Oceanmaster
Well-Known Member
Tony
When are we going for a beer?
When are we going for a beer?
Many dangerous errors in new Navionics cartography
- Thread starter tony_lavelle
- Start date
LadyInBed
Well-Known Member
Looks like another error was found here:
http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?441567-s-y-Ramprasad-lost-off-coast-of-Madagascar
http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?441567-s-y-Ramprasad-lost-off-coast-of-Madagascar
Tintin
Well-Known Member
A rather expensive way to sort out errors. Thankfully they weren't hurt, but the boat was lost.
Ravi
Well-Known Member
Errr... You weren't there when the tide was running at springs, were you? Because the buoys are pretty much underwater, when it is.
A few years ago i saw a forum post saying that the buoys had been removed but I found them and moored up, a few days later. It was like mooring in white water rapids, though. The unused buoys were pulled pretty much underwater.
bobgarrett
Well-Known Member
In think it is six monthly but I also seem to recall being prompted for a download at another time.
runningman
Well-Known Member
I am astonished by some of the things highlighted in this discussion. If Navionics really are producing electronic charts with islands and harbours, for example, in wrong positions then their product is simply not fit for purpose. Furthermore their product could sooner or later lead to loss of life. To try to get round this by saying "not to be used for navigation" must be some kind of joke. If their charts are not to be used for navigation what are they to be used for?
Tintin
Well-Known Member
I think that, if challenged in court, it wouldn't stand up because they clearly market and promote the product for such purposes.
But of course as good seamen (and women) we should always be responsible for the aids we use for nav, and knowing that vector charts (not just Navionics) have issues, whether loss of detail at higher zoom or wrongly placed detail, it is prudent isn't it to also use other sources such as old fashioned charts.
And even charts can be inaccurate due to the age and thoroughness of the survey they are based on, hence that chap in Scotland doing his own surveys.
And even with an accurate chart, you need to know where you are on it, and a mistake in plotting or taking bearings can screw that up. And of course the reliance on electronics is causing people to lose those skills or not learn them in the first place.
So they are all but aids to navigation, and every time we set out we need to be cogniscent of that.
And if you aren't, well quite frankly that is Darwinism at work isn't it?
AntarcticPilot
Well-Known Member
I entirely agree, and a "Not for Navigation" notice on a product intended to be used in a navigational device is unlikely to stand up in court.
I've had to deal with this for products where errors were inevitable (mapping Antarctica is like that!), and what we did was to make a comprehensive statement of the weaknesses of the product, so users could make their own judgement. In one case, we only distributed the data with a carefully written letter explaining the strengths and weaknesses of the product. The legal advice I was given was that this sort of statement is the only way to limit liability. You may not make any statement that attempts to limit your liability in the case of negligent or malicious behaviour.
Unfortunately, while we were in a position where we could be reasonably certain that users would be aware of the likely deficiencies of our products, Navionics aren't. We could expect users to read a few hundred words so that they knew (broadly) what our products were good for, but Navionics don't have that luxury - "Not for Navigation" is about as much as they can say.
Another issue is that this is an area where different legislations have different laws. I have written from the point of view of an organization subject to UK law; Navionics may be writing from the POV of US law, which I know to be different but do not know the details.
prv
Well-Known Member
AntarcticPilot
Well-Known Member
You may well be right; I don't know where the corporate headquarters of Navionics is.
RichardS
N/A
Vega1447
Well-Known Member
Just received an update from Navionics:
Dear XXXXX XXXXX
Thank you for bringing this issue to our Cartography Department. Navionics appreciates your input and we are pleased to inform you that the issue has been corrected. The updated data is currently available for Navionics Mobile by updating your maps. Always make sure you are running the most current version of the mobile app. To refresh your charts within the mobile app, simply download the area of mapping again. You can do this by going to Menu > Download Map and selecting the coverage you wish to update or by going to Menu > Update All to update all of your downloaded maps. Thank you for being a valued and helpful Navionics customer. Have a great day.
