Paper charts are dead

Re: VHS or Betamax?

My sextant is much more fragile than my gps, if I drop the sextant I cause damage and inaccuracy. In addition it's not much good in low cloud or fog. It's also prone to a large degree of operator error. I use the safest form of position finding possible, and at present that is gps.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: VHS or Betamax?

Raster was initially taking the scene because it was nearer to a paper chart in appearnace and also less Hard disk space etc. Vector charts having all the overlays and info etc. filled disks !!!

Now that many people are now fitting larger HD's and starting to use DVD disks etc. at 4gb etc. - vector is getting accepted as the better alternative.

A quick test is to zoom into a raster chart real hard and you lose all definition ... in fact many chart packages will not allow real depth zooming for that reason on raster. Take a vector chart and you can zoom way way in and resolution / definition will still be good.

But of course many said that Betamax was a better standard than VHS .... look what happened .....


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ...
So WHAT does the EU really stand for ????/forums/images/icons/cool.gif
 
Re: Yes, going the way of the Dodo

Ahh.. but with electronics, you can enlarge the text in most cases so that it is readable. Try that with paper!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: An interesting thought

Raster is not top-dog on commercial - its similar situation as we have !! Until ECDIS becomes universally accepted and distributed ... it will be split


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ...
So WHAT does the EU really stand for ????/forums/images/icons/cool.gif
 
Re: An interesting thought

The reason you think vector charts are smaller in size - is that they are split into very small segments ...... split those C-Map directorys in each area and see what happens .....

<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ...
So WHAT does the EU really stand for ????/forums/images/icons/cool.gif
 
Re: VHS or Betamax?

For all those reasons I'm also a fan of vector charts. But there is one real deficiency when compared to raster scan and it is that there is hardly any detail on land available on the raster charts, and certainly no conturs. So you don't get an idea of what the land shoud look like when you approach it. Mostly because of that I also keep, possibly somewhat outdated, raster charts.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.taniwani.de>http://www.taniwani.de</A>
 
Most PC charting

niow can have annotated marks / notes inserted into charts for later retrieval and viewing .... in fact it's one better than that. On a paper chart its marked and thats it ..... on a PC Chart you can turn it on or off depending on what you want AND re-position it if you make a mistake .... or even delete it without leaving any marks etc. to obliterate what was under it originally.

QED


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ...
So WHAT does the EU really stand for ????/forums/images/icons/cool.gif
 
Very true

The Vector charts are strange to first view as they seem 'empty' ..... but that is where they score - too much info that cannot be switched off can hide the real info you need.

The lack of land detail - I totally agree ..... having made landfalls etc. the old Church Spire etc. can be a deciding feature to ID the spot etc. The radar return from land can be matched to contours etc...... for those not familiar - if you have a land return on radar ..... is that the beach line or the cliff edge 1/2 mile behind it .... !!


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ...
So WHAT does the EU really stand for ????/forums/images/icons/cool.gif
 
Re: To Beneteau ......

Agreed ... but you made a statement that Corrections are monthly etc.

Not true - they are weekly. Stanfords actually decided to issue monthly - not the UKHO.

I agree that corrections are reccommended ..... but are you really worried that the buoy has displaced a few metres or the sunken rock is now .1 m less or more .... in a place that you'll never venture ..... that a depth has changed from 24m to 23m ....... etc. etc.

There is a sensible middle ground on this .... I spent years correcting admiralty folios ..... average vessel is about 2500 charts maybe more - never really counted em .... but imagine your average kitchen worktop and draws under ..... say about 4m long ... all draws full of charts .... AND many ships carry US / other charts as well for various locations.... with different style of corrections .... the second officers job on ship is never ending on this work .... even when he has the luxury of tracings to work with ....

And I thought you were talking about proper paper charts !!!!


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ...
So WHAT does the EU really stand for ????/forums/images/icons/cool.gif
 
What about the ships lifeboat ?

Abandon ship orders will now be ..... grab that bloody computer and a battery bank, solar charger, wind cahrger etc. etc.


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ...
So WHAT does the EU really stand for ????/forums/images/icons/cool.gif
 
Re: Most PC charting

Does this mean you can update your electronic charts yourself?

