Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, LB 15 said:

I think it comes from that country where young ladies say they are going to the football to root for their team.

I knew a few young ladies like that back in my school days - one was the scorer for the cricket team! Needless to say she scored more often than the opposition batsmen!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So what's wrong with an Opti kid being awarded the Rolex Male athlete of the Year?  Here's what  Shirley Robertson had to say: "Marco is undoubtedly a great talent, and I'm sure in time we will s

It's strange where one can gain motivation, sometimes in the unlikeliest of places. Mrs Octopus, stumbled a bit and has misrepresented the facts. Curious by comparison just appears to be  misinformed,

That's an awesome set of rose-coloured glasses you've got on! Yes, I prefer the discourse be public as other anarchists are interested also in the discussion.  You must be puzzled by the disconne

Posted Images

11 minutes ago, TheUltimateSockPuppet said:

I knew a few young ladies like that back in my school days - one was the scorer for the cricket team! Needless to say she scored more often than the opposition batsmen!

I hope she took a rubber to correct any mistakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

My point is that the Regs should just require that each entrant carries aboard sufficient charted information for the safety of the vessel.

If that means running their hand through sheep entrails and carrying one of Harrison's clocks then that is their problem.

The other problem with electronic maps (and I don't think I'm the first to observe this) is that as you scale it out, little details like smaller reefs disappear. By the same token if you scale it in, you don't get a very good idea of what's coming up. At least a paper map you plot your intended course and can see what's within a risky radius. Having done that, a chart plotter becomes safer to use.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Rambler said:

The other problem with electronic maps (and I don't think I'm the first to observe this) is that as you scale it out, little details like smaller reefs disappear. By the same token if you scale it in, you don't get a very good idea of what's coming up. At least a paper map you plot your intended course and can see what's within a risky radius. Having done that, a chart plotter becomes safer to use.

Indeed. Paper chart of Vestus reef.

Vestas | Maritimo 48

Electronic chart of Vestas reef.

team vestas wind crash

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, grs said:

Snoopy, there's changes to charts being considered. Go here to see what else might be on its way.

https://www.sailingresources.org.au/news/public-comment-invited-on-proposed-amendment/

AS is proving that it lacks the intellectual authority to mandate new requirements. The only thing AS can rely on is bullying owners to comply. Are owners supposed to check the AS website daily for updates?

Give David Taylor a call, he owned and raced yachts (Picese, Far 37 and Sydne 36) for many years. Hes an engineer. He knows boats. He might help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, snoopy said:

... Are owners supposed to check the AS website daily for updates?

We put these on our website and social media, circulate them via three different newsletters, and email owners of IRC/ORC rated boats for whom we have an email address. Not only does that exhaust our practical means of communicating with the sailing community, the large number of responses we get provides for an excellent cross sections of views from said community.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Jack Sparrow please pick up the white AS phone courtesy phone.

Fuck I'm half way having root.

What do want now cunt?

Good subject you raise cunt. 

4 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Indeed. Paper chart of Vestus reef.

Vestas | Maritimo 48

Electronic chart of Vestas reef.

 team vestas wind crash

Vestas had 2 plotters (one up one down), 2 PC laptops Adrena loaded using CMap and 1 tablet Adrena slave, paper charts and pilot etc.

Other than number pretty common nav aids on a typical competitive Cat 0/1/2 race boat these days.

Of those only laptop(s) guaranteed turned on, Vestas plotters maybe (save power) and tablet not offshore. Paper charts probably still in their waterproof tube/folder buried somewhere (as large deep nav tables with hinged lid has joined rocking horse shit) after last looking at them and taking notes before start. 

Adrena like Expedition takes the fixed digital chart data, dynamic data and introduces its own layering and lots of them. The amount of data in/output via software capability leads towards having twin PC's plus redundancy.

Zooming in and out layers change.  Both software allows you to put in marks or 'no go' areas so you don't inadvertantly route through them. This usually done ashore in routing planning in conjunction with paper charts, pilots and info from all sources.  

Bottom line it is the navigator who determines the output NOT the software in a PC program or firmware in a plotter.

That software/firmware output does NOT make someone a navigator. 

Using Vestas as an example software and not 'zooming in' far enough was cited as the cause. That has been misinterpreted by many.

To do that 'zooming in' you FIRST have to know the strengths/weakness of the navigation tools you are using AND 'where you are'. So to do that 'zooming' you FIRST have to know 'where you are' to know what to look for and find out in detail WHAT is there.

So FIRST you have to be a REAL navigator, then use nitendo navigation tools etc.  Vestas navigator one of the best. He fucked up, by NOT zooming in because he didn't know it was there by not knowing where he was in the first place. In his slight defence, fucking hard place to find/see on a electronic chart. Indefensible not picking it up in pre-planning, but race course changed at last minute from memory? Pirate shit? 

The elephant in the room. A lot of offshore race boat navigators could not find the starting line without their tablet.  

When was the last time you saw NOR's and or SI's refer to a Navigators and or Skippers navigation capability in a mandatory sense?

Back to my root. Thanks cunt. 

About time you wrote something usefull cunt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2020 at 9:44 AM, grs said:

Thanks GRS, though does appear to be at the wrong end of the hierarchy of control.

It appears a control has been implemented across all racing yachts to control a specific incident. I am aware of a handful of yachts losing there keels around the world, and each circumstance different. I am also aware of a large number of yachts that didn't lose their keel. How does this fall on the probability vs consequence scale?

At the other end of the HIRAC elimination, well prevention, has AS engaged the relevant authorities in relation to navigational hazards?

For example, has AS had discussions with RMS regarding the dangers of navigating Swansea channel and the damage that can cause to keels?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Fuck I'm half way having root.

What do want now cunt?

Good subject you raise cunt. 

