paper charts

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
catalinajack said:
All this hoohah about electronics failure goes in the same bin as worrying about a lightning strike. Having a backup leaves no worry at all.
Click to expand...

According to Boat US, you have about a 1 in 1000 chance of being stuck by lightening in the US, based on insurance claims paid. That makes it a rare event but not that rare. In one year on the east coast a boat was struck in the same anchorage I was in (with about 50 other boats) on two occasions. In the Southeast, the chances of lightening are far greater than in the PNW for example. Your chances of dying in a car accident in any year are about 1/10th that rate, yet most people wear seat belts. Chances of sinking are still less, yet many people carry liferafts or EBIRBs.

Thinking that your cell phone or laptop will still function after a lightening strike is very optimistic. Often they will all be dead - that is what causes the insurance claims. On the two occasions mentioned above, not a single electronic device onboard was functioning, in neither case was there significant structural damage.
 
mvweebles said:
As part of required coursework? Or some sort of historical view that includes art of scrimshaw, using an adz to hew a keel timber, careening a boat for repairs, blunderbuss marksmanship (handy for SHTF scenarios), curing fish in salt barrels (handy if refrigeration goes out), rendering blubber into lamp oil (handy if electricity goes out), and rigging a topsail (handy if engine goes out)?

Peter.
Click to expand...

mvweebkes, you will have to ask the folks at the Academy. maybe they are suddenly 'belts and suspenders'.
 
What do engineers do when bored. Well, yesterday, two I know decided to go boating with a purpose. They took a set of 20 year old charts, a set of 11 year old charts and a set of charts printed yesterday. They had a Garmin plotter (updated yesterday) on a center console and a depth finder. They went from Fort Lauderdale to West Palm and did some canals and rivers between. Now this is a well maintained area, not like you might find in South Georgia or Central SC.

In advance they marked all major differences in the three charts. They concerned themselves with whether a boat with a 6' draft would run aground.

They checked 79 specific differences. 60 of the differences weren't going to run a 6' draft aground anyway or so they thought. However, interestingly, 4 of those were getting close and 1 that showed 7' on today's printed chart showed shoaling on Garmin and 6' and actually measured 5'.

So, not to the other 19 which showed 6' or less on one of the charts. 2 showed 6' eleven years ago and 8' today and are now 8' or more so clearly dredging and not a problem on any charts. Now, to the final 17. The 11 year old chart was not appreciably better than the 20 year old and appeared to mostly use the same data. Only one instant where it would have protected you and the 20 would not have. 11 cases where the current chart showed 6' and had at least that or more so the difference in charts made no difference as to running aground on a 6' draft but the differences would have been significant to greater drafts.

This left 6 cases of significance to a 6' draft. In five of those today's chart would have protected you and in only one of those would have the 11 year chart while in 5 it would not have and the 20 year old would not have in any. In some cases the older charts has as much as 8 and current chart showed 5' or so. In one case the older charts had 7 and the current showed 3' and that's what it measured. Note that they did find an old notice to mariners but it was just that, old. If you're looking at recent notices, you wouldn't see it. Then there was the 1 remaining spot where the 20 year old chart showed 8', 11 year old showed 8' and current one showed 6' but Garmin showed 4' and they measured 4'.

Now none of these were in the channel of the ICW so stick there through this area and you're safe. However, some were just outside the channel. Others were side rivers or canals. If you were local you likely would have known to exercise care. It's just one small group, but it also clearly shows some shoaling and filling that didn't exist 11 and 20 years ago. It appeared the 11 year old chart had very little work done to improve versus the 20 but today's chart had a lot of improvement. The one where Garmin indicated 4' and the current chart 6', I looked at more carefully and found an Active Captain posting six months ago. I don't know if that accounted for it or not.

If you never leave the channel, it doesn't likely matter. However, if you take side rivers and streams or pull out of the channel occasionally, then with the limited dredging over the last 10 and 20 years, I'd be concerned and have the latest chart I could.

