DrissZougari
Senior Member
You can Plot your courses however, you should not expect your AP to take between two real beacons on the water due to GPS accuracy and beacons that are moved around to clear sandbars.
You can Plot your courses however, you should not expect your AP to take between two real beacons on the water due to GPS accuracy and beacons that are moved around to clear sandbars.
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
This sums up my feelings as well. Plus there are often pieces of local knowledge not incorporated into the charts, even those updated weekly to the LNMs; could be something as simple as dredging or bridge issues or reported shoaling.
That information isn't on the plotter whether you're doing it manually or automatically.
With vector charts obstructions often don't show until you zoom in.
Oops. Doesn't belong in power systems. Shouldn't make new posts on the phone. Maybe the mods can move it?
Twisted you put it very well. BD you make good points. Since starting this thread and following it down it's divergent paths I've got a better understanding of why some like auto routing.
I am not one, nor will I likely be. Mvweebles gave a good opinion up thread I agree with. Planning routes is part of the joy in voyage planning. I don't want to let automation take that from me
Another thing to consider is that good route planning is more than the hard data of tides, currents, depths and the positions of nav aids. It's also experience, judgement and local knowledge which automation cannot replace.
For those with considerable experience why let automation make your decisions? For those without much experience how will you gain said experience if you let automation do the work?
That said if your planning tool is a plotter on an MFD then I can understand why you would let automation do the work. They are at best cumbersome to enter and edit waypoints. I much prefer to do my planning on a laptop with a 15" screen running straight forward easy to use software.
Portage, with respect, using automation is not letting it make the decisions. It is merely a starting point, a suggestion to be verified and modified based on experience and local knowledge, that is, if one has local knowledge. I do not have time nor would I enjoy in the least plotting 100, 200 waypoints or more manually every evening on a long cruise. I'd rather relax, have a brew and enjoy a good meal. Sometimes, automation is a time-saver. Auto-routing is merely a time-saving tool. Perhaps some of us remember the American Automobile club trip-tiks, their suggestion of a route, on paper maps, to get to a distant location. I don't think any of us would blindly follow those routes without verification but they sure were a good starting point.
I used a computer based plotter (OpenCPN) on the ICW to give me ETAs to bridges, destinations, or other important items. Even on the most twisted sections and 50 mile legs, I doubt I ever used more than 50 or so waypoints and always had ETAs within minutes of actual arrival times.
I use the AP much of the time in the ICW, but on heading only or maybe track/Auto on those mile or more straight sections where my route line coincides with the channel.
There are lots of places in the ICW that autorouting probably does come in handy...but for me, those areas really don't need many waypoints so taking about 5 minutes in OpenCPN isn't a big deal to me.
But to waste the time trying to get all the necessary waypoints plotted to take care of all the winding....never gonna happen. Long curves or severe winding would be overly tedious....and in my judgement really not needed.
Doesn't mean [chart data] is correct
If you have reviewed the route in detail (zoomed in) what is the difference compared to a route that you plotted yourself?
The fact the technology enables stupidity doesn't mean that using it is stupid. There are so many responses that say "well it doesn't have local knowledge". Well then apply the local knowledge to the generated route. Then they say "well people don't do that". Well I don't care what "people" do - I care about what I do.
BD
Why should someone not use the convenience appropriately just because others don't?
Exactly!The fact the technology enables stupidity doesn't mean that using it is stupid. There are so many responses that say "well it doesn't have local knowledge". Well then apply the local knowledge to the generated route. Then they say "well people don't do that". Well I don't care what "people" do - I care about what I do. Why should someone not use the convenience appropriately just because others don't?
BD
If thats what you prefer that is certainly your choice.Then I may as well plot the course myself and get it right the first time vs let the machine do it wrong then me correct the mistakes.
Convenience is when it gets it right 100% of the time