A mini report from Royal Institute of Navigation Conference Friday 6th Feb

ylop said:
Or enough solar to charge your spare battery on a gloomy day to keep you going however long to reach safety?
Click to expand...
Possibly, but it would depend on how they define redundant power.
There's also a redundant GNSS requirement so 2 receivers, 2 antennas etc. and a need for an always on connection for chart updates.
 
When are we going to be allowed to use a chart plotter for navigation?
It is ridiculous that almost all pleasure boat sailors are using a chart plotter for this purpose when it explicitly says not to do this.

I also suspect that I am in the minority in actually having a full set of paper charts for my region of operation.
 
st599 said:
Possibly, but it would depend on how they define redundant power.
There's also a redundant GNSS requirement so 2 receivers, 2 antennas etc. and a need for an always on connection for chart updates.
Click to expand...
Of course, and a logical approach would consider the area of operation - an iPad (or similar tablet) could already achieve virtually all the redundancy needed but I imagine that might give traditionalists a heart attack.
 
dolabriform said:
So what I want to know is where the RYA's digital-first approach fits when we have plotters that are "not to be used for navigation" and a requirement to still carry paper charts.
Click to expand...

The only requirement is for small commercial vessels in the context of our leisure boats. If you have a non coded boat, use what you want to navigate with, it's just not an issue. For coded boats, unless they have a mini ECDIS or ECDIS (both unlikely), then you have to have to have paper charts. This is not a UK rule, it originates from the UN, via IMO, via the UK government that implants the requirements through its agencies after passing legislation (happy to be corrected on this last part, but that is how I understand it).

Digital First recognises the above position where the majority of leisure sailors will be using plotters and electronic chart packages that do not comply with any ECDIS or chart standards. As a rule of thumb teaching used to be 80% paper navigation, 20% plotter navigation. It is switching over now. However lines of position, EP, DR, Fix, CTS on paper will still be taught and practised but the majority of rout planning, position tracking, waypoint usage and plotter features will take a precedence.

It is early days for Digital First and I understand the RYA are working on updates to the syllabus. Current syllabus changes are few.

I think it is a compete cluster and being driven by people who just don't understand small vessel navigation and the current consumer market. Having said that, if you compare consumer digital chart products with UKHO paper or RASTER charts, many of the consumer digital charts are of a low quality, and if they were allowed to be converted to an ENC to be used on a small vessel ECS would require significant work. For example, small vessel ECS requires LOPs to be plotted on the screen, look at one of your paper charts for a CONSPICUOUS object, then look at the same area on the digital chart. What I have found is CONSPICUOUS objects, are not shown as conspicuous on the digital chart, or not shown at all. Our current suit of consumer products have along way to go.
 
RunAgroundHard said:
The only requirement is for small commercial vessels in the context of our leisure boats. If you have a non coded boat, use what you want to navigate with, it's just not an issue. For coded boats, unless they have a mini ECDIS or ECDIS (both unlikely), then you have to have to have paper charts. This is not a UK rule, it originates from the UN, via IMO, via the UK government that implants the requirements through its agencies after passing legislation (happy to be corrected on this last part, but that is how I understand it).

Digital First recognises the above position where the majority of leisure sailors will be using plotters and electronic chart packages that do not comply with any ECDIS or chart standards. As a rule of thumb teaching used to be 80% paper navigation, 20% plotter navigation. It is switching over now. However lines of position, EP, DR, Fix, CTS on paper will still be taught and practised but the majority of rout planning, position tracking, waypoint usage and plotter features will take a precedence.

It is early days for Digital First and I understand the RYA are working on updates to the syllabus. Current syllabus changes are few.

I think it is a compete cluster and being driven by people who just don't understand small vessel navigation and the current consumer market. Having said that, if you compare consumer digital chart products with UKHO paper or RASTER charts, many of the consumer digital charts are of a low quality, and if they were allowed to be converted to an ENC to be used on a small vessel ECS would require significant work. For example, small vessel ECS requires LOPs to be plotted on the screen, look at one of your paper charts for a CONSPICUOUS object, then look at the same area on the digital chart. What I have found is CONSPICUOUS objects, are not shown as conspicuous on the digital chart, or not shown at all. Our current suit of consumer products have along way to go.
Click to expand...
The other issue the RYA have is that if the change does come and paper charts are no longer acceptable or not made, then all of their sailing schools and many of their clubs who teach use coded vessels and will need to have a new plotter matching the specification- so unless the required plotter is mass produced (i.e. a requirement for all leisure plotters), the cost per school will be enormous.
 
ylop said:
Of course, and a logical approach would consider the area of operation - an iPad (or similar tablet) could already achieve virtually all the redundancy needed but I imagine that might give traditionalists a heart attack.
Click to expand...
Yes, I use two Samsung Android tablets for navigation, both with GNSS (GPS, GLONASS, etc.) that enables redundancy of satellite networks and although both are powered by the boat's batteries, both have their own batteries as backup. Oh and neither says "not to be used for navigation".
 