Note this was not about paper vs. electronic, but about old paper vs. current. Oh and just out of interest there was one old location close to the channel that showed 6' twenty years ago and a 3' shoal eleven years ago but 8' in today's chart. They only checked that because they knew the old charts had to be wrong. Actual today was 10'. Clearly much better dredging.
 
There will be more and more of these notices in the Chart Corrections section of the LNM:

LAST EDITION
No new editions of chart 11487 will be published. It will be canceled on
06-Apr-22. Comparable or larger scale Electronic Navigational Chart
(ENC) coverage is available. See "Cancellation of NOAA Paper and Raster
Nautical Charts" in Section I of this LNM for details. A list of all canceled
NOAA charts is at https://www.charts.noaa.gov/MCD/Dole.shtml.
 
When I was taking Canadian power and sail courses they gave me a 3450 chart clearly marked "not for navigation". Since it happened to be my main area I used that chart for navigation.

This thread reminded me of my Marine Atlas Volume 1 Olympia to Malcom Island 1977 (51 pages) which comes with compass course lines from A to B with marked 1 nautical mile. Also marked "not for navigation". I have many penciled course lines on the pages for my personal favorite routes. All the routes are in deep water then and now.
These were my paper charts and they are on this boat in case my chart plotter, radar and GPS all suddenly die.
But mostly I navigate with the eyes day or night. My water job on the coast involved ferrying forestry crews to remote places and landing them feet dry. I think that taught me a lot about where it is shallow and where it is deep. The colour of the water, the wave action changes.
 
WOW
Reading (scanning) through this thread I wish it included a poll to see how many still carry, use or like paper. 100++ posts and didn't see the OP return so question must be answered and I'm glad to see there is concensus about this lol... like many TF topics.
I personally like having paper in addition to echarts for a couple reasons.
Planning IMO much better w paper
I can view echarts at thebhelm while mate can reference paper.. I like to have big picture readily available w/o zooming screens
I run MFD and tablet w Navionics for 2 views at helm so already have redundancy but a third with paper is comforting.
 
Bacchus said:
WOW
Reading (scanning) through this thread I wish it included a poll to see how many still carry, use or like paper. 100++ posts and didn't see the OP return so question must be answered and I'm glad to see there is concensus about this lol... like many TF topics.
I personally like having paper in addition to echarts for a couple reasons.
Planning IMO much better w paper
I can view echarts at thebhelm while mate can reference paper.. I like to have big picture readily available w/o zooming screens
I run MFD and tablet w Navionics for 2 views at helm so already have redundancy but a third with paper is comforting.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, how old are your paper charts?
 
Regarding old charts, if I decide to go to Pitcairn Island, I dont want the Admiralty charts that the Royal Navy at the time had, but the electronic ones that get upgraded every week or so.
 
Bacchus said:
WOW
Reading (scanning) through this thread I wish it included a poll to see how many still carry, use or like paper. 100++ posts and didn't see the OP return so question must be answered and I'm glad to see there is concensus about this lol... like many TF topics.
I personally like having paper in addition to echarts for a couple reasons.
Planning IMO much better w paper
I can view echarts at thebhelm while mate can reference paper.. I like to have big picture readily available w/o zooming screens
I run MFD and tablet w Navionics for 2 views at helm so already have redundancy but a third with paper is comforting.
Click to expand...


I carry aboard paper chart No. 1 and several others of bays near me. These other charts have numerous notes for anchoring and fishing. I only pull out the paper charts when I am giving directions to others.



I use OpenCPN and Navionics for general use.
 
A number of responses in the anti-paper chart vein seem to think that those making pro-paper chart comments are using them for navigation. I think that is likely a misconception.

Reading through a bunch of these posts you see many comments from the pro-chart group like these:

"Planning IMO much better w paper"
"I only pull out the paper charts when I am giving directions to others."
"I like to have big picture readily available w/o zooming screens"
"keep wide area (coastal) paper charts for seeing the big picture"
"My sweetie prefers paper charts to electronics for planning"
"I also like the large paper chart for planning a cruise or for a wide area view of where we are."

