"Shen44" wrote in message

| Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one, but
not as
| important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as
compass,
| chart work, etc..
| Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just turn
on,
| for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's
usage.
| I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis, who
have
| problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then equating
that
| picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets, you
can
| easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.

Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I haven't
seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image... tuning
radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
newbie.

While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome... a
radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is perfectly
fine.

The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the general
population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.

CM

I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.

Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.

Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
and representative distances with respect to scale are
concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
at spatiality.

I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.

S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work




"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ...

"Shen44" wrote in message

| Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one, but
not as
| important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as
compass,
| chart work, etc..
| Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just turn
on,
| for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's
usage.
| I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis, who
have
| problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then equating
that
| picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets, you
can
| easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.

Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I haven't
seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image... tuning
radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
newbie.

While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome... a
radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is perfectly
fine.

The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the general
population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.

CM

Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended limits of
an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on mirrors and the visual
depth of field at a specific spot to determine this. This is one of the
reasons why women generally do not back into a parking space... while men
prefer to. I say this is a general trait.... I know of women who are very
good with spatial interpretation.

If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to resolve the
image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep in mind that often you
only view the proximal reflected surface of any object. The "chart" on a
radar screen is always oriented to the line of the vessel and bearing is
always relative unless a fluxgate compass or GPS input is available. In a
day or two I could easily have you running with a full comprehension of
radar... at least as well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no problem....

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
|
|
| I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
| of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
| to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
| a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
| apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.
|
| Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.
|
| Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
| look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
| more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
| display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
| than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
| and representative distances with respect to scale are
| concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
| radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
| much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
| spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
| geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
| at spatiality.
|
| I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
| that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
| yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
| the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
| the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.
|
| S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work
|
|
|
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
|
| "Shen44" wrote in message
|
| | Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one,
but
| not as
| | important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as
| compass,
| | chart work, etc..
| | Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just
turn
| on,
| | for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's
| usage.
| | I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis,
who
| have
| | problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
equating
| that
| | picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| | Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets,
you
| can
| | easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.
|
| Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I
haven't
| seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image...
tuning
| radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
| newbie.
|
| While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome...
a
| radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is
perfectly
| fine.
|
| The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
| Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the
general
| population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.
|
| CM
|
|
|
|

But radar is different from a paper chart because
a paper chart does not foreshorten the view while
radar does. Radar is really no different than a
looking at something with eyes that use radio
waves instead of light waves

Our eyes use light and when we see a hundred
yards of water at a distance of a quarter mile this
hundred yards of water looks a helluva lot shorter
than the same hundred yards right off our bow.

Radar 'sees' thing the same way so one must
extrapolate this information mentally in order
to match it with a chart of the same area.

It would be much the same as equating a gnomic
projection with a Mercator projection but backwards
if looking north on a Mercator.

See what I mean? But the point is the majority
of people can't even imagine such differences
let alone work with them.

This is what I mean by spatial comprehension.

S.Simon - a sailboat Captain who's superior to any and all motorboat Captains

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ...
Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended limits of
an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on mirrors and the visual
depth of field at a specific spot to determine this. This is one of the
reasons why women generally do not back into a parking space... while men
prefer to. I say this is a general trait.... I know of women who are very
good with spatial interpretation.

If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to resolve the
image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep in mind that often you
only view the proximal reflected surface of any object. The "chart" on a
radar screen is always oriented to the line of the vessel and bearing is
always relative unless a fluxgate compass or GPS input is available. In a
day or two I could easily have you running with a full comprehension of
radar... at least as well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no problem....

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
|
|
| I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
| of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
| to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
| a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
| apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.
|
| Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.
|
| Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
| look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
| more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
| display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
| than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
| and representative distances with respect to scale are
| concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
| radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
| much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
| spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
| geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
| at spatiality.
|
| I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
| that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
| yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
| the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
| the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.
|
| S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work
|
|
|
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
|
| "Shen44" wrote in message
|
| | Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one,
but
| not as
| | important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as
| compass,
| | chart work, etc..
| | Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just
turn
| on,
| | for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's
| usage.
| | I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis,
who
| have
| | problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
equating
| that
| | picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| | Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets,
you
| can
| | easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.
|
| Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I
haven't
| seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image...
tuning
| radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
| newbie.
|
| While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome...
a
| radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is
perfectly
| fine.
|
| The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
| Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the
general
| population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.
|
| CM
|
|
|
|

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension.

I have a theory about this. It is non-sexist!!

I think that, in our society, boys are encouraged to play ball games much
more than girls are! Soccer, tennis, football and baseball ALL rqquire the
ability to anticipate where the ball is going to be at a point in the
future. These sports help to develop spatial awareness. Girls were not
encouraged to play these games in the past.