The biggest safety improvement ever seen in small craft navigation IS the consumer plotter because it's easy to use, widespread, right there in the cockpit and correct enough for most practical purposes. Any attempt to burden a small boat with more complex, expensive capabilities is quite likely to make a small boat LESS safe just by reducing availability or convenience. Requiring training boats to use systems that aren't like the ones new skippers will go and use on private boats also won't help.
 
justanothersailboat said:
The biggest safety improvement ever seen in small craft navigation IS the consumer plotter because it's easy to use, widespread, right there in the cockpit and correct enough for most practical purposes. Any attempt to burden a small boat with more complex, expensive capabilities is quite likely to make a small boat LESS safe just by reducing availability or convenience. Requiring training boats to use systems that aren't like the ones new skippers will go and use on private boats also won't help.
Click to expand...

Excellent point which the MCA and UKHO fail to understand.
 
Thanks, that was a better response than I was expecting. (For the record, I have backups and also use and really like paper charts, I just don't think they deliver much practical safety at sea in 2026)
 
justanothersailboat said:
The biggest safety improvement ever seen in small craft navigation IS the consumer plotter because it's easy to use, widespread, right there in the cockpit and correct enough for most practical purposes. Any attempt to burden a small boat with more complex, expensive capabilities is quite likely to make a small boat LESS safe just by reducing availability or convenience. Requiring training boats to use systems that aren't like the ones new skippers will go and use on private boats also won't help.
Click to expand...
If the unit that sea schools use has to be different, then you'll bankrupt the sea schools. A redesign of a plotter to have dual power supplies and GNSS plus an always on communications channel like VDES, plus new software that allows you to override the GNSS position with a 3 point fix and running fix, ENC charts only - no non-governmental data. Then type approval and certification. I reckon I could find someone who could do a short run of say 5000 units at 25 grand a pop. Consumer electronics are cheap because of the large numbers produced, specialist hardware and software, not cheap.

Plus of course the compliant dual redundant power you'd need to add.
 
My Granddaughter did a couple of trips with us recently and wanted to learn how to navigate. I showed her the paper charts, compass heading, variation, deviation, tidal offset etc, all that stuff but then said nowadays we just tell the machine where to go and press a button. Is it important that new sailors learn the old basic methods?
 
DanTribe said:
My Granddaughter did a couple of trips with us recently and wanted to learn how to navigate. I showed her the paper charts, compass heading, variation, deviation, tidal offset etc, all that stuff but then said nowadays we just tell the machine where to go and press a button. Is it important that new sailors learn the old basic methods?
Click to expand...
I think it is some what important. In order to be able to know what you are seeing when you look at the land, a buoy, a light house, the port lights etc. And the relevant direction/distance between things and to understand the effect of tides on where you will end up.

Celestial navigation is irrelevant today.

I enjoyed learning about the things you mentioned.
 
DanTribe said:
My Granddaughter did a couple of trips with us recently and wanted to learn how to navigate. I showed her the paper charts, compass heading, variation, deviation, tidal offset etc, all that stuff but then said nowadays we just tell the machine where to go and press a button. Is it important that new sailors learn the old basic methods?
Click to expand...
I think there very much are good reasons to, but current RYA training does a terrible job of explaining why you would bother. I came relatively late to qualification and felt that, at least at day skipper level, trad nav was (as of last year) taught as a set of disconnected ancient rites. (No disrespect intended to the teacher, I thought he was a good guy and I learned from him, but not particularly thanks to the RYA). I still enjoyed the course but doubt whether it would equip new skippers to go off and use those techniques to really cope. I think a lot of people saw it as just something arbitrary they had to get through to be allowed to charter.

I appreciate there is a lot to cram in and maybe the higher level course does better. Funnily enough I signed up for a Yachtmaster Theory class that was meant to start this week, but it was cancelled because nobody else signed up. Not a great sign. From the syllabus I was expecting a more difficult and intricate version of quaint skills rather than a better-integrated vision, but you never know.

The RIN (EDIT: possibly MCA, sorry) fantasy of high levels of technical redundancy implies an expectation that in the event of unlikely failure modes they think little leisure boats should be equipped to carry on navigating "normally" - but in those cases (and lots of more likely ones) we won't be doing that, we'll be emergency-navigating to the nearest safe harbour. I think it would do far more for safety if a structured set of "weak, but good enough" fallback techniques were commonly taught as fallbacks. What you can easily and usefully do when various things go pear shaped. The classic techniques actually contain much of what you need to know for this and much more, but it would take an unnaturally calm genius skipper to join it all up for the first time under the pressure of a real problem. I'm not that person, which is why I think about it carefully, but I certainly didn't get it from current training.
 
Last edited:
justanothersailboat said:
The RIN fantasy of high levels of technical redundancy implies an expectation that in the event of unlikely failure modes they think little leisure boats should be equipped to carry on navigating "normally"
Click to expand...
Not sure RIN are to blame for this - it's MCA who've published the specification and MCA who will decide what is SOLAS V compliant.
 
st599 said:
Not sure RIN are to blame for this - it's MCA who've published the specification and MCA who will decide what is SOLAS V compliant.
Click to expand...
Definitely the OTT aspects and ENC fixation is MCA driven, not RIN - as seen from their presentation on the day.
I think MCA and UKHO people involved only had big commercial vessel experience and have difficulty relating to a 7 m sailing boat or RIB.
 
Calling that incident "relying on navionics" is a really weird way to represent it. With no passage planning and no tide planning it's hard to see how carrying charts or having higher spec navigational equipment could possibly have helped. Indeed, if I read the report right... had they actually used the navionics they were carrying, they might have been fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top