I would be very surprised if anyone on this board is actually using paper charts for navigating. IMO the real difference between the two groups is that one group sees the utility of a large scale paper chart for planning/fun, with the added benefit that it can serve as an ultimate back-up in event of catastrophe - even if out of date, while the other group prefers to do all chart viewing on a plotter or MFD and does not anticipate or consider the potential for failure, and therefore sees no benefit of the paper as a back up.

Personally I would rather have an outdated paper chart on board as my back-up than nothing. Just as I would rather have out of date flares, liferaft etc, than none. I will not rely on those outdated items for any purpose unless they are needed.

This will not convince anyone, positions here are pretty cemented so we should perhaps add this to the list of topic that starts with "Anchor selection!".
 
Obviously opinions vary. It may come down to what you learned with. When I started boating on my own there was no GPS. I like paper to see the 'big picture' quickly, I have two GPS chart plotters (plus Iphone!) so not really worried about them going down, though I've had them fail and glitch (reboot on their own). But I do find its faster and easier to get an overview on large paper chart than the screen. But I commit a cardinal sin, I do fold my charts so I can keep it next to the helm at all times. However I haven't laid a course on a paper chart for years.
 
A few years ago I took an advanced printing class where we were printing etchings on various types of paper. While talking, I mentioned that I was a boater. Another student asked if I had old paper charts. She used them to print nautical pictures (or a custom line drawing of your hull) over compass roses and famous areas on old charts. She offered to buy them at more than I paid ($4.95 back in the day). Turns out that printing over old charts was one of her most lucrative products. Naw, I'll keep mine (at home) for their entertainment value, just like my "78" record collection. You all kept your 78s and gramaphones didn't you?
 
BandB said:
Out of curiosity, how old are your paper charts?
Click to expand...
Most of mine are rather dated but most are in areas that change little if at all. The granite in Georgian Bay changes very little.
The charts we use frequently are NY & Canadian Canal systems. I also borrowed and used daily the Georgian Bay Small Craft Charts. I would not do any of those areas without charts but I always have echarts up and running at the helm. The paper provide the big picture and as I mentioned are convenient for my mate to be viewing and watching. If there is any question on discrepancy we stop & compare notes. I do recall one instance were Navionics showed a different preferred route than paper and we stopped to review. It turned out both options were acceptable and paper were the official marked channel but Navionics showed a shorter route which was also very navigable.
If cruising new areas or ones I get to infrequently I'm a planner so always work ahead off line with paper.
I'm sure this is a function of how I learned to navigate. I frequently work out waypoints off line, check my work then enter them into my MFD and again cross check the resulting routes.
I found the Great Lakes Cruising Club charts and info very helpful when we cruised Georgian Bay. Although they have all their info in eformat I printed areas of interest and found looking at the print easier than laptop. Their info is most useful in areas with no nav aids and are very localized as in how to enter a restricted Anchorage and show more info than any echart at any zoom level contains.
 
Last edited:
AlanT said:
A number of responses in the anti-paper chart vein seem to think that those making pro-paper chart comments are using them for navigation. I think that is likely a misconception.



Reading through a bunch of these posts you see many comments from the pro-chart group like these:



"Planning IMO much better w paper"

"I only pull out the paper charts when I am giving directions to others."

"I like to have big picture readily available w/o zooming screens"

"keep wide area (coastal) paper charts for seeing the big picture"

"My sweetie prefers paper charts to electronics for planning"

"I also like the large paper chart for planning a cruise or for a wide area view of where we are."



I would be very surprised if anyone on this board is actually using paper charts for navigating. IMO the real difference between the two groups is that one group sees the utility of a large scale paper chart for planning/fun, with the added benefit that it can serve as an ultimate back-up in event of catastrophe - even if out of date, while the other group prefers to do all chart viewing on a plotter or MFD and does not anticipate or consider the potential for failure, and therefore sees no benefit of the paper as a back up.



Personally I would rather have an outdated paper chart on board as my back-up than nothing. Just as I would rather have out of date flares, liferaft etc, than none. I will not rely on those outdated items for any purpose unless they are needed.



