Does anyone still use paper charts or do you rely on your Navigation equipment. I learned by hand as enjoy working with charts but see the ease of plotting a course via Navigation. Whats your preference?
Where do you get your cruising guides? i'd love to get one for the long island sound.Have redundancy on electronics. MFDs, IPads, laptop etc. but still have paper cruising guides. Often have several different sourced electronic charts up and a guide open when approaching a new unknown landfall. Not infrequently they disagree. Then resort to"if it's blue go on through. If it's brown run aground." Still have a log and a drop line as well. Grass, debris floating in the water, turbulence and other things can give false depth readings. Depth can be different in front or back of the boat.
Really only use a plotting chart with any frequency. And that's on passage. Good to see progress. Use who's on watch's initials. May write in pencil weather information on it as well as where weather router wants us to be by what time. Although drop waypoints with same information on electronic charts for that paper is a nice quick way to reference. Use multiple colors and symbols so don't get confused when doing that on electronic charts.
There is this feature called "zoom", and many of us aren't navigating on 5" displays. Several plotters now are smart enough to flag a dangerous course. Our Furuno, for example, "runs" a route zoomed in and flags potential hazards. Of course, the best way to do this is to not create a route over hazards at all. This is true paper or electronic, and is the responsibility of the person creating a route regardless of the type of chart used.On most electronics, the display is too small or the scale too large for the user to easily confirm that the course being set is free of danger. Best I know no current nav technology is smart enough to red flag a dangerous course.
If your takeaway from that event was that the "best electronics" used by the "most talented sailors" put a boat on a reef, then you either do not understand electronic charts and charting well, or your personal worldview biases your comprehension of what really happened there.If the most talented sailors with the best electronics can put the boat on a reef, what lesson should us folks take?
https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/...am-vestas-wind-went-aground-volvo-ocean-race/
Tapatalk
It seems like a lot of people look for instances where situations occur when electronic charting is used, then falsely equate them with not occurring if only paper charts were used.I agree, it's never been a problem for me to have the charts a bit shifted. But that's because I (we?) don't expect them to be perfect. So we're always compensating with eyes, ears, smell, and also with direct electronic measures like sonar and radar.
It's essential that people understand that a chartplotter is at least two steps away from showing actual reality. They show an approximate (GPS) fix that can easily be out by many 10s, if not 100s of feet. This is overlaid on a chart which could have an error of a mile or more.
This has never been a problem up till recently. Human senses, and other direct measures, easily compensated for any errors in charting. But now we're all being trained to believe that the little boat moving on the digital screen IS showing reality. It is not, but it's easy to fall into the trap of believing it is.
Here's a screen shot from my iPad using iNavx with Navionics charts.
How would that differ from a survey used for paper charts? NOAA publishes chart data in both formats, but I think they each come from the same survey data. Often that survey data is quite old. There are places that can be literally 100 years old.As far as I know... there have been no comprehensive GPS survey produced digital charts. ......
Some months back I was reading a bit about similar issues with aviation accidents. I think the distinction between working with the computer to navigate, and letting the computer navigate, is a critical factor that often gets lost. Telling people "don't trust the computer" may be good advice, but I question its effectiveness as a teaching method. Many people might not get it until they run into a real-life example.But it was a whole new world for her. Simple tasks like looking for a changing bearing on a potential intercept instead of flipping to the AIS data screen for point of closest approach. Sure get the clue from a nav aid. Then if possible confirm it with your senses. Our get the clue from your senses and confirm electronically. But for many the screen is the god.
Yes, full dependency is using the tool incorrectly. You personally must remain on watch.No question electronic nav aids are the bees knees. Can't be much arguing about that but like with credit card sailors a recipe for disaster if there's full dependency or if it's use decreases situational awareness..