Siting a chart plotter

[jordanbasset]

This is a "no brainer" as they say.

Absolutely no point having a plotter down below if it's the only one you've got - a repeater perhaps.

Given that the plotter display is effectively a chart right in front of you whilst helming or conning during pilotage, it's easy to establish whether the icon is in the right place or not, and much quicker than going below to check either the paper charts, or the plotter.

I agree that, if you blindly assume that the icon is correct at all times, with no additional checks, that could be a recipe for disaster on the rare occasion when things go awry with the system. However, armed with binoculars, hand bearing compass, a prepared pilotage plan, the additional benefit of a chart plotter immediately to hand, as an additional "aid", is almost immeasurable. As long as you are aware of the potential pitfalls and problems, and are monitoring the situation properly, there is no more, or less risk in using a chart plotter at the helm than any other navigational aid.

'To wit' radar - not to be relied on to the n'th degree, but bloody handy in fog etc.

For those who worry about electronic, or system, failure, I presume you employ a man with a red flag to walk in front of your car

We've landed on the moon, Aircraft take off and land automatically, cars park themselves, and so on.

Of course, on my little narrow boat, a chart plotter at the helm would be overkill - I tend to use Google Maps these days

Live and let live, and each to their own and suchlike

To the OP - iirc, the Navipods are around £250 or so but they do the job properly. Anything else will likely be cobbled together and not quite satisfactory. In the scheme of things, £250 isn't a great deal, and I'm sure it will repay its cost in spades.

In my case, starting without a plotter, I bought a cheap waterproof Lowrance job with a hi-res 5" screen which saw me from Glasson Dock to Malta and back. Mounted at the wheel on a swivel, and removable, the only thing I might have done differently with hindsight is to invest in Navionics charts, rather than rely on the cheap Transas charts that came with the plotter.

There is no way I would be without a plotter at the helm these days!

Richard

+1, especially useful for an area you are unfamiliar with and when we had very heavy fog down the Portugal coast it was a godsend coupled with the radar.
Cannot see the point of running down to the chart table when a quick glance down to a cockpit sited chartplotter will confirm what you see around you. Can also when in sight of land check compass bearings on headlands, lighthouses etc and double check with the chartplotter. Much easier to do this from the cockpit.

 

[Ex-SolentBoy]

I have a plotter below, and at the helm. If one had to be binned it would be the one below.

When in bad vis, or crossing shipping lanes, the ability to see radar and AIS daa without going below is a big plus.

This was discussed a lot recently and the vast majority prefer the cockpit.

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=291524&highlight=Chart+plotter+poll

 

[Colvic Watson]

I sometimes miss having a cockpit but it does mean with a wheelhouse that the chart table is at the helm!

 

[sailorman]

According to this thread autohelm . An auto helm for wheel steering is thousands - just depends what your budget is.

i have a 6000+, wrecked a navico wheel pilot in 6 months totally useless & poorly made

 

[pvb]

The place for the plotter is in the cockpit, where it can be referred to instantly. Mine is under the sprayhood and, as it's a 12" screen, I can easily see it from the wheel. It's also convenient to sit next to it and use it, whilst still being able to maintain a watch - essential for singlehanding.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Each to their own, and the only arguments that I don't agree with are the ones that say its a 'no brainer'.

If we were to put a plotter on the binnacle, I would have to go round behind the wheel to see where we were. At sea, I don't often sit behind the wheel, as I hate steering for long periods on passage and the auto pilot goes on very quickly - even when we are driving down the river I will often put the auto pilot on and potter round the boat keeping one eye on traffic and other boats and whilst tidying lines etc etc.

But to come back to the plotter: if it was by the wheel, it would mean that it could be used for pilotage. Bat that means that I would trust it enough for pilotage - or at least trust the charting enough...

As we are planning to set out for warmer waters where I KNOW (from experience) that the charting isn't always as good as we enjoy in home waters in the UK, then it perhaps indicates that by the wheel isn't the better option.

