Do I really need paper charts?

[SteveK]

Perhaps personal experience plays a large part in how today we view navigational aids.
In the 70's I was tasked to deliver and pickup forestry personnel in the areas of the Broughtons. Paper chart on mother ship, drop them here feet dry.
No chart on the 18 footer, just memory. Everyone dropped off and picked up feet dry in a different spot each day.
Trial and error played a big part in reading the shoreline to know where a landing would work.
It is all relative to ones experiences, is it not?

 

[psneeld]

Sure experience plays a huge role in vessel operation and certainly all the forms of navigation.... but I don't think it matters whether you are looking at a paper chart or electronic chart if they both are supposed to contain the same information. Paper is better than the worst MFD and a good MFD blows paper away for info at the fingertips.

As far as getting someplace safely, when I taught boating safety courses.... I always said, without a chart you are basically lost, that chart can be electronic, paper or in your mind (local knowledge)...all may or may not contain enough info to be completely safe, but they are the minimum to figure out where you are.

There is simple navigation...going from point A to point B with no worries of time or tide or current or hazards or restricted areas, etc...etc.... lots of people do that kind of navigation every day. So big deal, probably doesn't matter what they use including restaurant place mats to nav with. Doing complex nav and I doubt the placemat works so well.

 

[Simi 60]

For most of us this is relevant only in skinny water. On passage I could give a rodents behind if I’m off miles. I’ve gone to Bermuda multiple times on celestial which on a small boat ain’t very accurate.
So regardless of source no chart is going to tell me about sands that have shifted an hour ago or.buoys that went bye bye or shifted since the last update. Or what happened to that channel as the dredging is in progress or so many things that change in between updates. Even the satellite views are inherently inaccurate. Have no trouble finding an islands just looking for the clouds above it or by even smelling it. This is a skinny water problem and skinny water bottom changes constantly in many places. Many folks have run aground between the red and green when the chart has said they have plenty of water.
Think for the recreational boater much of this thread is a tempest in a teapot. If you maintain situational awareness and actually look at the world outside of you as well as use the instruments on your boat you will decrease your risks of getting in trouble. If you’re just looking at a chart (any chart) and a dot that’s said to be you that’s a recipe for mishap. Chart says or your eyes see rocks or coral heads or is the color you’ve set as your safety depth or you see breaking waves, or a rip or change in water color you’d better proceed with caution. Don’t much care when the update was done. It wasn’t done now.
Don’t care if f it’s 8’ or 80’. Do care if it’s under 5’. Don’t care how much under 5’ beyond if it’s within the tidal range. I don’t trust anything under 20’. My attention level goes up and my speed goes down. Paper, electronic, MFD, pad or laptop. Don’t care. Gets real skinny I’m up on the flybridge with the admiral at the bow. Eyes looking at the sonar and water. Occasional glance at the chart. The chart is no longer the Bible to be religiously followed. My senses and on board instruments take the lead.
Think you guys are discussing angels on the head of the pin. Rather see you spend the time and use a drop line to see if your depth sounder is accurate. Be more productive.

This^^^^^

Charts where we play are rarely up to date in real time
Tracks I ran a few weeks ago needed to be changed today

It's why I love OpenCPN.
So easy to make changes on the fly making last month's charts current.

 

[psneeld]

Of my 15 or so years operating as an assistance tower, most of it was back bay, uncharted, unmarked areas where people crabbed, clammed, water skied, jet skied, etc. Sure charts were near worthless, especially by year 5 when I could almost draw them from memory, only mine would be useful instead of one with few or incorrect ones. My boss really disliked putting other captains in my area because lack of local knowledge.

But that doesn't mean in other areas, especially busy ports or heavily marked and traveled waterways that charts are useless. It certainly doesn't make the debate equivalent to "angels on the head of a pin". Unless one doesn't care to be a conscientious navigator.

Charts are nothing more than a picture of information. None are completely accurate and some can be dangerous if you blindly follow them. But since when is having the most current and complete information available at your fingertips a bad thing? Sure, cost, overtreiance, complacency, malfunction, etc...etc all should be considered....

So use paper if you wan't...but the answer to the question is still no.. But as usual...it depends on many, many things.

 

[mvweebles]

Granted, few people cruise in truly unfamiliar waters. Charts, whether electronic or paper, are tools in an overall navigation system that includes human (helmsman) interpretation and judgement.

