eNavigation

[RunAgroundHard]

I think input from the RYA into the new code, and their feedback was extensive from members and other interested parties. This was discussed at an RYA event a couple of years ago, where they mentioned that the new code, while not addressing all the RYA concerns, had been much changed from the initial drafts. I am not aware of RIN or CA contributions specifically but understand that there was similar feedback. It appears to me that there is a lot of crossover understanding between organizations. I think RIN are more aligned with the MCA current approach but that is a guess.

The current concern with electronics navigation on small commercial vessels, and that of leisure vessels sits with the MCA. I dare say their priorities sit with compliance to IMO UK adopted resolutions in the wider sense, than serving a sector of their own citizens. I would hazard a guess that the USA does t have this issue with their commercial sport fishermen.

 

[RunAgroundHard]

This is the article from the RYA. Digital First: The Rise Of eNavigation

I found this part particularly interesting:-

eNavigation​

The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) defines eNavigation as "the harmonised collection, integration, exchange, presentation and analysis of marine information on board and ashore by electronic means to enhance berth-to-berth navigation and related services for safety and security at sea and protection of the marine environment".

This wide-reaching definition needs to be applied as best it can to the leisure world. The UKHO is presenting a paper to the IMO, supported by other administrations, to develop an international standard of digital navigation for the small craft sector.

When this comes to fruition, we’ll have approved systems that can fully replace the paper chart and enable us to embrace the efficiencies of navigation completely.

In support of this, the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities continues to update its guidance on a VHF Data Exchange System aimed at increasing the ability to transmit data over VHF, in a similar way to automatic identification systems. The last update was in December 2022, where potential uses were listed as providing GNSS augmentation to further improve positioning or providing automatic chart updates based on provided routes.

VDES - VHF Data Exchange System - IALA

 

[st599]

And the one option nobody on a comittee is considering is just letting people use whatever is appropriate. The very idea that we must have a standard and must thrust it upon commercial vessels is borne of comittee thinking. The vast majority of small commercial boats have no requirement for any navigation equipment on board at all, never leave familiar waters, never go to new places, never go out in adverse conditions.

SOLAS V requires undertaking a passage plan using relevant publications - would this not require charts?

 

[Lucky Duck]

SOLAS V requires undertaking a passage plan using relevant publications - would this not require charts?

As a parochial example those regulations don’t apply in the Solent and are advisory only instead

Edit - as an aside I spoke with one owners in Weymouth Marina who hadn’t previously left the Solent for around a decade, I suspect that applies to a goodly number of boats berthed between Lymington and Chichester

 

[RunAgroundHard]

SOLAS V requires undertaking a passage plan using relevant publications - would this not require charts?

Only when "preceding to sea" which has a very definite meaning: outside of categorised waters. Where I sail, the Firth of Clyde and West Coast of Scotland, the categorised waters, especially in the Firth of Clyde, summer month limits, is quite a large body of water. Some charter companies use this summer limit as their defined charter area.
`You are correct though, if sailing outside these limits, then "appropriate nautical charts" are required to be consulted. There may be some clause that makes the whole of SOLAS V passage planning part applicable to categorised waters, I am not an expert and not aware of such a clause.

 

[lustyd]

SOLAS V requires undertaking a passage plan using relevant publications - would this not require charts?

Exactly the point I’m making. It’s ridiculous to insist on a passage plan for every journey of every boat. Most boats, even small commercial ones, are going where they always go, the way they always go, and no amount of “planning” will make that safer.


Thankfully the requirement isn’t that strict though, doesn’t require publications at all, and doesn’t require paper.

 

[capnsensible]

I reckon everyone has a passage plan in their minds at least before setting off anywhere. What would be 'ridiculous' is not to share that information to all others onboard.....

 

[barca nova]

You’ve twice been in electrical storms bad enough to knock out equipment and apparently make satellites unavailable but close enough to land to use paper navigation? At night?
Thankfully none of the skippers on my boat are that bad.

a bad skipper causes electrical storms that blank out the satellite signal? I am a weather God!!

 

[barca nova]

And the one option nobody on a comittee is considering is just letting people use whatever is appropriate. The very idea that we must have a standard and must thrust it upon commercial vessels is borne of comittee thinking. The vast majority of small commercial boats have no requirement for any navigation equipment on board at all, never leave familiar waters, never go to new places, never go out in adverse conditions.