I do worry about people who drive their boats down lines on the plotter though. It has in the past lead to some dreadful cock-ups. You can get away with it in Europe most of the time as the charting is so good, but it can lead you into a false sense of security and bad habits perhaps?

There was an experienced blue water sailor who lost his boat somewhere tropical because the reef wasn't in the place it was showing on his plotter screen.

The advantages of having it at the Chart table is that is where most people do their passage planning. Look at the books, look at the overall plan on the chart and weigh up tides and currents. I can see the advantage of having the plotter to hand to put the way-points in.

We already have a high res multi-repeater in the cockpit that gives rolling road, distance to way-point XTE and almost anything we want on its display.

I am not convinced either way - and the jury is still out

 

[ksutton]

Small backup chartplotter in the cockpit?
I have the large chartplotter in the cockpit, and the small (backup) one down below, so it correlates to the paper charts.

Why, pray do you feel the need to keep your equipment where you cant see it in times of visual need?

+1

I sail very shorthanded and mostly single handed. You actually don't need a plotter when at sea but you do need it in tight nav situations. Going into new ports, dog legging through rocky entrance passages and channels where you have never been before, sometimes at night, poor viz and maybe difficult weather conditions. These are exactly the times when you don't need to be at the chart table, unless you always have qualified spare crew to give you sailing directions or be at the helm while you sit at the chart table.

Remember you cant sail the boat and sit at the chart table. Would a captain of a large ship try and navigate from his cabin! oh, come to think about it didn't this just happen!

 

[Salty John]

I think it would be great to have an automotive type voice-prompt chartplotter talking to an autohelm with voice recognition controls! If the autohelm went into a strop because it thought the chartplotter was shouting it would be like the good old days.

I blogged about it last year:http://saltyjohn.blogspot.com/2011/12/no-other-starboard.html

Seriously, there are times I'd be glad of a chartplotter at the helm but I'd also want access to the same information when I wasn't at the helm - most of the time on passage, so a repeater would be the way to go.

I'd also be concerned about night sailing, I'd hate the helmsman to be blinded by the glare from the chartplotter. This is a serious concern, I once had a forward looking sonar display on the binnacle and at night it took away all peripheral vision. It was an Interphase set and it had no dimmer function - unbelievable but true.

 

[Simondjuk]

Each to their own, and the only arguments that I don't agree with are the ones that say its a 'no brainer'.

If we were to put a plotter on the binnacle, I would have to go round behind the wheel to see where we were. At sea, I don't often sit behind the wheel, as I hate steering for long periods on passage and the auto pilot goes on very quickly - even when we are driving down the river I will often put the auto pilot on and potter round the boat keeping one eye on traffic and other boats and whilst tidying lines etc etc.

But to come back to the plotter: if it was by the wheel, it would mean that it could be used for pilotage. Bat that means that I would trust it enough for pilotage - or at least trust the charting enough...

As we are planning to set out for warmer waters where I KNOW (from experience) that the charting isn't always as good as we enjoy in home waters in the UK, then it perhaps indicates that by the wheel isn't the better option.

I do worry about people who drive their boats down lines on the plotter though. It has in the past lead to some dreadful cock-ups. You can get away with it in Europe most of the time as the charting is so good, but it can lead you into a false sense of security and bad habits perhaps?

There was an experienced blue water sailor who lost his boat somewhere tropical because the reef wasn't in the place it was showing on his plotter screen.

The advantages of having it at the Chart table is that is where most people do their passage planning. Look at the books, look at the overall plan on the chart and weigh up tides and currents. I can see the advantage of having the plotter to hand to put the way-points in.

We already have a high res multi-repeater in the cockpit that gives rolling road, distance to way-point XTE and almost anything we want on its display.

I am not convinced either way - and the jury is still out

That's pretty much how I feel about it.

In general aviation (that's private aircraft as opposed to commercial), the over-reliance on electronic navigation aids is increasingly becoming a factor in accidents. I suspect the same is happening in leisure boating but not publicised because the consequences are far less dramatic.

