Chartplotting
 

Now we can download NOAA charts for free and/or buy a DVD from a third
party who downloads them and organizes them all for $29 - 45, meaning we
can hook up a GPS antenna to our laptop and get a "chartplotter" with
all these charts for a reasonable investment. (And it looks like that's
what the new Garmin products are going to do, but that's another issue.)

The problem is that these laptops really aren't as waterproof and
shockproof as a real chartplotter.

Why doesn't someone come up with an adapter cord that connects a cheap
DVD players loaded with those charts to a C Map NT+/BlueChart/Navionics
chip adapter thingy so those of us with chartplotters that use these
antiquated systems can access all those charts without buying all of the
individual chips?

I would buy one...

Capt. Jeff

Chartplotting
 

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:42:33 -0800, Tamaroak
wrote:
Why doesn't someone come up with an adapter cord that connects a cheap
DVD players loaded with those charts to a C Map NT+/BlueChart/Navionics
chip adapter thingy so those of us with chartplotters that use these
antiquated systems can access all those charts without buying all of the
individual chips?

============================================

The electronics of creating your own C-Map chips is not all that
complicated so the real challenge would be to create some software
that would convert NOAAs ENC vector format charts (free) into C-Map
chips that you could plug into your chart plotter. I'd be surprised
if someone doesn't try to do it. There may be licensing issues
however since I believe the C-MAP format is proprietary.

Chartplotting
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:42:33 -0800, Tamaroak
wrote:

Why doesn't someone come up with an adapter cord that connects a cheap
DVD players loaded with those charts to a C Map NT+/BlueChart/Navionics
chip adapter thingy so those of us with chartplotters that use these
antiquated systems can access all those charts without buying all of the
individual chips?


============================================

The electronics of creating your own C-Map chips is not all that
complicated so the real challenge would be to create some software
that would convert NOAAs ENC vector format charts (free) into C-Map
chips that you could plug into your chart plotter. I'd be surprised
if someone doesn't try to do it. There may be licensing issues
however since I believe the C-MAP format is proprietary.

The charting info is also unreliable. It starts up with a disclaimer.
Use proper charts, digital or paper.

Chartplotting
 

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:20:59 GMT, Gary wrote:

The charting info is also unreliable. It starts up with a disclaimer.
Use proper charts, digital or paper.

=================================

Which are you referring to, the NOAA ENCs or the CMAPs?

A lot of those disclaimers are just legal CYA and don't necessarily
reflect poorly on actual quality. Here in SWFL, all chart information
is suspect to one extent or another since things change after every
major storm.

The new, free NOAA RNCs (raster format) carry a certification notice
that they meet all legal charting requirements.

Chartplotting
 

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:20:02 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

What's needed is a water-resistant laptop PC with a bright screen that
sells for about a grand. That'll be the kiss of death to the overpriced
"chartplotter" business.

================================

Probably not, although it might help to bring prices down. I have
both, and if one had to go, it would be the laptop. The chartplotter
integrates nicely with the RADAR which is a desirable thing. It also
has dedicated controls clearly labeled, and it will zoom in to a much
greater level of detail than the raster charts on the laptop.

There are two things the laptop does better which is why I use both.
The raster charts are very intuitive and easy to read since they look
just like the paper charts. My paticular software also does a good
job with trip planning and layout of routes, all of which can be done
below decks the night before.

Chartplotting
 

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 16:07:44 GMT, Commodore Joe Redcloud©
wrote:

Not true! The R.O.I. on a "toy" may not manifest itself as cash, but
there is an R.O.I., regardless.

==========================

At least we agree on one thing. :-)

To me the ROI is speed and convenience, and at times that translates
to safety.

Chartplotting
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:20:59 GMT, Gary wrote:


The charting info is also unreliable. It starts up with a disclaimer.
Use proper charts, digital or paper.


=================================

Which are you referring to, the NOAA ENCs or the CMAPs?

A lot of those disclaimers are just legal CYA and don't necessarily
reflect poorly on actual quality. Here in SWFL, all chart information
is suspect to one extent or another since things change after every
major storm.

The new, free NOAA RNCs (raster format) carry a certification notice
that they meet all legal charting requirements.

CMAP and all the other proprietary stuff. The NOAA products are
warranteed, correctable and verifiable. The rest are just eye candy.

Chartplotting
 

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:23:15 GMT, Gary wrote:

CMAP and all the other proprietary stuff. The NOAA products are
warranteed, correctable and verifiable. The rest are just eye candy.

