Modern navigation practice

DownWest

Well-known member
Joined
25 Dec 2007
Messages
13,912
Location
S.W. France
Visit site
[QUOTE="RunAgroundHard, post: 8168481, member: 193528

Good information as we move away from paper based navigation to digital navigation.
[/QUOTE]
Why am I reminded of a bloke I met that ran his Amel 53 onto a reef due to some glitz in the maps? Autopilot didn't know the reef was there....
 

RunAgroundHard

Well-known member
Joined
20 Aug 2022
Messages
2,318
Visit site
[QUOTE="RunAgroundHard, post: 8168481, member: 193528

Good information as we move away from paper based navigation to digital navigation.
Why am I reminded of a bloke I met that ran his Amel 53 onto a reef due to some glitz in the maps? Autopilot didn't know the reef was there....

The link to the RIN recommendations are worthing reading as they are trying to address weaknesses. They state in their book that they cant publish the recommendations within the book (read the intro bits to find out why). The link again.

https://rin.org.uk/page/ENavRec

Autopilots are dumb, they don't know what reefs are but no sure what that has to do with digital navigation. People do hit rocks and reefs using non digital navigation as well, obviously.

One thing that digital navigation is bad at, is getting a feel for the area, where the hazards are, just by looking at a paper chart. Of course, that too can be had by scrolling through a digital chart, but it may be a less intuitive (just an opinion).
 

finestgreen

Active member
Joined
6 Sep 2020
Messages
251
Visit site
One thing that digital navigation is bad at, is getting a feel for the area, where the hazards are, just by looking at a paper chart. Of course, that too can be had by scrolling through a digital chart, but it may be a less intuitive (just an opinion).

Digital seems limited and awkward for annotation too - drawing clearing lines etc or making notes.
 

AntarcticPilot

Well-known member
Joined
4 May 2007
Messages
10,574
Location
Cambridge, UK
www.cooperandyau.co.uk
Modern digital navigation software can be set to give a course between two points that will avoid any and all "charted" dangers and obstructions.
And our common disclaimer on our maps was "The absence of a feature on this map does not imply the absence of a feature on the ground". Antarctic mapping is like that, but so is charting away from commercially important areas.
 

Fr J Hackett

Well-known member
Joined
26 Dec 2001
Messages
66,658
Location
Saou
Visit site
And our common disclaimer on our maps was "The absence of a feature on this map does not imply the absence of a feature on the ground". Antarctic mapping is like that, but so is charting away from commercially important areas.

If it aint shown on the chart digital or paper or in the "wrong" place it doesn't matter you could still hit it.
 

Chiara’s slave

Well-known member
Joined
14 Apr 2022
Messages
7,713
Location
Western Solent
Visit site
If it aint shown on the chart digital or paper or in the "wrong" place it doesn't matter you could still hit it.
Which brings us back to the good old fashioned custom of keeping a good look out. I’ll agree that doesn’t mean that you will see a submerged obstruction, but you’re more likely to if you’re looking where you are going rather than staring at your plotter!
 

Fr J Hackett

Well-known member
Joined
26 Dec 2001
Messages
66,658
Location
Saou
Visit site
Which brings us back to the good old fashioned custom of keeping a good look out. I’ll agree that doesn’t mean that you will see a submerged obstruction, but you’re more likely to if you’re looking where you are going rather than staring at your plotter!

Why would you be staring at your plotter any more than you would be staring at your paper chart?
 

AntarcticPilot

Well-known member
Joined
4 May 2007
Messages
10,574
Location
Cambridge, UK
www.cooperandyau.co.uk
Why would you be staring at your plotter any more than you would be staring at your paper chart?
Because no one stares at a chart - you study the chart beforehand and keep it handy for reference, but because your position isn't constantly visible, you don't look at it much. It's a different style of navigation from a chart-plotter.
 

johnalison

Well-known member
Joined
14 Feb 2007
Messages
40,915
Location
Essex
Visit site
Nothing compels you to stare at a plotter.
Wives sometimes do, morally at least. There are different kinds of navigational areas, much it being pilotage for many of us. For navigation out of sight of land only occasional reference to a chart or plotter is needed as it is usual to set a course and steer by it, at least for major chunks of it. For myself, I would use the information from the plotter on a repeater, giving direction and distance to Waypoint plus SOG & COG, though others may want XTE or a rolling road. This is quite sufficient to get me from England to France or Belgium, providing I have made the right studies while planning the route.

Closer inshore I might do the same, though my route would be more complicated, nevertheless, I have often done it while coasting. In some situations, as when weaving between islands or rocks, The helm may well want a chart to hand. In the past this would have been a chart, perhaps in a waterproof case, but now a screen will serve the same purpose. It is not something I have often done out of necessity, the last occasion I think being when threading our way out of Treguier using the iPad, which took great offence at being put in the sun and shut itself down.
 

Chiara’s slave

Well-known member
Joined
14 Apr 2022
Messages
7,713
Location
Western Solent
Visit site
Why would you be staring at your plotter any more than you would be staring at your paper chart?
Like the others have said, it’s a bad habit. It’s the compulsion to know exactly where you are. As you’ll know, you rarely need any level of precision in position finding, especially if you’ve got some visibility, ie it’s not dark or foggy.
 
Top