Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 09-26-2016, 06:29 AM   #141
Senior Member
 
Greatlaker221's Avatar
 
City: Kenosha, WI
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Tortuga
Vessel Model: Hershine 37
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 104
I wonder why they did not get as many big bags under it asap to try and unground asap on the falling tide, if/once unsuccessful another opportunity to bag it and float it with the rising tide. Sounds like they focused on pumping more then flotation. It would take a lot of 6000# bags for that size boat. ah well, easy to say in a warm armchair. Interesting case.
__________________
Advertisement

__________________
Hershine 37 refit blog:

http://savingtortuga.blogspot.com/
Greatlaker221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 07:17 AM   #142
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedtree View Post
I would respectfully disagree that paper charts are the only solution. Most chart plotters can display raster charts as well as vector charts. If you switch to the raster charts, you see exactly what's on that paper chart. So in this example, it's paper or electronic raster chart would show you the same thing.

But even that's not the problem. The issue is that charts at different scales show different levels of detail, and this is true for paper, raster, and vector charts alike. There are lots and lots of large scale paper/raster charts that don't show critical hazards, where the smaller scale chart of the same area does show the details.

So I think the real issues is that you need to check your route at various scales, down to the smallest, to ensure you see everything. This is true with all chart types. I would argue that with electronic charts it's much easier to switch scales vs digging out more paper charts. Where vector charts can lure you into trouble is that the source data has many scales, where raster charts might have 2 or 3 for any given area.
Right on. And, the captain of the ill-fated Nordhavn says the same thing and offers no excuses, taking full accountability for what happened. As I said in an earlier post, there are reasons why it happened, but no excuses. A chartbook does make it so easy to review a route, much easier than futzing with zooming a little screen.
__________________

__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 07:38 AM   #143
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 14,262
I am not sure.....but I think the main difference between vector and raster zooming is there is a definitive jump in chart detail on raster where on vector, the zoom is infinite and when detail is lost might be less apparent to a personunfamiliar with an area or relatively inexperienced.

If zoomed in enough...no big deal, if zoomed out both chart types will drop features....the trick is what zoom level is appropriate for the area and style of navigation you are attempting.

In this case, using a chart to navigate down the river need only show the channel marks if using the channel if in a 60 foot vessel compared to a 600 foot vessel.

Leave the channel and now you best be using the largest scale chart you can get to and go at the appropriate speed if unfamiliar waters. If there is no marked USCG channel, best to also have reviewed the notice to mariners for that area. Not that I always do that...as often a simple scan of the area gives the flavor of how complicated nav should be. But that still leaves you open to uncharted or poorly charted/marked hazards.

That's why I have stuck with raster charts....my navigation habit patters are used to them and subconsciously must make subtle decisions that I can't say I am aware of. That does not mean that someone good with raster charts couldn't easily be a better navigator with them.

The posters that brought up double checking your work, especially when navigating in unfamiliar waters out of clearly marked channels make one of the most important points.
psneeld is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 07:59 AM   #144
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 5,924
Yup PS, you nailed it.

Maybe I missed it in this long thread - are there not buoys in this area marking the channel?

Another comment, Nordhavn or other high end boaters are not necessarily any more diligent, just with bigger wallets. Bottom line though, lots of Tesla auto guide mentalities in the boating world. Look how often many set an auto pilot on Navigation and sit back seldom looking at the charts in detail whether paper or electronic.

In the old days when boating on the Mississippi, every spring we yakked about what the corp had done over the winter for jetty and dike building. New man made hazards were common. But, after a boozy weekend lots of mishaps occurred, I was equally guilty of hitting a new sand bar and filling the strainers - ouch.
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 08:35 AM   #145
Senior Member
 
Sealife's Avatar
 
City: In transit
Country: From USA
Vessel Name: Sea life
Vessel Model: Krogen 42 #61
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 262
Simple solution to the chart debate. I run two plotters, one zoomed out and one zoomed in. I even use different software to cross check by changing which is in and which is out. Works great. Even if your second plotter is just an iPad.

