Electronic Charts

[coco]

Re: What would it really cost ?

I have another good reason to use the Yeoman: power 12V-250mA. PC's just gobble up power (especially the older ones). Same argument for plotters. Nothing available below 15 Watts.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ponapay]

hat instabilities are you taling about?

I have used SEAPRO through my laptop connected to GPS for nearly 5 year now with ARC charts from droggie. Apart from some problems at the start the system has been excellent. One update of charts would not load properly and that was corrected by the supplier very quickly.

I buy the charts 10 at a time for the maximum discount and take 4 updates per annum. The latter is a bargain and ensures very up to date charts at all times. Additionally ue of overlays is easy and you can add any data you want.

My boats log shows each cruise in detail logged by SEAPRO.

I have used the system in all conditions from hot (40+) to cold (-5) and from calm to force 10. My old SONY laptop copes well with only 32Mb memory and 10Gb disk.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: There are 3 factors

Nigel, I use Seaclear for recreational sailing also and find it meets my straight forward needs. We have the added advantage here in that the hydrographic people put all of their charts on the internet in .tiff format for free download (stated not for navigation, but are exact copies of course). Takes a bit of downloading but makes it easy for Seaclear. I always carry paper charts as well, but with the downloads one can complement them with electronic copies plus carry charts for the possibility of needing them eg en route ports unlikely to visit.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

I wouldnt think so as you can only legally navigate with paper charts, the electronic ones usually require you to accept a 'disclaimer' on the way into the system as it boots.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Me too - but their charts are also out of date. In any event, you have to accept a disclaimer which says, amongst other things ...

"This product is designed to ease and speed up navigational calculations. It is not designed to replace official printed charts or the navigator's responsibility to exercise common prudence. "

So, from a legal standpoint, it is a requirement to carry corrected paper charts, and there are no warranties as to the accuracy of any electronic (even raster scanned) charts.

The only possible exception will lie with S57 charts which are commonly used with ECDIS systems on commercial bridges, and with a weekly electronic NM update facility. The annual cost of these is likely to be more than some will spend running a small boat for a year, so are not a viable alternative.

As far as I am aware all the electronic systems, (CMap,Navionics, ARCS, MaxSea) carry a similar 'not for navigation' warning. As much as anything this is to cover scenarios where the boat is left without electric power

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Martin_e]

Re: There are 3 factors

In the case I am talking about The paper charts from the Norwegains for the last Ten years are more updated than the Electronic chart that I have just bought. I also understand that the Norwegains suply the chart in S57 format already digitised so I do not see any reason as to why this company suply an April 03 update which is 15+ years out of date. Gudging by some of the replies I have red it seems that they may have a problem.

I have checked two other chart systems now and both are more up to date than the one I am complaining about. It will be interesting to see what the outfit say.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Martin_e]

What make of charts were you using? If it is the same as the one I have bougth then maybey I should return it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Martin_e]

Re: What would it really cost ?

I agree with your way of thinking, except on smaller boats like ours we often have wet fingers/hands I have at least. As we all know PC keboards do not like rain water and positivly hate the salty stuff. Do you have a special secret or are you just b***** carefull.

Martin E.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ccscott49]

Re: What would it really cost ?

Keyboard socks, plastic things that cover the keys.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[philmarks]

I opted for CMapNT+, with a Plastimo 5600 plotter this spring, becuase it offered a dual system - I can read the card into my laptop with card reader and use charting software with it. The plotter is full colour and was realtively inexpensive.

I have 2 superwide cartridges - E Channel, and Ushant to Gibraltar. Before Easter I did a 1 week trip down to St Malo, navigating (cautiously) into tricky anchorages eg at Sark as a tester of the system. I always plot and project on paper charts. Since then I've sailed down to Lagos in Portugal. I have been impressed with the quality of the CMap Charts, and the accuracy of the Plotter/chart combo, down to position on pontoon in Cascais. I have 80% paper chart backup (Ie I don't carry every chart for areas I've sailed), probably 70 charts in total. I bought the paper charts for Portugal 18 months ago (UKHO) and the CMap charts are far more up to date and comprehensive. I have never had cause to doubt the e-charts in 1700 nm. I am well pleased, and would recommend.

The only downside (which I expected) is that plotter is too small (6" screen) to give the wider picture, I don't think I'd be happy even with 15" laptop screen. I'll always use paper charts for that.

Good luck
Phil

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Re: There are 3 factors

Chartplotters for the recreational market are toys really, but this is reflected in the price.

