"otnmbrd" wrote in message
ink.net...
It's not so much you should use your charts with a "grain of salt", as you
need be aware that they are not perfect and if you have any doubts, you
should use ALL means at your disposal, especially the "Mark I eyeball".
If you see discolored water, obvious current swirls, disturbed wave
action, (to name some) in a particular area, or your wake changes and you
bog down ..... these are indications that something may not be as the
chart suggest, and it doesn't matter whether you're using GPS, celestial,
radar, etc., for your navigation, you may want to stop or reverse
direction till you can figure things out or find a better route.

otn

Got it...3AM blowing 35...12 foot seas...Check for the disturbed waves and
current swirls...yeah right. Watch the little birds...if they land it
probably is not deep.

Still at the old game otnmbrd? Would you really reverse course under those
conditions? Would you turn the boat across the wind?

Jim Donohue

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 19:31:22 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:

Yeah, the QEII (I think) ran aground about 20 years ago just off the
Elizabeth Islands on Cape Cod and in one of the most heavily traveled
areas of New England. The chart turned out to be wrong.

--
Much more recent than that. I kept a copy of the last chart edition
before the grounding just to show people.

It was surveyed quite promptly after the grounding. THe new edition
looks very different.

BTW, the previous survey was not 100 years old. It was 1939. WW2
intervened or I expect the job would have been completed.



Rodney Myrvaagnes NYC J36 Gjo/a


Capsizing under chute, and having the chute rise and fill without tangling, all while Mark and Sally are still behind you

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:02:09 -0600, wrote:

Yeah, the QEII (I think) ran aground about 20 years ago just off the
Elizabeth Islands on Cape Cod and in one of the most heavily traveled
areas of New England. The chart turned out to be wrong.

Is that the case? I heard about something similar but not a case of a
chart being wrong. A cruise liner enroute to Boston was under autopilot
but the gps lost lock for an extended period of time. During that period
the course was continued with the unit doing its own dead reckoning. By
the time it regained lock it was well off course and the new course to
the next waypoint took it over some rocks. None of the crew had noticed
the system had lost lock and all were trusting that the "gps referenced
autopilot" was safely steering the ship waypoint to waypoint. They also
did not bother to look and see that their course was now taking them
over the rocks.

That was a different incident, not the QE2.



Rodney Myrvaagnes NYC J36 Gjo/a


Capsizing under chute, and having the chute rise and fill without tangling, all while Mark and Sally are still behind you

Jim Donohue wrote:



Got it...3AM blowing 35...12 foot seas...Check for the disturbed waves and
current swirls...yeah right. Watch the little birds...if they land it
probably is not deep.

Still at the old game otnmbrd? Would you really reverse course under those
conditions? Would you turn the boat across the wind?

Jim Donohue

LOL I see you're still looking for the simple cure-all answer to navigation.
Sorry Jim, it doesn't exist.
You'll note I said use ALL means at your disposal. Sometimes those means
are limited due to conditions, be they visibility or sea conditions.
However, frequently there are any number of things you can look for
under many varied conditions which may help you determine that you are
"standing into danger" and your god, GPS will not tell you these things.
So, yes, I'm still up to the old games ..... if in doubt, stop, turn
around, sail across the wind, if those things are possible.
Don't keep going blindly based on a GPS fix ..../ use whatever other
tools may be available to you, be they natural, mechanical, or electronic.
Only a fool relies on one means of navigation and only a bigger fool
discards all the older methods which served and still serve, many of us
well, even if in a limited capacity.
G Maybe someday you'll learn to take your eyes off the GPS and see
what's going on around you.

otn

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:17:11 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:

That rings a bell and I think you might be right. The shoal being
shallower than charted may have been a secondary factor.

I don't think it would have been GPS in those days. Probably Loran.


Can't tell what you are talking about. Both the QE2 and Nantucket
shoals incident are quite recent. The QE2 was a chart problem, since
corrected, and had nothing to do with autopilot or any other automated
gear.

The Nantucket shoals incident was from a system that ran on DR for
600+ miles with the GPS disconnected.



Rodney Myrvaagnes NYC J36 Gjo/a


Capsizing under chute, and having the chute rise and fill without tangling, all while Mark and Sally are still behind you

I think that incident occurred several years ago. The QE2 did suffer from a mysterious power
ailment and found itself adrift for several hours in the 1980's while cruising thru an area known as
the Bermuda Triangle... but I will leave it at that. The QE2 grounding was also found to be
exacerbated by a previously unknown condition the ship had while at speed, it was found to "squat"
down 6 feet.

"Roger Long" wrote:
Yeah, the QEII (I think) ran aground about 20 years ago just off the
Elizabeth Islands on Cape Cod and in one of the most heavily traveled
areas of New England. The chart turned out to be wrong.

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:04:38 -0500, "Glenn Ashmore"
wrote:

http://www.goupstate.com/apps/pbcs.d...60/1051/NEWS01

Not that any of us will be cruising at 30 knots 500 feet below the surface
but navigating soly by GPS you are just as blind. Many of the charts we use
are from surveys over 100 years old.

If I might use an analogy.

How many out there are prepared to drive their car using GPS only?

Jack

__________________________________________________
Jack Dale
Swiftsure Sailing Academy
Director/ISPA and CYA Instructor
http://www.swiftsuresailing.com
__________________________________________________

What I recall reading about the QE2 hitting the rock there (divers confirmed
that there was recent bottom paint scuffed on the rock, and I don't think
there was an indication that the rock had less water than the chart showed)
is that she was running at too much speed for that little clearance between
hull and sea floor. The hydrodynamic forces from speed in shallow water will
pull the stern down. I see this happen frequently, and when it does, besides
thinking about QE2, I know I'd better head to deeper water, or slow down.
I just couldn't believe the captain didn't think about this when he was
steaming along near the rock.

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
Yeah, the QEII (I think) ran aground about 20 years ago just off the
Elizabeth Islands on Cape Cod and in one of the most heavily traveled
areas of New England. The chart turned out to be wrong.

--

Roger Long



"Glenn Ashmore" wrote in message
news:mgwGd.21097$EG1.17828@lakeread04...

http://www.goupstate.com/apps/pbcs.d...NYT02/50115036
0/1051/NEWS01

Not that any of us will be cruising at 30 knots 500 feet below the
surface
but navigating soly by GPS you are just as blind. Many of the
charts we use
are from surveys over 100 years old.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or
lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

The Nantucket shoals incident was from a system that ran on DR for
600+ miles with the GPS disconnected.

THAT is the story I was remembering. None of the crew noticed. No one
was running their own plot.

When did these incidents happen? I lived on the Cape in the late 70's
so I may be transferring the memory back to that association. When
did they start installing GPS on big ships?

--

Roger Long



"Rodney Myrvaagnes" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:17:11 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:

That rings a bell and I think you might be right. The shoal being
shallower than charted may have been a secondary factor.

I don't think it would have been GPS in those days. Probably Loran.


Can't tell what you are talking about. Both the QE2 and Nantucket
shoals incident are quite recent. The QE2 was a chart problem, since
corrected, and had nothing to do with autopilot or any other
automated
gear.

The Nantucket shoals incident was from a system that ran on DR for
600+ miles with the GPS disconnected.



Rodney Myrvaagnes NYC
J36 Gjo/a


Capsizing under chute, and having the chute rise and fill without
tangling, all while Mark and Sally are still behind you