Vestas had 2 plotters (one up one down), 2 PC laptops Adrena loaded using CMap and 1 tablet Adrena slave, paper charts and pilot etc.

Other than number pretty common nav aids on a typical competitive Cat 0/1/2 race boat these days.

Of those only laptop(s) guaranteed turned on, Vestas plotters maybe (save power) and tablet not offshore. Paper charts probably still in their waterproof tube/folder buried somewhere (as large deep nav tables with hinged lid has joined rocking horse shit) after last looking at them and taking notes before start. 

Adrena like Expedition takes the fixed digital chart data, dynamic data and introduces its own layering and lots of them. The amount of data in/output via software capability leads towards having twin PC's plus redundancy.

Zooming in and out layers change.  Both software allows you to put in marks or 'no go' areas so you don't inadvertantly route through them. This usually done ashore in routing planning in conjunction with paper charts, pilots and info from all sources.  

Bottom line it is the navigator who determines the output NOT the software in a PC program or firmware in a plotter.

That software/firmware output does NOT make someone a navigator. 

Using Vestas as an example software and not 'zooming in' far enough was cited as the cause. That has been misinterpreted by many.

To do that 'zooming in' you FIRST have to know the strengths/weakness of the navigation tools you are using AND 'where you are'. So to do that 'zooming' you FIRST have to know 'where you are' to know what to look for and find out in detail WHAT is there.

So FIRST you have to be a REAL navigator, then use nitendo navigation tools etc.  Vestas navigator one of the best. He fucked up, by NOT zooming in because he didn't know it was there by not knowing where he was in the first place. In his slight defence, fucking hard place to find/see on a electronic chart. Indefensible not picking it up in pre-planning, but race course changed at last minute from memory? Pirate shit? 

The elephant in the room. A lot of offshore race boat navigators could not find the starting line without their tablet.  

When was the last time you saw NOR's and or SI's refer to a Navigators and or Skippers navigation capability in a mandatory sense?

Back to my root. Thanks cunt. 

About time you wrote something usefull cunt. 

Yes well anyone who could be fucked googling like you just did would know that. The fleet had been rerouted due to a hurricane and thus they had no detailed paper charts of the area. Which may or may not have made any difference. 

Enjoy your root old chap. Are you doing a ‘can dance Warner’ in the departure lounge mother’s room?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LB 15 said:
7 hours ago, Rambler said:

The other problem with electronic maps (and I don't think I'm the first to observe this) is that as you scale it out, little details like smaller reefs disappear. By the same token if you scale it in, you don't get a very good idea of what's coming up. At least a paper map you plot your intended course and can see what's within a risky radius. Having done that, a chart plotter becomes safer to use.

Indeed. Paper chart of Vestus reef

See what you replied to cunt.

See what you ignored cunt.

Still a cunt.

Just being a cunt 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

Yes well anyone who could be fucked googling like you just did would know that. The fleet had been rerouted due to a hurricane and thus they had no detailed paper charts of the area. Which may or may not have made any difference. 

 I just googled cunt.

Hurricane settled before race start so route and final exclusion zone for leg more certain.

Timing of and size/position of FINAL exclusion zone was set by pirates and SET B4 START. Charts not an issue as on board but no pilot info for that area.

Also not made public so primate pirates wouldn't find out.

Vestus Wind Stranding Report

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BOI Guy said:

What a pity we are not allowed to take full responsibility for our own safety when going sailing. 

Australian Sailing puports to make it safer by prescribing the ECN system.

The really stupid thing (well not for AS) there is nothing about training requirements.

Then agin AS not longer delivers training worth anything.

As they used to teach us years ago, 100% of collisions happen within zero metres of your boat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Nice deflection cunt.

From what cupcake? Brexit? Quarantine numbers? Mark Richard's AIS? 

I must say, you have put me in exulted company in your cunt club. Boris J, Scomo, Anastasia, Ricko, Dictator Dan and Random but to name a few.

Now that your dick has had a good swing, tuck it away and lets us get back to the failings of the special regulations.

You may want to open Google in a new window.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LB 15 said:
1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

Nice deflection cunt.

From what cupcake? Brexit? Quarantine numbers? Mark Richard's AIS? 

Your missing charts cunt.

3 hours ago, LB 15 said:

The fleet had been rerouted due to a hurricane and thus they had no detailed paper charts of the area. 

2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Charts not an issue as on board but no pilot info for that area.

 

And.

1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

Now that your dick has had a good swing, tuck it away and lets us get back to the failings of the special regulations.

Stop the bloviating and knock this regulatory "failing" OR not, out of the park then cunt.

5 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

...So FIRST you have to be a REAL navigator, then use nitendo navigation tools etc... 

...The elephant in the room. A lot of offshore race boat navigators could not find the starting line without their tablet.  

When was the last time you saw NOR's and or SI's refer to a Navigators and or Skippers navigation capability in a mandatory sense?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And tonite on SBS ‘The flightless Sparrow’ looks at the toll airport living takes on Australians mental health. “It’s not just the feeling of abandonment, but the frustration of watching countless ex liberal Prime ministers and cabinet members skipping down the departure gates, while we lie in silence on our bed made of inflight magazines”. That’s tonite episode  ‘The Black dog in the massage chair” streaming live only on SBS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Rambler said:

The other problem with electronic maps (and I don't think I'm the first to observe this) is that as you scale it out, little details like smaller reefs disappear. By the same token if you scale it in, you don't get a very good idea of what's coming up. At least a paper map you plot your intended course and can see what's within a risky radius. Having done that, a chart plotter becomes safer to use.

Yes. Very annoying. The end result of allowing pimply-faced dweebs who have never seen the sea write software for marketing fuckwits who have never been on a boat.