Picked up this trick doing delivery, when I brought my own nav. equipment as backup and the vessel had it's own which continued to work.
__________________
Scott

www.caribbeansealife.com
Sealife is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 09:07 AM   #146
Senior Member
 
City: Owings, Md
Country: US
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 224
I like raster charts that are NOAA sourced, they look exactly like my paper charts and it is very clear when I have zoomed in when it switches to a different chart. I use Memory Map on my android devices and really like it, the app is free but you pay for their proprietary charts which are just a unique file type from NOAA rasters, $15-20 buys you the license for the current year complete catalog of NOAA charts and you download the ones you need. The hardwired navigational equipment is Garmin running vector charts and it just isn't my cup of tea.
Gdavid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 09:20 AM   #147
Senior Member
 
Ka_sea_ta's Avatar
 
City: Puget Sound
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Ka_sea_ta
Vessel Model: 48 Defever
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sealife View Post
Simple solution to the chart debate. I run two plotters, one zoomed out and one zoomed in. I even use different software to cross check by changing which is in and which is out. Works great. Even if your second plotter is just an iPad.

Picked up this trick doing delivery, when I brought my own nav. equipment as backup and the vessel had it's own which continued to work.
yup run one with the radar overlay at an appropriate range for conditions.... The other one displays the area of interest, then I have my wife that prefers paper charts...
Ka_sea_ta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 09:23 AM   #148
Guru
 
cardude01's Avatar
 
City: Victoria TX
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Bijou
Vessel Model: 2008 Island Packet steadysailer
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sealife View Post
Simple solution to the chart debate. I run two plotters, one zoomed out and one zoomed in. I even use different software to cross check by changing which is in and which is out. Works great. Even if your second plotter is just an iPad.

Picked up this trick doing delivery, when I brought my own nav. equipment as backup and the vessel had it's own which continued to work.

That's what I do as well. I have my Garmin plotter zoomed out a bit and the iPad chart (also Garmin however) zoomed in for detail.

But I still run aground from time to time. 😂

Question:

Would a steel boat have possibly survived a grounding like that Nordhavn? I've heard people say you can run a steel boat (I think they were talking about a Diesel Duck at the time) onto a coral head and it will survive.
cardude01 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 10:19 AM   #149
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltexflanc View Post
A chartbook does make it so easy to review a route, much easier than futzing with zooming a little screen.
Only for those of you who grew up in the paper generation. I don't have to futz. Plus my screen isn't little.

Now as to the other comments, we always have two different systems in use and we do the double checking that was referred to, but we have a check list to make sure we do. Prior to the start of the leg, we check the charts thoroughly and note all potential issues. We also check possible deviations from plans. If, in the course of the day we decide to change our plans entirely, we repeat the process. The real work is done before you start cruising, not while cruising. While cruising you use the information you saw earlier and combine it with what you visually see now. The owner had a good system in place, just failed to use it that time. The owner did an excellent analysis. This wasn't an accident due to failure to see the jetty. It was due to failure to follow their procedures, designed to prevent failure to see accidents.

As to whether steel or aluminum would have survived, due to the nature of the major damage as it being weight more than just an initial impact, I think they would also have had serious problems.

Then the talk of whether more flotation earlier might have saved the situation. It might have helped, but there was already some serious damage developing long before the water inflow and before it was known. The stress under the boat didn't just happen at once. It became known at once though. And, I toss something else out. The owner noted the time at which it became strictly salvage. There's an earlier point that I would have no regrets it wasn't saved. There were signs of structural hull damage, although not clearly understood at the time. However, let's say you save the boat from sinking completely but you have a hull with serious structural damage from the stress of the weight, do you really have anything at that point that you care to recover? Would you have had more of a battle getting the insurer to declare it a total loss? I don't know when the time was but there was a time some hours after the boat sat as it did, that unknown to everyone at the time, the hours of stress made it something I wouldn't have wanted to have tried to restore. In fact, this is the reason in most damage claims that items are declared total losses when the cost of repairs exceeds a certain percentage, such as 75%, not when it's 100%. Yes, there are people who could have restored it but basically they're boat builders and would have been rebuilding not repairing. Then it's not the boat it was, might be a better version or worse version, and it's a boat with a lot of bad history.
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 10:48 AM   #150
Guru
 
Crusty Chief's Avatar
 
City: Las Vegas/Portland
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Pairadice
Vessel Model: Selene 47
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 788
This was a tragic loss and I applaud the couple for taking the time to post this mishap. Not sure I would feel up to posting an incident like this given that they lost a very nice boat and owning up to not only the cause but the end result.

