ARCS Skipper Charts?

[marisca]

I am in the process of planning for the trips I probably won't get round to doing next year. However, this negativity doesn't stop the process and so I am looking at the charts I may need and getting a wee bit scared at just how much I could spend.

Norway is a probable destination on the way from the Forth to the Clyde (well, it has to beat sitting off Aberdeen or Peterhead for 6 hours in that awful slop) and I've been looking at the UKHO, the Norwegian Leisure folios, C-Map, and ARCS. I don't have a plotter but an old lap-top and a GPS dongle are within my reach. My thoughts are running to large scale UKHMO charts, Ms Lomax's Pilot, and ARCS Skipper charts loaded on the lap-top running on Sea-Clear (or something) for the detailed stuff + possibly an AIS engine.
Reason for the ARCS is that they can be updated (unlike some of the plotter stuff) and they show all the detail at whatever zoom level - I don't like the suddenly appearing/disappearing rocks when the scale changes on vector charts, and access to more charts is just a phone call away.

So what I want from you guys is your experiences and thoughts for and against. Does anyone actually use ARCS?

[Afrita]

First post for me on here, but as a fellow CO32 owner and seeing as you haven't had a reply let I thought I'd chip in.

Reason for the ARCS is that they can be updated (unlike some of the plotter stuff) and they show all the detail at whatever zoom level - I don't like the suddenly appearing/disappearing rocks when the scale changes on vector charts, and access to more charts is just a phone call away.

So what I want from you guys is your experiences and thoughts for and against. Does anyone actually use ARCS?

I looked into this last winter and for a variety of reasons (including concerns over power use) put of the decision and made do with paper for another season. I have been looking again recently and after thinking about the options I agree that I prefer raster charts to vector charts because (i) I trust them more (no/fewer hidden rocks!) and (ii) they're more familiar and (ii) because a cartographer has drawn them, rather than a computer, generally clearer (e.g. text isn't printed over chart symbols as happens with leisure vector charts ). ARCS seem to be the best raster charts money can buy and are available with global coverage.

However, as you say they're not cheap and for UK use only (which I appreciate doesn't deal with your Norwegian plans) there are alternative sources of raster Admiralty charts. These come bundled with some of the available charting packages:

http://www.neptune-navigation.com/plotter%20plus.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; [software and a portfolio of around 80 charts costs a similar amount to one ten chart ARCS folio without software (just under £100) and can be updated for about £30 a year]

http://www.tideplotter.co.uk/chart-plotter/index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; [slightly cheaper than the above (~£70) but slightly more expensive to update (~£50), but seems to include raster images of all UK Admiralty charts not just one area so you'd get the west and east coasts of Scotland in one go]

http://www.norcom.demon.co.uk/meridian/seatrak.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; [their website doesn't show it, but these people now produce a ~£100 package with all UK admiralty charts as well, which can be bought from here: http://www.bookharbour.com/epages/BookH ... ories/1003" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; but there is no update service, you have to buy again each year and their lack of website update for 4 or 5 years is perhaps concerning]

There is also a version of MaxSea (more sophisticated than the above) which comes with all of the UK Admiralty charts but it's 600 Euros. They do another covering Norway though, but I can't get the price up. http://comen.maxsea.fr/MaxSea/Products/ ... fault.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think the only catch is that these packages can't read any other charts in these version so you are limited to the UK.

I hope this helps, and finally I don't think SeaClear can read ARCS charts - it's more aimed at the US/NOAA chart format.

David

[Silkie]

Welcome aboard David.

Although it's early days yet, I can confirm that your post has earned a place on the short list for the coveted Most Informative First Post of 2010 award.

[Afrita]

Welcome aboard David.

Although it's early days yet, I can confirm that your post has earned a place on the short list for the coveted Most Informative First Post of 2010 award.

Thanks Silkie, my own research last year took a while so I might as well share some of the findings. More batteries probably needed if I am to go ahead with a laptop on board, especially as Afrita's windmill broke at the end of last year.