A most basics rule of a paper chart, no matter the scale, is that some speck of ink will be printed for any and all things that might ruin a cruise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, El Borracho said:

Yes. Very annoying. The end result of allowing pimply-faced dweebs who have never seen the sea write software for marketing fuckwits who have never been on a boat.

A most basics rule of a paper chart, no matter the scale, is that some speck of ink will be printed for any and all things that might ruin a cruise.

File Under: Passage planning. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SCANAS said:

File Under: Passage planning. 

Triggered much? Pimply faced dweeb or marketing fuckwit?

Slightly better software could be much safer and save a great amount of time spent zooming and scrolling while never being certain every hazard is shown. Sometimes a new route needs to be planned in a hurry, for example. Odd that it is far easier to accomplish on a small scale paper chart than on cutting edge software.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, El Borracho said:

Slightly better software could be much safer and save a great amount of time spent zooming and scrolling while never being certain every hazard is shown. 

"Better software" saving "time spent zooming" a "safer" 'solution' OR compounding the 'problem' of a navigation 'aid' becoming the 'navigator' when in the wrong hands, NOT the 'navigator' determining the output of the 'aid' ????

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

"Better software" saving "time spent zooming" a "safer" 'solution' OR compounding the 'problem' of a navigation 'aid' becoming the 'navigator' when in the wrong hands, NOT the 'navigator' determining the output of the 'aid' ????

Come on Jack lift your game. Google ECDIS and then lecture us on your vast ability to use a search function knowledge. Include numerous quotes (including your own naturally), long rambling cut and pastes presented as your own work and, as usual, finish by calling everyone a cunt.

You are not going to win this years 'Bent sailor memorial medal for outstanding services to bloviation' if you start phoning it in at this late stage. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn’t know one could ‘Google’ sea miles? Most of us had to actually sail ours. You really do know how to use that thing. While you are preparing your dick for its next swinging outing, don’t forget to include all those miles you did in the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^^^Start your engine. 

Just read this more closely and got a shock.

Originally passed it off as just to address backup paper ONLY (well paper beside primary electronic at your own risk for last 30 years) on account AHS paper and raster being sunseted and switching to just AustENC.

On 12/22/2020 at 9:22 AM, snoopy said:
On 12/22/2020 at 7:08 AM, grs said:

Snoopy, there's changes to charts being considered. Go here to see what else might be on its way.

https://www.sailingresources.org.au/news/public-comment-invited-on-proposed-amendment/

....Are owners supposed to check the AS website daily for updates?

On 12/22/2020 at 12:27 PM, grs said:

We put these on our website and social media, circulate them via three different newsletters, and email owners of IRC/ORC rated boats for whom we have an email address. Not only does that exhaust our practical means of communicating with the sailing community, the large number of responses we get provides for an excellent cross sections of views from said community.

 

So effectively takes existing approach where anything on board if not up to date IHO/AHS authorised paper has to be ONLY a minimum of 'unauthorised' ECS.

IMG_20201227_140500.thumb.jpg.aa67e7f4f2f8e949e2d91f7a4a0128b0.jpg

Digital charts not complying with all joined at the hip IHO/AHS ENC/ECDIS and IMO/ASMA/SOLAS standards DEFAULT to the generically designated  'unauthorised' ECS AND where there is NO standard. Can be any old shit.

WTF.

Navionics (owned by Garmin) and C-Map (JV owned by Navico/B&G/Simrad) are all 'unauthorised' ECS in plotter or mobile form and always will be. Especially since community editing like jet-skis is the new rage.

So offshore race boats will now be equipped LITTLE different than the weekend tinny on Australia's harbours and bays.

Why not 'authorised' ENC 57/63 standard???

57/63  can be read by heaps of interfaces. From the most expensive Expedition and Adrena (ENC pending) down to the USD$500-$700 range like Coastal Explorer, Time Zero, WinGPS etc.

Then the free in all formats incl mobile and with live data inputs like CuteVL'M, OpenCPN, SeeMyENC and SEAaiq. CuteVLM is like Expedition lite beer. In addition the AHSs' own pending 'Viewer' (like NOAAs).

These are virtually ENC/ECIDS and IMO/AMSAR SOLAS compliant or as close as you can get without all the interface build compliance.

The cracker is on page 6, paragraph 22; "Over recent years there have been several notable incidents where mistakes have been made in the prioritisation of 'unofficial' charts and dangers to navigation have been omitted altogether or not visible at smaller scales."

AKA Vestas on the bricks, Scallywag told by RO to turn wheel hard left in Solomons, Flinders GPS location etc etc

So ignore that and make those EXACT SAME 'prioritisation mistakes' by mandating 'unofficial' ECS as a Special Regulation minimum??? WTF.

AS regards ALL NON-ECIDS as being 'unauthorised' ECS even though the above 'chart interfaces' can access 'authorised' ENC 57/63 charts. That is chalk and cheese.

So S2H with ONLY 2 Iphones/free Nav App, or tablets using a 'crowd sourced' App such as OpenSeaMap, will FULLY COMPLY with proposed ASSR Section 4.10.

So navigating to Hobart using the nautical version of Wikipedia. What could possibly go wrong?

Anyone with any brains will go 'official' ENC and ignore 'unofficial' ECS .... but AS encourage 'unofficial'???

Like the stakeholder consultation period, 3 weeks. Xmas in the middle and submissions close Monday week on the 4th. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack, check out who wrote the AS discussion paper.

Would the outcome be any different.

How about mandate nothing and let the owner decide whatever they want to use.

and of course, as I have already put a thread over two days ago and there is no response, can any one show me a report where the difference between C-map or Navionics or Gamin and official ENC has been the cause of a grounding in Australia

It is just like can you show me a Cat 5 race in Australia where there is not mobile phone coverage.