If only more people in this world would accept responsibility for their actions as this couple did. I hope they can get over this and at some point find another boat to continue on.
__________________
John & Tracey
Pairadice S4714
Mvpairadice.blogspot.com
" I can explain, but I can't make you understand"
Crusty Chief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 11:31 AM   #151
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,674
I believe I could pick up and continue after the loss of a boat, although haven't ever experienced it so can't absolutely know. My fear is loss of life. If someone lost their life on my boat, around it, I don't know. I don't know if someone slipped on my patio or if I was in an auto accident with a fatality. But the loss of a life on my boat, entrusting their life to me, I'm not sure I could ever boat again. That is and always will be my greatest fear in boating.
BandB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 11:47 AM   #152
Guru
 
koliver's Avatar
 
City: Saltspring Island
Country: BC, canada
Vessel Name: Retreat
Vessel Model: C&L 44
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,938
A couple of lessons we are all taking from this tragic loss:

Don't trust your navigation to only one source;

Know that your charts must be zoomed out and in on a regular and frequent basis, so that all levels of detail are obvious.

The lesson for users of vector charts from this and the Volvo ocean race incidents show how bad the situation can get if you fail to zoom in from time ot time.
__________________
Keith
koliver is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 01:25 PM   #153
Guru
 
fryedaze's Avatar
 
City: Solomons Island Md
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Fryedaze
Vessel Model: MC 42 (Overseas Ltd) Monk 42
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sealife View Post
Simple solution to the chart debate. I run two plotters, one zoomed out and one zoomed in. I even use different software to cross check by changing which is in and which is out. Works great. Even if your second plotter is just an iPad.

Picked up this trick doing delivery, when I brought my own nav. equipment as backup and the vessel had it's own which continued to work.
__________________
Dave Frye
Fryedaze, MC 42 (Monk 42') 1989 Overseas Co
http://mvfryedaze.blogspot.com/
fryedaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 02:01 PM   #154
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,730
To me, I think the Golden Rule in boating is to cross check everything in as many ways as possible looking for corroborating evidence. And if you find any discrepancy, figure out why.

Exactly how you do the cross checks I think is much less important that just doing them at all. You can cross check paper charts against chart plotter, two chat plotter views against each other....whatever is available to you, and the more the better. Discrepancies should always be red flags until completely explained.
__________________
www.MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 02:31 PM   #155
Guru
 
High Wire's Avatar
 
City: Englewood, FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Irish Lady
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,282
The takeaway for me is that anytime we leave the main marked channel, cross check the route on both raster AND vector chart as we go. We already have both available. I do that now but not at the same time. I plan my route in the morrning on the paper chartbook. Enroute, I mainly just use the Garmin chartplotter. I realize I have been relying on the STAR principle (Shoot That Ain't Right!) to keep me out of trouble. I have to force self compliance until it becomes habit. Then, once a habit, don't allow persceived time pressure to take a shortcut.
High Wire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 03:46 PM   #156
TF Site Team
 
Baker's Avatar
 
City: League City, Tx
Country: Texas
Vessel Model: Carver 356
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crusty Chief View Post
This was a tragic loss and I applaud the couple for taking the time to post this mishap. Not sure I would feel up to posting an incident like this given that they lost a very nice boat and owning up to not only the cause but the end result.

If only more people in this world would accept responsibility for their actions as this couple did. I hope they can get over this and at some point find another boat to continue on.
He made reference to flying in the blog. I think he might come from an aviation background. And in aviation, one must be immediately accountable. You can tell by his self reflection of the entire ordeal. In aviation we do that via "protected reports". So it is almost natural to report an incident since we have done it so many times(the report...not the accident). Even his policy/procedure of cross checking is exactly how we check an oceanic route.

NOW....we have all read it!!! What is the solution??? We can talk about procedure. But I have a solution that should be very easy. In airplanes we have a GPWS...ground proximity warning system. We kinda have them on our depth sound era except our depth alarms are reactive and not predictive(we have both on airplanes). IOW, a depth sounder can only tell you what is under the boat. Forward looking systems are expensive. Why can't there be a way(or is there) to program a protective and predictive algorithm that would warn us when we are about to hit something or go into water shallower than a preset limit?? It would have to be a function of not just direction/heading, but speed as well. And when I say speed, mean time. In inland waterways we are always pointed at land. But if we were able to set a 30 second to implact type of warning based on speed and course...