One of my criteria is that the chartplotter is a dedicated instrument with a high degree of stability - I've had far too much to do with PCs to trust them with anything really important.

My clear preference would be for the ARCs charts, but here again you're paying big money for your updates.

Having received state subsidies to put all the independent cartographers out of business (admittedly in the 17-20th centuries) Droggie is now exploiting his monopoly position.

There's only one thing worse than a public monopoly and that's a private one.

For me the greatest benefit of electronic charts in a 31-footer is how little room they take up. I'd need over 900 paper charts to cover W Atlantic and Med, which are contained on 6 flash ROMs.
Still I never trust their port-plans and it's not unusual to find a 100m discrepancy, might be the paper original or the conversion.

After all they're only aids to navigation, just as are paper charts, GPS, compasses, GRIB files etc.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Unforgivable

Perhaps you should bring the matter to the attention of your local Trading Standards Office (or even Mario Monti).

I'd argue that they are providing a product not fit for service.

Can you not source the charts elsewhere?

I'd choose the charting system before the plotter.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Re: What would it really cost ?

But you've got to carry reams of paper charts - it's a major storage problem if you have an extended cruising area.

I think your power consumption for chartplotters is a bit of an exaggeration.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

Re: What would it really cost ?

You're correct, rather exaggerated

Garmin 176c plotter - 2.6W (or run it off AA batteries is current draw is a real problem)
Garmin 182 plotter - 4W

There's plenty more at well under 15W

<hr width=100% size=1>Err, let me know if Depsol enters the forum, I'll go and hide

 

[charles_reed]

I have Maxsea and can run ARCs charts on my laptop - they're expensive for the area covered and I certainly wouldn't consider using my PC in any seaway apart from the power problem (on 12 v it uses about 100 watts).

I'm intrigued by a laptop with only 32Mb of memory and as much as 10 Gb HDD - I know of 3 reports of Seapro freezing on machines running any of the DOS programmes (Win 95/98).

One advantage of my chartplotter is that it keeps an hourly log for me with Lat/long, SOG, STW, COG, log and wind speed/direction the other is that it uses 6 watts.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[markdj]

Hi Charles

I simpethise with your problem and know that it is very difficult to choose a good system. I wrote an article on this in the forum a while back reagrading ARCS charts and using a stable PC.

Here's the link

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.ybw.com/cgi-bin/forums/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=pbo&Number=239482&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1>http://www.ybw.com/cgi-bin/forums/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=pbo&Number=239482&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1</A>


I short, we use software called Meridian Seatrak that uses ARCS charts (only £60 plus VAT a year to update EVERY chart we have). The system is extremely stable, there is no waiting for the screen to redraw and you can schedule a log of boat position, SOG etc. up to every minute if you want and include weather forecasts and tides and a narrative etc.
We run the system on a 4Gb 400MHz 96Mb RAM laptop running WinXP and it works great. So fast and easy to use, you won't know yourself compared with seapro, raytech etc. Any questions, just ask me as I know the software inside out.

Good cruising



<hr width=100% size=1>Princess Owners Club
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://surf.to/princessownersclub>http://surf.to/princessownersclub</A>

 

[coco]

Re: What would it really cost ?

Yes the volume of paper can be staggering, but I do not consider the G176 or the G182 mentioned by BrendanS as real chartplotters. The display is just too small to be of any real value (this is my opinion of course). In order to be able to really replace paper charts in maost situations, I guess you need to have a larger display like the bigger Garmin (2006 or 2010) or even better the Simrad larger models. They all draw more than 20 Watts! Most of the power goes to the display and is a function of its size. Colour displays are especially hungry.
I assume it is a matter of taste and boat size. I would not mind using a really good chartplotter like the Simrad CP54 as a complement to paper charts, but I dont have the boat fitting the plotter size and its energy needs.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[david_bagshaw]

Another yeoman user here for the real stuff & selfscanned charts & oziexplorer for planing etc.

Did not fancy the costs of the electronic charts, nevermind their age, particularly for places like the eider.

<hr width=100% size=1>David
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.euroboating.net>http://www.euroboating.net</A>

 

[duncan]

Re: What would it really cost ?

I am facinated by your views regarding 'real chartplotters' - perhaps you could clarify how you would define a chartplotter?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

David,
Vector (not raster) charts are a lot less expensive than paper - mainly because you can zoom in without having another overlay.

So a 64 mBit navionics chart covers the same area, including port-plans, as about 65 Admiralty charts, cost £106 compared to £750.

The biggest boon is that you don't have to find storage space for all that paper.

<hr width=100% size=1>