Auto routing

[Portage_Bay]

I'm curious about your thoughts on auto routing. Do you use auto routing? Why? Do you trust it?

A recent thread on Agate Pass and the auto routing not "letting" the OP go through Agate Pass is what triggered my question.

I've played with it a bit in Navionics and didn't like the routes proposed.

The best use I can see is an initial estimate of distance on a new to me route when in the initial planning stages of a cruise.

Beyond that I want to plan my route, make the decisions and be aware of obstacles and potential trouble spots.

 

[Portage_Bay]

Oops. Doesn't belong in power systems. Shouldn't make new posts on the phone. Maybe the mods can move it?

I'm curious about your thoughts on auto routing. Do you use auto routing? Why? Do you trust it?

A recent thread on Agate Pass and the auto routing not "letting" the OP go through Agate Pass is what triggered my question.

I've played with it a bit in Navionics and didn't like the routes proposed.

The best use I can see is an initial estimate of distance on a new to me route when in the initial planning stages of a cruise.

Beyond that I want to plan my route, make the decisions and be aware of obstacles and potential trouble spots.

 

[tiltrider1]

I like auto routing as a starting point. With vector charts obstructions often don't show until you zoom in. Some extremely experienced ocean racers ran their boat on to a reef. It turned out they set the course while zoomed out to far for the reef to show. With Auto routing you won't have this issue.

Like I said, its only the starting point. Once the auto routing is complete you should review the course and make adjustments. Often the route might take the shortest distance between two points when you know that more room needs to be left for on coming traffic or it might take you right through a known turbulent area that you know should be avoided by taking a longer more rounded path.

 

[stevemitchell]

I only ever use it to get estimated distances and times. I’ve used the various incarnations on just about every piece of software and MFD and found them wildly lacking. Cutting buoys for no reason, going over land, and generally requiring more work to double check that something stupid hasn’t happened.

 

[Spinner]

I use and like auto routing. It’s very helpful when you need to get to a particular point at a particular time (as in a rapids). Most will let you set certain parameters such as minimum depth and distance from shore. In the case of the poster who couldn’t get auto-route through Agate Pass, having a too-conservative set of parameters can prevent it from setting your desired course, but I haven’t found that to be an issue.

I think you just have to use common sense. If the route doesn’t seem right, don’t go there!!! On my Garmin equipment, it will not send you across land unless you select the Route To option. Guide To is the auto route selection...

 

[Seevee]

Love auto routing and wouldn't be without. For most legs beyond a hour or so, it's on for the majority of the route.



Now, for some reason the Navionics (or my Simrad plotter) limited the number of wpts, so in a winding river I can only make a route for perhaps 20 miles. However, it's easy to do on the fly, for the next part should my trip be longer.



However, trust but verify. I found it incredibly accurate overall, but it still makes an occasional mistake.


And, easy to disconnect and use heading to avoid things, and go back to Nav and pickup the route a few minutes later.


Now, I'll be switching to Garmin in the near future and will find out how good that one is.

 

[mvweebles]

I've tried auto routing a few times and just couldn't bond with the idea. Leaving aside issue of whether it's reliable (it has to be - it uses the same base data as it gives me if I were to manually route), setting a route is part of my process of trip planning. For me, auto routing makes the trip all about the destination and not enough about the journey.

Peter

 

[BDofMSP]

Love auto routing and wouldn't be without. For most legs beyond a hour or so, it's on for the majority of the route.

Seevee,

I believe the OP is referring to auto generated routes, not auto following a route with the auto pilot.

BD

 

[Hippocampus]

Think it depends on what your doing. Often will have the autoroute show up on the plotter and then put in way points 1/4 to 1/2 mile to seaward. When it tells me to lace between a host of small islands or reefs or rocks don’t use it at all. I’m risk adverse so want time to drift if something goes wrong. Often in certain areas autopilot will put you through the fastest, shortest route which doesn’t have that built in safety factor or the route likely to have the most traffic. I’m in no great hurry. Rather be safe than sorry. However for passage it gives you the great circle route and that’s a big plus so use it there.