[marisca]

Thanks David. We seem to share the same view on raster v. vector. For UK charts (and plotters) there is indeed quite a choice and at a price that makes the c-map and other vector cards look less than attractive. For Norway - I've had a chance to see the Båtsportkart and apart from the cost and size, they seem to be ideal. The size thing is the charts are only 47 x 36.5 cms (18"x14.5") and at 1:50000 a magnifying glass is a must for my tired old eyes but the detail is all there. I am assured by those that have done it (thanks Paul and Jim) that eyeball navigation through the maze of skerries, boghs and sgeirs is aided greatly by poles, perches and handy arrows, though some of the harbour entrances require an act of faith.
I have had a wee play with Seaclear scanning in bits of chart and apart from the pain of the scanning (16 scans for a normal chart) and the copyright question, it seems to lace it all together, changes scale, zooms in and out, and best of all, the price is affordable. If I am going to Norway then the Båtsportkart paper also scanned into Seaclear to add GPS position and zooming is likely to be my solution. Going vector or expensive raster would still require paper charts as well.

[Pete Cooper]

Some thoughts on maps from somebody who makes maps for a living:

Raster charts are not to be preferred over vector ones, because they are derived from vector data! His words about “cartographic input” are flawed, because the vector cartography (which underlies all modern charting) is carried out by cartographers. And vector data allows things like automatic removal of features at different zoom scales, for example, and also allows much more flexibility over scale of display. Indeed, it also allows things like changing displays to account for thing like colour blindness, though most chart plotters or software don’t have this sort of capability.

[marisca]

Thanks Pete. I am a total neophyte with digital charting. The rasterisation of paper charts (or maybe its all the vector data on one level) gives an image that I am familiar with and which matches my expectations. The vector chart plotters I have seen, and I admit I have very little experience of the things, have had the disconcerting habit of changing the detail shown as the zoom factor changes so that, for example, rocks which are of critical interest can appear or disappear, and they don't look like paper charts. I can see that an optional facility to declutter might be useful with a small screen but I reckon that I will still be using paper charts and a pencil as my primary navigation method with the laptop as a cheaper than paper way to get the smaller scale charts (and detail) that would be "nice-to-have" so raster will do nicely.

Of course, if the forum disagrees, I expect to be told!

[NorthUp2]

I use both types of electronic charting, ARCS, Cmap and have used Navionics on another boat.
I prefer the ARCS format mainly because it's 'familiar' with respect to paper charts.
The biggest bug with Cmap for me is the way that placenames can appear and disappear at random depending on the scale. Try moving the cursor to St Kilda on some versions- you will find that at certain scales the islands are renamed The Flannans! What other discrepancies are lurking in there?
Navionics- the chart datum seems to be different on every 'chart boundary ' associated with the Admiralty chart, the biggest error seen was 120' North/ south and 80' E/W at Berneray, Sound of Harris three years ago. The pier at Stornoway was exactly where the plotter said it was though. (E120 raymarine)
Having said that, there are still rocks west of Lewis that are uncharted...anywhere!

[Afrita]

His words about “cartographic input” are flawed, because the vector cartography (which underlies all modern charting) is carried out by cartographers.

I think I failed to explain my self properly. I don't doubt that Vector charts are accurate, but what I was trying to say is that in my experience a lot of the consumer/leisure vector chart systems seem quite cluttered or poorly presented on the screen. Examples include text being printed over other chart objects, presumably because the software isn't sophisticated enough to prevent it by automatically adjusting text sizes, rotating the text or moving it to the other side of the object being labelled. I know that this can be avoided by switching off certain layers of information, but them I'm at risk of not seeing what I need to see when I look at the chart.

I am sure that high end ECDIS systems with S57 charts don't suffer from this problem, but they are aimed at commercial shipping and the price tends to reflect this.

All IMHO of course, and maybe I've just not found the right system so any recommendations would be welcome.