The post about taking your charts with a grain of salt and using all
available information brings up the conundrum I'm facing as I return
to sailing after nearly 20 years.

Most of my command time was in simple, traditional, boats. The most
complex instrument on board was my usually watch. I didn't even have a
depth sounder or speedometer and navigated clock and compass exactly
as was done 100 years ago. Since I sailed in Maine, I saw a lot of fog
and made a lot of long runs this way.

Never in a boat have I felt more aware and in touch with my
surroundings then when enveloped in that gray cocoon with buoys and
ledges occasionally moving through it, usually right on schedule. The
faint sound of a wave on rock, the darkening of the fog where a
headland blocked the light, a change in wave patterns as I passed a
gap in a protecting chain of islands or ledges, all helped confirm
that my chart work was right.

Some of the later boats I chartered had Loran but I never turned it
on. I didn't want to be distracted by learning it and using the old
ways was a big part of the enjoyment of cruising. I used (and taught
when I was a piloting instructor) very simple methods that would be
less likely to let me down when tired or busy. Instead of speed and
distance calculations, I would just set my dividers to the boat's
speed on the scale and then do everything in time.

On one of my last charters, a hurricane threatened. We were way
downeast and the owner insisted that we had to get sixty miles back to
his mooring in dense fog instead of tucking the boat into a hole and
riding it out. It was one of the thickest fogs I have ever seen. We
ran through most of Fox Island Thoroughfare without seeing either
shore. It was a memorable day.


I learned how to fly airplanes a few years later and that put
navigation in a whole new light. The plane had Loran and GPS but I
refused to turn them on for the first three years so that I would
develop the map and eyeball skills and a feel for the distances and
speed. Now I use the magic boxes all the time but, in some ways, my
situational awareness is less. I track a position that I can transfer
to the paper map it the power fails but it is different. I used to be
flying over the land and identified fixes below. Now I am flying over
the map. You get lazy fast, especially with all the other things to
attend to in an airplane.

Now that I am about to return to boat piloting, I'm unsure about the
place of GPS in my life. The old ways were a big part of cruising for
me. Ride a cable car up a mountain in Switzerland and you may see
people with ropes hanging by their fingernails trying to get the same
place you are going. The rational is similar. I'd also like my video
gaming kids to learn what the human mind can accomplish without the
aid of a microprocessor.

But, is it responsible? It certainly won't be seen as such if I ever
hit anything. On the other hand, I know of many aircraft accidents
that were clearly caused by the pilot trying to use the box instead of
his mind. I always used to know where I was. I'm not sure narrowing it
down with an electronic cursor will significantly increase my safety
in most circumstances.

The strongest rational I can see for relating my place in life to
invisible satellites instead of the landscape I can see around me is
backup for my macroprocessor. If I should fall overboard or become
incapacitated, the kids can either tell the Coast Guard, "We're right
here", or follow the cursor home. I'd like to think I could teach them
to do the same thing the old way but, face it, they know about GPS,
they aren't going to be very interested in learning that, "other
stuff".

I like gadgets though. I have an old aviation GPS that will give me
latitude, longitude, and waypoints. I can't knowingly leave it ashore.
I'll have to buy a marine unit for my new job as Harbormaster. I won't
leave that behind either. Once I turn them on, I know I'll be hooked
and something very rich and rewarding will have passed from my life
forever.


--

Roger Long

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:18:02 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:
Once I turn them on, I know I'll be hooked
and something very rich and rewarding will have passed from my life
forever.

=================================

Nicely put Roger. I started cruising on small boats back in the 70s
when an RDF was high tech, and we always went everywhere we wanted to
go, including Maine and the fog. The new gadgets are great however
and they have their own rewards, not the least of which is always
knowing exactly where you are. That leaves more time for other things
like looking out for the lobster pots.

I probably saw more lobster buoys when I studied each one intently as
I passed to see if there was any current change to account for than I
will when I'm just checking the GPS track.

OTOH, my new boat is going to be a warp catcher so I'll be looking for
them.