Don’t let the evidence get in the way.

this is just a solution looking for a problem

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Livia said:

and of course, as I have already put a thread over two days ago and there is no response, can any one show me a report where the difference between C-map or Navionics or Gamin and official ENC has been the cause of a grounding in Australia

Vast majority groundings  will be 'unauthorised' ECS shit exactly as AS specify, as apart from those sort of 'chart interfaces' I listed, nothing else can read  'authorised' ENS 57/63.

Even tactical/navigation Expedition (as has been able to read ENS 57 around 5 years ago and 63 later) would be loaded with 'unauthorised' ECS C-Map as primary in any crash. Maybe 'approved' ENS and or raster RNC loaded but not looked at. 

VOR RO is like AS. They provided electronic charts with laptops loaded with Expedition and Adrena. BUT they ONLY provided 'unapproved'  C-Map. Did not add into their pack 'approved' RNC at least to have there if not used. No ENS only RNC in 2014.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Livia said:

Jack, check out who wrote the AS discussion paper.

Has someone told them the transistor has been invented?

Technical subject but the two doctors on NSC would have an idea something not right?

Out of top 10 RTW race navigators at least 3 are Australian. Anyone at AS think to pick up the phone? At least that invented even if theirs rotary bakelite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Livia said:

How about mandate nothing and let the owner decide whatever they want to use.

Reality is that is the skippers responsibility so let them work it out with whatever is available and does the job.

However another reality many can't find the start line without a screen. Maybe count navigators who can navigate as a handicap advantage. That would get the message out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A retired rear adrimal and a director of the hydrographic office, Jack

All I know is this will either cost me more money or make existing equipment redundant.

In practice we will most likely just keep using the Furuno plotter and update the card and an I pad for weather and routing which will not comply and there will be a laptop in the chart table loaded with official ENC that no one will look at.

Which is of course is what everyone will do in practice.

Funnily enough on the big fishing boat we still run raster through memory maps on a laptop which of course is now not supported but we carry paper charts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jack_sparrow said:

Reality is that is the skippers responsibility so let them work it out with whatever is available and does the job.

However another reality many can't find the start line without a screen. Maybe count navigators who can navigate as a handicap advantage. That would get the message out.

That is my view.

The last thing we need is more fucking lists!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2020 at 12:27 PM, grs said:
On 12/22/2020 at 9:22 AM, snoopy said:

Are owners supposed to check the AS website daily for updates?

We put these on our website and social media, circulate them via three different newsletters, and email owners of IRC/ORC rated boats for whom we have an email address. Not only does that exhaust our practical means of communicating with the sailing community, the large number of responses we get provides for an excellent cross sections of views from said community.

Mate in addition to the whinge above about stakeholder consultation period being only 3 weeks with Xmas in the middle. 

It's worth noting NO 'Safety Information Notice' has been issued on these charting amendments. In fact appended to the info is a Draft dated September with upload still pending.

So apart from submission invitation on web site 2 weeks ago, what actually has been sent out??? Who exactly knows this is coming?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Livia said:

A retired rear adrimal and a director of the hydrographic office, Jack

All I know is this will either cost me more money or make existing equipment redundant.

In practice we will most likely just keep using the Furuno plotter and update the card and an I pad for weather and routing which will not comply and there will be a laptop in the chart table loaded with official ENC that no one will look at.

Which is of course is what everyone will do in practice.

Funnily enough on the big fishing boat we still run raster through memory maps on a laptop which of course is now not supported but we carry paper charts.

"director of the hydrographic office,"

Isn't he retired too?

Both look good on paper for this task. Pun intended.

"In practice we will most likely just keep using the Furuno plotter"

I remember those from another age.

"All I know is this will either cost me more money  or make existing equipment redundant."

Won't cost you more money not make existing redundant if it becomes emergency/redundancy gear. See below.

"Which is of course is what everyone will do in practice.

Not if they know what to do

From my ENC list upthread, my pick of the freebies and in fact better than many that cost a lot and make 'unauthorised' ECS plotter/chart combo look very sick.

TOTALLY FREE qtVlm (CuteVLM) is ENC S-57 and S-63 compliant. Note S-63 standard is piracy protection by encryption and authentication that ENC data has come from and used by approved sources so no Trojans onboard. S-63 ALSO respects ENC S-52, 57 and 58 IHO standards all used for ECDIS compliance. 

It has many features found only in expensive navigation and tactical software like Expedition and Andrena. Live data inputs, routing, tides, currents, gribbed weather and geo referenced graphic image importing etc.

Available FREE in Mac, PC, Linux and Raspberry and for fee mobile Android/IOS versions. That mobile cost subsides the free PC/Mac/Linux and Raspberry.

You have an existing lap top and iPad off you go.

Weird CuteVLM name for qtVlm comes from 'qt' (cross platform softwaretool) and 'Vlm' from Virtual Loup-De-Mer one of the many web-based real-time routing race simulators.

Check out the Excellent Documentation

Actually I lied....you know advise costs.  Will send you my PayPal by DM.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

From my ENC list upthread, my pick of the freebies and in fact better than many that cost a lot and make 'unauthorised' ECS plotter/chart combo look very sick.

TOTALLY FREE qtVlm (CuteVLM) is ENC S-57 and S-63 compliant. Note S-63 standard is piracy protection by encryption and authentication that ENC data has come from and used by approved sources so no Trojans onboard. S-63 ALSO respects ENC S-52, 57 and 58 IHO standards all used for ECDIS compliance. 

It has many features found only in expensive navigation and tactical software like Expedition and Andrena. Live data inputs, routing, tides, currents, gribbed weather and geo referenced graphic image importing etc.

Available FREE in Mac, PC, Linux and Raspberry and for fee mobile Android/IOS versions. That mobile cost subsides the free PC/Mac/Linux and Raspberry.