Most recreational cruisers have encountered range markers - big orange boards with vertical stripes where ships align the stripes to visually confirm they are within the channel. Range boards are not practical at many Pacific Coast bar crossings either because geographic limitations, or because they are likely obscured by fog or darkness. Directional lights are used instead.

Attached are three screenshots of the exact same area: the approach to Ft Bragg California (Noyo River) - sea buoy shown to the west. Because there is almost aways at least a moderate 4-foot swell running from the NW, there are (1) breakers on either side of the approach once you get within 0.5 nm of the bridge; and (2) refractive waves in addition to the swell. It adds-up to a pretty active ride with the boat moving along X, Y, and Z axis with a lot of pitch and yaw that makes following an electronic highway/trackline on an MFD impossible. The USCG maintains a directional light that shines in three sectors: WHITE if you are within the narrow channel; GREEN if you are too far north and need to make a starboard correction; and RED if you are too far south and need to make a port correction. Because this is a visual/hand-steer approach, the range light remains highly relevant despite highly accurate vessel navigation systems.

So, if you've never been to Ft Bragg, how would you know about this directional light? The first picture - the RASTER display, shows this pretty well. The second screenshot, the VECTOR display, is a classic case of lots of data but little information. You have to pull-up the properties on the light and it tells you that from 103.5-106.5 degrees bearing the light is white, from 100.5-103.5 degrees the light is red, etc. The final screenshot - the NAVIONICs display, doesn't even tell you that much. Just says there is a directional light with no additional information (though at one zoom level, there is a tiny red/green indicator without explanation, but its not shown at all zoom levels).

Whats my point? Several-fold

1. Use Case. Really depends on how you plan to use your boat. Even if you cruise to new areas, if you are generally in the same type of environment (say, cruising the California Delta or Great Loop), the destinations and information are more similar than not. Encountering broadly unfamiliar conditions (such as a sectored range light at Ft Bragg) is unusual.
2. If you plan to cruise to out-of-the-way places, you really need as much information as you can possibly carry. In the above example, the Navionics display is useless, and possibly dangerous to rely on.
3. The base information should be the same but its not, or its represented in a manner that is not easily digested. In this case, the RASTER is the best, but often the VECTOR will have more information......but you may have to dig deep and interpret.
4. In this example, the highly variable charts are not due to update accuracy, but purely how the information is represented. All three are likely accurate, but the NAVIONICs display is dangerously incomplete. It really means the helmsman needs to be the final interpreter of information, not blindly follow a highway-view on an MFD/PC/Whatever.

Peter

 

[Hippocampus]

Peter I’m having trouble with “uncharted”
Already posted about getting into Deltaville. Don’t much think the Chesapeake is “uncharted”.
One of my best friends keeps two center consoles in Eastham MA. Local harbor/boat ramp is tidal. Channel in is sticks placed in the mud/sand. Sometimes they’re spot on. Sometimes not so much. Locals place (and move) them as required and when they want. Don’t think Cape cod is “uncharted”.
There are many heavily trafficked areas of the good old USA where charts, even if updated that morning, are inaccurate. I could think of dozen without much effort . I’m sure posters here have their own one or two dozen.
I’m a dilettante. Never been a pro. Just wanna have fun. Need to stay out of areas I shouldn’t be (use tools other than charts for that mostly) and not hit stuff or run aground. I was only trying to stress the point charts are a AID to navigation. A AID is all. Nothing more. Sure keep them up to date. Be smart and use several choices so you’ll be super careful when they don’t agree or show lack of detail or show a situation likely to have a shifting bottom. But the best aid to navigation is between your ears. We continue to not be totally depend on charts. Will always keep our judgment. Even go to the extreme of anchoring. Launching the dinghy to check things out before proceeding with the big boat. Or waiting for when it’s not high tide so I can see more stuff and float off if I miss judge. I’m a different skipper near the equator when there’s minimal tides. Will put on extra miles to miss out on anything sketchy. Even so grounding is when not if you will. Yes good charts make it less likely but good judgment from knowing how to read water (and the info beyond depths on charts) remains the primary avoidance measure for me.
One thing I really like on the MFD is showing currents (not just tides). Sure you can get that from other sources when using paper. But I process that info quicker and easier on the MFD. So although we have paper and do take it out when doing a unfamiliar landfall the MFD is always up.
Point of interest Peter. Does the relevant chart book or cruising guide give one enough to get in safely? Thanks for the work involved to generate your last post.

