Capt. Mooron wrote:
"Wally" wrote in message

GPS should still be able to give lat/long, which can be found on the
paper chart. (At no point have I said that nav aids should be a
substitute for the traditional tools, to the extent that the latter
should be left ashore.)

Ask Bob what his coordinate system is set at.... let alone how to
interpolate that data onto a chart. He has no clue as to chart datum
and wouldn't comprehend UTM from Lat/Lon.... seconds, minutes and
degrees are greek to him..... yet he uses a GPS.

Duh...., okay...


--
Wally
www.makearatherlonglinkthattakesyounowhere.com
Things are always clearer in the cold, post-upload light.

"Wally" wrote in message

| Duh...., okay...

Better yet ... let's ask Bob how to denote the following "fixes"

Time/Speed Bearing

Triangulation

Fix with confirmation from GPS/Radar

How would you note this on the charted plot??

CM

Subject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: (Bobsprit)
Date: 09/02/2003 04:04 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


I've been using several books to aid Suzanne with learning basic nav skills.
Dispite Mooron's comment that Radar is a "basic" component for the novice,
it's
not covered at all until (Colgate, Seamanship series and so on)
Some of these books are up to 4 years old. I'm guessing that NEW books will
show that learning radar is a basic nav skill that a person should start
with.

RB


Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one, but not as
important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as compass,
chart work, etc..
Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just turn on,
for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's usage.
I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis, who have
problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then equating that
picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets, you can
easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.

Shen

"Shen44" wrote in message

| Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one, but
not as
| important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as
compass,
| chart work, etc..
| Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just turn
on,
| for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's
usage.
| I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis, who
have
| problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then equating
that
| picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets, you
can
| easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.

Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I haven't
seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image... tuning
radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
newbie.

While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome... a
radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is perfectly
fine.

The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the general
population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.

CM

I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.

Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.

Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
and representative distances with respect to scale are
concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
at spatiality.

I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.

S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work




"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ...

"Shen44" wrote in message

| Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one, but
not as
| important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as
compass,
| chart work, etc..
| Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just turn
on,
| for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's
usage.
| I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis, who
have
| problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then equating
that
| picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets, you
can
| easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.

Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I haven't
seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image... tuning
radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
newbie.

While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome... a
radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is perfectly
fine.

The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the general
population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.

CM

Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended limits of
an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on mirrors and the visual
depth of field at a specific spot to determine this. This is one of the
reasons why women generally do not back into a parking space... while men
prefer to. I say this is a general trait.... I know of women who are very
good with spatial interpretation.

If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to resolve the
image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep in mind that often you
only view the proximal reflected surface of any object. The "chart" on a
radar screen is always oriented to the line of the vessel and bearing is
always relative unless a fluxgate compass or GPS input is available. In a
day or two I could easily have you running with a full comprehension of
radar... at least as well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no problem....

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
|
|
| I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
| of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
| to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
| a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
| apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.
|
| Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.
|
| Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
| look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
| more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
| display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
| than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
| and representative distances with respect to scale are
| concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
| radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
| much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
| spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
| geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
| at spatiality.
|
| I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
| that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
| yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
| the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
| the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.
|
| S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work
|
|
|
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
|
| "Shen44" wrote in message
|
| | Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one,
but
| not as
| | important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as
| compass,
| | chart work, etc..
| | Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just
turn
| on,
| | for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's
| usage.
| | I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis,
who
| have
| | problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
equating
| that
| | picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| | Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets,
you
| can
| | easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.
|
| Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I
haven't
| seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image...
tuning
| radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
| newbie.
|
| While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome...
a
| radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is
perfectly
| fine.
|
| The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
| Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the
general
| population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.
|
| CM
|
|
|
|

But radar is different from a paper chart because
a paper chart does not foreshorten the view while
radar does. Radar is really no different than a
looking at something with eyes that use radio
waves instead of light waves

Our eyes use light and when we see a hundred
yards of water at a distance of a quarter mile this
hundred yards of water looks a helluva lot shorter
than the same hundred yards right off our bow.

Radar 'sees' thing the same way so one must
extrapolate this information mentally in order
to match it with a chart of the same area.

It would be much the same as equating a gnomic
projection with a Mercator projection but backwards
if looking north on a Mercator.

See what I mean? But the point is the majority
of people can't even imagine such differences
let alone work with them.

This is what I mean by spatial comprehension.

S.Simon - a sailboat Captain who's superior to any and all motorboat Captains

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ...
Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended limits of
an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on mirrors and the visual
depth of field at a specific spot to determine this. This is one of the
reasons why women generally do not back into a parking space... while men
prefer to. I say this is a general trait.... I know of women who are very
good with spatial interpretation.