--

Roger Long



"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:18:02 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:
Once I turn them on, I know I'll be hooked
and something very rich and rewarding will have passed from my life
forever.

=================================

Nicely put Roger. I started cruising on small boats back in the 70s
when an RDF was high tech, and we always went everywhere we wanted
to
go, including Maine and the fog. The new gadgets are great however
and they have their own rewards, not the least of which is always
knowing exactly where you are. That leaves more time for other
things
like looking out for the lobster pots.

A smart boater doesn't give up the charts. You still have to know where
you are, and where you are going. I always lay out my course on the
paper chart and track it on paper too. In a boat GPS is just another
tool and should never be used as the only source of navigation.
I always have in my mind, course, speed, and time, with GPS it's from
waypoint to waypoint, just a change of terms. I always know what the
heading should be from one waypoint to another and have caught many
errors because I did know.
The biggest mistake new boaters make is not learning basic navigation
skills. I boat in the western end of Lake Erie, there are to many reefs,
and islands that will not let you just look up a waypoint to where you
want to go and enter it in a GPS and launch off on the trip. More than
once a season a boat will end up on the beach or on a reef, many time
killing one or more on board. Why, because they entered the waypoint
they wanted and took off at night, and sure enough that island was right
on their straight line course. They would have known that was the case
if they would have charted it first, before leaving.
The other problem is that the units can fail half way thru the trip and
at night or in even a heavy haze, you'd have no clue as to where you
were if you didn't back the GPS up with the tried and true methods. The
only difference today with GPS you don't have to be quite as careful
ploting and tracking.
The only thing I totally rely on my GPS for is "time to go", I have to
go thru a draw bridge to get to my dock, it opens on the half hour, so I
set my speed to be on time. The problem if the GPS screws up, I sit for
a while waiting for the bridge to open, no big deal.
So if you're smart you will still have and use the paper charts.

I agree 100%. I would never give up the paper charts and always will
consider them the primary navigation tool. It's a question of
constantly updating from GPS fixes or from time, distance, and cross
bearings.

--

Roger Long

You can find any number of cases where someone had an accident because
they "eyeball" navigated and ignored their instruments.
You can find any number of cases where someone had an accident because
they "electronically" navigated and ignored their "eyeball"
You rarely (note "rarely" .... not always) find a case where someone had
an accident when they were using all means available.
There's nothing wrong with many of the "old" methods, but they required
training and experience and the knowledge of their drawbacks.
Even at night, you could tell when the seas shortened and became steeper
as you approached shallower water. Even at night you could identify
currents by increased whitecaps or disturbed water.
The problem with many of these methods is they aren't always available
and you need to know what to look for, if it is.

otn

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:18:02 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:

The post about taking your charts with a grain of salt and using all
available information brings up the conundrum I'm facing as I return
to sailing after nearly 20 years.

Most of my command time was in simple, traditional, boats. The most
complex instrument on board was my usually watch. I didn't even have a
depth sounder or speedometer and navigated clock and compass exactly
as was done 100 years ago. Since I sailed in Maine, I saw a lot of fog
and made a lot of long runs this way.

Never in a boat have I felt more aware and in touch with my
surroundings then when enveloped in that gray cocoon with buoys and
ledges occasionally moving through it, usually right on schedule. The
faint sound of a wave on rock, the darkening of the fog where a
headland blocked the light, a change in wave patterns as I passed a
gap in a protecting chain of islands or ledges, all helped confirm
that my chart work was right.

Some of the later boats I chartered had Loran but I never turned it
on. I didn't want to be distracted by learning it and using the old
ways was a big part of the enjoyment of cruising. I used (and taught
when I was a piloting instructor) very simple methods that would be
less likely to let me down when tired or busy. Instead of speed and
distance calculations, I would just set my dividers to the boat's
speed on the scale and then do everything in time.

On one of my last charters, a hurricane threatened. We were way
downeast and the owner insisted that we had to get sixty miles back to
his mooring in dense fog instead of tucking the boat into a hole and
riding it out. It was one of the thickest fogs I have ever seen. We
ran through most of Fox Island Thoroughfare without seeing either
shore. It was a memorable day.


