Navionics

[JoCrow]

Hi, I wish to use Navionics as a back up to my Raymarine Axiom plotter -the iPad Air has slot for sim/GPS but I don’t want to have it cellular as I will take it home to use with WiFi. I have spoken to Navionics and I am confused. How can I set this up please? I need charts for UK and Channel Coast, and which option is best [Platinum?] I am not yet a subscriber.
All help appreciated.

 

[scottie]

Hi, I wish to use Navionics as a back up to my Raymarine Axiom plotter -the iPad Air has slot for sim/GPS but I don’t want to have it cellular as I will take it home to use with WiFi. I have spoken to Navionics and I am confused. How can I set this up please? I need charts for UK and Channel Coast, and which option is best [Platinum?] I am not yet a subscriber.
All help appreciated.

My understanding is that Apple bundle the cellular and GPS and that Navionics will work without a SIM card
although it is possible that some functions may require interaction via the simm but you may bypass this with hot spot from a phone

 

[Sticky Fingers]

It works perfectly on an iPad with 4G/Cellular capability. No SIM needed.

 

[cherod]

It works perfectly on an iPad with 4G/Cellular capability. No SIM needed.

that was my experience

 

[scottie]

Why not get a data SIM card anyway they are not a lot anyway

 

[cherod]

what does the SIM card do

 

[Just_sayin']

To back up Scala, if your iPad has a sim slot you have GPS. No SIM card required.

 

[scottie]

I said at the beginning of this post that a SIM card is not a requirement but in. #5 suggested that is still worth having for what it costs to allow data access for other uses weather forecasts tides etc

 

[Just_sayin']

If I want to use my iPad for data I just hotspot from my phone. Or if I want weather forecasts tides etc I use my phone.

 

[Simi]

If you wish to use your iPad with Navionics you need a Bad Elf GPS receiver and down load Navionics I think it costs about £37 per year
Bad Elf from Mndelson GPS is around £130
It works great

 

[Just_sayin']

If you wish to use your iPad with Navionics you need a Bad Elf GPS receiver and down load Navionics I think it costs about £37 per year
Bad Elf from Mndelson GPS is around £130
It works great

Good grief. Ignore this. Read what the OP has.

 

[ex-Gladys]

Tillergirl may come and give his opinion on the quality and accuracy of Navionics charts in a while... He's less than "not keen"

 

[Sticky Fingers]

Tillergirl may come and give his opinion on the quality and accuracy of Navionics charts in a while... He's less than "not keen"

Is that in particular to the E Coast?

 

[JoCrow]

Is that in particular to the E Coast?

Many thanks. My iPad has gps and have downloaded app. I will be using the plotter principally.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Tillergirl may come and give his opinion on the quality and accuracy of Navionics charts in a while... He's less than "not keen"

AntarcticPilot neither - at least when it comes to the Sonar Chart product, which can be dangerously wrong. The regular charts are HO data, so they should be ok, within limits.

Always remember that Navionics etc. don't do their own survey - they repackage HO data. That introduces the potential for error in processing the data, of course, and also means there's a lag as it takes time to ingest new data.

 

[cherod]

i have got GPS in my ( wifeys ) ipad and it works great without anything else ( except of course her to work it ) , got us home after 5 days at sea .

 

[Sticky Fingers]

True, but also true of Imray and all others. It would be very useful to know, with actual facts not speculation, what is deficient about Navionics charts. My boat chartplotter is Simrad and uses Navionics charts. I use the tablet Navionics App and I use the web app for casual planning. What risks do I run?

 

[tillergirl]

I bought a chart plotter last year! Silly I know but there it is. So I had the choice of C-Map or Navionics. So I compared both. And looking at Navionics I was looking at the Whitaker Channel/Ray Sand area. In a 1 square mile, three buoys were wrong - one missing and two in the wrong place, and the soundings on the Ray Sand were hopelessly inaccurate. I had mentioned it at the time on the Forum and somebody must have told them as it got corrected a month or so later. But they weren't new buoys or new moves so I wasn't impressed. I just wondered if I went somewhere I didn't know, would Navionics be accurate. (I must admit I already had Imray's charts on my laptop for the survey work).

It is quite interesting asking the question 'What risks do I run'? A good and important question. I fear plotter tend to increase and inflate the sense of safety - cos it's IT. Indeed charts are only as good as the data at the time. I think we must remember that we need seamanship not a smart phone. Perhaps I could use the Sunk Sand as an example of the need for seamanship - whatever that means. There are three common crossing points: the South-Sunk swatchway, the Middle Sunk crossing and the Little Sunk.