 

[backinblue]

This argument could go on forever. I think we can mostly agree that nobody really "NEEDS" paper charts, but perhaps we can also agree that some people prefer them and that should be ok too especially considering that the majority of us are not traveling the globe. You could also make the case that nobody needs to receive mail or own a checkbook, but many of us are more comfortable using them.

 

[mvweebles]

Peter I’m having trouble with “uncharted”
Already posted about getting into Deltaville. Don’t much think the Chesapeake is “uncharted”.
One of my best friends keeps two center consoles in Eastham MA. Local harbor/boat ramp is tidal. Channel in is sticks placed in the mud/sand. Sometimes they’re spot on. Sometimes not so much. Locals place (and move) them as required and when they want. Don’t think Cape cod is “uncharted”.
There are many heavily trafficked areas of the good old USA where charts, even if updated that morning, are inaccurate. I could think of dozen without much effort . I’m sure posters here have their own one or two dozen.
I’m a dilettante. Never been a pro. Just wanna have fun. Need to stay out of areas I shouldn’t be (use tools other than charts for that mostly) and not hit stuff or run aground. I was only trying to stress the point charts are a AID to navigation. A AID is all. Nothing more. Sure keep them up to date. Be smart and use several choices so you’ll be super careful when they don’t agree or show lack of detail or show a situation likely to have a shifting bottom. But the best aid to navigation is between your ears. We continue to not be totally depend on charts. Will always keep our judgment. Even go to the extreme of anchoring. Launching the dinghy to check things out before proceeding with the big boat. Or waiting for when it’s not high tide so I can see more stuff and float off if I miss judge. I’m a different skipper near the equator when there’s minimal tides. Will put on extra miles to miss out on anything sketchy. Even so grounding is when not if you will. Yes good charts make it less likely but good judgment from knowing how to read water (and the info beyond depths on charts) remains the primary avoidance measure for me.
One thing I really like on the MFD is showing currents (not just tides). Sure you can get that from other sources when using paper. But I process that info quicker and easier on the MFD. So although we have paper and do take it out when doing a unfamiliar landfall the MFD is always up.

I don't think I said anything about uncharted areas. There are clearly areas where the underlying depth data is suspect (thus the "Zone of Confidence" identifier NOAA started using several years ago), but in US waters at least, where water meets land is accurate.

Another thread just started about a boat that hit a rock in the PNW. I looked up the chart for this area. To my eyes, it's a Russian Roulette entrance - I don't understand the sector light, and there are a couple if innocuous identifiers for rocks that don't jump out unless you're doing a post mortem on why a boat hit one. Are they charted? Yep. Sort of in a gotcha way.

If I can summarize several of the learned comments to this thread (including Hippocampus), charts have a lot of data but turning that into actionable information is not always intuitive. The challenge is only partially related to currency and accuracy.

If a captain worries about stuff like EMPs or political actions wiping out all electronics, they should definitely carry paper charts so they will feel better even though they are likely screwed and dead-in-water anyway. Otherwise, physical paper charts are not necessary. I like spiral chart packs and find them useful, but not necessary. I also find Raster digitized charts useful and posted an example why above (Ft Bragg). I also use Navionics, especially for basic planning and distance calculations. I use a lot of navigation tools, and have also posted several examples where I've disregarded due to observations to the contrary. As both Hippocampus and Psneeld note, the navigation system needs adult supervision with the captain making an informed decision on how to assimilate data into actionable route decisions.

Peter

 

[Art]

Granted, few people cruise in truly unfamiliar waters. Charts, whether electronic or paper, are tools in an overall navigation system that includes human (helmsman) interpretation and judgement.

Most recreational cruisers have encountered range markers - big orange boards with vertical stripes where ships align the stripes to visually confirm they are within the channel. Range boards are not practical at many Pacific Coast bar crossings either because geographic limitations, or because they are likely obscured by fog or darkness. Directional lights are used instead.

Attached are three screenshots of the exact same area: the approach to Ft Bragg California (Noyo River) - sea buoy shown to the west. Because there is almost aways at least a moderate 4-foot swell running from the NW, there are (1) breakers on either side of the approach once you get within 0.5 nm of the bridge; and (2) refractive waves in addition to the swell. It adds-up to a pretty active ride with the boat moving along X, Y, and Z axis with a lot of pitch and yaw that makes following an electronic highway/trackline on an MFD impossible. The USCG maintains a directional light that shines in three sectors: WHITE if you are within the narrow channel; GREEN if you are too far north and need to make a starboard correction; and RED if you are too far south and need to make a port correction. Because this is a visual/hand-steer approach, the range light remains highly relevant despite highly accurate vessel navigation systems.