Can you do this on a chart plotter ?

Is it best to have a laptop connected to the gps and use charts on CD or use a chart plotter with a charts on a cartridge?

Is C_Map the best?

<hr width=100% size=1>Richard
 
Re: To Beneteau ......

So how do you keep your electronic admiralty charts up to date. You mock the Stanford chart but I would rather have any updated chart in poor visibility off the east coast than an out of date C-Map.

<hr width=100% size=1>Richard
 
Re: To Beneteau ......

..but any format corrected chart is preferable to any format out of date chart.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: To Beneteau ......

But to keep a c-map up to date would have cost a huge ammount with 8 updates last year just on the 30 miles between Gt Yarmouth and Harwich.
Paper charts can be updated weekly if you are diligent but would a leisure sailor correct cartridges weekly?

<hr width=100% size=1>Richard
 
Re: To Beneteau ......

At present, I agree that it costs more to update electronic charts. However it is much easier to do, and I am sure that the price will drop in the future. I don't know of any leisure sailor who corrects his paper charts weekly...

I think that we are in a transition period, and at present electronic charts are making their presence. They can be expensive (but not always) and the associated hardware is far from perfect. That is why I always carry paper charts. However they do offer huge advantages- why else do the MN, RN and RNLI put dirty great computers and plotters in their craft?

In the near future, things will change further and we can rely on electronics. After all when you fly in a commercial airliner, your life is in the hands of the various electronic systems....

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: To Beneteau ......

Is there any chance that chart plotters will have CD drives? We could then download an updated chart and save it onto a CD. Or allow us to buy a cartridge rewriter.

The update service for paper charts is free, should we not be campaining for free electronic updates?

<hr width=100% size=1>Richard
 
Re: An interesting thought

Perhaps I can add a bit to your comments - to help clarify for others Nigel, as there seems to be an assumption around that it is vector versus raster.

Raster is/has been most common commercially because that is what the official charts have mostly been - all the vector charts commonly used by yachtsmen are not official. The raster charts are basically scans off paper charts and so were readily produced by the nations' hydrographic services. The production of vector charts is far more complicated and has taken the various nations hydrographic people alot longer to do. I just had a quick look on the UKHO site re ECDIS and they say

"As new ENCs become available, they are automatically issued to Admiralty ECDIS Service customers, replacing their corresponding ARCS charts"

so they assume that their customers will automatically change to the vector charts as they become available.

Is a while since I checked on UKHO status but I think they have progressed through much of the British Isles area and into the Med with ENC (vector) cells. I think NIMA/NOAA are close to having all theirs done, but again haven't looked at that recently. Here in NZ they have done some cells but they have only been, I believe, issued to some users for the purposes of testing and getting feedback as to layers, etc. When the ENC projects are finished one assumes the ENC charts will take over from raster insofar as official charts are concerned.

As I said before, once these official vector charts become widely available I have no idea how the likes of C-Map, etc will fare. Put it this way, I am not rushing out to buy a plotter that uses proprietary charts- in the meantime I use paper as well as raster charts with SeaClear (a /forums/images/icons/smile.gif for Nigel) and will use the official vector ones when they become available.

Given the marriage to paper charts that some have, I wonder if any forumites are still navigating with lattices of sticks, the observation of the swells, and the monitoring of seabirds - and despising paper charts as being too modern and unreliable.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: An interesting thought

"Given the marriage to paper charts that some have, I wonder if any forumites are still navigating with lattices of sticks, the observation of the swells, and the monitoring of seabirds - and despising paper charts as being too modern and unreliable."

Total nonsense, old chap, they sacrifice a virgin herring gull to ensure a safe passage. I'm sure that their cars have magneto ignition, their houses have log fires with no central heating, and when they go to a hospital for an operation they shun Xrays etc..When their car ABS braking kicks in and saves their lives they'll still despise it...


<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

Goldie
iPad Charting Recommendations Please
2
Replies
20
Views
797
ylop
Y
T
Notices to Mariners - Week 3
Replies
0
Views
587
tillergirl
T

Share this page

Top