Of course the sounding data is the same. The issue is not the data itself, it’s that due to the nature of the display ECDIS uses will have more confidence in the soundings then is warranted.
“It’s often forgotten that large parts of the world are unsurveyed or were surveyed using rudimentary equipment like leadlines more than a century ago. Add to that the fact that seismic activity can radically alter seabed profiles in some places, many of which have not been surveyed in many years. As ECDIS becomes more and more common there is a risk of accepting electronic charts as more accurate even though they may be derived from paper charts with old or inadequate survey data.”
By far the greatest challenge to the ECDIS mindset is in overcoming the tendency to a false sense of security. The problem is that ECDIS often appears to be highly accurate and it is all too easy to assume that this is true 100% of the time. At best, its accuracy is limited by the quality of the underlying ENC data – which may have been taken from surveys made 100 years ago or more. (But, of course, the correct mindset always checks the current CATZOC status.)
The benifits of ECDIS far outweight the drawbacks but the drawbacks do exist.
At the same time if the info is the same as a paper chart wouldn’t that make the paper chart just as inaccurate? If they share the same data one could not be more accurate than the other. Unless I’m missing something
[QUOTE=acesouthcoast;166926]Unfortunately we were out of range of service. I had a shitload of notifications and newsfeed to sort through when we got off canaveral and got a few bars. I should have towed through the cape hatteras slew to pick it up but the swell was a bit large and i had 5 layers out. This fuckin offshore towing thing really gets in the way of social media.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Gofast;166950]At the same time if the info is the same as a paper chart wouldn’t that make the paper chart just as inaccurate? If they share the same data one could not be more accurate than the other. Unless I’m missing something[/QUOTE]
You’re right, it’s the same data, the paper chart is just as inaccurate.
The ECDIS experence is very differant then with paper charts. The argument is that, due to the nature of the display, mariners using ECDIS have more confidence in the same information then do paper chart users. Google “ECDIS overconfidence” or confidence
With regards specially to the soundings, Capt Marc’s argument is that most charts have a source diagram, by contrast the ECDIS forces the user to interrogate the system, using zoom and scroll etc. Users are less likely to do that then when the info was right on the chart.
Paper charts have evolved over hundreds of years. There is a lot of information there (source charts, the notes etc). That is what the chart maker wants you to look at. With ECDIS the users has more control on what is seen or not seen.
The other arguments are more abstract, having to do with human perception etc, metacognition. How things appear has a very strong influence on how people feel about things.
[QUOTE=txh2oman;166872]I think too there is an element of time management, or – more accurately – sufficient manning. With one officer on watch, or one officer and an AB, is there actually time to plot while underway? Sometimes yes, often no. In my experience.[/QUOTE]
ECDIS does reduce workload but I think the manning is not that big of an issue. There is (was) a vast differance between the way an experienced chief mate and new third mate navigated, it was much more time-consuming for the third mate.
The experienced navigator made much more use of the DR, radar bearings and ranges, parallel index lines or offset EBL, natural ranges, prominent landmarks etc.
For example, the C/M approching a point with a turn would set an EBL at the appropriate distance off and then drink coffee while waiting for the ship to come abeam of the point to make his turn. To meet the requirement for a fix, bang down a quick radar range abeam, to measure and plot the distance abeam, takes what, 15 seconds? Thirty seconds if you’re slow.
The third mate by contrast, knowing the position = Fix = GPS. Third mate was too nervous to think straight, in the same situation all they know is a turn is coming up, no DR so they don’t know when, difficult or not able to build full situational awareness because matching the radar picture with the chart with what’s out the window too difficult. Even after a fix no real feel for where the ship is so every minute that passes after the fix the panic builds. No experence so no confidence that they know where the ship is.
By standing orders if the watch mate did not have time to lay out a DR and maintain a plot because of traffic or whatever they had to call the captain. The third mate hit this trigger at a much lower threshold then did the Chief mate. With the ECDIS no trigger is hit, the green third mate might be in over his head but not know it.
See? That’s the sort of stuff I was hoping to hear in Bridge Resource Management … not “this is a voyage plan” and “what is the role of a pilot aboard a vessel.” Radar ranges and bearings and coffee notwithstanding, I’m still not seeing it though: steering, making arrangements on VHF, going back and forth to the chart table, in the dark, approaching Fourchon …
[QUOTE=txh2oman;166959]See? That’s the sort of stuff I was hoping to hear in Bridge Resource Management … not “this is a voyage plan” and “what is the role of a pilot aboard a vessel.” Radar ranges and bearings and coffee notwithstanding, I’m still not seeing it though: steering, making arrangements on VHF, going back and forth to the chart table, in the dark, approaching Fourchon …[/QUOTE]
When we read posts like this I think we all imagine ourselves in our own wheelhouse.
Situations differ. I think there is a range when the mate can work with just the AB, a range where an additional person is needed. There is also a band in between where, without ECDIS help is needed and with it, no help is required.
On a large sea-going vessel the captain will be in the wheel house coming in to port, there is no way the mate can manage with just the AB, ECDIS or not. Bosn has to be called out to clear the anchors, pilot ladder needs to be rigged, low-speed diesel engine needs to be put on the load-down program, all while keeping the plot, dodging fishing boat traffic and keeping on time to hit the ETA.
I think some who have posted here spend a lot of time working in that band where having an ECIDS means the differance between one or two in the wheelhouse. In my case that band is just going to be a few minutes wide as the ship approaches the pilot station or when navigting through certain choke points.
A bit off topic but keeping with BRM, how often do wheelhouse personnel log there lat/long or a known geographic position while transiting up the Mississippi river or a similar narrow waterway upon arrival from sea. Ive heard some people do it every 15 mins to an hour depending on company policy. Every 15 mins seems crazy especially if you are alone in the wheelhouse like on a tug for example.
[QUOTE=txh2oman;166959]See? That’s the sort of stuff I was hoping to hear in Bridge Resource Management … not “this is a voyage plan” and “what is the role of a pilot aboard a vessel.” Radar ranges and bearings and coffee notwithstanding, I’m still not seeing it though: steering, making arrangements on VHF, going back and forth to the chart table, in the dark, approaching Fourchon …[/QUOTE]
That’s the kind of situation where you just need local knowledge and a radar. I’ve done that a fair bit with no ECDIS and while at first it was freaky since I was used to having ECDIS it really isn’t bad.
Yea thats what im on at the moment and im logging my position in two logs every 15 minutes while trying to navigate with all of 30ft draft if not more. Just following company policy but it seems a bit much. I guess its designed to keep you from falling asleep or something. Every hour wouldnt be bad but every 15 mins?
[QUOTE=acesouthcoast;166971]A bit off topic but keeping with BRM, how often do wheelhouse personnel log there lat/long or a known geographic position while transiting up the Mississippi river or a similar narrow waterway upon arrival from sea. Ive heard some people do it every 15 mins to an hour depending on company policy. Every 15 mins seems crazy especially if you are alone in the wheelhouse like on a tug for example.[/QUOTE]
We log something every 15 or 20 minutes in rivers but never use lat/long. We log the time when abeam some aid to navigation. And then we just use the symbol for abeam (a circle with an arrow through it, pointing left for port and right for stbd, an arrow with two heads for a bridge)) we don’t write it out.
Yes i use an aid or geographic point reference. But thanks for your input. I will try that. The less i have to write the more i can focus on steering and listening to the radios.
We used to use time abeam of ATON’s along with the abeam symbol in tight pilotage waters, but then our company came back and changed our SMS procedures to require exact lat/long’s, even on the river. The company’s explanation was “The Coast Guard said so.” So that’s what we did from then on.
Time abeam was much simpler and worked well in my experience.
Thats ridiculous. If I were pushing that much draft I wouldn’t want to turn my back or break my concentration every 15 minutes to write down a position, especially in a harbor channel.
Just read an article that said ECDIS makes good navigators better and bad navigators worse. Sounds correct.
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;166975]That’s the kind of situation where you just need local knowledge and a radar. I’ve done that a fair bit with no ECDIS and while at first it was freaky since I was used to having ECDIS it really isn’t bad.[/QUOTE]
LIke you I"ve also experienced the same situation with, then without ECDIS. My observation is that without the ECDIS the comfort level decreases at first but then returns to the former non-ECDIS level. However, while the comfort level is the same, the actual level of situational awareness is lower.
For example approaching an unfamiliar anchorage with ECDIS it’s quick and easy to see where the ships are anchored in relationship to the boundaries of the anchorage and where there is an open spot. Without ECDIS, while technically it’s doabale to plot the postion of each ship it’s not a worthwhile use of time and attention. At first it’s annoying that you can’t plan your approach ahead of time but after awhile you just revert to the old “lets go up there a little closer and have a look”. It’s just as safe but it wastes time.
Another example is overtaking vessels in a place like Singapore Straits. With ECDIS it’s easy to see where ships ahead are in relationship to the traffic lanes so you can pick the best side to pass them.
Tugs and barges have been using laptops with coastal explorer and other nav programs for years. You wouldn’t think it would be a huge transition over to ecdis but a lot of people are hating it as our company rapidly installs one ecdis on each ATB at a time. Ive heard of some boats having a lap top right next to the ecdis rather than learn how to use something new. I guess if youre retiring in a year or two its all good to stick with lap top.
Having used Rose Point ECS (pro version of Coastal Explorer) prior to being on compulsory ECDIS equipped vessels I vastly prefer Rose Point. It’s not that I can’t be proficient at using our Transas ECDIS (even though they don’t make it easy), it is just that is is a POS. It is very buggy (both soft and hardware), not at all intuitive to use, and lacks the functionality of Rose Point (particularly in pilotage waters). I joke, half seriously with the mates, that the best tool you could have supplied with a Transas is a sledgehammer.