So, if you've never been to Ft Bragg, how would you know about this directional light? The first picture - the RASTER display, shows this pretty well. The second screenshot, the VECTOR display, is a classic case of lots of data but little information. You have to pull-up the properties on the light and it tells you that from 103.5-106.5 degrees bearing the light is white, from 100.5-103.5 degrees the light is red, etc. The final screenshot - the NAVIONICs display, doesn't even tell you that much. Just says there is a directional light with no additional information (though at one zoom level, there is a tiny red/green indicator without explanation, but its not shown at all zoom levels).

Whats my point? Several-fold

1. Use Case. Really depends on how you plan to use your boat. Even if you cruise to new areas, if you are generally in the same type of environment (say, cruising the California Delta or Great Loop), the destinations and information are more similar than not. Encountering broadly unfamiliar conditions (such as a sectored range light at Ft Bragg) is unusual.
2. If you plan to cruise to out-of-the-way places, you really need as much information as you can possibly carry. In the above example, the Navionics display is useless, and possibly dangerous to rely on.
3. The base information should be the same but its not, or its represented in a manner that is not easily digested. In this case, the RASTER is the best, but often the VECTOR will have more information......but you may have to dig deep and interpret.
4. In this example, the highly variable charts are not due to update accuracy, but purely how the information is represented. All three are likely accurate, but the NAVIONICs display is dangerously incomplete. It really means the helmsman needs to be the final interpreter of information, not blindly follow a highway-view on an MFD/PC/Whatever.

Peter

For four decades we owned a 3 bed 2 bath Beach House... 30 minutes south of there. Many a time dined in a now long gone tiny restaurant with great food that looked directly at that bridge.

 

[bowball]

So what will I use my shallow chart drawers for now?

 

[bowball]

I will miss Canadian Nautical Chartbook 3313 though. Anyone have an extra?

 

[twistedtree]

FWIW, the example Ft Bragg range light info is all in the ENC (vector) chart, but to weebles point, you need to dig for it. See attached screen shot from CoastalExplorer.


I think if you are going anywhere where a rage light is needed, you will/should scope it out in advance and can see the details without too much trouble. But maybe not, in which case you will be hunting around as you are approaching.


But I can't argue that the raster chart doesn't present it all on a platter in a nice way. The down side, is more clutter on the rater charts, depth readings that are arbitrarily rotated depending on how you display them, depths in fathoms, or feet, or some other random unit, and no good way to read all the notes which are arguably the most important thing that is uniquely on the rater charts.


Regardless, we are human so will resist change, despite being the most adaptable creatures on earth.

 

[twistedtree]

FWIW, the example Ft Bragg range light info is all in the ENC (vector) chart, but to weebles point, you need to dig for it. See attached screen shot from CoastalExplorer.


I think if you are going anywhere where a rage light is needed, you will/should scope it out in advance and can see the details without too much trouble. But maybe not, in which case you will be hunting around as you are approaching.


But I can't argue that the raster chart doesn't present it all on a platter in a nice way. The down side, is more clutter on the rater charts, depth readings that are arbitrarily rotated depending on how you display them, depths in fathoms, or feet, or some other random unit, and no good way to read all the notes which are arguably the most important thing that is uniquely on the rater charts.


Regardless, we are human so will resist change, despite being the most adaptable creatures on earth.

 

[Bmarler]

So what will I use my shallow chart drawers for now?

You mean the pizza drawer?

 

[backinblue]

So what will I use my shallow chart drawers for now?

Packages of microwave popcorn!

 

[OldDan1943]

Okay, chart/no chart seems to be an individual choice. Now, has anyone questioned their insurance?

 

[psneeld]

Questioned their insurance....... for what? For chart related issues? Is it OK insurance? Too much...too little?

 

[OldDan1943]

Questioned their insurance....... for what? For chart related issues? Is it OK insurance? Too much...too little?

Good. That takes care of that question/problem.