At the moment the SW Sunk swatch is distinctive and well shown on the UKHO chart, copied of course by Imray, Navionics and C-Map (and others for all I know). But this swatch is a moving feast. I found it in 2014 after a swatch half a mile away had closed. Others may have found it before of course but at the time that area was charted as drying a metre or so and so some how the tide carved out 1 metre or so of sand down to a 6 metre swatch! In the 1980's the current swatch was in that place, ten years or so later, it was closed. So in 2014 it was there and in 2019 Plum and I were able to say it was still there and showing no signs of closing. But with my boat still firmly ashore waiting in the queue, who can say about the swatch in 2020? My view of seamanship of that would be: I have surveyed that swatch every year from 2014 to 2019 and the swatch may have moved 50 metres or so one way or the other but I would be very surprised if it was closed this year. My view would be it would be worth a look in reasonable conditions but then I know the waters there (it was very interesting with Plum last year: conditions were marginal for the survey - otherwise ok of course but it was very interesting to see the tide rips and wave action in the conditions - sorry, this is anorak stuff). A reader is moving from Sail to Motor on account of age like me and he is to move the new boat from Brightlingsea to the South Coast. He is tending to take the Swin and Princes Channel. He is using a fast but previously unused boat so he is taking the view he would prefer not to test the unmarked SW Sunk that he has never used. I think that is a reasonable view.

Let us take a different view by looking at the Middle Sunk. Crossing the Middle Sunk is quite simple; just generally heading north from the Fisherman's Gat. The chart shows an obstn which is unmarked (that's the remains of the old 1950's Middle Sunk beacon) and ahead there is a shallow extension fo the Middle Sunk but it has enough to get over. Well according to the UKHO chart - and all the others. But a reader sent me a report a couple of weeks ago that he had gone aground at LW neaps last summer on that shallow extension when the chart suggested enough. But! In 2015 I was given some data from the Port of London Authority which was part of the Barrow Deep but included the Middle Sunk sand and that shallow extension. That data showed that it had 0.2 and 0.4 at CD. As a result I did an update on my readers list saying whilst the Middle Sunk crossing was feasible I didn't recommended it at the moment because the shallow extension had to be circumvented - a dog leg. I was saying that while the SW Sunk swatch was feasible, it was better than doing the Middle Sunk.

I noted that the PLA survey data did not find the remains of the Obstn. I would suggest that since the PLA use a RIB over the sands as opposed to the real kit in the channels we cannot be certain whether the remains have completely rusted away or not. But the reader's email a couple of weeks ago has caused me to think that I ought to be repeating my warning about the Middle Sunk more often. And it makes me wonder why the PLA data hasn't been actioned by the UKHO. I have no intention of starting a storm in a tea cup over that though. I am aware that the PLA was then very, very busy surveying and dredging the Black Deep, Oaze and Sea Reach in prep for the new Thames thingy dock and it may have just been missed. So that raises the issue of relying on old data. How often to do check on the age of the data on a chart plotter? The UKHO shows the current Middle Sunk data is PLA surveys 1993-2012. For the SW Sunk it shows 2004-2019 Commercial Surveys which includes my data. So that part of all the charts is inaccurate.

And as for the Little Sunk. That is a stable 'plateau' that was last amended by British Govt Surveys 2014. I did a survey last year with Gladys and we found the Middle Sunk as expected. Whilst I sent the data into the UKHO (and received a nice response) the chart needed no updating. I had done a survey there before in 2012 and it was exactly as it is now. And workboats from Brightlingsea to the London Array used that crossing ever day. So I would conclude that the Middle Sunk would be the best option for the unexperienced. The SW Sunk will probably be ok but merits a check survey at the least (I hope I will be afloat soon) because that saves quite a few miles for the Essex Rivers. But I think the point is that when using plotters and indeed charts, we ought to be taking a view of all of the best information available and not relying on just what we see on a screen.

I am not sure that makes things better. I just fear that some people can assume that electronic data is 100% and is better than looking at the water.

 

[Laminar Flow]

I bought a chart plotter last year! Silly I know but there it is. So I had the choice of C-Map or Navionics. So I compared both. And looking at Navionics I was looking at the Whitaker Channel/Ray Sand area. In a 1 square mile, three buoys were wrong - one missing and two in the wrong place, and the soundings on the Ray Sand were hopelessly inaccurate. I had mentioned it at the time on the Forum and somebody must have told them as it got corrected a month or so later. But they weren't new buoys or new moves so I wasn't impressed. I just wondered if I went somewhere I didn't know, would Navionics be accurate. (I must admit I already had Imray's charts on my laptop for the survey work).

It is quite interesting asking the question 'What risks do I run'? A good and important question. I fear plotter tend to increase and inflate the sense of safety - cos it's IT. Indeed charts are only as good as the data at the time. I think we must remember that we need seamanship not a smart phone. Perhaps I could use the Sunk Sand as an example of the need for seamanship - whatever that means. There are three common crossing points: the South-Sunk swatchway, the Middle Sunk crossing and the Little Sunk.