And quite right too. If you are using the boat on your own you can navigate by whatever means you want. But if your boat is commercial then by definition you are likely to have other people on board and other lives to worry about not just your own miserable neck. So then you are obliged to do the job properly and follow the guidance of wiser people than your opinionated self

And by the way, the RYA does not set the rules

 

[st599]

This is the article from the RYA. Digital First: The Rise Of eNavigation

I found this part particularly interesting:-



VDES - VHF Data Exchange System - IALA

Benelux and Germany have already rolled out VDES, but it requires a licence change in the UK (which would obsolete a number of older VHFs).

 

[westhinder]

Benelux and Germany have already rolled out VDES, but it requires a licence change in the UK (which would obsolete a number of older VHFs).

That’s right, and your VHF set needs to be reprogrammed, but in practical terms I haven’t noticed any difference so far.

 

[ylop]

E

Exactly the point I’m making. It’s ridiculous to insist on a passage plan for every journey of every boat. Most boats, even small commercial ones, are going where they always go, the way they always go, and no amount of “planning” will make that safer.


Thankfully the requirement isn’t that strict though, doesn’t require publications at all, and doesn’t require paper.

id say quite the opposite. Surely if there is a standard route that IS the plan. The rules only require a suitable plan not a particular style / content (not for it to be recorded). The courts will decide afterwards if it was good enough! Do you not make a plan before you head to sea?

most requirements are made after some cock up / disaster. If solas requires a plan it’s probably because people who were making it up as they went along came a cropper. If the rules expect commercial skippers to have actual charts, it’s probably because someone didn’t and had an avoidable accident.

 

[ylop]

And meanwhile nobody really cares.

You seem to! Ok you care that they care, rather than caring about the underlying issue - but I’m sure if you surveyed commercial RYA members they do care that a practical and affordable solution is found!

We’re all navigating using well proven tools.

But some may be more proven than others. How should a new boat owner decide between them when none of them are compliant? How would a regulator determine if a skipper was negligent by using a tool which say hadn’t been updated, or was on a very small screen, a screen which couldn’t be read in daylight, or that adversely affecting night vision?

Even coded boats keep their paper stuff in the drawer just for compliance.

Not all coded boats. Some keep their paper charts on the chart table, some even mark their position. In fact so do some non-coded boats because it’s a contingency or provides better situational awareness on a large chart than a small screen. The reason “we” need rules/standards is precisely because some people think if they’ve never had a problem before they’ll be fine next time.

The RYA and others have obstructed progress for years on this

Have they?

but close enough to land to use paper navigation? At night?

Might be a shock to know people used paper charts away from land long before GPS was common.

And the one option nobody on a comittee is considering is just letting people use whatever is appropriate.

No they are likely going to define what “appropriate” means. They could leave it to vessel owners - but then why have regulations for anything?

The vast majority of small commercial boats have no requirement for any navigation equipment on board at all, never leave familiar waters, never go to new places, never go out in adverse conditions.

Is that true? I don’t know if it’s true or not. It’s not impossible that they will end up with different requirements for different use cases / areas of operation.

No, I didn't raise it with RYA.

But you are quite happy to spend your day arguing with people online who have neither the influence to change the RYA views nor the ability to sway government (or the IMO) to act differently.

If they want to sit around discussing settled issues that's on them,

let’s assume it is a settled issue that electronic plotters are good enough. Which mapping systems? Which screen size? Which resolution? How often must they be updated? If used on deck what brightness of screen? If used at night should the screen change mode? If the GPS fails (something I’d have laughed at 5 yrs ago but which is certainly not impossible) should there be an alternative method to input estimated position? If the power fails (battery, fuse, wiring) what alternative is acceptable? Is it acceptable for the system to calculate a route for you? If so with what tolerances and under which circumstances? Which types of commercial vessel would be allowed to use these systems? Workboats in sheltered familiar waters may have different requirements from a small ferry doing 25 knots with 12 passengers on board.

All we need right now is to de-restrict use of available plotters. If and when any real world deficiency is actually found, update the rules.

What if the very first deficiency is that the manufacturers of those systems state they should not be used for the very purpose you intend? Is that not a “real world problem”.

Some people would say the “easy” solution to the paper charts problem is not to change the commercial rules to support leisure type system - but rather to find a solution to continue printing paper charts - because that’s been the viable compromise for the last two decades.