 

[Portage_Bay]

Yes, I asked about auto generated routes. Though thoughts on autopilot following a route are welcomed as well.

Seevee,

I believe the OP is referring to auto generated routes, not auto following a route with the auto pilot.

BD

 

[Seevee]

Yes, I asked about auto generated routes. Though thoughts on autopilot following a route are welcomed as well.

That was my understanding, and yes, occasionally I'll following the auto route manually or just using heading.



It's not perfect and sometimes on really sharp curves the autopilot won't quite stay on the path, so if I hit "skip wpt" before I get there, it will cut closer, which works.



Overall... love it!

 

[jhall767]

Love auto routing and wouldn't be without. For most legs beyond a hour or so, it's on for the majority of the route.



Now, for some reason the Navionics (or my Simrad plotter) limited the number of wpts, so in a winding river I can only make a route for perhaps 20 miles. However, it's easy to do on the fly, for the next part should my trip be longer.



However, trust but verify. I found it incredibly accurate overall, but it still makes an occasional mistake.


And, easy to disconnect and use heading to avoid things, and go back to Nav and pickup the route a few minutes later.


Now, I'll be switching to Garmin in the near future and will find out how good that one is.

the route limitation in navionics is actually an apple problem. You can do it on a samsung device and do much longer routes. I imagine its something with the memory management. Because after you generate the route you still can't load it onto an ipad.

I always use it. But sometimes just to get at ETA. It's especially useful on the ICW trying to time bridges and locks.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Good subject to post.

I don't use auto route on my Raymarine with Navionics charts. I just don't trust it.

I manually create my own routes, then trust, but verify as some here have stated. For this, I use Coastal Explorer then move the route to my MFD.

 

[Seevee]

the route limitation in navionics is actually an apple problem. You can do it on a samsung device and do much longer routes. I imagine its something with the memory management. Because after you generate the route you still can't load it onto an ipad.

I always use it. But sometimes just to get at ETA. It's especially useful on the ICW trying to time bridges and locks.

JHall,
Yes, I understand the limitations of the Ipad, but this limitation is also on my Simrad Plotter.

 

[Simi 60]

Don't trust auto routing, have had it run a course for us through areas that would have caused serious brown pants moments if not loss of vessel.

Will use it to get a guestimate on distance, hours and fuel usage

 

[Bacchus]

jhall. I always use it. But sometimes just to get at ETA. It's especially useful on the ICW trying to time bridges and locks.

I agree. I used Navionics extensively on a tablet during a cruise through the Trent Severn and Georgian Bay.
In most cases it did a good job of following marked channels. In some cases it showed a dashed course line indicating visual navigation required.
I used it as a guide and planning tool and found it very useful alongside my MFD chart plotter and paper charts for reference.

 

[FWT]

Now, I'll be switching to Garmin in the near future and will find out how good that one is.

I THINK that unlike Simrad's version, in Garmin the start point of a route has to be your current location. That might or might not be a limiting factor depending on how you use it.

 

[BDofMSP]

I THINK that unlike Simrad's version, in Garmin the start point of a route has to be your current location. That might or might not be a limiting factor depending on how you use it.

That would be a complete bummer. I've already plotted my routes for all the days of my 2nd trip next summer. I use autorouting, save it, and then review it in detail. If I don't like where it puts me, I simply adjust the route. The important thing is to NOT set things like Draft to your actual draft - give it however many extra feet to make sure the route is in your comfort zone, not just what's possible to navigate. I also don't try to have it get too cute and bring me right into a marina or anything. The route ends where I can see the entrance, and I take it from there.

Regarding auto steering, I usually engage it but since I'm monitoring it so closely I've usually advanced to the next waypoint as soon as it seems safe, before I've actually arrived at the last one. Of course now I'm not following my "carefully reviewed" route anymore, and one time I almost got burned on that. Patience isn't always my strong suit...

