The dying breed of paper charts, (and electronic charts to a lesser extent) are “good enough” estimate that can be used to get the job done. The day I wrote this was the day I learned from the president of Ocean Graphics that scale isnt uniform, apparently 1:10,000 can be +/- several millimeters, which really killed the mood for the day for my OCD ass. But beyond that, I’ve seen numerous cases where coast pilot disagrees with the light list on bearings of ranges, the position of a buoy on a chart compared to its actual position is only a concept, and while I’m not planning to go scuba diving to prove a point, i suspect there are loads of ghost obstructions cluttering charts everywhere. Comparing the light list to looking out the window I have my doubts to its accuracy as well. Also considering some of the survey data dates back to some guy with a lead line in the 1800s in some places, to reported depths from 30 years ago else where, charts are really only a rough aproximation of depths.
While i understand why they arent updating land on paper charts anymore, there have been years where the ENC shows different land than the chart. And I wont be able to really confim this while I’m at work, i have a strong suspicion that Oceangrapix charts have different land shapes than NOAA charts.
Then you look at the accuracy of publications like the coast pilot, which have a lot of outdated and conflicting information. Just try to find the nearest repair facilities in Florida, no two ports say the same thing, and for some reason Miami cites container gantry cranes in Port Everglades as a repair facility?
While we aren’t exactly assuming the earth is the center of the universe, there are a lot if assumptions made on nautical charts. I was trying to echo and agree with this guy more than anything:
(Sorry ive been editing this on the fly, I pressed post on accident too quick)