You have an existing lap top and iPad off you go.

 

I use qtVlm from my sofa for SailOnline racing. It is very impressive software for something that is free. Sailonline with the ability to receive it's NMEA data from your navigation software, helps you practice with navi software from your sofa  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes arse cover by BOTH the chart plotter manufacturer as they DON'T allow IHO 'authorised' charts to be loaded and replicates the chart makers 'terms of use' for that 'unauthorised' chart which the user accepts when they buy or update the chart.

Paper charts have two disclaimers.....corrections and blind people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Dark Knight said:

I use qtVlm from my sofa for SailOnline racing. It is very impressive software for something that is free. 

Hoppy you are good example of their business model success PLUS hopefully many will follow you when they see this new Special Reg.

Around 8 years ago this space had dozens of providers both free and $ that could read 'authorised' IHO ENC and raster RNC. OpenCPN dominated the free space. Just about every world cruiser used it.

Now many have gone or no longer support their product. CuteVLM fully featured incl live data input and free for Win/Mac/Linux/Raspberry has nudged OpenCPN aside. However they know at some point many of those free users won't be able to resist and will shell out money to also have it on their mobile device(s). Very smart.

AS ignorance of the above ENC interface solutions having access to 'authorised' AustENC charting is pretty breathtaking.

If they aren't ignorant then by deception they they got rid of them as a AustENC solution by avoiding mentioning IHO ENC standards in their 'regulatory impact paper'.

Then rediculously applying AMSAR/ECDIS/SOLAS 'interface' non-compliance to lump them in by DEFAULT to the generically designated 'unauthorised' ECS AND where there is NO standard.

That ECS category range from them and even the Australian Hydrographic Services's own ENC proposed Viewer to those that can't, including any old NavApp some nut job has developed. Chalk gets mixed with cheese.

Why do that? Fuck knows.

To then MANDATE the use at sea of digital charts/interfaces that come with a disclaimer (excl the ENC capable) that stipulates they CAN'T be used for navigation purposes has hit a new level of regulatory stupidity.

I wonder if AS has told their liability insurer about this brain fart??

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Livia said:

Jack, check out who wrote the AS discussion paper.

22 hours ago, Livia said:

A retired rear adrimal and a director of the hydrographic office, Jack

So advisor to Aust Sailing  National Safety Committee who helped draft this Special Reg is a Director of the Australian Hydrographic Office (AHO)....

....mmmmm...isn't he allowed to look at his OWN WEBSITE??

Starting with his December 2020 - AHO News Page. Tells everyone their "official"  AustENC charts are cheap as chips and encourages recreational users to load them into the very SAME 'applications' I have noted upthread, using either laptop, tablet, or dedicated workstation.

AHO marketing even point out ENC has larger scales and more detail than is included in their paper charts (paper is edited copies of ENC).

IMG_20201228_165702.jpg.a16aa68e1c296662850884a698581785.jpg

Then it gets fucking better.

First a AHO Fact Sheet - "Official charts, unofficial charts & chart plotters" complete with pictures of the reef Vestas Wind tried to sail over and describing the differences between 'authorised' ENC chart and 'unauthorised' ENC charts.

It WASN'T just a zooming issue. Also a WRONG information issue.

IMG_20201228_173742.jpg.e275e151ce681f7e046608f23e5a5c08.jpg

Snip to page 2 and 3.

IMG_20201228_183603.thumb.jpg.048f1578a1e5dc60ec3675ecce805ad6.jpg

Points out that while only mandatory for most commercial vessels over 12m in length, irrespective of State of registration, recommends recreational vessels use 'official' ENC charting as good practise for going offshore, NOT 'unofficial' ENC.

The Fact Sheet also points out his departments wonderful publication titled the Mariners Handbook for Australian Waters (AHP20).

On page 258 it even has a section devoted to 'Unofficial' ECS charts. 

IMG_20201228_172204.jpg.0d51423a7a6b0f5529ce129fb6b6468b.jpg

Points out they are not warranted for navigational use and all are marked ‘not for navigation’. Cites reefs and islands missing and a major land reclamation area remaining missing for two years after completion of works. That I think Port of Brisbane reclamation in LB's own backyard causing one or more deaths??

These people are totally fucking nuts.

If anyone wants to make a submission to AS before the close next Monday 4th January, feel free to use the above material. 

Special Reg Amendment Submission Link

Hint: In that AHO Mariners handbook is a good section on the accuracy of depth information in electronic charts where they give a rating to the accuracy and the associated risks involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

So advisor to Aust Sailing  National Safety Committee who helped draft this Special Reg is a Director of the Australian Hydrographic Office (AHO)....

....mmmmm...isn't he allowed to look at his OWN WEBSITE??

Starting with his December 2020 - AHO News Page. Tells everyone their "official"  AustENC charts are cheap as chips and encourages recreational users to load them into the very SAME 'applications' I have noted upthread, using either laptop, tablet, or dedicated workstation.

AHO marketing even point out ENC has larger scales and more detail than is included in their paper charts (paper is edited copies of ENC).

IMG_20201228_165702.jpg.a16aa68e1c296662850884a698581785.jpg

Then it gets fucking better.

First a AHO Fact Sheet - "Official charts, unofficial charts & chart plotters" complete with pictures of the reef Vestas Wind tried to sail over and describing the differences between 'authorised' ENC chart and 'unauthorised' ENC charts.

It WASN'T just a zooming issue. Also a WRONG information issue.

IMG_20201228_173742.jpg.e275e151ce681f7e046608f23e5a5c08.jpg

Snip to page 2 and 3.

IMG_20201228_183603.thumb.jpg.048f1578a1e5dc60ec3675ecce805ad6.jpg

Points out that while only mandatory for most commercial vessels over 12m in length, irrespective of State of registration, recommends recreational vessels use 'official' ENC charting as good practise for going offshore, NOT 'unofficial' ENC.