If it's right in front of you, it's hard not believe what it's telling you, so can easily lead you blindly into trouble. Rather like that chap on the BBC program who walloped a rock when following his previous day's track. A few metres error one way on the way in, a few metres error the other way on the way out and... "Bang!" Just after he'd said, "The plotter says we're fine.", or similar, too.

 

[sailorman]

That's pretty much how I feel about it.

In general aviation (that's private aircraft as opposed to commercial), the over-reliance on electronic navigation aids is increasingly becoming a factor in accidents. I suspect the same is happening in leisure boating but not publicised because the consequences are far less dramatic.

If it's right in front of you, it's hard not believe what it's telling you, so can easily lead you blindly into trouble. Rather like that chap on the BBC program who walloped a rock when following his previous day's track. A few metres error one way on the way in, a few metres error the other way on the way out and... "Bang!" Just after he'd said, "The plotter says we're fine.", or similar, too.

Its all Dr Beechings fault init

diggin-up all them railway lines

 

[Simondjuk]

The problem seems to be, that even if the tracks were still there to follow, a lot of folk wouldn't be looking out the window to see them, relying on the electronic view instead.

 

[duncan99210]

We have the chartplotter/radar controller at the chart table with a full function repeater at the wheel. i wouldn't be without either of them; the one at the wheel enables the helmsman to check course, watch the radar on poor visibility and generally keep an eye on things. The one at the chart table enables the navigator to enter route data, check plotter against paper charts and keep the log up to date.

Entering confined water, then the first call is always pilotage; use the electronic and paper charts, almanac and sailing guide to give you likely transits, buoyage and the like, use the chartplotter and radar to confirm these and sail mainly visually to the destination. I've never used the chartplotter alone to enter a harbour for example, as the large scale charts are often set to a slightly different datum and your position as shown on the plotter is often out by 40 - 60 metres, which could make life interesting!

So there you have it, IMHO the best thing is to have 2 plotters. However, if I couldn't afford that, I'd have the plotter at the wheel because the bloke that's steering needs to be able to see where he is on the chart rather than the navigator, who can take time to plot his position on paper chart.

 

[sailorman]

We have the chartplotter/radar controller at the chart table with a full function repeater at the wheel. i wouldn't be without either of them; the one at the wheel enables the helmsman to check course, watch the radar on poor visibility and generally keep an eye on things. The one at the chart table enables the navigator to enter route data, check plotter against paper charts and keep the log up to date.

Entering confined water, then the first call is always pilotage; use the electronic and paper charts, almanac and sailing guide to give you likely transits, buoyage and the like, use the chartplotter and radar to confirm these and sail mainly visually to the destination. I've never used the chartplotter alone to enter a harbour for example, as the large scale charts are often set to a slightly different datum and your position as shown on the plotter is often out by 40 - 60 metres, which could make life interesting!

So there you have it, IMHO the best thing is to have 2 plotters. However, if I couldn't afford that, I'd have the plotter at the wheel because the bloke that's steering needs to be able to see where he is on the chart rather than the navigator, who can take time to plot his position on paper chart.

the guy at the helm just needs X track / course to steer

 

[ghostlymoron]

Try this for a home made version of a pod. Hardwood strips biscuit jointed together to form fascia and a waterproof electric box with the bottom cut out to house the back of the plotter and cables.

Hurrah for John! This is the first practical response to the OP most of the others are just slagging off other peoples responses. Personally i prefer to have the plotter visible from the tiller and have found it pretty accurate. They do have their limitations such as shifting estuarial aproaches where I would rely on eyeball and depth sounder and not go below to make a cup of tea.

 

[ghostlymoron]

Each to their own, and the only arguments that I don't agree with are the ones that say its a 'no brainer'.

If we were to put a plotter on the binnacle, I would have to go round behind the wheel to see where we were. At sea, I don't often sit behind the wheel, as I hate steering for long periods on passage and the auto pilot goes on very quickly - even when we are driving down the river I will often put the auto pilot on and potter round the boat keeping one eye on traffic and other boats and whilst tidying lines etc etc.

But to come back to the plotter: if it was by the wheel, it would mean that it could be used for pilotage. Bat that means that I would trust it enough for pilotage - or at least trust the charting enough...

