On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 02:25:30 +0000, Don Bouchard wrote:

Has anybody compared The CAPN by Nautical Technologies and Nobeltec's
VNS version 8 or 9? Any recommendations? Has anybody tested both
Electronic Charting systems?

My favorite is Pocket Navigator running on a PDA, but I reach for The
Cap'n when I need a backup. We have others aboard too --
all versions of Maptech back to 1.0 for DOS, plus a couple of older
versions of Nobletec (6?). They all have their problems, either bugs or
poor usability, or being cluttered with useless crud while
important things go missing. The Cap'n is at least simple and uncluttered,
but plotting courses is a pain because the screen/cursor movement is
cumbersome.

Pocket Navigator, nee Memory Map Navigator (stupid name), works like a
charm. The only problem is that it takes both a PC and a PDA.

I'm convinced this stuff is not designed by boaters anymo we're
a side business now compared to the land-based products.

All this stuff should be better than it is. With all the
engineer/tinkerer/technical types in the yachting world, I'm amazed we
don't have better software.

I haven't tried Fugawi, but I'd like to. I'm convinced vector charts are
the way to go.

Matt O.

"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
news

I haven't tried Fugawi, but I'd like to. I'm convinced vector charts are
the way to go.

Matt O

And I am convinced that raster charts are the way to go and that, perhaps, I
am not in the mainstream and have made it to the position of 'old-fart'. I
am in the process of looking at some current generation chart plotters to go
on a new boat. I haven't paid much attention to marine electronics in the
past 6 or 7 years since I outfitted my last boat. It has surprised my that
every non-pc based chart plotter out there is vector based --- no one has
done one to support raster.

I have been using paper charts for nearly 55 years. My last 2 boats had PC
based systems (Maptech and/or Cap'n). I found that having chart images on
my screen that looked exactly like the charts on my nav table was a BIG
plus.

It has been my experience that vector charts have less information on them
than raster charts. While some see this as an advantage I do not: one mans
clutter is another mans important data. Most of the vector charts that I
have looked at do not show light characteristics: you need to point to it
to get a pop up. That makes absolutely no sense to me. Having to manage my
vessel and putz around with a pointing device trying to find the light with
a 6 second flash is somewhere between dumb and dangerous. Raster charts
have all the information right there with no screwing around. Vector
technology salesmen take great pride in their products' ability to remove
layers of information to 'unclutter' the screen. When they demo this
feature, all I see being removed is information I deem important. My
understanding of the vector chart manufacturing process is that they all
start out with the raster charts. So they do not have any more accurate or
timely information. In fact the process of going from one format to the
other has been known to introduce errors.

Let me say at this point that I am a retired geek. I have spent most of my
life playing around with the then current technologies. I still consider my
self to be pretty much of a geek. So I am not afraid of something new. I
had great hope for vector charting. but IMHO, that promise has yet to be
fulfilled. The biggest failure of this technology is in not being able to
provide timely updates. With digital, it should be a simple matter to push
out weekly (daily ??) NTM updates via the internet. This is something I had
been able to do with the MapTech Pro service . Each week I would get NTM
updates to 100% of my charts. Now, you can download them yourself for free.
Not with vector charts.

So, less information, less accurate information, less usable information,
what am I missing? Am I really getting that far out of touch?

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:45:00 -0400, "Gerald"
wrote:

I am convinced that raster charts are the way to go and that, perhaps, I
am not in the mainstream and have made it to the position of 'old-fart'.

I hear you, vector charts definitely takes some getting used to, and
for some things raster is clearly superior.

For the last two years I've had both side by side, raster on
PC/Maptech, and CMAP/vector on a Furuno chart plotter. I agree with
much of what you say, but have come to appreciate some of the benefits
of vector as well.

One thing that vector does much better is "zoom in" and "zoom out".
When you zoom a raster chart the text fonts and pixel details get
larger and smaller also, which renders them illegible very quickly.
Vector on the other hand automatically compensates for zoom level so
that font sizes are constant, and detail pixels are adjusted to an
appropriate size. The net result is that fewer vector charts are
required for any given area since detail improves as you zoom in,
unlike raster which requires an entirely new chart to show greater
detail.

The other area where vector is clearly superior, is "course up" mode.
Course-up is a much more intuitve way to view chart data, particularly
in close quarters. However, if you display raster charts "course up"
on anything other than a north bound heading, chart text and symbols
appear rotated out of the normal vertical orientation, and are
actually upside down in south bound directions. With raster charts,
the text and symbols are automatically rotated to stay in normal
orientation, making course-up much more useful.