The Fact Sheet also points out his departments wonderful publication titled the Mariners Handbook for Australian Waters (AHP20).

On page 258 it even has a section devoted to 'Unofficial' ECS charts. 

IMG_20201228_172204.jpg.0d51423a7a6b0f5529ce129fb6b6468b.jpg

Points out they are not warranted for navigational use and all are marked ‘not for navigation’. Cites reefs and islands missing and a major land reclamation area remaining missing for two years after completion of works. That I think Port of Brisbane reclamation in LB's own backyard causing one or more deaths??

These people are totally fucking nuts.

If anyone wants to make a submission to AS before the close next Monday 4th January, feel free to use the above material. 

Special Reg Amendment Submission Link

Hint: In that AHO Mariners handbook is a good section on the accuracy of depth information in electronic charts where they give a rating to the accuracy and the associated risks involved.

Jack, I appeared for the Defendant at the Committal and the Coroners Inquest.

All charges were later dropped.

Funnily enough LB was expert witness and his evidence was accepted entirely.

Really simple explanation there and it had nothing to do with the charting.

Never really understood what perverting the course of justice was until that one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

If anyone wants to make a submission to AS before the close next Monday 4th January, feel free to use the above material. 

Special Reg Amendment Submission Link

^^^^^ Just noticed that submission link now indicates the closing date has suddenly been extended to 16 January.  

The invitation dated 11 December however still remains 4 January. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Livia said:

Really simple explanation there and it had nothing to do with the charting.

Never really understood what perverting the course of justice was until that one.

It was at night and also an inadequate marking/lighting issue I recall? Good luck with that in practise with port and city lighting backdrop and a low reclaimation in the dark. Assume works in NTM?

Using 'unofficial' charts with disclaimer, charts as an issue would automatically fall away would it not?

A RO mandating 'unofficial' not 'official' charts as a minimum standard could be more than interesting, disclaimer or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

So advisor to Aust Sailing  National Safety Committee who helped draft this Special Reg is a Director of the Australian Hydrographic Office (AHO)....

....mmmmm...isn't he allowed to look at his OWN WEBSITE??

Starting with his December 2020 - AHO News Page. Tells everyone their "official"  AustENC charts are cheap as chips and encourages recreational users to load them into the very SAME 'applications' I have noted upthread, using either laptop, tablet, or dedicated workstation.

AHO marketing even point out ENC has larger scales and more detail than is included in their paper charts (paper is edited copies of ENC).

IMG_20201228_165702.jpg.a16aa68e1c296662850884a698581785.jpg

Then it gets fucking better.

First a AHO Fact Sheet - "Official charts, unofficial charts & chart plotters" complete with pictures of the reef Vestas Wind tried to sail over and describing the differences between 'authorised' ENC chart and 'unauthorised' ENC charts.

It WASN'T just a zooming issue. Also a WRONG information issue.

IMG_20201228_173742.jpg.e275e151ce681f7e046608f23e5a5c08.jpg

Snip to page 2 and 3.

IMG_20201228_183603.thumb.jpg.048f1578a1e5dc60ec3675ecce805ad6.jpg

Points out that while only mandatory for most commercial vessels over 12m in length, irrespective of State of registration, recommends recreational vessels use 'official' ENC charting as good practise for going offshore, NOT 'unofficial' ENC.

The Fact Sheet also points out his departments wonderful publication titled the Mariners Handbook for Australian Waters (AHP20).

On page 258 it even has a section devoted to 'Unofficial' ECS charts. 

IMG_20201228_172204.jpg.0d51423a7a6b0f5529ce129fb6b6468b.jpg

Points out they are not warranted for navigational use and all are marked ‘not for navigation’. Cites reefs and islands missing and a major land reclamation area remaining missing for two years after completion of works. That I think Port of Brisbane reclamation in LB's own backyard causing one or more deaths??

These people are totally fucking nuts.

If anyone wants to make a submission to AS before the close next Monday 4th January, feel free to use the above material. 

Special Reg Amendment Submission Link

Hint: In that AHO Mariners handbook is a good section on the accuracy of depth information in electronic charts where they give a rating to the accuracy and the associated risks involved.

The funniest thing about the AHO bullshit is the pic of the idiot having the paper chart on deck.

does the chart have a disclaimer on it "Do not take this chart on deck because if it blows away you are completely fucked"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

My guess is more phones have been dropped in the piss than charts which have blown away. 

I suspect that is only because people don't take the charts on deck, except for a photo....

When I navigated a boat from Devonport to Melbourne in the mid 80's, the chart never left the chart table. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, The Dark Knight said:

When I navigated a boat from Devonport to Melbourne in the mid 80's, the chart never left the chart table. 

Hoppy yes.... and many like you I suspect think outlaying $25 for an 'official' coastal chart is an 'expensive' drinks coaster....and very 'fucking expensive' if having to cut 4 holes in it.

Maybe AS should make it mandatory for mobile phones to be 'tethered' when up top like crew? Maybe cutting a slot in the cockpit table will comply?

Turnips.

images - 2020-12-29T095854.489.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, The Dark Knight said:

 

I suspect that is only because people don't take the charts on deck, except for a photo....

When I navigated a boat from Devonport to Melbourne in the mid 80's, the chart never left the chart table. 

That is because you never left the chart table.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Livia said:
1 hour ago, The Dark Knight said:

I suspect that is only because people don't take the charts on deck, except for a photo....

When I navigated a boat from Devonport to Melbourne in the mid 80's, the chart never left the chart table. 

That is because you never left the chart table.

