UKHO backs down on paper chart withdrawal

[lustyd]

Yeah I've got all that stuff, been wondering what to do with it.

What I meant was that if the time came that we needed to do it, it would be a simple software update for some boats and others might need to fit a camera, but the electronic navigation methods could quite comfortably continue without satellites.
Even my wrist watch can now use inertia to position fix of it loses satellites in a tunnel. These are solved problems which would very quickly be adapted if necessary. The likelihood of it being necessary is still very nearly zero so it’s still not a realistic concern.
Paper nav is great fun, I do enjoy it as a hobby and for the learning, but when cruising it’s not something I still feel a need to do.

 

[dunedin]

What I meant was that if the time came that we needed to do it, it would be a simple software update for some boats and others might need to fit a camera, but the electronic navigation methods could quite comfortably continue without satellites.
Even my wrist watch can now use inertia to position fix of it loses satellites in a tunnel. These are solved problems which would very quickly be adapted if necessary. The likelihood of it being necessary is still very nearly zero so it’s still not a realistic concern.
Paper nav is great fun, I do enjoy it as a hobby and for the learning, but when cruising it’s not something I still feel a need to do.

Quite how long do you think it would take to develop and deploy across tens of thousands of boats a new software version with different position fixing method (even assuming all your suggested key was available). Many/most plotters in use have software which is not being updated even by the manufacturer.

 

[lustyd]

Quite how long do you think it would take to develop and deploy across tens of thousands of boats a new software version with different position fixing method (even assuming all your suggested key was available). Many/most plotters in use have software which is not being updated even by the manufacturer.

Across three main brands, not tens of thousands of boats. My software is regularly updated by B&G and both plotters are several years in to their lifecycle. I know that Raymarine and Garmin both update regularly too and all three have standard OS on modern gear.
My scenario is way more likely than the apocalypse others are suggesting as a reason we must keep paper.

 

[requiem]

Paper nav is great fun, I do enjoy it as a hobby and for the learning, but when cruising it’s not something I still feel a need to do.

I don't think of it as "paper nav", simply rudimentary navigational concepts independent of the medium. These are also not complex software functions to implement. What I am disappointed about is the lack of a decent electronic standard for for small boat navigation. Regulators have simply dropped the ball on prepping the industry for electronic navigation. The sort of objections raised by the RYA, RIN, and others should have been anticipated and planned for years ago.

When I'm sailing I usually have a phone or tablet aboard. It has a current set of official electronic charts, updated to the current week (a side benefit of being in the US). If the GPS happens to glitch and put my position in the wrong place, it's easy enough to take bearings and draw a quick fix on the screen. I've also marked up the charts with clearing bearings and other annotations. Depending on where you are in the world, it's possible you may find an island is not quite in the charted position. Being able to adapt to that might be useful to some.

That this is not often possible on most chartplotters or many apps is more a feature of them having been written for muppets with the thinking that they're only adjucts to paper.

 

[lustyd]

I’d agree, a standard should be there and isn’t hard. That standard doesn’t need to include a pointless cocked hat around the position of the boat though, we need to be realistic about what’s necessary. I’m not sure I see a need for more than we have on normal cruising boats, but it would be nice to get rid of the “not for navigation” screen.
There’s generally no need to mark clearing bearings on a plotter, just mark the waypoint you need to follow or clear.

 

[requiem]

To me the "cocked hat" is more a side affect of being able to have basic charting tools. Limiting markup to routes and waypoints is IMO insufficient. If you have the ability to draw a line or shape, and can drop a few LOPs, then you instantly have access to all the activities you might be used to from the paper days.

For example, if the latest notice to mariners mentions activity happening in a particular area, I can draw a box around it. Littering the screen with random waypoints doesn't have the same effect. The chart should provide a clear visual representation of the situation, and being electronic allows it to provide a near real-time view rather than a static snapshot of a previous timepoint.

 

[lustyd]

access to all the activities you might be used to from the paper days.

Those are generally necessary only because you choose to navigate with paper techniques. If you start from the assumption that you need a whip and a saddle, the motorcar will never succeed.

Generally larger NTMs will be added to the latest electronic update, so in many instances are better than paper since I've never actually witnessed an updated paper chart or skipper doing updates to paper charts. People on these forums talk about it all the time, but most of those keep their charts at home next to the armchair where they navigate.