If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to resolve the
image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep in mind that often you
only view the proximal reflected surface of any object. The "chart" on a
radar screen is always oriented to the line of the vessel and bearing is
always relative unless a fluxgate compass or GPS input is available. In a
day or two I could easily have you running with a full comprehension of
radar... at least as well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no problem....

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
|
|
| I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
| of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
| to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
| a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
| apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.
|
| Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.
|
| Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
| look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
| more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
| display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
| than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
| and representative distances with respect to scale are
| concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
| radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
| much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
| spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
| geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
| at spatiality.
|
| I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
| that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
| yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
| the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
| the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.
|
| S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work
|
|
|
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
|
| "Shen44" wrote in message
|
| | Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has one,
but
| not as
| | important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics, such as
| compass,
| | chart work, etc..
| | Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can just
turn
| on,
| | for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with it's
| usage.
| | I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular basis,
who
| have
| | problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
equating
| that
| | picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| | Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot targets,
you
| can
| | easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.
|
| Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I
haven't
| seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image...
tuning
| radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
| newbie.
|
| While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome...
a
| radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is
perfectly
| fine.
|
| The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
| Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the
general
| population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.
|
| CM
|
|
|
|

But radar is different from a paper chart

A major breakthrough for Neal, folks!!!


Bwahahahaha!

RB

Most people I've seen either find a radar image intuitively correct to what
they see around them ... or they don't. I knew immediately what I was
looking at on the first radar image I saw. I can interpolate between radar,
air photo and chart in an instant. I mentally compensate for differences in
scale and orientation. Maybe I'm one of the lucky few... but I assumed
everyone had this ability to some extent.

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
|
| But radar is different from a paper chart because
| a paper chart does not foreshorten the view while
| radar does. Radar is really no different than a
| looking at something with eyes that use radio
| waves instead of light waves
|
| Our eyes use light and when we see a hundred
| yards of water at a distance of a quarter mile this
| hundred yards of water looks a helluva lot shorter
| than the same hundred yards right off our bow.
|
| Radar 'sees' thing the same way so one must
| extrapolate this information mentally in order
| to match it with a chart of the same area.
|
| It would be much the same as equating a gnomic
| projection with a Mercator projection but backwards
| if looking north on a Mercator.
|
| See what I mean? But the point is the majority
| of people can't even imagine such differences
| let alone work with them.
|
| This is what I mean by spatial comprehension.
|
| S.Simon - a sailboat Captain who's superior to any and all motorboat
Captains
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
| Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
| comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended limits
of
| an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on mirrors and the
visual
| depth of field at a specific spot to determine this. This is one of the
| reasons why women generally do not back into a parking space... while
men
| prefer to. I say this is a general trait.... I know of women who are
very
| good with spatial interpretation.
|
| If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to resolve
the
| image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep in mind that often
you
| only view the proximal reflected surface of any object. The "chart" on a
| radar screen is always oriented to the line of the vessel and bearing is
| always relative unless a fluxgate compass or GPS input is available. In
a
| day or two I could easily have you running with a full comprehension of
| radar... at least as well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no
problem....
|
| CM
|
| "Simple Simon" wrote in message
| ...
| |
| |
| | I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
| | of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
| | to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
| | a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
| | apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.
| |
| | Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.
| |
| | Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
| | look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
| | more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
| | display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
| | than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
| | and representative distances with respect to scale are
| | concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
| | radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
| | much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
| | spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
| | geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
| | at spatiality.
| |
| | I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
| | that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
| | yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
| | the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
| | the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.
| |
| | S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
| ...
| |
| | "Shen44" wrote in message
| |
| | | Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has
one,
| but
| | not as
| | | important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics,
such as
| | compass,
| | | chart work, etc..
| | | Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can
just
| turn
| | on,
| | | for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with
it's
| | usage.
| | | I have seen any number of people using it on a fairly regular
basis,
| who
| | have
| | | problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
| equating
| | that
| | | picture to their charts or vessel traffic around them.
| | | Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot
targets,
| you
| | can
| | | easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.
| |
| | Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I
| haven't
| | seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image...
| tuning
| | radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of
the
| | newbie.
| |
| | While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to
overcome...
| a
| | radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is
| perfectly
| | fine.
| |
| | The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
| | Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the
| general
| | population's ability to embrace technology has increased
dramatically.
| |
| | CM
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|

And you, even if you could envision it in your mind's eye,
have no paper charts to compare the radar image to.

Hooooo Hah!

S.Simon - a Captain who knows a fraud when he sees one


"Bobsprit" wrote in message ...
But radar is different from a paper chart

A major breakthrough for Neal, folks!!!


Bwahahahaha!

RB