BD

BD

 

[FWT]

That would be a complete bummer. I've already plotted my routes for all the days of my 2nd trip next summer. I use autorouting, save it, and then review it in detail. If I don't like where it puts me, I simply adjust the route. The important thing is to NOT set things like Draft to your actual draft - give it however many extra feet to make sure the route is in your comfort zone, not just what's possible to navigate. I also don't try to have it get too cute and bring me right into a marina or anything. The route ends where I can see the entrance, and I take it from there.

Regarding auto steering, I usually engage it but since I'm monitoring it so closely I've usually advanced to the next waypoint as soon as it seems safe, before I've actually arrived at the last one. Of course now I'm not following my "carefully reviewed" route anymore, and one time I almost got burned on that. Patience isn't always my strong suit...

BD

BD

Double check how current and accurate my comment is. I was reviewing some YouTubes comparing the Garmin and Simrad versions of autoroute, a few weeks ago. This technology changes and adapts quickly and perhaps some new release of software has modified this. What I was looking for was a comparison on 1) how easy to plot an autoroute, 2) how easy to review the path and adjust / move waypoints, and 3) how easy and FAST to turn off the autopilot from the screen when you have to. You can put an autopilot dedicated control pad on the dash, at a cost of money and space, but is that an unnecessary redundancy? Seems to me the big value of the pad is having a BIG RED BUTTON on it to turn off it controlling the boat. That is a lot for having a big red button. The Simrad MFD with the hard controls on the side has a programmable button that can be programmed to be your Big Red Button. It occurs to me maybe you can program a touch screen button on these MFD's to give you the same thing. That would be an important feature to investigate, and I have not done so. It can be as slow as it needs to be to engage it. But when its time to turn it off, it needs to turn off NOW. Not 3 layers down in a menu tree.

 

[Roger Long]

I would never trust or follow an auto route and have said harsh things about them and people who use them. That said, when on the ICW, Navionics auto routes on my phone have become one of my favorite things for quickly answering the "When will we get to___?" questions that come up unexpectedly.

 

[BDofMSP]

I would never trust or follow an auto route and have said harsh things about them and people who use them. That said, when on the ICW, Navionics auto routes on my phone have become one of my favorite things for quickly answering the "When will we get to___?" questions that come up unexpectedly.

If you have reviewed the route in detail (zoomed in) what is the difference compared to a route that you plotted yourself?

 

[Portage_Bay]

I don't trust software to switch among standby/nav/on/off control of a plotter controlling the autopilot to follow a course. I'm especially leery of touch screens for critically important functions. Cold fingers, wet fingers any number of things can make the use of a touch screen far less than positive or responsive. A track ball or mouse are more reliable than touch screen but still dependent upon software to disengage the autopilot. I admit to not being up on current technology but all the autopilots I have used that can take feed from the plotter to follow a route have hard standby/auto/nav controls. One button push and the plotter is no long driving the boat. I wouldn't have it any other way.

Double check how current and accurate my comment is. I was reviewing some YouTubes comparing the Garmin and Simrad versions of autoroute, a few weeks ago. This technology changes and adapts quickly and perhaps some new release of software has modified this. What I was looking for was a comparison on 1) how easy to plot an autoroute, 2) how easy to review the path and adjust / move waypoints, and 3) how easy and FAST to turn off the autopilot from the screen when you have to. You can put an autopilot dedicated control pad on the dash, at a cost of money and space, but is that an unnecessary redundancy? Seems to me the big value of the pad is having a BIG RED BUTTON on it to turn off it controlling the boat. That is a lot for having a big red button. The Simrad MFD with the hard controls on the side has a programmable button that can be programmed to be your Big Red Button. It occurs to me maybe you can program a touch screen button on these MFD's to give you the same thing. That would be an important feature to investigate, and I have not done so. It can be as slow as it needs to be to engage it. But when its time to turn it off, it needs to turn off NOW. Not 3 layers down in a menu tree.

 

[Portage_Bay]

If you have reviewed the route in detail (zoomed in) what is the difference compared to a route that you plotted yourself?

Not answering for Roger, but as the OP of this thread I'll note the differences I'm aware of.