 

[requiem]

Generally larger NTMs will be added to the latest electronic update, so in many instances are better than paper since I've never actually witnessed an updated paper chart or skipper doing updates to paper charts.

This is actually one of my favourite parts of going electronic! Each week like clockwork there's a pop-up indicating the number of updated charts, and downloading them is but a click away. So much faster (and with far less error potential) than hand-applying them.

Hand-notes I use more for special event areas, reminders, or other local issues that generally won't be passed up to the hydrographic office. For example, the most recent NTM for my area warns of a large tree stuck in the mud directly in front of one light (likely storm run-off), it lists a few buoys where the light or sound signal is temporarily out, and it mentions various events such as organised swims.

Ideally there'd be a mechanism to quickly verify and disseminate all these smaller details. ENCs also include date-dependent features, which would be perfect for temporary updates. Unfortunately that's likely some ways off, and in any case I'd be surprised if there's much in the way of training on ENCs available for pleasure boaters.

 

[lustyd]

For example, the most recent NTM for my area warns of a large tree stuck in the mud directly in front of one light (likely storm run-off), it lists a few buoys where the light or sound signal is temporarily out.

The nice thing is that if you're navigating with electronics that tree is as irrelevant as the light. The light is nice to check your surroundings match expectations, but realistically if the plotter knows where it is and I don't see a light I was expecting I won't take any action whatsoever anyway. I assume either I didn't spot it, it was broken, it was moved, there's a ship in the way, or maybe there was just a lot of seagull poo on it. The last thing I would do is panic about a lack of light since I don't need to take a bearing on it to know where I am, I already know
Once, in Ireland (Howth I think), the bulb had been replaced to save energy and so the 9 mile light was now a 1/2 mile light and had the same flash pattern as a buoy in the Dublin entrance. We knew where we were though, so on we went.

 

[KeithMD]

as far as I know, absolutely no electronic leisure charts available that don’t have a “not to be used for navigation” restriction.

Does that mean vector charts?
Concidently, just been looking at Visit My Harbour.
I think it says it's offering digitised raster charts "for navigation".
"Unified Charts on USB a portable, easy to use way of providing "For Navigation" Raster charts, that are compatible with some fantastic free (or very cheap) navigation programs."
Am I reading it correctly?

 

[dunedin]

Does that mean vector charts?
Concidently, just been looking at Visit My Harbour.
I think it says it's offering digitised raster charts "for navigation".
"Unified Charts on USB a portable, easy to use way of providing "For Navigation" Raster charts, that are compatible with some fantastic free (or very cheap) navigation programs."
Am I reading it correctly?

There might not be any definitive / simple answer to your question - certainly not without some input from UKHO and/or Visit My Harbour.
Yes to a degree my original statement was primarily about vector charts.
These VmH charts look to be similar to the ones sold by MemoryMap, for example - which are UKHO raster images of the paper charts.
Would I be happy to navigate with them - yes. Would they be formally “approved for navigation” (eg in terms of use on a coded boat) - possibly not. Two things:
(a) Does the licence that UKHO gave to VmH specify that it is permitted for navigation use (cant tell from that website, but much UKHO chart data is apparently sold on a contract which does not permit use for navigation. Quite what it is supposed to be used for is a mystery)?
(b) Can the charts be updated with changes? Probably not other than annually (and which may be a few months old when first loaded).
Also, as far as I know UKHO plan was to withdraw electronic raster charts as well as paper charts. After all, these are just the images used to create the paper charts, which are printed by third parties anyway.
Its a bit of a mess, which needs sorted BEFORE permitting UKHO to stop issuing paper charts.

 

[requiem]

I suppose it really depends on what "for navigation" means; to me the phrase in isolation is somewhat meaningless. Ironically, in an electronic environment raster charts are generally not "for navigation" when suitable vector chart coverage is available.

ECDIS is treated as a system: it's the combination of software, hardware, and official charts that create a valid "for navigation" arrangement. It's certainly overkill for smaller vessels, but I agree with the thinking that the entire system is what must be considered.

There was mention of "mini-ECDIS" upthread; I'm a bit surprised that would be attempted to begin with. More efficient might be to reference existing international standards such as the RTCM standards for ECS.