I learned how to fly airplanes a few years later and that put
navigation in a whole new light. The plane had Loran and GPS but I
refused to turn them on for the first three years so that I would
develop the map and eyeball skills and a feel for the distances and
speed. Now I use the magic boxes all the time but, in some ways, my
situational awareness is less. I track a position that I can transfer
to the paper map it the power fails but it is different. I used to be
flying over the land and identified fixes below. Now I am flying over
the map. You get lazy fast, especially with all the other things to
attend to in an airplane.

Now that I am about to return to boat piloting, I'm unsure about the
place of GPS in my life. The old ways were a big part of cruising for
me. Ride a cable car up a mountain in Switzerland and you may see
people with ropes hanging by their fingernails trying to get the same
place you are going. The rational is similar. I'd also like my video
gaming kids to learn what the human mind can accomplish without the
aid of a microprocessor.

But, is it responsible? It certainly won't be seen as such if I ever
hit anything. On the other hand, I know of many aircraft accidents
that were clearly caused by the pilot trying to use the box instead of
his mind. I always used to know where I was. I'm not sure narrowing it
down with an electronic cursor will significantly increase my safety
in most circumstances.

The strongest rational I can see for relating my place in life to
invisible satellites instead of the landscape I can see around me is
backup for my macroprocessor. If I should fall overboard or become
incapacitated, the kids can either tell the Coast Guard, "We're right
here", or follow the cursor home. I'd like to think I could teach them
to do the same thing the old way but, face it, they know about GPS,
they aren't going to be very interested in learning that, "other
stuff".

I like gadgets though. I have an old aviation GPS that will give me
latitude, longitude, and waypoints. I can't knowingly leave it ashore.
I'll have to buy a marine unit for my new job as Harbormaster. I won't
leave that behind either. Once I turn them on, I know I'll be hooked
and something very rich and rewarding will have passed from my life
forever.


I have transited the Fox I Thorofare without seeing anything but
buoys, but that was with a loran c. I have done shorter and less
unlikely DR passages in total pea soup in the same area of the Maine
coast without electronics, and I am glad I did.

After that we chartered a boat that had no loran a total of 8 weeks in
5 years, departing from Northeast Harbor. But that was in May and
September, when the fog is much less frequent.

Now I wouldn't dream of leaving the GPS turned off. Using all the info
at your disposal requires that. I also use the radar if it socks in.


Rodney Myrvaagnes NYC J36 Gjo/a


"Be careful. The toe you stepped on yesterday may be connected to the ass you have to kiss today." --Former mayor Ciancia

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:06:22 -0500, Rodney Myrvaagnes
wrote:

I have transited the Fox I Thorofare without seeing anything but
buoys, but that was with a loran c.

Yep. We once did the same thing eastbound on Eggemoggin Reach, never
even saw the bridge as we went under.

Now I wouldn't dream of leaving the GPS turned off. Using all the info
at your disposal requires that. I also use the radar if it socks in.

I certainly agree with that. Good navigation requires using all the
tools at your disposal and GPS/WAAS is about as good as it gets.
Chart error is the primary issue for us these days. Take a look at
the following GPS track, all of which was done in deep water and
recorded with a WAAS GPS:

http://tinyurl.com/5utpw

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/hoonos...&.dnm=66dc.jpg

That is good. GPS is a tool, not the way to navigate.

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:34:21 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:
I agree 100%. I would never give up the paper charts and always will
consider them the primary navigation tool. It's a question of
constantly updating from GPS fixes or from time, distance, and cross
bearings.

============================

Roger, there seems to be a misconception evident on this thread, not
necessarily yours, that using a GPS means giving up charts. Far from
it in my experience. The paper charts may be safely stored below for
emergencies but I always have at least one set, frequently two sets,
of electronic charts at my disposal, both fed from separate GPS
sources, and both maintaining a running track.. My Maptech BSB format
charts on the laptop look exactly the same as the paper charts and are
used the same way also, just more convenient, and with some electronic
bells and whistles thrown in. Who has the time to maintain a manual
DR track when running at any kind of speed in congested waters?