On our boat I generally do all of my route planning on the PC using
raster charts since Maptech is very good at that, and I can do
everything off-line in the comfort of the main cabin the night before.
While running I keep the PC zoomed out to show the big picture and the
route information such as range/bearing to next waypoint, total miles,
time-to-go, etc. On longer legs I will transfer the next waypoint
details to the Furuno chart plotter as well. The chart plotter is
usually left in course-up mode and zoomed in to a fairly high level of
detail where chart symbols are resonably uncluttered and easily
readable.

Another superior feature of the chart plotter, unrelated to
vector/raster, is screen brightness and clarity. The brightness level
is fully adjustable for comfortable viewing all the way from direct
sunlight to complete darkness. No PC or flat panel display that I
have used has a comparable level of brightness or adjustability.

With the right selection of features and options, the chart plotter
has some other worthwhile attributes. For example our Furuno system
has the ability to super impose radar data on top of the chart display
which is very useful for identifying unkown radar blips and determinig
whether or not it is a navaid or probable boat. Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

Hmmm, no it doesn't. At least not on a Raymarine E-80. I can overlay radar
on top of charts in any orientation. I tend to prefer North up orientation,
but the admiral likes it to rotate with the heading. It's a snap to change
between them.

When dealing with charts at the helm I find vector more useful. When
plotting courses on a laptop, however, raster seems better. For me the
difference is what I need to know RIGHT NOW versus planning what I where I
feel like going at some later time. The vector charts with the ability to
zoom in/out quickly and without losing detail (getting grainy like raster)
are of tremendous help when actually moving. Granted, I'm usually at 30kts
in a powerboat; those in sailboats might have a different sense of urgency.
But when I'm planning trips ahead of time I find the extra detail they've
got on raster charts to be rather handy. I generally use Coastal Explorer
(aka Maptech Chart Navigator Pro) with Maptech digital charts. On the
chartplotter I use a Navionics platinum chip.

If faced with having to choose one over the other I'd probably go with
vector because of it's benefits (for me anyway) while underway and just use
other sources for trip planning extras.

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:56:53 -0400, "Bill Kearney"
wrote:

Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

Hmmm, no it doesn't. At least not on a Raymarine E-80. I can overlay radar
on top of charts in any orientation. I tend to prefer North up orientation,
but the admiral likes it to rotate with the heading. It's a snap to change
between them.

I agree that it is theoretically possible to rotate the radar image
instead of the chart image. In practice however, virtually everyone
is used to looking at radar images in "heading up" format.

I agree that it is theoretically possible to rotate the radar image
instead of the chart image. In practice however, virtually everyone
is used to looking at radar images in "heading up" format.

There's no theory involved, the E-80 does it. At least from the perspective
that someone that wants to see the radar overlaid on charts can do so while
the charts are being displayed in a 'heading up' orientation. Or if
they're looking at the chart in 'north up' orientation it'll likewise
overlay the radar. We use these two modes all the time.

Uh well, yeah, when looking at *only* the radar scope rings it's rather
standard to see them in heading up format. I think you can show it in north
up mode as well. Although I personally don't see myself ever using it that
way.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:56:53 -0400, "Bill Kearney"
wrote:


Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

Hmmm, no it doesn't. At least not on a Raymarine E-80. I can overlay radar
on top of charts in any orientation. I tend to prefer North up orientation,
but the admiral likes it to rotate with the heading. It's a snap to change
between them.


I agree that it is theoretically possible to rotate the radar image
instead of the chart image. In practice however, virtually everyone
is used to looking at radar images in "heading up" format.

I was taught, and always use north up. All of my peers also use north
up. That way the picture doesn't change every time you alter course or
make a small correction. It comes from the days of using parallel index
lines when navigating blind.

Gary

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 04:15:38 GMT, Gary wrote:

I was taught, and always use north up. All of my peers also use north
up. That way the picture doesn't change every time you alter course or
make a small correction.

Are you talking about radar or charting ?

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:45:00 -0400, "Gerald"
wrote:

I am convinced that raster charts are the way to go and that, perhaps, I
am not in the mainstream and have made it to the position of 'old-fart'.

I hear you, vector charts definitely takes some getting used to, and
for some things raster is clearly superior.