Autorouting

• When I plan a route, manually on the plotter or on paper, I pay a lot more attention to all of the details. I generally plan on the PC then upload to the plotter. I find I make better decisions for the safety of my boat an crew than autoroute does. In my opinion.
• As Mvweebels says up thread it's an enjoyable part of the voyage to carefully plan the route.

Plotter controlling the autopilot to follow a route
​

• When I let the plotter auto follow a route I can let myself become distracted. I shouldn't but I sometimes do.
• When cruising with non-professionals and allowing use of the route following on longer transits that require some relief I've too often come back to the wheel to see my relief face down in their smart phone not even looking out the windows.
• When working with professionals I have occasionally seen them fail to observe the turn at a waypoint with potentially disastrous results.

​

 

[FWT]

I don't trust software to switch among standby/nav/on/off control of a plotter controlling the autopilot to follow a course. I'm especially leery of touch screens for critically important functions. Cold fingers, wet fingers any number of things can make the use of a touch screen far less than positive or responsive. A track ball or mouse are more reliable than touch screen but still dependent upon software to disengage the autopilot. I admit to not being up on current technology but all the autopilots I have used that can take feed from the plotter to follow a route have hard standby/auto/nav controls. One button push and the plotter is no long driving the boat. I wouldn't have it any other way.

Point taken and agreed

Many (all?) of the pure touch MFD's have an option to have a hard button control pad on the console. If that includes a programable button, then that is a multi-function use of the space and money and get to the need efficiently. A programable touch button becomes a second path to the same function. Just thinking out loud.

 

[FWT]

Another differentiating feature is that once you turn off autopilot on a programmed route, what happens when you engage it again? There are options on how it gets you back on the path. Some options might veer you over some danger. Hypothetically. Just another thing to review and understand.

 

[BDofMSP]

Not answering for Roger, but as the OP of this thread I'll note the differences I'm aware of.


Autorouting

• When I plan a route, manually on the plotter or on paper, I pay a lot more attention to all of the details. I generally plan on the PC then upload to the plotter. I find I make better decisions for the safety of my boat an crew than autoroute does. In my opinion.
• As Mvweebels says up thread it's an enjoyable part of the voyage to carefully plan the route.

Plotter controlling the autopilot to follow a route
​

• When I let the plotter auto follow a route I can let myself become distracted. I shouldn't but I sometimes do.
• When cruising with non-professionals and allowing use of the route following on longer transits that require some relief I've too often come back to the wheel to see my relief face down in their smart phone not even looking out the windows.
• When working with professionals I have occasionally seen them fail to observe the turn at a waypoint with potentially disastrous results.

​

While I agree with your statements about auto following, I think that these are related to autopilot in general, not auto following a route. Once the autopilot is on, it enables you to focus on other things. If you choose to focus on your phone that's a bad choice, and isn't any different if you set the autopilot heading or the route did. Also engaging the autopilot means that at some point you need to change it if your route changes. No "following" algorithm that I've ever used does that for you - it requires you to acknowledge that the turn is required and approve it. At least if your autopilot is following a route it will alarm and alert you that your turn has arrived. Simply engaging the autopilot will not do so.

Mostly what I'm hearing from folks is "I just don't like it or trust it". That's fine and I'd never suggest that they should. It does bother me that people imply that others are irresponsible for doing that though. Using any tool with blind adherence is asking for trouble. But not using them at all seems to add a lot of opportunity for human error, adds fatigue, and makes things more stressful and difficult than they need be.

BD

 

[Portage_Bay]

I agree mostly with what you've said. Especially with respect to relieving stress and allowing the watch to focus on traffic and other hazards rather than stare at the compass rose. In that respect an autopilot is an important safety device.

I do think there is a difference between using the autopilot to a single waypoint, auto follow or not. And auto following an entire route. I've noticed that too many when auto following a route will loose focus and let the robot run the boat. If they know that they must keep track of where they are, time and distance to the next waypoint then manually change course they pay more attention.