Hoppy do you have a second wheel below or AP'd all the way and all running gear led below? Mate that's a comfortable delivery.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Exactly..and on proprietary plotters too, so why is AS mandating them as the compliance minimum to replace 'official' paper??

A drinking problem??

But you have to check with official ENC remember!!!

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Livia said:

But you have to check with official ENC remember!!!

LOL

And for Cat 1 & 2 ONLY and NOT at sea, but on land BEFORE you start will do.

Maybe you can only do Cat 1 and 2 now if having a photographic memory. Cat 3 and lower it's now dementia accepted and 'roll of the dice' electronic navigation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But 5 metres of chain is not going to help.

One of the most stupid things in the Special Prescriptions

Clearly the decision makers on that one have not anchored a modern race boat in a real blow given that 10 metres and 50 metres of the warp specified is inadequate.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Livia said:

That is because you never left the chart table.

It was a bit hard to navigate from down below in the 80's. I had to meerkat with my compass to take bearing to the islands.

2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Hoppy do you have a second wheel below or AP'd all the way and all running gear led below? Mate that's a comfortable delivery.

No AP, but there were 5 of us onboard. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/27/2020 at 8:17 PM, jack_sparrow said:
On 12/27/2020 at 7:44 PM, Livia said:

How about mandate nothing and let the owner decide whatever they want to use.

Reality is that is the skippers responsibility so let them work it out with whatever is available and does the job.

However another reality many can't find the start line without a screen. Maybe count navigators who can navigate as a handicap advantage. That would get the message out.

On 12/27/2020 at 8:19 PM, Livia said:

That is my view.

The last thing we need is more fucking lists!

 

AS has a 'list' fetish that is NOT warranted.

Look at Special Regulation (SR) 4.10.1 both before and after. A dogs breakfast incl the supporting info.

One of the functions AS National Safety Committee should be is to promote equipment and or regulatory requirements that are appropriate for the conditions, easily verified, and not excessive.

This is a fail on ALL three counts. Quite an achievement.

IMG_20201227_140500.thumb.jpg.aa67e7f4f2f8e949e2d91f7a4a0128b0.jpg

AS Special Regulations 'as is' generally accord with World Sailing Offshore Special Regulations and that used in other countries. 

WS OSR

4.11 Navigational charts (not solely electronic), light list and chart plotting equipment.

Most countries simply have no prescriptions that change WS OSR.

UK is an example where the RYA stays silent 

US Sailing defer to WS OSR but also include a supplement called 'US Safety Equipment Regulations' (SER). This is hardly an addition.

Safety Equipment & Navigation 3.2 "A boat shall have non-electronic charts that are appropriate for the race area."

Yachting New Zealand are however good list makers with there own SR for each race category like Australia.

19.03 CHARTS PUBLICATIONS & PLOTTING EQUIPMENT

(a) Local tide tables. 

b) Reasonably large scale marine charts of area to be sailed. 

(c) Plotting equipment, dividers etc

(d) Sailing directions or cruising guide for intended voyage. 

(e) Tide tables for all ports on voyage. 

(f) Operating instructions & manuals for the equipment.

Common with WS and all countries is what constitutes a "navigational chart" is NOT defined. It could be such as adopting AMSAR or Maritime NZ definition like.

"Nautical Chart. Nautical chart means a special-purpose map, or a specially compiled database from which such a map is derived, that is issued officially by, or on the authority of, the relevant government institution and is designed to meet the requirements of marine navigation."

However it seems that has been avoided because use (and liability) varies in each jurisdiction, national, state or local and so left to the RO to prescribe. They do often by prescribing 'official' paper chart numbers in NOR and SI's that have to be carried on board. 

Arguably regulations over time have led us slowly over the cliff of diminished navigational responsibility being accepted as the norm.

For instance AS for SR accepted the reality of real time GPS's introduction 3 decades ago. But this was simply by introducing the words "not solely electronic" still making the inclusion of 'authorised' charts on board remaining as mandatory, BUT how used up to those on board responsible as it should be. Paper charts not a 'backup' but simply an unnamed default, not a prescribed use. 

Note: The new amendment introduces the concept of backup and prescribed use for the first time. It even prescribes when you look at a chart when ashore. It turns SR 4.10.1 into a regulatory avalanche.

Finally GPS became a mandatory inclusion for Cat 1 - 3 with SR 3.30.1 "A permanently installed GPS"

That then effectively made the ubiquitous Chart Plotter MANDATORY in Cat 1 - 3 utilising "unofficial" ENC charts like like Navionics (now owned by Garmin) and C-Map (now JV owned by Navico/B&G/Simrad).

However the mobile form of GPS was also introduced and again using 'unofficial' charts for Cat 1 & 2 with:

4.11.2 A second GPS which is handheld and water resistant with a spare battery(s) shall be provided.

The mandatory standard being a permanently installed 'chart plotter' using "unofficial" charts was further reinforced for Cat 1 - 2 by inclusion of a Emergency Position Fixing System;

4.11.3 A yacht shall be equipped with an EPFS (e.g. GPS) capable of recording a man overboard position within 10 seconds and monitoring that position.

The above prescriptions for a while were reflected in  actual practise on the race course of using a Chart Plotter with 'unofficial' charts (supplemented later by a mobile GPS) and with 'official' paper charts on board. This was mapping/plotter manufactures like Navionics/Garmin and C-Map/Navico/B&G/Simrad wet dream come true. Those sailing chart plotter manufactures like NKE and Raymarine etc with no mapping association, simply choose either Navionics and or C-Map.

Two plotter manufacturers being a basic Raytech/Raymarine offering and more sophisticated B&G/Deckmaman added tactical/navigation PC "software" to their armoury to distinguish their sailing/race position compared to others. But still using 'unofficial' charting. 