I do realize that this would be the last layer of safety and not something to rely upon. I also realize it would only be as reliable as the underlying database. But had they had this, it would not have happened. And it would seem to be an easy algorithm with today's computing power.

Just a thought.... not only an audible alarm but a visual one as well. And one that changed color and heightened alert as impact got closer.
__________________
Prairie 29...Perkins 4236...Sold
Mainship Pilot 30...Yanmar 4LHA-STP...Sold
Carver 356...T-Cummins 330B
Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 04:22 PM   #157
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,460
Quote:
hy can't there be a way(or is there) to program a protective and predictive algorithm that would warn us when we are about to hit something or go into water shallower than a preset limit??
Depth alarms are available on most integrated systems I am aware of. As are alarms for approaching certain way points, or MARPA for radar targets. There were a few tight and irregulalry shaped anchorages where I liked to set my depth alarm.
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 04:42 PM   #158
TF Site Team
 
Baker's Avatar
 
City: League City, Tx
Country: Texas
Vessel Model: Carver 356
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltexflanc View Post
Depth alarms are available on most integrated systems I am aware of. As are alarms for approaching certain way points, or MARPA for radar targets. There were a few tight and irregulalry shaped anchorages where I liked to set my depth alarm.
Not really what I am getting at. Depth alarms are reactive. IOW, It has already happened. This jetty likely had deep water right up until impact. The chartplotter knows we're you are. And it knows where the shallow water is and where the obstructions are. Why not have an algorithm that can alarm you both audibly and visually when you are pointed at something and impact is imminent????

A little history....on airplanes, our radar altimeters are a depth sounder....literally. There is no radar to them...really a radio altimeter that works exactly like a depth sounder. The Original GPWS was based on closure rates to terrain and some other factors. But it was pointing straight down. It was useful but it was limited in that it could not see ahead and predict ahead of time. But then they developed EGPWS where the E stands for Enhanced and it is EXACTLY what I am talking about here. It uses a GPS database and it knows where the terrain and obstructions are. Based on speed and course and altitude, it will give you various levels of warning based on time to impact. If you turn away, the warning goes away. If you climb, the warning goes away. But if you maintain course, it will go from caution level to warning level with increasing audible warnings.

The software and algorithms cannot be too terribly complex to not be able to put them on a chartplotter. Hell, ARPA, seems to be more complex than what I am talking about. I am actually somewhat surprised that something like this is not already out there. Maybe it is a liability issue where someone could litigate that the warning did not go off???
__________________
Prairie 29...Perkins 4236...Sold
Mainship Pilot 30...Yanmar 4LHA-STP...Sold
Carver 356...T-Cummins 330B
Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 05:16 PM   #159
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,460
There are plotters now that will auto-draw a route that avoids various depths and any barriers and link to your AP, if you quest for nanny technology. Up until someone puts something in the way, or sinks something or a shoal is created since your chart was last updated....
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2016, 05:32 PM   #160
TF Site Team
 
Baker's Avatar
 
City: League City, Tx
Country: Texas
Vessel Model: Carver 356
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltexflanc View Post
There are plotters now that will auto-draw a route that avoids various depths and any barriers and link to your AP, if you quest for nanny technology. Up until someone puts something in the way, or sinks something or a shoal is created since your chart was last updated....
It is not a quest for nanny technology. It is a last layer of safety. A layer that would have likely prevented this incident from happening. Safety comes in layers. And if you have a hole in one layer, then hopefully the next layer will catch it. That's how it works in the aviation world.

And I would say that 90%+ of boat's out there are not on a planned route that was put into the plotter. And I already said that this technology was only as good as the underlying database. But yes, a route that avoids shallow water and obstructions is a start.

Hey, I just figured if it was good enough for a $100,000,000+ airplane I thought it might be good enough for a boat. And I can't imagine it being a complex program for the average chartplotter.
__________________

__________________
Prairie 29...Perkins 4236...Sold
Mainship Pilot 30...Yanmar 4LHA-STP...Sold
Carver 356...T-Cummins 330B
Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012