 

[RunAgroundHard]

ECDIS lite will be the way to go in future and probably (but I don't know) there is no real reason why any of the current systems could not be modified to be compliant, after all, most of it is just software, not hardware. On the ECDIS systems that I associate with, the automatic chart update is now being removed. The reason is to do with Cyber Security. Open ports with feeds to external sources are a threat to a safety critical systems. Updates are received to an isolated system, which itself will scan for threats, transferred to a portable drive, scanned again for threats and then, transferred to the ECDIS system. There are standards now around this and class notations by DNV and ABS for Cyber Security.

Where would the balance sit between providing reliable navigation data electronically, with back up, and full blown ECDIS? I client of mine is receiving a brand new vessel from the builder and it only has one ECDIS and a set of paper charts as the back up, which meets class requirements. Hence, in the commercial world, paper charts are still being used. This is a very large ship. Interestingly, a sister ship, from the same yard, has found their system corrupted with a virus. When I was checking my client's vessel we found open ports and unbranded, unaccompanied memory sticks in various ports around the vessel, before handover. How much of threat this is, has still to be determined.

Interesting days.

 

[dunedin]

ECDIS lite will be the way to go in future and probably (but I don't know) there is no real reason why any of the current systems could not be modified to be compliant, after all, most of it is just software, not hardware. On the ECDIS systems that I associate with, the automatic chart update is now being removed. The reason is to do with Cyber Security. Open ports with feeds to external sources are a threat to a safety critical systems. Updates are received to an isolated system, which itself will scan for threats, transferred to a portable drive, scanned again for threats and then, transferred to the ECDIS system. There are standards now around this and class notations by DNV and ABS for Cyber Security.

Where would the balance sit between providing reliable navigation data electronically, with back up, and full blown ECDIS? I client of mine is receiving a brand new vessel from the builder and it only has one ECDIS and a set of paper charts as the back up, which meets class requirements. Hence, in the commercial world, paper charts are still being used. This is a very large ship. Interestingly, a sister ship, from the same yard, has found their system corrupted with a virus. When I was checking my client's vessel we found open ports and unbranded, unaccompanied memory sticks in various ports around the vessel, before handover. How much of threat this is, has still to be determined.

Interesting days.

I understand that full ECDIS systems are very expensive. And an ECDIS-Lite was proposed some years ago but failed to get any traction. Hence the current gap.

 

[requiem]

When I was checking my client's vessel we found open ports and unbranded, unaccompanied memory sticks in various ports around the vessel, before handover. How much of threat this is, has still to be determined.

The ransomware is waiting for an unfavourable weather forecast before activating.

Regarding updates, the whole (well, official) point of wrapping ENCs in crypto was to ensure the integrity of the charts. Unofficial, I expect it was really about copy prevention, but the end result is a signed dataset which should provide trust. At the very least a VPN connection to a trusted network should provide added security around the pipe used for the download. Of course, given the other issues mentioned this is likely the least of their worries. Worrying about someone messing with the charts is like pondering adding an additional latch to a steel security door and ignoring the adjacent drywall.

Where would the balance sit between providing reliable navigation data electronically, with back up, and full blown ECDIS?

Vastly cheaper would be an ECS system such as this, combined with something like this, which would get you most of the way there. Providing reliable data, to me, is not really a significant problem. I'd guess you can get 90% of the value for 5-10% of the cost.

 

[st599]

Vastly cheaper would be an ECS system such as this, combined with something like this, which would get you most of the way there. Providing reliable data, to me, is not really a significant problem. I'd guess you can get 90% of the value for 5-10% of the cost.

The only price I can see for Rose Point is $2000 in 2012 and those computers are bigger than any surface on the nav station on the boats I help on.

I think UKHO will need to cater for most sailing schools/clubs/charity that would be looking at a low power computer, 10-14" display and intermittent access to updates. Vessel Data Recorders and the extras are overkill.

 

[requiem]

I think UKHO will need to cater for most sailing schools/clubs/charity that would be looking at a low power computer, 10-14" display and intermittent access to updates. Vessel Data Recorders and the extras are overkill.

Agree on the VDR bit; this was but one example. On the US side things are tiered; a Class C ECS doesn't require the VDRs and such, and the screen size requirements are much smaller (150x150 mm). Cost of official charts for UK waters would likely be about half that of paper for a year's subscription. I think it should be possible to get better pricing on software too.