However around a decade ago more sophisticated mapping software appeared some free, some not BUT using 'authorised' ENC charts. Expedition well constructed and supported and both tactical and navigation sealed the plotters fate in this space. The plotter manufacturers dream turned into a nightmare.

Plotter manufactures however have fought back with their own 'firmware' tactical capability but nothing like fully featured Expedition and it's Eurocentric cousin Adrena. Expedition for around 5 years and Adrena (shortly) read 'official' ENC charts, the chart plotters never will.

The sunsetting of IHO/AHO 'official' paper and raster RNC charts is an opportunity to stop the rot of 'unofficial' chart use on the race course and elsewhere. 

It also DOESN'T need a big regulatory change like that contemplated .The existing regulation replaced as follows guarantees that there is at least ONE 'official' electronic ENC chart on board and in ALL race categories. 

All required is just REPLACE the current 3 words in brackets (not solely electronic) with 5 words still in brackets (one set must be AustENC).

4.10.1
(a) Navigational charts for the current
race (one set must be AustENC), and chart plotting equipment shall be provided

It addresses the recent approach of RO's to downgrade Cat 2 races to Cat 3 and where the proposed AS amendment has those (incl 4 & 5) competitors relying SOLELY on 'unofficial' ECS charting with not even the look at ENC prior to starting.

It also removes once and for all the problem of counterfeit paper charts that has increased over time because of the cost of paper. Digital 'official' AustENC charts are cheaper than proprietary 'unofficial' ENC and come with an easy update service.

It actually begs the question why AS have not acted sooner on cost, authenticity alone plus lessening the risk of paper charts not being corrected?

How competitors comply is up to them as it should be.

The choice is they either already have the 'chart interface' to comply (ie. Expedition and other ENC 57/63 users) OR spend between nothing and something on a AustENC interface to comply. For primary or secondary use on board it is up to them, as has been the case since GPS appeared 3 decades ago and SatNav over 4 decades ago.

God forbid some might discover something like totally free qtVlm (CuteVLM) that is ENC S-57 and  S-63 compliant, fully featured incl grib weather and live data input and throw away their Chart Plotter, making everything on board 100% ENC compliant.

So full compliance plus authenticated, better charts and cheaper charts than the old paper, both now and finally once they and RNC disappears. 

How fucking hard is that.

Livia even you have to agree surely??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack, every time AS go to ex Navy clowns for anything, we get more lists, and I get to spend more money for no increase in safety.

My obligations as a master under the existing law are sufficient, but clearly I cannot be trusted to comply with that.

Which I actually find insulting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

I think AS should hire jack as a consultant. They should pay him by the hour, not the word.

LB I have posted desperately hoping you would give me a job as an instructor.

Then again at the end of the first week you would be forced into saying;

"Jack you have to stop calling me by 'hey cunt' in front of my valued clients ....and you fucking my clients is not good for fucking business."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Livia said:

My obligations as a master under the existing law are sufficient, but clearly I cannot be trusted to comply with that.

Which I actually find insulting.

There is also a 'master' by profession who hasn't yet worked the RRS or international marine law....maybe you need to blame him for the lack of trust that abounds. 

Many have found his actions more than insulting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

LB I have posted desperately hoping you would give me a job as an instructor.

Then again at the end of the first week you would be forced into saying;

"Jack you have to stop calling me by 'hey cunt' in front of my valued clients ....and you fucking my clients is not good for fucking business."

I doubt it, all of your students would be sound asleep and not hear you calling LB that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

LB I have posted desperately hoping you would give me a job as an instructor.

Then again at the end of the first week you would be forced into saying;

"Jack you have to stop calling me by 'hey cunt' in front of my valued clients ....and you fucking my clients is not good for fucking business."

The lobby just called to say the your room is ready you two!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Livia said:

Jack, every time AS go to ex Navy clowns for anything, we get more lists, and I get to spend more money for no increase in safety.

More than a list and your safety goes backwards. 

WS and affiliates have never prescribed what a "chart" is in Special Regs. They have left it to the RO to prescribe having regard to the jurisdiction and overlaid by a skippers ultimate responsibility.

AS now intend to prescribe, prescribe the wrong thing and tell you when to use it.

That is more than quite a leap.

Wonder how many affiliates adopt AS approach in response to paper being sunseted??

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Livia said:

LB, Jack has a point there.

He may have a point but whilst AS's approach is more grounded in reality and it won't affect safety.

What's the point of having official paper charts onboard in they are never going to be referred to?

What's the point of having official AusENC on the backup navigation device when for 99% of the time it will never be referred to?

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, The Dark Knight said:

He may have a point but whilst AS's approach is more grounded in reality and it won't affect safety.

Australia's Hydrographic Office says use of 'unofficial' ENC charts as AS are doing does impact upon safety and in writing and many times. AS approach also less grounded in so far as more costly and corrections convenience and surety etc. 

45 minutes ago, The Dark Knight said:

What's the point of having official paper charts onboard in they are never going to be referred to?

- Govt charting/nav aids are either the law/implied/recomended by states in state jurisdictions.

- Races are sailed in waters outside state jurisdictions, multiple jurisdictions being 3 or 12 mile offshore.

- Commonwealth jurisdiction also includes and extends beyond territorial boundry 12 mile to 200 mile offshore (EEZ). 

- Some states regulate type of nav equipment.  Yours state Victoria states Chart Plotters should not be used as sole source for navigation.

- See below for electronic.

45 minutes ago, The Dark Knight said:

What's the point of having official AusENC on the backup navigation device when for 99% of the time it will never be referred to?

As above. There is no such thing as 'back up' navigation equipment defined in offshore sailing special regs worldwide. Charting is mandated to being aboard, use is determined by user. Exact charts nominated by RO in NOR and SI.

You should share your thoughts with your insurer.

Link to post
Share on other sites