======================================

That's a bit harsh in my opinion. Both the CMAP and NOAA products
serve a useful purpose. I have both. I've never found an error on
one of my CMAP charts that is not also on the NOAA product. Chart
errors are just a fact of life around here in south Florida but I've
been the entire length of the east coast this year, and back, with no
issues regarding CMAP charts. In many cases the CMAP charts were more
up to date than my somewhat older BSB/raster collection (NOAA images).

Chartplotting
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:23:15 GMT, Gary wrote:


CMAP and all the other proprietary stuff. The NOAA products are
warranteed, correctable and verifiable. The rest are just eye candy.


======================================

That's a bit harsh in my opinion. Both the CMAP and NOAA products
serve a useful purpose. I have both. I've never found an error on
one of my CMAP charts that is not also on the NOAA product. Chart
errors are just a fact of life around here in south Florida but I've
been the entire length of the east coast this year, and back, with no
issues regarding CMAP charts. In many cases the CMAP charts were more
up to date than my somewhat older BSB/raster collection (NOAA images).

Well you are lucky and wrong. CMAP, which I use every day on a Furuno
chart plotter, compared to real charts which I actually navigate on
every day is vastly different. It is very evident that the chart work
is done by geeks as opposed to cartographers. The single most commen
error that I see is when the cartographer marks the bottom with an R
indicatig a rocky bottom and the CMAP gek puts a rock there. Within 10
mile of where I live I can show you a dozen without trying. I even
talked to the vendors about it and they said they only do updates once
in a while and that stuff wasn't critical.

All CMAP is really good for is seeing where you are at a glance. You
can bet the bulk carriers full of some toxic sh*t aren't using CMAP to
find there way up the creek. In fact nobody but yachties us it because
they are the only folks who will trust it. It is not certified by any
independant body and not even legal to navigate with.

Ask them:http://www.c-map.com/default.asp

I see on their website that they have got some ISO approval for there
professional chart databases:

"The CM-93/3 and NT-Link databases consist of approximately 20,000
electronics charts with worldwide coverage, mostly used on ECDIS and ECS
on SOLAS-class ships, as an aid to navigation in addition to official
paper charts or ENCs. It is also widely used on naval vessels (in both
navigation and Command & Control systems) and Vessel Traffic Control
Centers."

Note the line "in addition to official paper charts or ENCs."

Don't be fooled. It is a lovely piece of eye candy, an aid, nothing more.

Gaz

Chartplotting
 

"Tamaroak" wrote in message
...
Now we can download NOAA charts for free and/or buy a DVD from a third
party who downloads them and organizes them all for $29 - 45, meaning we
can hook up a GPS antenna to our laptop and get a "chartplotter" with all
these charts for a reasonable investment. (And it looks like that's what
the new Garmin products are going to do, but that's another issue.)

The problem is that these laptops really aren't as waterproof and
shockproof as a real chartplotter.

Why doesn't someone come up with an adapter cord that connects a cheap DVD
players loaded with those charts to a C Map NT+/BlueChart/Navionics chip
adapter thingy so those of us with chartplotters that use these antiquated
systems can access all those charts without buying all of the individual
chips?

I would buy one...

Capt. Jeff

get the panasonic tough book

Chartplotting
 

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:20:02 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:42:33 -0800, Tamaroak
wrote:
Why doesn't someone come up with an adapter cord that connects a cheap
DVD players loaded with those charts to a C Map
NT+/BlueChart/Navionics chip adapter thingy so those of us with
chartplotters that use these antiquated systems can access all those
charts without buying all of the
individual chips?

============================================

The electronics of creating your own C-Map chips is not all that
complicated so the real challenge would be to create some software that
would convert NOAAs ENC vector format charts (free) into C-Map chips
that you could plug into your chart plotter. I'd be surprised if
someone doesn't try to do it. There may be licensing issues however
since I believe the C-MAP format is proprietary.



What's needed is a water-resistant laptop PC with a bright screen that
sells for about a grand. That'll be the kiss of death to the overpriced
"chartplotter" business.

Well, a Toughbook fits that description except for the price.

I've been using Pocket Navigator on a PDA, and I like it best so far. It's
not waterproof, but a PDA could be. I think the ultimate solution is
either a waterproof PDA or a tablet PC, which is basically a PDA with a
larger screen. Supposedly tablet PCs will eventually sell for like 200
bucks.

Matt O.

Chartplotting
 

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 14:52:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:20:02 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

What's needed is a water-resistant laptop PC with a bright screen that
sells for about a grand. That'll be the kiss of death to the overpriced
"chartplotter" business.