Best regards,
XXXX XXXXXXXXX
Navionics Customer Service
Dear XXXXX XXXXX
Thank you for bringing this issue to our Cartography Department. Navionics appreciates your input and we are pleased to inform you that the issue has been corrected. The updated data is currently available for Navionics Mobile by updating your maps. Always make sure you are running the most current version of the mobile app. To refresh your charts within the mobile app, simply download the area of mapping again. You can do this by going to Menu > Download Map and selecting the coverage you wish to update or by going to Menu > Update All to update all of your downloaded maps. Thank you for being a valued and helpful Navionics customer. Have a great day.
Best regards,
XXXX XXXXXXXXX
Navionics Customer Service
prv
Well-Known Member
The Banc Ampamonty that cost a couple their boat (see earlier in the thread) is still wrong on the Web App though.
Pete
AntarcticPilot
Well-Known Member
I'm afraid a response like this does NOT reassure me at all. What is the source they have used to correct the cartography? How have they validated it? Given the nature of the original errors, I would want reassurance on the QA of the correction.
prv
Well-Known Member
+1
Maybe I can email them about an "error" in their charts, and get the Brambles removed?
Pete
Angele
Well-Known Member
+1
Maybe I can email them about an "error" in their charts, and get the Brambles removed?
Pete
Yes. It is such a pain as it on the direct line from Hamble to Cowes. Get it removed from the charts, so I can then safely sail directly over the top of it.
prv
Well-Known Member
Yes. It is such a pain as it on the direct line from Hamble to Cowes. Get it removed from the charts, so I can then safely sail directly over the top of it.
Actually, if their checking really were so bad that they accepted such a correction, it wouldn't be a bad way of publicising the issue.
Pete
Angele
Well-Known Member
I like your thinking.
Perhaps just before the 2016 Brambles Cricket Match. That would give the organisers a bit of a problem. Sorry, but the wicket isn't available this year....
Ravi
Well-Known Member
It does NOT reassure you?
They have acknowledged their mistake, they have corrected their mistake (whether by survey vessel or reference to everyone elses' charts), they have expressed thanks to the helpful user that pointed out the error.
They are a company that trades on charts. For goodness sake, do you REALLY think that they would change a chart on the basis of an email without sophisticated checking procedures. If you do, what makes you think that the RYA doesn't just place their contours using dice?
All users can automatically update their charts with the corrected information.
WHAT DO YOU WANT?????????
Do you want the CEO to commit Hari Kiri? (If that was the punishment for cartographic mistakes, Capt. Cook wouldn't have got far.)
Do you want the company to go round to each and every users house and give them a personal briefing?
For goodness sake! You are getting charts of the whole world for £25 and you are complaining about one minor mistake which is corrected immediately on report. UNLIKE THE THOUSANDS OF OUT OF DATE PAPER CHARTS THAT ARE STILL BEING USED FOR NAVIGATION.
And..... You don't need to check publications and get your pencil out and correct your chart (as you need to do with the MANY corrected errors on paper charts)
The basic fact is that you are much less likely to die using GPS with 10m accuracy and a digital plotter than you are using old fashioned methods where a bit of freak tidal activity can leave you arguing about whether you are heading for France or the Channel Islands.
In fact, no freak tidal activity required. Just human error!
So, when you say that it "Does not reassure you", what do you want them to do? Put a listing in Yachting Monthly, like the UKHO? Would that be better than an instantaneous online update?
Angele
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but I disagree on so many levels.
They seem to be very good at importing errors without a proper checking process.
If only it was a single error, then I would also wonder what the fuss was about. But it isn't. There is a worrying trend here.
The RYA doesn't produce charts, let alone decide where the contours go. On the assumption that you probably meant the UKHO then at least they use survey vessels to do the work.
The response from Navionics looked like a pretty standard (possibly computer generated) email.
I could go on....