A man will usually automatically know the extended limits of
an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on mirrors and the visual
depth of field at a specific spot to determine this.

My wife doesn't. She doesn't use the mirror at all! She recently
reversed into the bloody house - and broke a rear light!!

25 years ago, I tried to teach her how to drive. Geeeze, that was a
disaster! We had a MAJOR row after she refused to look in the mirror before
pulling out into the road. She *knew* that there wasn't any traffic because
it was a quiet Sunday afternoon.


After that, she got a driving instructor.



Regards


Donal
--

Subject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"


I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.

S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work


Gawd you're funny!! You don't have a clue as to what's going on, on the bridge
of a ship, do you?

Shen

Subject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Capt. Mooron"

Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I haven't
seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image... tuning
radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
newbie.

On the contrary, I've seen and continue to see quite a few. Problem with many
is they are unable to relate the picture to the chart, since they are looking
down at the full view of an area, on a chart, they have a problem relating
their "surface" view to the chart, where some things , such as headlands will
blend, or their horizon will not allow them to match visually with that which
the radar shows.
It is, to a degree, a spatial awareness thingy G but hard to learn for many
and one that takes practice or a natural tendency to do well.

On a good percentage of newer radars, tuning is not really all that hard
.....knowing when to detune and to what degree, can be harder.

While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome... a
radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is perfectly
fine.

No argument and if you have the money, definitely get one, but .......

The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the general
population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.

LOL I'd say that ended years ago. I've seen some smaller yachts with better
equipment than larger ships.


Shen

"Shen44" wrote in message ...


LOL I'd say that ended years ago. I've seen some smaller yachts with better
equipment than larger ships.

Motor yachts maybe but sailboaters don't have a clue.

I've seen many a radar on small sailboats that the owners
brag about and these units are more suited to big ships than
yachts, especially sailing yachts that heel.

Sailboaters are stupid when it comes to choosing radar.
They favor the wrong features. One example is the range
they choose. Booby is a good example. He keeps his
unit on 24 mile range so he can keep track of thunder
storms while he should be using 1/4 mile range to keep
track of things that will affect him sooner rather than
later. Big and powerful is really stupid for a slow speed
boat that heels. Small and accurate at close range is
what a sailor really needs. Radar also needs to be
mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
down'. This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
the higher up the worse the heel. You end up with a
gimballed mount lower down that's garbage.

S.Simon - a natural-born Master

Simple Simon wasn't doing too bad until he got down to:
Radar also needs to be
mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
down'.

Look down? First of all, if you mount too high you can see over close in things - at the
top of a 0 foot mast, you'll miss small buoys 250 feet from the boat. Second, higher up
you'll get more sea clutter.

This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
the higher up the worse the heel.

Are you saying the heel angle on your mast is more higher up? I thought only my old
Nonsuch did that!

You end up with a
gimballed mount lower down that's garbage.


I think some of them are too low, and I don't like having it on the stern, but I don't
think thy're garbage.

S.Simon - a test-tube Master

ubject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"
Date: 09/02/2003 15:32 Pacific Standard Time

Sailboaters are stupid when it comes to choosing radar.
They favor the wrong features. One example is the range
they choose. Booby is a good example. He keeps his
unit on 24 mile range so he can keep track of thunder
storms while he should be using 1/4 mile range to keep
track of things that will affect him sooner rather than
later. Big and powerful is really stupid for a slow speed
boat that heels. Small and accurate at close range is
what a sailor really needs.

ROFL .... Your lack of knowledge in another area, is screaming at us.
At sea, there is nothing wrong with using the 24mi range (though I'd admit for
his size boat, that's a bit far). You can still see targets that are closer to
you, so you can easily shift your range down for a better view .... course,
that should be a normal procedure.
Normally for Boobie, I'd suggest, in the Sound, running on the 6 or 12 mile
range, depending on conditions and what his major use is. Minimum would be 3
miles, shifting to lower (1.5 or 0.75) for a closer look at a particular target
for short periods, but NEVER leaving his radar at 0.25 mi, unless he was doing
some close in navigation, within a harbor area.
You always want to be on the longest range that allows you the best overall
picture of your area, be it traffic or navigational.
Whenever you switch to the real low ranges (0.75mi and below) you are creating
a situation of "tunnel vision" and Highly limiting your overall view of
surroundings.
Are there times that you want to be on these lower ranges? Of course, but,
these are normally only within harbor areas, or close situations in fog
(traffic) or close navigation problems .... even then, stay on the higher range
as long as possible (question of G spatial awareness).

Radar also needs to be
mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
down'. This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
the higher up the worse the heel. You end up with a
gimballed mount lower down that's garbage.

S.Simon - a natural-born Master

You're a "Natural born" something, but it ain't "Master"

Shen