saltiest1 said..

SeanTsv said..
The owner of the yacht that sank reported that their paper charts had the reef but the electronic charts didn't.
www.mackayandwhitsundaylife.com/article/family-marooned-after-yacht-strikes-reef
Not sure if that link is on a pay wall but the main part is copied below.
I have paper charts of The Withsundays but it only goes as far East as Cobham Reef which is about 7nm from the reef in question, which is off the page.

Here I am thinking it’s normal to cross reference a course on paper charts prior to departure.

I think a lot of people treat their chartplotter like google maps, hit auto route and go.

I followed 3 vessels yesterday from Townsville to Orpheus Isl, they went straight through the military exercise zone during announced exercises while we stayed the mandatory 5nm away. I assume they didnt read any cruising guides, look at any notice to mariners or phone anyone to check. VMR were announcing a securite periodically so probably not monitoring their radios either.

cammd said..

saltiest1 said..
Here I am thinking it’s normal to cross reference a course on paper charts prior to departure.

I think a lot of people treat their chartplotter like google maps, hit auto route and go.

I followed 3 vessels yesterday from Townsville to Orpheus Isl, they went straight through the military exercise zone during announced exercises while we stayed the mandatory 5nm away. I assume they didnt read any cruising guides, look at any notice to mariners or phone anyone to check. VMR were announcing a securite periodically so probably not monitoring their radios either.

People 'navigating' on the fly using Navionics on their phone gives me the heebie geebies. (I am not suggesting that was the case in this instance)
Maybe I'm obsessive, but I route plan in advance and then study the chart closely along the whole of the planned route for any signs of objects before sticking to the planned route.

This is a bit off topic. And I am in no way the standard setter for what someone else should or shouldn't do.

But in answer to your question, it depends. Open ocean I scan for sea mounts and for information on currents or whatever may affect conditions. Closer to the coast I scan it for things such as fish aggregators, shipping lanes and local rules (eg notes on chart), anchor grounds, but also changes in depth. I scan along the route for anything that may affect passage, and of course possible bolt holes if I need to take shelter.

I do attempt to stay close to the planned route under sail (which means I often have a different heading, to stay with my planned COG) except when tacking. As a cruiser I tend to wait for favourable winds whenever I can, to minimise working to windward. But one reason to scan along the planned route is to have learnt as much as I can of what is either side of it, to have some idea of room for manoeuvre, if for example tacking is required. Using OpenCPN, which is what I tend to use for route planning on a laptop or desktop, I zoom in to the point where any charted object or feature wont be missed as I plan the route, and I also zoom back out to get a sense of the coast. If the wind shifts or I've misjudged a current, and I'm out at sea, I generally adjust as necessary to come back to the route. If it's close to the shore or otherwise there is an immediate risk, then I may fire up the engine and drop sail. Regardless of the planning or the route, in the daytime I keep my eyes open and hope to spot uncharted hazards (lobster pots, anyone?) or other developments (eg squalls). In poor visibility or at night, I fire up the radar, for what it can show me. I also monitor AIS day and night, and of course the depth sounder if I'm in water where depth may be an issue. I also listen to weather scheds.

So I use pretty much everything I can, but in terms of planning, if I am heading into unfamiliar waters, I plan in advance quite carefully in order to gain as much information as I can from the charts and other sources ahead of time. Other sources include weather forecasts and tide tables. No point, for example, arriving to cross a bar when the tide's running against a decent swell and/or the depth is iffy.

If this is to become a discussion, probably should open a thread on passage planning. I'm sure there are people who know a lot more about it than me.

It hit a reef about 6nm NE of Elizabeth Reef. See exact co-ordinates in the AMSA video link from JohnE post earlier.
sean

I had a look on my Open CPN and there is no way I would be travelling there at night, especially with my family on board. I mean who tries to make their own way out through the reef?

Just a few hours north there is a proper passage at Palm Passage, there are heaps more passages too further north or go south and go through Hydrographers. So the question for me is - Why would anyone try to sail at night through an area that is probably poorly charted to save a few miles and not go through a well charted passage through the reef. It seems totally barmy to me. Coral is scary enough in good weather with great visibility in well charted zones. To DIY a passage through the reef at night is baffling. And what is with the dinghy being towed - I mean who does that offshore? What was the guy on?

He calls it unacceptable for the E chart to be wrong. All charts are wrong to different degrees. I would think it is far more negligent to be sailing in coral at night, through a DIY passage offshore, through a part where OPEN CPN shows less charting accuracy with the dinghy down and being towed. Nothing I read from the article has me thinking the guy was being seamanlike. His family were let down by a dad who was being reckless.

A good skipper would have doen something like
- Started at about 1-2am from Cape Upstart - it is 50 miles on a beam reach in a SE to the start of the Flinders Passage - You would get there after first light, better to sail slow and be able to see when you start the passage.
- It is 20 miles through Flinders passage - done by lunchtime,maybe by 10am or earlier if you push it. Follow thr track of the big boats.
- Then about another 70 miles to Flinders reef. Hard to work out what to do - you may get there by dark if lucky but it may be better to sail slow and heave to in the big lee of Flinders till the morning.

No need for super accurate charts - just don't act like an idiot and expect everything else to be error free when you make basic mistakes. Stay on the main road and all is good. No charts are totally accurate is a basic first step of staying safe.

When you have a look at the satellite images and compare them to the navionics chart there are many of those reefs in that area that navionics reads as 20mtr.

They sailed into a minefield, I am gobsmaked they did it at night or even at all.

I don't have Navionics, but what is a community edit?

Quixotic said..

Maybe I'm obsessive, but I route plan in advance and then study the chart closely along the whole of the planned route for any signs of objects before sticking to the planned route.

I think you can change “maybe I’m obsessive…..” to “I do the proper and seamanlike thing….”.

Personally I’m often happy to deviate further from the planned route than you may, but then again I’ve spent no real time in coral. But route planning as you do is a vital part of seamanship, and it seems that doing it on a paper chart is part of the proper preparation.

Chris 249 said..

Quixotic said..

Maybe I'm obsessive, but I route plan in advance and then study the chart closely along the whole of the planned route for any signs of objects before sticking to the planned route.

I think you can change “maybe I’m obsessive…..” to “I do the proper and seamanlike thing….”.

Personally I’m often happy to deviate further from the planned route than you may, but then again I’ve spent no real time in coral. But route planning as you do is a vital part of seamanship, and it seems that doing it on a paper chart is part of the proper preparation.

Thanks. It is getting harder to do it on paper. The Hydrographic Office has discontinued quite a few of the large scale charts I used to maintain (I still have the old ones, but of course they're increasingly out of date). Apparently they are too costly/labour intensive to produce, and so they are reducing the number of larger scale paper charts they issue and update. I expect it is also because too few people buy them these days to cover the costs of production. It costs me $40 per paper chart, whereas the cost of the whole of Australia set of vector charts via o-charts is 35 euros (about $60).

PacificStar said..
and before the tradiionalsist say "what happens if the chart plotter fails", we always carry at least 2 and often 3 completely independent charting systems - exactly as per commercial shipping (which stopped using paper charts years ago)

cheers,

Every ship I have worked on had the ability to print paper charts for traditional navigation methods if required from databases on the bridge. They also kept a very basic folio of charts for emergency use (I stopped working at sea 5 years ago). The issue is 3 GNSS receivers as per above gives you the same common failure mode. GPS jamming and s****ing areas are growing each year. Even in the SW Pacific it occurs. See today’s interference map above.

In parts of the world you can by GPS privacy jammers, the illegal fishing boat next to you could be using one.