I’m not sure why you actually care - the rules don’t directly affect you as a leisure sailor. It kind of smells of “ah ha, I’ve found something stupid the RYA said” and then when someone points out the issue that commercial operators face very soon - you say “well that’s the RYAs fault too” rather than admit you might have missed the significance, and that the RYA might be a stakeholder rather than decision maker! Could they have communicated it better? Probably. Could you have reacted differently? Yes, you’ve already decided the RYA are idiots and you are looking for evidence to back you up. I assume you will not rejoin in 5 yrs when your ICC needs renewal out of principle?

 

[lustyd]

a bad skipper causes electrical storms that blank out the satellite signal? I am a weather God!!

A good skipper checks the weather and learns from mistakes.

 

[lustyd]

So then you are obliged to do the job properly and follow the guidance of wiser people than your opinionated self

Specifically what do you suppose small commercial boats making the exact same passage year in, year out in local waters will use their navigation equipment for?

And by the way, the RYA does not set the rules

And yet, the thread is about their statement that they do.

 

[lustyd]

but I’m sure if you surveyed commercial RYA members they do care that a practical and affordable solution is found!

They are bothered mostly because they are being told the tools they use day in and day out aren’t sufficient despite doing the job well. They are bothered by the additional cost of paying for things they have no intention of using. Yes, things need to change, no that doesn’t require strict regulations.

But some may be more proven than others. How should a new boat owner decide between them when none of them are compliant? How would a regulator determine if a skipper was negligent by using a tool which say hadn’t been updated, or was on a very small screen, a screen which couldn’t be read in daylight, or that adversely affecting night vision?

I said above, if and when issues are found they can be dealt with. That shouldn’t prevent current working solutions just being approved for use. People are using them regardless so if it’s genuinely an issue the authorities are currently causing dangerous situations to occur. Obviously there isn’t any danger, so why continue the farce.

Not all coded boats. Some keep their paper charts on the chart table, some even mark their position. In fact so do some non-coded boats because it’s a contingency or provides better situational awareness on a large chart than a small screen. The reason “we” need rules/standards is precisely because some people think if they’ve never had a problem before they’ll be fine next time.

Yes, some do. Some need to navigate new places too. I didn’t say nobody needs nav gear or that all people use electronics, did I? I said many have no need of nav gear on board as they make the same journey in known waters every day. I don’t use satnav to drive to my local shop either.

Might be a shock to know people used paper charts away from land long before GPS was common.

How is that relevant? You should be on the committee of grandpa’s with comments like that.

No they are likely going to define what “appropriate” means. They could leave it to vessel owners - but then why have regulations for anything?

Specifically why do we need regulations covering what nav gear is needed on board? “Appropriate navigation equipment “ would be absolutely fine in the regs. Regulation often prevents tech advancing and in this case has prevented better tooling from being adopted on commercial vessels for decades for no good reason. I agree if safety issues are found then regulate (and said this multiple times) but none have been

.

But you are quite happy to spend your day arguing with people online who have neither the influence to change the RYA views nor the ability to sway government (or the IMO) to act differently.

As are you. This is a forum for people to chat and discuss. If you don’t like that then leave. I’m free to criticise the RYA, we have no other body and they’re entirely out of touch.

let’s assume it is a settled issue that electronic plotters are good enough. Which mapping systems? Which screen size?

Whatever the owner/skipper agree is appropriate and safe for the intended purpose. Why shouldn’t they?

Which resolution? How often must they be updated? If used on deck what brightness of screen? If used at night should the screen change mode? If the GPS fails (something I’d have laughed at 5 yrs ago but which is certainly not impossible) should there be an alternative method to input estimated position? If the power fails (battery, fuse, wiring) what alternative is acceptable? Is it acceptable for the system to calculate a route for you? If so with what tolerances and under which circumstances? Which types of commercial vessel would be allowed to use these systems? Workboats in sheltered familiar waters may have different requirements from a small ferry doing 25 knots with 12 passengers on board.

What a load of waffle. Skippers, especially commercial skippers will use systems they trust and that are appropriate to conditions. Would you prefer a situation where a plotter doesn’t dim at night because it rigidly aligned to a regulation that wasn’t updated?

What if the very first deficiency is that the manufacturers of those systems state they should not be used for the very purpose you intend? Is that not a “real world problem”.