================================

Probably not, although it might help to bring prices down. I have both,
and if one had to go, it would be the laptop. The chartplotter integrates
nicely with the RADAR which is a desirable thing. It also has dedicated
controls clearly labeled, and it will zoom in to a much greater level of
detail than the raster charts on the laptop.

There are two things the laptop does better which is why I use both. The
raster charts are very intuitive and easy to read since they look just
like the paper charts. My paticular software also does a good job with
trip planning and layout of routes, all of which can be done below decks
the night before.

Some PC nav software has radar integration. You're right about zooming
and detail though -- vector graphics allow this, plus they load faster.
Actually I think vector graphics are superior for electronic charts,
because aspects of them can be updated without having to redo the whole
chart. This is the idea behind the hew ENC charts. How they appear on
your screen with the colors, etc., can be completely adjustable too.

The one advantage of a raster chart is that the resolution is what it is.
It becomes appropriately pixellated when you zoom in too far, so there's
no way to read beyond the chart's true resolution. I'm afraid vector
formats may allow this, which could cause problems.

Matt O.

Chartplotting
 

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:13:52 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

Considering how little they do and how simple they are, "marine"
chartplotters are a rip-off of the first magnitude. For about $1000, you
can buy a small format PC, a 19" LCD monitor, and a waterproof keyboard
for a boat with a cabin control station. A few hundred bucks more will get
you a GPS antenna and chart software. That computer will perform a lot of
functions on a boat.

It's true, but not all boats have inside steering stations. Also, try
reading your monitor when the sun's directly on it -- not always avoidable.

Matt O.

Chartplotting
 

Matt O'Toole wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 14:52:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:


On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:20:02 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:


What's needed is a water-resistant laptop PC with a bright screen that
sells for about a grand. That'll be the kiss of death to the overpriced
"chartplotter" business.

================================

Probably not, although it might help to bring prices down. I have both,
and if one had to go, it would be the laptop. The chartplotter integrates
nicely with the RADAR which is a desirable thing. It also has dedicated
controls clearly labeled, and it will zoom in to a much greater level of
detail than the raster charts on the laptop.

There are two things the laptop does better which is why I use both. The
raster charts are very intuitive and easy to read since they look just
like the paper charts. My paticular software also does a good job with
trip planning and layout of routes, all of which can be done below decks
the night before.


Some PC nav software has radar integration. You're right about zooming
and detail though -- vector graphics allow this, plus they load faster.
Actually I think vector graphics are superior for electronic charts,
because aspects of them can be updated without having to redo the whole
chart. This is the idea behind the hew ENC charts. How they appear on
your screen with the colors, etc., can be completely adjustable too.

The one advantage of a raster chart is that the resolution is what it is.
It becomes appropriately pixellated when you zoom in too far, so there's
no way to read beyond the chart's true resolution. I'm afraid vector
formats may allow this, which could cause problems.

Matt O.
My biggest complaint with vector charts as compared to raster is the
lack of place names on the screen. Makes it a two handed operation to
figure out the name of a nearby point or bay. Not so bad when you are
familiar with the area but awful when you are somewhere new.

Gaz

Chartplotting
 

Commodore Joe Redcloud© wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 14:49:59 GMT, Gary wrote:


Matt O'Toole wrote:

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 14:52:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:



On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:20:02 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:



What's needed is a water-resistant laptop PC with a bright screen that
sells for about a grand. That'll be the kiss of death to the overpriced
"chartplotter" business.

================================

Probably not, although it might help to bring prices down. I have both,
and if one had to go, it would be the laptop. The chartplotter integrates
nicely with the RADAR which is a desirable thing. It also has dedicated
controls clearly labeled, and it will zoom in to a much greater level of
detail than the raster charts on the laptop.

There are two things the laptop does better which is why I use both. The
raster charts are very intuitive and easy to read since they look just
like the paper charts. My paticular software also does a good job with
trip planning and layout of routes, all of which can be done below decks
the night before.


Some PC nav software has radar integration. You're right about zooming
and detail though -- vector graphics allow this, plus they load faster.
Actually I think vector graphics are superior for electronic charts,
because aspects of them can be updated without having to redo the whole
chart. This is the idea behind the hew ENC charts. How they appear on
your screen with the colors, etc., can be completely adjustable too.

The one advantage of a raster chart is that the resolution is what it is.
It becomes appropriately pixellated when you zoom in too far, so there's
no way to read beyond the chart's true resolution. I'm afraid vector
formats may allow this, which could cause problems.

Matt O.

My biggest complaint with vector charts as compared to raster is the
lack of place names on the screen. Makes it a two handed operation to
figure out the name of a nearby point or bay. Not so bad when you are
familiar with the area but awful when you are somewhere new.