I have made numerous long coastal transits requiring multi day 24 X 7 runs. In those cases once I have decided a route the watch has orders to follow it unless necessary to depart to avoid traffic or hazards. If a long term change is required for example to deal with weather then I need to be made aware of the change. On those transits I require the watch to log the following on paper on the hour every hour and at course changes.COG, SOG, Lat/Long, course to next waypoint and weather remarks. I find it helps them to maintain situational awareness. It has also been of value on the rare occasions the gizmos quit and then we all have a very good idea of where we are when the humans take over from the robots.

I have used systems that will auto turn at a waypoint and systems that require the watch stander to acknowledge arrival at the waypoint and the course change to the next. It is the auto turn at waypoint systems that have caused me grief on both recreational and professional runs.

My preferred is auto follow to a single waypoint. Then manually set course to the next waypoint. That way the watch can with confidence know the boat will go where intended while evaluating traffic or running in restricted vis. No worries about set or drift, a significant factor areas of strong currents. The quick cross check of plotter, radar if on and looking out the windows will confirm the plotter and autopilot are doing their job.

All good conversation and helpful to all who are thinking this through. But back to my OP of the thread, autorouting. Do you use it and why? I can see the attraction, but I won't use it. I've messed around with it and never like the route proposed. If I'm going to walk through the route turn by turn and adjust after the robot creates the route why not just create the route myself in the first place?

While I agree with your statements about auto following, I think that these are related to autopilot in general, not auto following a route. Once the autopilot is on, it enables you to focus on other things. If you choose to focus on your phone that's a bad choice, and isn't any different if you set the autopilot heading or the route did. Also engaging the autopilot means that at some point you need to change it if your route changes. No "following" algorithm that I've ever used does that for you - it requires you to acknowledge that the turn is required and approve it. At least if your autopilot is following a route it will alarm and alert you that your turn has arrived. Simply engaging the autopilot will not do so.

Mostly what I'm hearing from folks is "I just don't like it or trust it". That's fine and I'd never suggest that they should. It does bother me that people imply that others are irresponsible for doing that though. Using any tool with blind adherence is asking for trouble. But not using them at all seems to add a lot of opportunity for human error, adds fatigue, and makes things more stressful and difficult than they need be.

BD

 

[BDofMSP]

All good conversation and helpful to all who are thinking this through. But back to my OP of the thread, autorouting. Do you use it and why? I can see the attraction, but I won't use it. I've messed around with it and never like the route proposed. If I'm going to walk through the route turn by turn and adjust after the robot creates the route why not just create the route myself in the first place?

One reason that I use it is because I find that if I do it myself, I do not choose the most efficient route. I don't bother to put extra waypoints in to keep the turns around islands tight and then when I'm following my route I am annoyed by how far from optimal my route is. Obviously I could do that better, but I find it easier to just let the route get created for me and modify.

And I do modify. For example I recently routed to a point on the North shore of Lake Superior. It put me on course between two islands that I know from experience is tricky. I didn't like that and immediately routed around that. Since I've been through there several times, I know that the route it chose was safe - it didn't make a "mistake". I just didn't like it so I changed it.

Another reason I use it is because I just get tired of zooming in and out over and over to see the detail I want, but also see how far I can go before I need to change course. It takes too long and occasionally I screw it up and then I end up deleting things and starting over. Just annoys me and the auto route avoids that completely - now I'm just zoomed in following it making sure I agree.

None of these are huge issues - if I didn't have auto routing I'd be fine. But I do have it and it makes my life easier.

BD

 

[DrissZougari]

The auto routing should be used as a starting point only (to view the big picture of your planned path) as it assumes that;
- you have the latest charts.
- you entered all your boat information.
- Sandbars/all navigation beacons are fixed on the chart.
- You are the only boat out there (LOL).

 

[BDofMSP]

The auto routing should be used as a starting point only (to view the big picture of your planned path) as it assumes that;
- you have the latest charts.
- you entered all your boat information.
- Sandbars/all navigation beacons are fixed on the chart.
- You are the only boat out there (LOL).

What are you proposing as the alternative? If you're plotting a route on the plotter, then the charts, sandbars, beacons, etc are exactly the same whether auto or not. Are you saying I should not be plotting a course based on information on the plotter?

BD