 

[Hippocampus]

Excellent post Peter and have also enjoyed PS’s insights. One of the reasons I didn’t buy Garmin when I replaced all the electronics on our new to us boat was my dislike of some of the modes of presentation of navionics and the economics once you enter garmin world. I like navionics on a iPad for planning but not as a primary aid to navigation. I do have a navionics chip in the MFD system but also have c-maps. I have Open on the laptop. I do have paper. I don’t fully trust any of them.
We do carry chart one on paper and still need to refer to it time to time just like the rules of the road and solas but also have them in the pads. But I got to admit I often just pick a direction or a final destination fire the bad boy up and leave. Never hit anyone nor been hit. Never asked for a tow or any outside assistance. Haven’t even been asked “please state intentions “. Perhaps I’m lucky. Have used ranges (seem to remember one at morehead city) and of course sector lights. But it’s usually “what’s that honey?” then looking at various sources to get comfortable we’ll be safe before proceeding. Don’t feel safe don’t go. PS had no choice. It’s his job. Recreational boaters do. Sure the most important decisions occur before you leave. Boat’s good to go? Check. Crew in good shape and knowledgeable? Check. Is what I intend to do safe? Check. PS is right you should be using good information to answer that last question. How you get it is secondary as long as you get.
East coast is different than west. Harbors abound and they’re usually close to together. Figure out landfalls an hour or three before we get there not infrequently. Don’t feel comfortable about the situation choose another. We avoid things that are sketchy. Can’t remember the times I’ve done the Jersey coast. To date it’s Atlantic highlands then cape May.
Sure we plot and research possibly stops before leaving. But many of the nuances posted here are true and important in so far that they may lead us to avoid their being applicable if possible.
Find I’m enjoying worrying less about draft and gradually becoming less stressed gunkholing. Still view charts as a suggestion not the reality in that activity.

 

[Art]

SF Delta - Plastic flip pages... spiral bound. Just for kicks! More accurate than you'd think!!

 

[Simi 60]

SF Delta - Plastic flip pages... spiral bound. Just for kicks! More accurate than you'd think!!

Nice but no such thing exists in much of the world
I wish they did.

 

[Art]

Nice but no such thing exists in much of the world
I wish they did.

So do I.

 

[mvweebles]

Does the relevant chart book or cruising guide give one enough to get in safely?

Really depends. A couple years ago I was with a friend on the ICW down towards Boca Grande. A bridge was closed so rather than backtrack, we took a cut that was clearly labeled "local knowledge needed." Being Alpha Males, we figured we could figure it out. Half way through the cut we were stranded and didn't know which way to go. We were 'rescued' by a local on a 45-foot motoryacht who escorted us through the cut. Hippocampus: you'll find it humorous he was a retired doctor and his boat was "No Patients."

I still like cruising guides, but they vary widely. Back in the day, there were two main ones for the west coast. One was excellent (Don & Reanne Douglass aboard an early Nordhavn 40) and the other was so-so at best (Brian Fagan on a sailboat). The Douglass's had clearly been in/out of every possible gunkhole. I suspect Fagan did a number of drive-bys as many of his descriptions were generic and felt like they were from the Coast Pilot.

The posts directly before this discuss the California Delta. Hal Schell wrote the definitive guide to the region and published a map (yes, a map) that gives more usable information than any chart could ever offer. Sadly, the book was not updated after his passing 20-years ago, but if i were headed to the Delta, it would be the one book and map I'd have at my helm station because the sidebar articles are so rich in history and context. Good travel books are like that I suppose.

Delivery skippers John & Pat Rains wrote the definitive cruising guide of California to Florida. Pat is still active and has just issued an update. She is also generous with her time and an active contributor to Southbound group.io, a west coast cruising network.

Cruising guides seem to have given way go ActiveCaptain which is a shame. While there are some good contributors to ActiveCaptain, it varies widely and you just don't know the experience level of the reviewer. Besides, they all tend to cluster in the same place. While I've never been, Rio Dulce is on my distant radar to visit. Crossing the shoal is apparently a challenge - a good cruising guide with broader view than a single boat is invaluable. There is at least one well respected cruising guide for the Rio.

Like yourself Hippocampus, i view navigation as a toolbox. Sometimes you have precisely the right tool and no need to look further. Sometimes you have to improvise and triangulate and make a decision on how confident you are in your conclusion. And sometimes prudence takes hold. There are a number of entrances on the Pacific Coast that I wouldn't enter if God himself signed the chart and promised good weather (Depot Bay OR comes to mind - pic attached).

