But that's on gullible buyers of such overpriced initially free resource.

Rant over.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by requiem

Are we talking official government charts or the derived products such as a Navionics subscription? The latter are reasonably affordable. oeSENC charts are not bad when available, but S-63 are not particularly cheap.

On the surface S-63 charts may be only a third the cost of paper, but paper charts can be easily hand-corrected and thus that apparent cost benefit goes away once you use them for more than a few months.

Which I suppose means I'm not opposed to a reasonable use fee, and the question would then be what is reasonable. Some working class stiff who wants to go boating would have a different idea than a shipping company, or someone with a fancy new yacht.

I think there's a perception that many boaters are relatively well off, but is that really the case? I suspect there's a very large number of lower-income working class or subsistence fisherfolk out there that's simply not as visible.

The” working class stif ! “ probably isn’t sailing too far and only needs a few charts anyways

[requiem]

Originally Posted by waterman46

It's not unreasonable that users should pay for luxury services like pleasure boating information. Now someone will say this information should be free since it is needed for public safety. If that's the case, then other basic safety equipment like life preservers, etc. should be free. Where would you draw the line?

The marginal cost of providing access to additional users is rather insignificant, and this is a key difference that separates it from e.g. a program to supply life preservers. I wouldn't even consider it a luxury service; most boaters aren't wealthy, and aside from large commercial shipping there are plenty of working class people out there earning a living or just pulling in some extra food on small fishing boats.

"Common people" might not use charts directly, but they still benefit from them as they facilitate commerce and economic growth. It's a bit like defense spending, but with more practical use. I think of electronic charts as similar to GPS; something originally having a significant defense component, but also becoming an enabling technology for so much else. For example, as the second head of the Coast Survey mentioned almost two centuries ago, "But if the Survey had rendered no other benefit to the country than making known the before unknown and hidden dangers of that part of the coast – dangers, because unknown and hidden – it certainly would have repaid to the country in money the whole amount which it has cost. One vessel which came very near stranding upon shoals – now, through the enterprise of Lieut. Com’g Charles H. Davis, made known and familiar to us – had a cargo which paid the Government a duty of $125,000; and if this sum had been devoted to the survey, the shoal would have been discovered years ago."

Trying to make everything a profit center may sound appealing, but it's a good way to turn a large business into a small one or a thriving society into a broken one. Complex systems are more than just the sum of their parts and attempting to optimize each component without regard for the system-wide impact can be counter-productive. I would much rather see companies developing better software and competing on features rather than simply reselling taxpayer-funded charts.* As to the safety aspect, how many here are maintain up-to-date government charts from countries that charge? How many are instead using charts that are more than a few years out of date due to the cost issues?

* I do note that many may incorporate their own or acquired survey data, and that's certainly worth paying for. Spreading the cost across all chart products (e.g. US users paying for NOAA charts to help bring down the cost of foreign charts) isn't necessarily bad either; as mentioned earlier Navionics pricing is not too terrible.

[TheLuckyone]

Originally Posted by waterman46

*snip*...Now someone will say this information should be free since it is needed for public safety. If that's the case, then other basic safety equipment like life preservers, etc. should be free. Where would you draw the line? *snip*

I'll bite. Providing free charts may alleviate the costs associated with a rescue and recovery option, as well as salvaging a derelict boat, on the government's dime. Charts start looking real cheap then.

Not providing other basic safety equipment, such as life preservers, would not reduce costs for the local government; they reduce the likelihood of loss of life, but do not prevent the incident from occurring in the first place.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The” working class stif ! “ probably isn’t sailing too far and only needs a few charts anyways

So, say someone in Vallejo, CA or Bari, Italy wants to have charts for nearby waters. At a quick glance it looks like seven charts would be plenty for "not sailing too far". On the Italian side that would cost just over $200 USD/year to maintain official charts, but you'd be covered for about 25 miles up or down the coast for weekend trips. On the US side seven charts gets you up the delta a ways and almost down to Berkeley.