At the moment the SW Sunk swatch is distinctive and well shown on the UKHO chart, copied of course by Imray, Navionics and C-Map (and others for all I know). But this swatch is a moving feast. I found it in 2014 after a swatch half a mile away had closed. Others may have found it before of course but at the time that area was charted as drying a metre or so and so some how the tide carved out 1 metre or so of sand down to a 6 metre swatch! In the 1980's the current swatch was in that place, ten years or so later, it was closed. So in 2014 it was there and in 2019 Plum and I were able to say it was still there and showing no signs of closing. But with my boat still firmly ashore waiting in the queue, who can say about the swatch in 2020? My view of seamanship of that would be: I have surveyed that swatch every year from 2014 to 2019 and the swatch may have moved 50 metres or so one way or the other but I would be very surprised if it was closed this year. My view would be it would be worth a look in reasonable conditions but then I know the waters there (it was very interesting with Plum last year: conditions were marginal for the survey - otherwise ok of course but it was very interesting to see the tide rips and wave action in the conditions - sorry, this is anorak stuff). A reader is moving from Sail to Motor on account of age like me and he is to move the new boat from Brightlingsea to the South Coast. He is tending to take the Swin and Princes Channel. He is using a fast but previously unused boat so he is taking the view he would prefer not to test the unmarked SW Sunk that he has never used. I think that is a reasonable view.

Let us take a different view by looking at the Middle Sunk. Crossing the Middle Sunk is quite simple; just generally heading north from the Fisherman's Gat. The chart shows an obstn which is unmarked (that's the remains of the old 1950's Middle Sunk beacon) and ahead there is a shallow extension fo the Middle Sunk but it has enough to get over. Well according to the UKHO chart - and all the others. But a reader sent me a report a couple of weeks ago that he had gone aground at LW neaps last summer on that shallow extension when the chart suggested enough. But! In 2015 I was given some data from the Port of London Authority which was part of the Barrow Deep but included the Middle Sunk sand and that shallow extension. That data showed that it had 0.2 and 0.4 at CD. As a result I did an update on my readers list saying whilst the Middle Sunk crossing was feasible I didn't recommended it at the moment because the shallow extension had to be circumvented - a dog leg. I was saying that while the SW Sunk swatch was feasible, it was better than doing the Middle Sunk.

I noted that the PLA survey data did not find the remains of the Obstn. I would suggest that since the PLA use a RIB over the sands as opposed to the real kit in the channels we cannot be certain whether the remains have completely rusted away or not. But the reader's email a couple of weeks ago has caused me to think that I ought to be repeating my warning about the Middle Sunk more often. And it makes me wonder why the PLA data hasn't been actioned by the UKHO. I have no intention of starting a storm in a tea cup over that though. I am aware that the PLA was then very, very busy surveying and dredging the Black Deep, Oaze and Sea Reach in prep for the new Thames thingy dock and it may have just been missed. So that raises the issue of relying on old data. How often to do check on the age of the data on a chart plotter? The UKHO shows the current Middle Sunk data is PLA surveys 1993-2012. For the SW Sunk it shows 2004-2019 Commercial Surveys which includes my data. So that part of all the charts is inaccurate.

And as for the Little Sunk. That is a stable 'plateau' that was last amended by British Govt Surveys 2014. I did a survey last year with Gladys and we found the Middle Sunk as expected. Whilst I sent the data into the UKHO (and received a nice response) the chart needed no updating. I had done a survey there before in 2012 and it was exactly as it is now. And workboats from Brightlingsea to the London Array used that crossing ever day. So I would conclude that the Middle Sunk would be the best option for the unexperienced. The SW Sunk will probably be ok but merits a check survey at the least (I hope I will be afloat soon) because that saves quite a few miles for the Essex Rivers. But I think the point is that when using plotters and indeed charts, we ought to be taking a view of all of the best information available and not relying on just what we see on a screen.

I am not sure that makes things better. I just fear that some people can assume that electronic data is 100% and is better than looking at the water.

Using Navionics we managed to find an unmarked rock off Ploumenach' last year.

We had been in there half a dozen times before and felt confident enough. It was a pretty low tide.
When I started seeing seaweed I stopped and my wife went to the bow to check. But it was too late. We bounced in the slight swell and the boat robbed of its buoyancy heeled over dramatically. Unable to back off, I gunned her on the rise of the next wave in foreward and we, thankfully, cleared the obstruction.
I dived on her when we subsequently anchored to await the tide and apart from some scratches to her keel and my dignity there was no damage.

When I later checked our paper chart I found "our" rock marked.

 

[Gargleblaster]

I have used a £50 tablet with GPS and WIFI but no SIM with Navionics downloaded while in range of WIFI. It has been brilliant. I like Navionics from the fact that if I am sailing to the US, I just pay for what I need that year or if I am going to the Baltic I just pay for Europe which inlcudes most of the English Channel and half the Thames Estuary but not Denmark [Denmarks price is eye watering for a small area].
I lost my £50 tablet in the US and bought another and using my email and password Navionics was reinstalled without additional cost.