Peter

PS: if I remember, Don & Reanne Douglass circumnavigated on a sailboat he built. She wrote a book about her experience on the cruise - its an extremely interesting read because it's from a wife's point if view and is far from glowing. Reading it, hard to imagine they were happily married.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01L7YQNV2/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_H53197H5JXD6EEC1K3SB

 

[Inbreaker]

I returned to this thread with a heavy sense of misgiving. It turned out much as could have been predicted.
The first commercial vessel I worked on had only a compass, properly swung, and a wet roll sounder, and paper. Admittedly, the skipper managed to run us aground one night- high and dry when the tide went out- but that was more alcohol related than anything else. We operated all over the central BC coast with paper charts and nothing more. Everybody did.
Then some of the fleet got radar. Radar! Magic!
I have navigated in that way, and with the old Magnavox sat nav in the South Pacific, and then a handheld Magellan (which saved my bacon, together with-yes, paper charts after being hit by lightning), with raster charts on a laptop and vectors on Simrad and Garmin MFDs.
With an even moderate understanding of basic principles of navigation, MFDs with either raster or vector charts are- in historical marine terms, miraculous. If Olaf had had one of those he he probably would not have driven us into downtown Courteney, passed (spell check correction) as he was.
I would not go anywhere without an MFD and up to date chart card. But I like paper charts. And I should get another hand held GPS. Enough!
Otherwise, I need a new anchor. What do you recommend?

 

[twistedtree]

I did a quick look to see what the US chart carriage requirements are for recreational vessels, and from what I could find, the answer is none. Does anyone know otherwise?

 

[rslifkin]

I did a quick look to see what the US chart carriage requirements are for recreational vessels, and from what I could find, the answer is none. Does anyone know otherwise?

I don't know of any chart carriage requirements for recreational vessels in the US.

 

[psneeld]

I did a quick look to see what the US chart carriage requirements are for recreational vessels, and from what I could find, the answer is none. Does anyone know otherwise?

For vessels under certain lengths...

No charts
No anchor
No oars/secondary propulsion
No radio
No operational experience

Certain local waters do have special requirements....of all kinds...

To power boat in the Everglades Nat Park...you need to take their special education program... I don't recall if it specifically refers to charted areas so is a backdoor way, you may be required to at least have a park chart. Or like any restricted area, you are just supposed to know.

 

[ssobol]

... PS: if I remember, Don & Reanne Douglass circumnavigated on a sailboat he built. She wrote a book about her experience on the cruise - its an extremely interesting read because it's from a wife's point if view and is far from glowing. Reading it, hard to imagine they were happily married.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01L7YQNV2/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_H53197H5JXD6EEC1K3SB

Well, they did try to go around Cape Horn where a wave trashed their boat and they were in survival mode for 40+ days. Probably would put a lot of people off boating if that happened to them and lead to a few terse moments between even the best of couples.

 

[AnneC]

NOAA produces pdfs of charts that can be downloaded for free. Their website lists several companies - most or all are online - that have the NOAA's approval to print out the pdfs to the correct scale. When these companies print them out, they update them with the latest NOAA updates, which are listed on the https://msi.nga.mil/ website. I shopped around and got several Southern California charts for about $20 each online. They were printed on heavy sturdy paper and look to be of very good color quality.

 

[Hippocampus]

Recently blew the bucks for two ICW guides and the various Explorer chart books for the Bahamas. Re upped on WaterwayGuide as well. Previously did the same for the Windwards and the Leewards. Charts be they vector or raster don’t tell you a lot. Neither walk you through a landfall to a new to you harbor or country in a manner to decrease stress. Sure the information is available elsewhere. Noonsite, WaterwayGuide electronically even navionics or C-map. But find having a chart book open with guide book next to it and several charts on electronic screens is very helpful. Usually the admiral is looking at the various paper sources and reading out loud the salient points while I’m looking at screens. Maybe a belt and suspenders approach but have seen many other cruisers having the same approach. All to often youcruising a coast line having not decided where to stop or having changed our mind as to where to stop. We commonly pick a direction and go. Know this not the style of many but we are cruisers not held to a schedule. Get tired, want to fix something, decide we want to see something or the myriad reasons to change plans want to quickly learn about a potential landfall and decide if it easy, safe and enjoyable to stop there. Paper is and I suspect will always be part of the equation.