Jeff Morris wrote:
"Dennis Pogson" wrote:
I think it is time someone sat down and defined just what is it that
we, the non-commercial, leisure-oriented sailors want out of
electronic navigation systems.
You mean the people who won't pay.
No, I mean because your vessel only draws 5ft, and doesn't weigh in at
100,000 tons , maybe there could be something much simpler than the charts
used by the commercial shipping world, which have been sold as "suitable for
all", and priced accordingly. Why should electronic charts be copies of
these?
I cannot help feeling that some of the old monochrome engraved
charts, with their "views from seaward" and other myriads of useful
navigation features, would contain some of the answers.
I have a number of that type of chart - they look nice on the wall.
Nowadays, that type of chart only happens in cruising guides. How
many boaters buy a guide for their own area?
A good electronic chart could combine a lot of the info from a cruising
guide with the chart itself, by leaving out a lot of the clutter from the
"official" chart, and superimposing a lot of the notes from the guide. For
example, does the fact that there is 500 metres of water under your keel
really turn you on? Even 30 metres would be of little interest to the
captain of the QE2, unless shoaling rapidly, so why must we have the
original depth survey, from 1898, transcribed in great detail, onto a chart,
when what we really want is the leading line into this harbour or that
anchorage? The fact that we have had this stuff rammed down our throats
since birth, because that is what is demanded by the commercial shipping
world has so affected some guys thinking that they would throw a fit if no
depths were shown in mid-Atlantic (hell, you might hit something,
particularly if it is moving). Agreed it's nice to be able to check your
echo sounder now and again, but spare us the garbage.
I met a guy the
other day who was busy pouring over an electronic chart of the local
area on his laptop, despite having sailed in these waters
continuously for over 30 years! Is the laptop taking over from the
brain these days?
OK, I also have electronic charts "of the world" on my home computer,
but on the water a Chartkit, augmented by an old Garmin 175 chart
plotter (does that count as an antique yet?) does just fine. I think
its rather silly to have computerize navigation on smaller boats,
though if the bridge or nav center is big enough to accommodate, why
not? Of course, not having the paper readily available is foolish.
Maybe it's because I do a fair bit of night sailing in smallish yachts, but
to me the "instant fix" is worth it's weight in gold when in a tight
situation. In mid-Atlantic, other considerations apply, but in amongst some
of the myriad islands of the West of Scotland, it's great not to have to lay
off the co-ords on a chart in pitch blackness and with a big sea running.
Many of the raster charts being marketed today are only fit for the
garbage can, whilst others are superb reproductions of the
cartographer's art.
Do we want the technology to be driven by mathematicians, or artists?
A lot or the cartographers' art was made up on the spot. Here's my
favorite: http://home.tiscali.nl/~helmink/mmarctic.html
Beautiful piece of work! Pity Mr Mercator had to distort his land masses
(towards the poles) so much that they are almost unrecognizable! I used to
really believe that Greenland was bigger than Brazil, until I read the areas
in sq.miles. Still, in the absence of a more suitable projection, Mercator's
has been good enough for most mariners! I will take this with me next time I
visit the North Pole (in a nuclear sub.).
--
Remove "nospam" from return address.