For the last two years I've had both side by side, raster on
PC/Maptech, and CMAP/vector on a Furuno chart plotter. I agree with
much of what you say, but have come to appreciate some of the benefits
of vector as well.

I have never actually used vector charts underway. Marine vector only in
showrooms and boatshows. Like it or not, I suspect I am going to have to
make the leap -- grumbeling all the way, but doing it. I am in the process
of downsizing and won't have the room or 'trons to do what I am used to.

One thing that vector does much better is "zoom in" and "zoom out".
When you zoom a raster chart the text fonts and pixel details get
larger and smaller also, which renders them illegible very quickly.

Again, something I will have to 'learn to love'.

Vector on the other hand automatically compensates for zoom level so
that font sizes are constant, and detail pixels are adjusted to an
appropriate size. The net result is that fewer vector charts are
required for any given area since detail improves as you zoom in,
unlike raster which requires an entirely new chart to show greater
detail.

Logically that should be the case. The examples that I have seem in demo
machines don't have much of the detail I am used to seeing to begin with, so
the zooming effect doesn't matter --- the details ain't there. It may well
turn out that that is more a function of the demo, demo operator or
excessive nit picking on my part. In the long run, if it isn't totally true
now, it will be someday.


The other area where vector is clearly superior, is "course up" mode.
Course-up is a much more intuitve way to view chart data, particularly
in close quarters. However, if you display raster charts "course up"
on anything other than a north bound heading, chart text and symbols
appear rotated out of the normal vertical orientation, and are
actually upside down in south bound directions. With raster charts,
the text and symbols are automatically rotated to stay in normal
orientation, making course-up much more useful.

This is one of those interesting areas that make vector a selling point for
some, but not me. Having done paper charts (read north up) for so long, it
is natural for me. I have tied using my Maptech in course up and found it
disorienting. My minds eye sees the world in a north-up orientation,
looking at something in a heading up orientation feels, well, just wrong.
No, I didn't give it a real chance. I tried it for half an hour ro so here
and there, pronounce the foolishness of it all, and go back to north up.
There are some paper charts strips in the Chartbooks that are turned to
other than north up to optimize printing, I turn the North up too (chart
book cockeyed). Ok, I have found the problem: I AM and old fart!!!!!!


On our boat I generally do all of my route planning on the PC using
raster charts since Maptech is very good at that, and I can do
everything off-line in the comfort of the main cabin the night before.
While running I keep the PC zoomed out to show the big picture and the
route information such as range/bearing to next waypoint, total miles,
time-to-go, etc. On longer legs I will transfer the next waypoint
details to the Furuno chart plotter as well. The chart plotter is
usually left in course-up mode and zoomed in to a fairly high level of
detail where chart symbols are resonably uncluttered and easily
readable.

I had a similar drill. After I loaded (or selected) my route in Maptech, I
would export the Waypoints into my GPS system. If the computer crapped out,
everything was ready to go on the GPS. This was especially useful when
offshore. I had the autopilot set up to take steering commands from either
the computer or the GPS. Again, if the computer died, I would not actually
have to steer the boat - heaven forbid!


Another superior feature of the chart plotter, unrelated to
vector/raster, is screen brightness and clarity. The brightness level
is fully adjustable for comfortable viewing all the way from direct
sunlight to complete darkness. No PC or flat panel display that I
have used has a comparable level of brightness or adjustability.

I had high brightness OceanPc displays in a pilot house environment, so this
was not a problem. It will be an issue in the new boat: no pilot house.


With the right selection of features and options, the chart plotter
has some other worthwhile attributes. For example our Furuno system
has the ability to super impose radar data on top of the chart display
which is very useful for identifying unkown radar blips and determinig
whether or not it is a navaid or probable boat. Since this feature
requires rotating and zooming the chart data to match the radar
display, vector charts are clearly the right choice.

While all of this has been available in the PC / Raster chart arena,
certainly not a cost that compares well with the integrated solutions
available with vector charts. This is a great feature and I look forward to
playing with it. I suspect this really requires the use of a gyro compass
to get a sufficiently stabilized overlay. I had a gyro on my last boat and
it made a big difference in ARPA accuracy.

I hope I have that whine out of my system so I can just get on with it...

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:49:01 -0400, "Gerald"
wrote:

I suspect this really requires the use of a gyro compass
to get a sufficiently stabilized overlay. I had a gyro on my last boat and
it made a big difference in ARPA accuracy.

Not really. I have an electronic compass sensor and it works just
fine for both ARPA and chart/radar overlay.