Gaz


What vector charts were those?

One of the great things abot Vector charts is you can add or subtract
overlays with as much or as little information as you like. When you
zoom in or out, you can even set them so that notations either zoom in
and out with the chart, or stay one size.


Commodore Joe Redcloud©
DNC produced by the US National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.

The add or subtract feature is great for a Nav team but for one guy
sailing along in a strange place constantly fiddling with the computer
to get info is distracting and time consuming. Light characteristics,
for example, require one to mouse over the object and a window opens
that obscures other stuff. Not nearly as convenient as a chart in a
plastic bag.
I do like the superior planning ability, ease of use and myriad other
benefits of electronic charting but I sure like to have paper handy and
prefer raster scans on screen.
I set my system up with vector below raster in display priority so that
the computer is using the look ahead and danger recognition ability of
the vector information but I see the raster chart when I glance at the
screen.

Chartplotting
 

Commodore Joe Redcloud© wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:28:01 GMT, Gary wrote:


Commodore Joe Redcloud© wrote:

What vector charts were those?

One of the great things abot Vector charts is you can add or subtract
overlays with as much or as little information as you like. When you
zoom in or out, you can even set them so that notations either zoom in
and out with the chart, or stay one size.


Commodore Joe Redcloud©


DNC produced by the US National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.

The add or subtract feature is great for a Nav team but for one guy
sailing along in a strange place constantly fiddling with the computer
to get info is distracting and time consuming. Light characteristics,
for example, require one to mouse over the object and a window opens
that obscures other stuff.


That sounds like a poorly designed piece of software you've got there!
I single hand a lot of the time, so I'm the team. I can turn light
characteristics on and off with a single muse click or a key
combination.


Commodore Joe Redcloud©
That is my point, the single mouse click etc. On a dark rainy night, in
narrow waters, I like to just look. Taking a glove off and reaching
under some protective cover to do "just a mouse click" sucks.

It is not the siftware that limits this, it is the ISO approval that
demands it.

Chartplotting
 

Dave wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 15:28:01 GMT, Gary said:


I do like the superior planning ability, ease of use and myriad other
benefits of electronic charting but I sure like to have paper handy


I'm thinking about having some of the NOAA charts, with routes added by the
nav program, printed out in color on a size that would just fit my plotting
board. Anyone checked the prices of such a thing at Kinko's?
I do that sort of thing regularily so I have a printed notebook of
critical spots. Works a charm. Find someone with a wide bed printer.

Chartplotting
 

On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 02:11:09 -0500, Matt O'Toole
wrote:

Some PC nav software has radar integration. You're right about zooming
and detail though -- vector graphics allow this, plus they load faster.

======================

Another advantage to vector charts, which I had forgotten, is that
they rotate all the chart notations right side up when you are in
"Course Up" mode. Raster charts can't do that, and they are slower to
rotate after a course change. "Course Up" is much more intuitive in
many situations compared to "North Up", but it does take some getting
used to.

Chartplotting
 

I have used CMAP cards and PC-Planner to plan trips to Maine and in
French Polynesia for the past 6 years. I have over 400 waypoints in
Maine, from the Five Islands and Robinhood area on the Sheepscot River
to Roque Island near the Canadian border. I have never found a
significant error in the location of one of my waypoints. The same is
true for the waypoints I created in advance for navigation in Raiatea,
Tahaa and Bora Bora for a trip last Sept.
David Sparks

Chartplotting
 

good idea. there are free viewers for S57 or converted ENCs but they won;t
accept position input. the cheapest one i found whcih would was about
$400....the $200 version i nearly orderd turned out not to have that ability
either. Nobeltech Admiral V-8 has that ability....if i didn;t Grandfather
into it i would never have been able to justify the cost though.
Fugawi or Ozzi claim to be able to do it but they are still hundreds of
dollars. C-map is deffinately proprietary...just don;t resell what you make.
rick

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:42:33 -0800, Tamaroak
wrote:
Why doesn't someone come up with an adapter cord that connects a cheap
DVD players loaded with those charts to a C Map NT+/BlueChart/Navionics
chip adapter thingy so those of us with chartplotters that use these
antiquated systems can access all those charts without buying all of the
individual chips?

============================================

The electronics of creating your own C-Map chips is not all that
complicated so the real challenge would be to create some software
that would convert NOAAs ENC vector format charts (free) into C-Map
chips that you could plug into your chart plotter. I'd be surprised
if someone doesn't try to do it. There may be licensing issues
however since I believe the C-MAP format is proprietary.