As we are planning to set out for warmer waters where I KNOW (from experience) that the charting isn't always as good as we enjoy in home waters in the UK, then it perhaps indicates that by the wheel isn't the better option.

I do worry about people who drive their boats down lines on the plotter though. It has in the past lead to some dreadful cock-ups. You can get away with it in Europe most of the time as the charting is so good, but it can lead you into a false sense of security and bad habits perhaps?

There was an experienced blue water sailor who lost his boat somewhere tropical because the reef wasn't in the place it was showing on his plotter screen.

The advantages of having it at the Chart table is that is where most people do their passage planning. Look at the books, look at the overall plan on the chart and weigh up tides and currents. I can see the advantage of having the plotter to hand to put the way-points in.

We already have a high res multi-repeater in the cockpit that gives rolling road, distance to way-point XTE and almost anything we want on its display.

I am not convinced either way - and the jury is still out

Would the reef that the 'experienced blue water sailor' ran onto have been shown more accurately on a paper chart - I doubt it. The problem is with the chart data not the technology used to display it.

 

[JayBee]

One problem with a chartplotter at the wheel is that you have to be at the wheel to see it. I don't have a wheel on my 36 foot, 8 tonne boat and why would I want one? A tiller is about as foolproof as it is possible to get and requires very simple, low friction connections to the autopilot and my Aries vane gear. For 95% of the time my boat is not being hand steered and I am free to move around the cockpit and attend to other things.

In close pilotage situations, when I am hand steering, I have GPS information in the cockpit which gives me cross track error and other info. I treat all of this with caution. On a recent occasion, entering the lagoon at Culatra, in a strong tidal current at night, the chartplotter had the boat sailing along right on top of of the eastern breakwater, when we were actually in the middle of the channel. This was not a one-off experience. Yes, I was using the correct WGS84 datum and the latest C-map charts.

I can see that setting up a wheel steered boat for day trips on the Solent may make a chart plotter at the helm de rigeur, but each to his own.

 

[timbartlett]

Every time this question comes up, I am reminded of the sad story of a little boat called Kishmul of Ayr.

She'd had a rough cross-channel passage, on which most of the crew were so seasick that the skipper had spent much of the trip effectively sailing single handed.
They were almost home, when -- unable to get to the chart table, and navigating by eye and memory -- he miscounted a row of buoys, and ran onto a rock.
The crew were rescued, but the boat was wrecked and the skipper died.
Investigators were able to trace her track from the GPS, which had faithfully (and apparently accurately) recorded her movements right onto the rock.

I can't help thinking that if he'd had a chart plotter in the cockpit, the skipper and boat would have survived.

 

[ghostlymoron]

JB as I said earlier the problem is with the chart data not the plotter. Some remote areas not of commercial interest have not been surveyed since Napolionic times (or earlier) and were done with lead lines and octants so its no surprise that there are errors.

 

[sailorman]

Every time this question comes up, I am reminded of the sad story of a little boat called Kishmul of Ayr.

She'd had a rough cross-channel passage, on which most of the crew were so seasick that the skipper had spent much of the trip effectively sailing single handed.
They were almost home, when -- unable to get to the chart table, and navigating by eye and memory -- he miscounted a row of buoys, and ran onto a rock.
The crew were rescued, but the boat was wrecked and the skipper died.
Investigators were able to trace her track from the GPS, which had faithfully (and apparently accurately) recorded her movements right onto the rock.

I can't help thinking that if he'd had a chart plotter in the cockpit, the skipper and boat would have survived.

or a good A/h that would steer whilst he done the nav

 

[JayBee]

JB as I said earlier the problem is with the chart data not the plotter. Some remote areas not of commercial interest have not been surveyed since Napolionic times (or earlier) and were done with lead lines and octants so its no surprise that there are errors.

Yes, agreed. So a chart plotter at the helm is no different to one at the chart table in this regard. I think there is an argument for not having the helmsman, who is also often the navigator, standing in one place behind a wheel.