They’re legally obliged to say that, that’s the problem!! Take away that requirement and we’re golden.

Some people would say the “easy” solution to the paper charts problem is not to change the commercial rules to support leisure type system - but rather to find a solution to continue printing paper charts - because that’s been the viable compromise for the last two decades.

Why not both? Paper is useful sometimes and to some people. Let the skipper use what’s appropriate. There are many situations where paper navigation isn’t appropriate.

I’m not sure why you actually care - the rules don’t directly affect you as a leisure sailor.

They do, actually. Why are you so bothered that I called out that the RYA are behind the times?

It kind of smells of “ah ha, I’ve found something stupid the RYA said” and then when someone points out the issue that commercial operators face very soon - you say “well that’s the RYAs fault too” rather than admit you might have missed the significance, and that the RYA might be a stakeholder rather than decision maker! Could they have communicated it better? Probably. Could you have reacted differently? Yes, you’ve already decided the RYA are idiots and you are looking for evidence to back you up. I assume you will not rejoin in 5 yrs when your ICC needs renewal out of principle?

I didn’t miss the significance. In fact I acknowledged it throughout and stated an alternative view to yours. For some reason you’re unable to process alternative opinions on this matter so instead attack me and my knowledge and look foolish in doing so.
I will renew in 5 years if I need an ICC, it’s cheaper. I can simultaneously use a service and consider the organisation out of touch.

 

[lustyd]

I reckon everyone has a passage plan in their minds at least before setting off anywhere. What would be 'ridiculous' is not to share that information to all others onboard.....

I don’t. Sometimes I just pootle about Obviously commercial vessels will have a plan, although I dare say fishermen also often pootle about fairly randomly. Thankfully the rules don’t require a very detailed plan at all so I’m still unsure why someone brought this up.

 

[ylop]

I don’t. Sometimes I just pootle about

If that’s true, one day you will come unstuck (or perhaps actually stuck). The plan can be to “go out there sailing about in this area and then come back” but it’s still a plan - you identify the risks and hazards - if you don’t then one day they’ll find you. The reason it’s a requirement is because some people do/did go to sea without engaging their brain at all.

Obviously commercial vessels will have a plan, although I dare say fishermen also often pootle about fairly randomly. Thankfully the rules don’t require a very detailed plan at all so I’m still unsure why someone brought this up.

you are confused what a passage plan is; it’s not the same thing as a pilotage plan (although it could contain one).

 

[dunedin]

….
And yet, the thread is about their statement that they do..

I think this thread is jumbling up three related but in fact separate things:

1) Rules/laws for UK flagged pleasure vessels - for which, unlike many other countries, we are fortunate to have a very light touch with no formal regulations on what navigation systems and charts we need to carry, beyond the basic SOLAS statement on passage planning.

2) Rules/laws for UK flagged coded vessels - which are set by MCA, not RYA, and have recently mandated via MGN319 either continued use of official paper charts, or use of a new SV-ECS system and only official (very expensive) ENC charts. (I believe that RYA and others have tried to push back on this with MCA to no avail, as yet.)

3) Basis for Yachtmaster training curriculum - this is what RYA rightly play the lead role in defining, and his been teaching electronic methods for many years. The issues here in moving formally to electronic as the primary or sole means of navigation include that a coded training yacht now needs to still carry paper charts or use only SV-ECS and ENCs - which would be different from what the trained skippers would actually use on their own boat (and be very expensive).

I believe it is primarily the third of these that RYA’s announcement was about, which is indeed their core role, but happy to be proven wrong.

It would be helpful if posters could also be clear on which aspect(s) they are referring to.

Finally, it is unclear in my mind what remit if any UKHO have to propose international standards in ANY of these areas. They did recently take a paper to IHO but that seemed to be around their attempts to push for more regulation on all craft and mandating their ENCs, which may not be helpful and not clear what, if any, benefits this might have (other than to official HO revenues).

 

[lustyd]

If that’s true, one day you will come unstuck (or perhaps actually stuck). The plan can be to “go out there sailing about in this area and then come back” but it’s still a plan - you identify the risks and hazards - if you don’t then one day they’ll find you. The reason it’s a requirement is because some people do/did go to sea without engaging their brain at all

What world are you living in? This is absolute rubbish. We are absolutely free to pootle about with no aim and no plan.