Jim Donohue wrote:
"otnmbrd"
No, my comments on your skills are based on reading your explanations of
various navigational procedures and your conclusions regarding their
viability based on your experience and skill or lack thereof.
Ahh Bull otn...I use the same navigational procedures as you otn...and I
understand why the work something you do not.
To be blunt .... what a stupid statement. Look. Jim, as I've said, I
applaud your 25 years and 12,000 mi. of experience. However, because of
my 40+ years (licensed, I'll ignore what came before) and hundreds of
thousands of miles (conservatively) all over the world, plus my ongoing
pilotage, you'll excuse me if I say .... BULL****!! I use methods you've
never heard of, much less thought of. Understand them? LOL I've read
your post ...... my statements about your skill level stands, and I
understand things about most Nav SYSTEMS, you've never heard of.
The eye is a most important
piece of navigation...unfortunately it does not work at all a great
percentage of the time.
Bull****!! It doesn't matter if it's a clear day or a foggy day... the
eye, looking at visual points, radar points, GPS points, Loran
points.... then, using your brain, is the best interpreter of what's
right or wrong. The problem is to make the maximum use of which SYSTEM
is giving you the best information ..... and this can vary.
Radar is fine under some circumstances but not very
good under others.
You've made it clear that your radar skills are limited. The problem is,
that so many others also have your limited skills. One does not install
a radar on their boat and become a "radar observer", so, in this
respect, for you and most boaters, radar will not match GPS.... another
of your statements that are a "tell" for me.
Only GPS works with accuracy all (for practical
purposes)the time. It is therefore the first of many tools employed.
We could argue your "absolutes", but for the average boater, it would be
meaningless. Sorry, but it's not the "first" of many tools .... starting
from when you leave the dock, until you return. Hell, it's not
necessarily even the most important.
And you again utterly misstate my position.
I don't think so.
GPS is the first skill
taught...it should be the centerpiece of the navigation system.
No. What the hell good are those numbers if you can't make use of them?
You best learn how to read a chart and plot Lat/Long first. Then it
might be a good idea to learn what CMG means and how that relates to a
compass.
Then
others.
Yup, comes in handy knowing more than one way to plot a position and/or
determine a route to clear hazards to your navigation.
Certainly even the dullest of students can learn to check a chart
position via eyeball or radar.
True, but you've made it clear that for you ( and we must assume that
many others are the same) this is not the easiest or most accurate
method in your arsenal.
Neither has the accuracy to verify the
position
Oh? Interesting. I'm running a range (either manmade or one I've
determined, cause I can read a chart) and I pass abeam of a light house
and put a mark on my chart. Will GPS be more accurate? Faster?
and bnoth are compromised under some conditions but both are good
checks for at least gross error.
BG and you wonder why I doubt your skills.
A fathometer provides a way to verify that
the depth is where it should be for the position.
Obviously, you've never used a fathometer for navigation.
Disagreement calls for
caution. I use a second GPS to protect against a failure and to help
resolve anomolies.
I use "ALL MEANS AVAILABLE".
I would not teach RDF or some of the more exotic piloting techniques. I
would not teach time delay loran though I would point out that a working
LORAN also provides a gross check on the GPS.
G I'd call that "teaching by amateurs, for amateurs".
I would not teach VOR/DME...though I have used VOR in navigating a boat.
Neither are Marine terms that I'm familiar with
I would teach limited celestial for a student with the right mission.
Depends on whether you believe in the "half assed" approach .....
obviously you do.
Now exactly what is it that you don't agree with and why otn?
BG Obviously quite a bit.... Why? VBG Because your attitude
regarding navigation safety, sucks. Hey, personal opinion, others may vary.
The Royal Majesty had at least five systems on which it was relying. It had
GPS, Loran, Depthsounder, radar and eyeball. Its procedures required their
use. The chief officer in fact lied about crucial visual sightings. You
would have fit right in otn all the right system, an easy call but no
nothing navigators who screwed it up. The message of the grounding was that
given a sufficient level of incompetence you can screw up the simplest of
tasks. It also demonstrated the level of utter incompetence available among
the "cream" of professional navigators.
ROFLMAO The above paragraph doesn't deserve any comment, other than this
sentence and another hearty ROFLMAO !!!!
OH hell, just for you, Jim. If you're gonna try to insult me, at least
TRY to make some valid points.
As for the magnetic compass..... Lord willing you make it to a ripe old
age with a sound mind. If you do, on your death bed, try to remember to
ask someone if we are still using the magnetic compass in some form. My
guess is that your response to their answer will be ..... Chit!!
We will see otn. You really do not understand science. You simply can't
project can you?
G I remember in my youth, the statements that the magnetic compass
would soon disappear from ships because of the gyro compass .... guess
what, Jim .............
otn
otn
|