Should we be alarmed? Proposed removal 350 navigational buoys USA North East.

[lustyd]

So, despite the advice of pilot books and the Harbour Master you would follow GPS and out of date (electronic) charts rather than repositioned buoys after a Westerly Gale to enter the Menai Straits from the Irish Sea?

Unfortunately the electronics are not always up to date and experience pays off.

Yes, if the repositioned buoys were AIS virtual ones I’d be perfectly happy with that. AIS ones don’t take a month to reposition.

 

[lustyd]

I can immediately think of 4 separate personal experiences in the last 10 years where a GPS/chartplotter has failed me, when a chart and pencil + use of marks would not have done. One led to a grounding. One a very near grounding. One would have taken me approximately 20m parallel to a narrow channel had I not followed the marks. The last one could have been more serious without marks - tablet crashed exactly on emerging from a Dutch lock into the Wadden Sea, with a complex, bumpy, windy, tidal path ahead. Fortunately I had a paper chart to hand and could see the marks.

So, apart from your tablet crashing (that’s on you) what were the actual issues with GNSS?

 

[Pye_End]

So, despite the advice of pilot books and the Harbour Master you would follow GPS and out of date (electronic) charts rather than repositioned buoys after a Westerly Gale to enter the Menai Straits from the Irish Sea?

Unfortunately the electronics are not always up to date and experience pays off.

Reminds me of the yacht lost off Reculver not too many years ago after they had re-positioned the marks to a new channel. They presumably tried to follow the old channel using out of date charts on chartplotter. Lost its keel.

 

[SaltyC]

Yes, if the repositioned buoys were AIS virtual ones I’d be perfectly happy with that. AIS ones don’t take a month to reposition.

What I'm hearing is blind faith in electronics and many years, loxal knowledge and commitment count for nothing. Hmmm Vestas here we come!

 

[Pye_End]

So, apart from your tablet crashing (that’s on you) what were the actual issues with GNSS?

An electronic failure is not 'on me' - it is a failure in the system that could happen to anyone at any time. You have to take such failures into consideration.

The chartplotter showed me to be in deep water approx 200m from shallow. This was not a change in the banks as far as I can tell. The chart datums stacked up, but felt like a datum issue. But it is pretty irrelevant - I bought plotter - used it properly - and it failed me.

 

[lustyd]

What I'm hearing is blind faith in electronics and many years, loxal knowledge and commitment count for nothing. Hmmm Vestas here we come!

Well, as discussed earlier nobody has up to the minute paper charts on board either way so your hypothetical scenario is pointless. My electronic charts are automatically updated every day, how often do you thoroughly update your paper?

Who said I was ignoring local knowledge etc? That’s purely your imagination. What I actually said was I’d use AIS markers in that scanario in a heartbeat if provided. I then explained why that would be better than waiting for the physical buoys to be eventually moved

 

[lustyd]

An electronic failure is not 'on me' - it is a failure in the system that could happen to anyone at any time. You have to take such failures into consideration.

The chartplotter showed me to be in deep water approx 200m from shallow. This was not a change in the banks as far as I can tell. The chart datums stacked up, but felt like a datum issue. But it is pretty irrelevant - I bought plotter - used it properly - and it failed me.

Failed electronics are on you in so much as you could easily use a backup. Using a tablet on a boat is risky at best so proper backups are a must, as is updating it and keeping software patched, monitoring battery etc.
so your position shifted on a plotter? Did that affect your other electronic devices? Did you check/have them? A simple cross reference with a phone would show if GNSS had a problem.

 

[SaltyC]

Well, as discussed earlier nobody has up to the minute paper charts on board either way so your hypothetical scenario is pointless. My electronic charts are automatically updated every day, how often do you thoroughly update your paper?

Who said I was ignoring local knowledge etc? That’s purely your imagination. What I actually said was I’d use AIS markers in that scanario in a heartbeat if provided. I then explained why that would be better than waiting for the physical buoys to be eventually moved

NO The instructions are 'Follow the buoys NOT GPS' You stated you follow GPS, yes you may update daily BUT what is the delay from the Master Mariner with decades of experience repostioning the buoys and the multi national company uodating your electronic chart from his information?

You said you would ignore the buoys not me!

I feel it better we agree to disagree, I will use all information at my dispisal and decades if experience, you pilot your little boat across the electronic screen.

 

[lustyd]

NO The instructions are 'Follow the buoys NOT GPS'

Well, this is a discussion of physical vs AIS buoyage so perhaps you’re in the wrong thread.
20 minutes in a RIB and AIS buoyage can be updated after a storm. Physical buoyage requires some pretty big equipment and planning to move, and will very likely be wrong after a storm, so yes I would ignore it if the plotter suggested something more sensible.

 

[Pye_End]

Failed electronics are on you in so much as you could easily use a backup. Using a tablet on a boat is risky at best so proper backups are a must, as is updating it and keeping software patched, monitoring battery etc.

No, not risky, as I had paper charts, and physical marks to navigate by.

so your position shifted on a plotter? Did that affect your other electronic devices? Did you check/have them? A simple cross reference with a phone would show if GNSS had a problem.