This will not convince anyone, positions here are pretty cemented so we should perhaps add this to the list of topic that starts with "Anchor selection!".
Click to expand...
Alan
Excellent summary of the pro paper folks rationale.
I took the Georgian Bay Small Craft charts to FL the winter before we were headed there. I thought it would entertain me on a rainy day doing some planning. Long story short I discovered a guy I had met at the pool one day had a seasonal slip & boated the area of interest.
He provided a wealth of info that I used post it notes to mark recommended anchorages and places to avoid. I dont think Navionics on a tablet would have been anywhere near as productive as a chart in front of us.
 
@slowmo, the cardinal sin is not folding charts, but rolling them. Just like with architectural blueprints
 
I think Alan did a great job of summarizing. This was never really about which is better. I think the majority of us can agree that a current electronic chart is most accurate for navigating especially in your current location. Some of us may never look at a paper chart again, but for those of us that do, it seems that most like the large area view for general planning more than navigating. And in a pinch, when all else fails (if ever) they are a backup that even if not the most current revision, is still better than nothing at all. Anyway, good discussion, not sure there is much more that needs to be debated.
 
Side Question - what documentary? Trying to get my wife interested in the trawler culture and looping. Anything like that might help her understand it a bit better.
 
trouble with E charts

As tiltrider1 mentioned, a hazard of piloting with E charts is that when you zoom out, that is, hit the minus button a few times, small details (like hazards) drop out of view.

A few years ago, a professsional race crew, on a trans pacific race ran into an atoll because they had backed out to the larger view and lost the atoll entirely.
 
Because, if it runs on electrons, it will fail at some point. My experience is that; it's usually when you need it the most.
 
Using paper he must have been on the water a long time like me. In my book there is no substitute.
 
While serving aboard a US naval destroyer in the 90's, I built a database to keep track of our paper charts. We must have had THOUSANDS of them, no joke. I guess those days are gone...

Having said that, were I to be aboard boat/ship again, I would at least have a few paper charts for my homeport as well other significant ports where I might need to shelter, plus a small scale chart of the coast I was operating out of.

I guess the powers that be must know something, as most folks seem OVERLY reliant on electronics, IMHO...
 
Why Paper Charts?

My then 14 year old trawler's OEM Raymarine C-9 and C-12 MFDs Yshowed my boat at least 100 ashore - dry land - when transiting the ICW between Pamlico and Bay Rivers one day. That got my attention, and I wondered what else might be wrong. Quickly checking DR from a fixed marker affirmed where I was, and the episode led me to replace the old nav electronics with Garmin MFDs, Garmin Fusion radar, etc. Years before GPS, paper charts, a straight edge and compass were more than adequate in my small sailboat in those waters.

Now I find planning primary destinations and alternate shorter destinations for bad weather on paper, testing the plan on Navionics - fast and easy, and tracking progress on MFDs gives me a great visual concept, a quick route, and clear evaluation underway - hence, confidence. Plus, using a paper chart helps explain/discuss/evaluate the trip and each day's objectives with the Admiral or other crew.

A Wyoming cowboy explained to me once that a good cattle drive began at the breakfast table every day. Same applies for each day of a cruise, and paper charts make that easier, also building teamwork with the crew. It's fun, too.
 
papa charts or not

Some on this forum confuse the operation of the gps system with the advisability of carrying paper charts. These are entirely different things.

If the gps shuts down you can still navigate wth the digital charts, even easier than with paper. Usually the charts are stored on redundant devices. If all power goes down you won’t need navigation in any event.

I carried a complete set (almost 60 lbs worth) of every chart in British Columbia and SE Alaska. I realized at some point that it had been over ten years since I had pulled out a chart. So I sold them to a person whose friends had told him how important it was to carry paper charts.

Regarding the Navy teaching celestial (which I doubt) I can elate that about ten years ago I was asked to give a lecture at the Naval Observatory in DC. When there, my host asked if there was anything they could do for me. I asked if they could get me a sextant which I assumed they had many of. After asking all his colleagues he came back to tell me that no one knew of the existence of a sextant in that institute. Amazing!!

And by the way, most NAVY ships, and all submarines, navigate by inertial guidance. Surface ships use gps and the inertial is back up. For subs, GPS won’t work when submerged but inertial guidance is more than sufficient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom