Do You Still Need Paper Charts?

I would be, at this point, quite OK with going solely electronic (with appropriate backup gadgets, of course, for when the main one dies).

I would emphatically not be OK with relying purely on GPS and radar, without the skills to navigate on my own. “Selective availability” may be gone and the GPS satellites are probably out of reach of a Kessler cascade, but I spend enough time programming computers to know better than to trust them without a way to double-check for myself. There are times, as John mentioned, when the datum is screwed up and all the chartplotter can do is to display “well, this is what the paper chart would look like”.

Until affordable 4K displays show up, though, I’m keeping paper around. A 1080p display is nowhere close to good enough to replace a two-by-three foot spread when you need the big picture.

Oh, and a note to the Canadian Hydrographic Service: Get with the times, guys. If the Americans can make up-to-date S57 charts for all their major waterways available free online, I don’t see what excuse we Canadians have for charging a king’s ransom for update packs in crippled, DRM-locked formats.

Dear John,
Since the issue of chart plotting in the cockpit is brought up so prominently in this article stream, I will respond here lest everyone reading believes that navigating from the cockpit is the last word.
First, I agree that doing all charting from the cockpit is likely the safest, certainly the most efficient and is most likely to preserve situational awareness.
My caveats include:
I see this as another BBB (big boat bias). The bigger the boat, the more likely having navigation in the cockpit can be made to work. On 40 footers, charting with the larger screens you are espousing becomes a real estate issue as well as a visibility forward through the dodger windows issue. Paper charts would usually only be considered able to be worked on top of the companionway slide: feasible, because we have done it, but not easy nor convenient.
I would also challenge your description of the trials of a navigator using a laptop at the nav station (except possibly for single-handers, but even there I am doubtful). When things get complicated (or even when we get near something hard as you put it), Ginger is most likely at the nav station on the computer/chart plotter and I am on the helm. No one is jumping around or demented. She is feeding me relevant data and I am asking her questions while I maintain situational awareness of the boat and surroundings. She has her own situational awareness and they work well together in a synergistic fashion.*
It sounds like near-shore is primarily where you are making the case for cockpit navigation. This is where we are operating with 2 people available when needed and a single-hander may have the challenges you describe.
Offshore, where we are more likely to be on watch alone, having access to the laptop/chart plotter is far less important (when near something hard, both of us are active usually) and it is usually off to save power. We care where we are every hour or 2 when we log position and even then we rarely turn on the laptop. Most important are the AIS and the radar, both of which have displays in the cockpit.
Finally, we have navigated in this fashion (laptop below) for 12+ years now and, while sometimes finding it a bit inconvenient, I can’t think of a time where I deemed it unsafe.**
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy

*Once for a long forgotten reason, we switched positions mid-way through a challenging manoeuver. Both of us took a dangerously long time to orient (establish situational awareness), became quite scarily unsettled, and we learned a valuable lesson.
** Far more dangerous, from my observation, is the modern tendency to install big complicated chart plotters at the helm. I suspect this is not what you meant by having nav ability in the cockpit, but I would want to challenge this seemingly innovative, reasonable and efficient (at first blush) and very seductive innovation. It is way too easy get lost in electronic manipulation, and then loose situational awareness. This task, that should never be the province of the helmsperson. An automobile equivalent is manipulating a cell phone by hand during driving: done all the time, but not good judgment.

John,
I think you, Dick and others have covered all the bases here. I just want to point out that the number GPS enabled devices we have on board is staggering, nine at last count. We have a small globe on board and the 3 ft. by 4 ft. chart table has a world map embedded in case we wake up after a week long trance and wonder where in the world we are.
I love maps especially paper ones and as a older pilot learned how to navigate using them but can’t imagine having to do that again. I have vivid memories of shooting instrument approaches at night in rain, fog and enough turbulence to prevent the eyes from latching on to the essential numbers. And the grey hair to prove it.

Hi John,
I have some further comments on the topic of navigation and paper, prompted by Michael´s comment above.
I think it is important to make clear that the part of navigation which is properly referred to as pilotage, has special requirements, and I infer that this on what you have based much of your script. Use of the eyeball and land or sea-based features/marks together with charts – paper or electronic. I fully agree with you that pilotage, particularly when short-handed, needs to be done on deck. Besides a chart on a manageably sized board, a small whiteboard prepared beforehand with details like clearing bearings, buoys and distinctive landmarks makes the job easier. The other sort of navigation, offshore, I still believe is best done below decks, at a chart table and in (relative) comfort. Writing up the log, plotting a position are easier done sitting down and out of the rain/spray/wind. There may be a case for a boat as large as Morgans Cloud, with a centre cockpit, to have its navigation station under the dodger, but on the smaller sized yachts sailed by most of us, perhaps with an aft cockpit, this is not an option – hard dodger or no. Plotting a position on a chart needs a table or firm surface at least large enough to take a folded chart, and with fiddles to stop pencils, dividers, paralle rules etc disappearing.
My other point is that any SOLAS vessel which does not have an ECDIS must carry paper charts – no option. Although this does not directly affect pleasure yachts, it is for me a strong indication that paper charts are a requirement, not an option, for us too. You grew up using paper, and although you rely principally on electronic navigation systems, you´re well able to cope if they should suddenly collapse. Less experienced sailors who decide that paper is no longer absolutely necessary will, if their electronic systems should suddenly fail, probably be completely lost – never having had to use paper charts. Even an uncorrected chart is better than nothing in the event of a complete system collapse. Solar storms happen all the time, and one which is strong enough to affect or disrupt satellite-based navigation systems will come. One scientist has predicted that there is a 12% likelihood of a Carrington Event in the next 10 years. That would mean a major catastrophy but much smaller solar storms could cause serious disruption.
I hope that you will understand my persistence in putting forward my point of view, and I am reassured that it is reflected in some of the comments – I´m not the only one in step!
Although it would be an real undertaking, it would be of enormous benefit if original post and its comments could be consolidated into a revised chapter.
Yours aye,
Bill

Hi John,
To throw another log on the fire of paper vs electronic charting, readers may find it interesting to read the article in the 2.17.16 edition of the Washington Post describing how the US Navy has recently changed its curriculum for teaching navigation skills to future officers. The link to this article is http://wpo.st/l-sC1.
Cheers, Tom