Permanent feature of the set up. Once realised, various waypoints and alarms set up on plotter. Correct plotting in areas nearby, so may be charting errors. But failures they still are, whatever the cause.

 

[lustyd]

No, not risky, as I had paper charts, and physical marks to navigate by.

And you’re the one person with fully up to date paper charts on board who never sails near incorrect buoyage. Whether you’re right or not, nobody else has updated paper or encounters no weirdness.

Permanent feature of the set up. Once realised, various waypoints and alarms set up on plotter. Correct plotting in areas nearby, so may be charting errors. But failures they still are, whatever the cause.

And it’s the same across devices? Where is this anomaly, did you report it?

 

[SaltyC]

Well, this is a discussion of physical vs AIS buoyage so perhaps you’re in the wrong thread.
20 minutes in a RIB and AIS buoyage can be updated after a storm. Physical buoyage requires some pretty big equipment and planning to move, and will very likely be wrong after a storm, so yes I would ignore it if the plotter suggested something more sensible.

Best of luck with AIS Buoyage around much of the UK coast.

Stop digressing, the thread us about the removal of physical buoys.

Perhaps you should sail more with Sandy moving seabeds rather than dredged commercial areas?

I recomend the East Coast and Swatchways.

 

[lustyd]

Nah, French north and west coast in 2026, UK East coast is no fun at all.

Did you miss the NAB NTM stating AIS only markers for the “wrecks”. That’s UK coast as far as I can tell…

 

[SaltyC]

Nah, French north and west coast in 2026, UK East coast is no fun at all.

Did you miss the NAB NTM stating AIS only markers for the “wrecks”. That’s UK coast as far as I can tell…

WRECKS to the best of my knowledge they fall generally under Trinity House. Virrual marks are quick and easy to deploy - Useful IF you gave AIS but difficult to spot with Mk1 eyeball.

Local aids to navigation are generally (in non commercial areas) covered by local HM.

UK East Coast no fun at all? You have no sense of adventure, glued to your screen, it needs skill, understanding and a sense of adventure - I feel sure Pye End will agree, when not searching his plotter / tablet / phone for invisible virtual AIS Ato N.

 

[Marsali_1]

Is there no limit to the things that Dave is prepared to argue about?

 

[LittleSister]

Most do have electronic aids though, that’s the point. We can’t provide expensive buoyage just for a few holdouts who refuse to modernise. . .

But buoy age is just the start of it.

Think of all the money that could be saved by doing away with all the millions of road signs for direction, destinations, speed limits, potentially even parking restrictions, etc., now that most have satnavs.

 

[ylop]

Best of luck with AIS Buoyage around much of the UK coast.

I’ve not investigated how AIS virtual aids to navigation are deployed but if you have the ability to get CG on Ch16/70 is there not a mast capable of broadcasting a virtual bouy location? I can fully imagine that that actually results in years of beaurocratic civil service wrangling but if you could save a fortune deploying and maintaining bouys decision makers can get motivated. Or is there some technical or geographic issue I’m missing?

 

[westhinder]

They only confirm your place if they are correct and as expected, hence the question above of what, if you’re being honest with yourself, would you do if it wasn’t as expected?
I know that I trust the GPS in that scenario, been there and done it many times in the past year alone when the many buoys were not as expected. Hence my position that the buoys aren’t as useful as most think.

Whether it’s your primary or not, if you immediately abandon it when it doesn’t agree with you then it’s of no genuine use. If you trust the buoys and stop the boat to investigate then there is some utility in them, I just don’t think many actually would.

Try telling that to someone who regularly sails in waters where buoys are moved frequently like the Wadden Sea. The channels there shift continually and the buoys are moved accordingly. If the buoy appears in a different position than your updated chart (paper or electronic) suggests, trust the buoy, not the chart.

 

[Pye_End]

And you’re the one person with fully up to date paper charts on board who never sails near incorrect buoyage. Whether you’re right or not, nobody else has updated paper or encounters no weirdness.

Both electronic charts and paper charts can be out of date. Ok you have a system that updates daily. Great. Many don't. I don't. I have electronic charts older than some of my paper charts. I update both with particularly important NTM to me (always have done) - but not the less relevant ones.

But I think you miss my point - you have 100% faith in electronics - I don't, and I have given you 4 (possibly 5) real life experiences of why not. You can drill into reasons all you like, but the failures are still there. You base your conclusions on your experiences and preferences, but there is so much more to consider eg reliability/different boats/types of boating/different systems.

I wonder how you know that so marks in the wrong position - are you checking with your plotter? How do you know your plotter is correct? Do you check correct position from a reliable source other than your electronics? Are you taking bearings on known objects to double check, or 'marking your own homework' with other electronics? How far out are these marks? Is it that the sinkers are correct, but the tide has taken the marks a short distance away and you havn't taken this into account?

 

[lustyd]

Try telling that to someone who regularly sails in waters where buoys are moved frequently like the Wadden Sea. The channels there shift continually and the buoys are moved accordingly. If the buoy appears in a different position than your updated chart (paper or electronic) suggests, trust the buoy, not the chart.

As I said above, AIS ones could be moved faster than physical ones so would be more reliable. If the bottom has shifted and the buoy not yet moved do you still have blind faith that you won’t go aground?