Navionics Subscription

[Harryj50]

Originally Posted by SV Tom Crean

I spoiled myself by getting a new iPad Air with lots of storage to use for Navionics, PredictWind, gurumaps - the “older” ipad (last years entry model) is now used for media playing, Victron and everything else. Also acts a backup to the new iPad.

I think using Navionics with its better coverage plus the community edits, along with the fixed plotter makes a lot of sense.

Strongly agree re the advantages of Navionics. I switched from iNavx to Navionics earlier this year, and really appreciate the thought that has gone into its design and usability. Very nice.

We keep the iPad in a Lifeproof case and sadly they rarely work on the next model of iPad (now have two Lifeproofs). But, I can see the advantages of upgrading the current iPad as it is now about 5 years old but gets used as much or more than my laptop. And as noted, is much more useful than our old Furuno chartplotter with C-Map. I may need to bite the bullet.

[sailingharry]

I am a strong supporter of purpose designed chartplotters. I do not like using a handheld device as an alternative. But if major manufacturers provide abysmal charting, it may be the only alternative.

[iNavX]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Yes, I knew about the connection. But to be clear, I ended up using Navionic's own app, Navionics Boating, to acquire their charts. But I went through a similar widrawl of service when I was using iNavx and Navionics. I assume it's a Garmin thing...

This is correct, Navionics charts were withdrawn from iNavX by Garmin after the acquisition of Navionics.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Two pictures to show a recent example. This is Trois Riviera, a significant stopping point on the St Lawrence River in eastern Canada. We draw 7 ft.

....

So the questions.
* Are C-Map charts universally worthless?
* Did I buy the wrong chart package? This is the mega wide option that covers everything from the far north of Labrador down into the Caribbean.
* Have they been dumbed down to work on an obsolete piece of equipment?
* Is the operator not properly configuring his equipment?

It looks like you have Navionics set to the crowd-sourced "SonarChart" view which adds additional contour detail. As for C-Map, my suggestion would be to compare it against the most detailed current CHS chart of the area. (My guess is they will be rather similar.)

This is why for shallow waters I tend to keep Navionics as a secondary source.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by requiem

It looks like you have Navionics set to the crowd-sourced "SonarChart" view which adds additional contour detail. As for C-Map, my suggestion would be to compare it against the most detailed current CHS chart of the area. (My guess is they will be rather similar.)

This is why for shallow waters I tend to keep Navionics as a secondary source.

I’ve looked in a few areas up where I am, and this is nit the case. The C-map charts (at least the ones used by TZ) do not include the more detailed CHS harbour projections. They only use the larger-scale (low rez) CHS charts.

Navionics is clearly using all available CHS data. TZ (which uses C-charts) is not; but I only say this in reference to my current area, which is NE Newfoundland.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by requiem

It looks like you have Navionics set to the crowd-sourced "SonarChart" view which adds additional contour detail. As for C-Map, my suggestion would be to compare it against the most detailed current CHS chart of the area. (My guess is they will be rather similar.)



This is why for shallow waters I tend to keep Navionics as a secondary source.

Yes, that is the SonarChart. But here is the same area with the standard chart. Note I have set the red dot area to 6 ft and the blue shading to 12 ft. I'm not sure if those contours come from the standard charting or from the SonarChart. But even in this mode, the data is 1000% better than the nearly useless C-Map.

I've become fairly comfortable with a new standard mode of operation. The chartplotter gets me from point A to point B. It includes AIS, time to waypoints, and that sort of information. For the first and last few miles, the cell phone is propped on the binnacle and provides the majority of navigational data.

I really like my Furuno chartplotter. I really do not like using a cell phone! But Furuno has confirmed it is not simply the age of my chart plotter, but the unfortunate state of affairs. Their newest equipment uses the same atrocious charts. Anyone who intends to sail to Canada should never buy a Furuno chartplotter! I do not know if the situation propagates to other countries.

[smac999]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Two pictures to show a recent example. This is Trois Riviera, a significant stopping point on the St Lawrence River in eastern Canada. We draw 7 ft.

The sketchy picture is our $500 C-Map charts loaded on our mega pricey Furuno chartplotter (to be fair, it is probably over a decade old). It shows our track and our anchorage point. The darker blue is the 6-ft line, and there is not a single sounding in the entire area. No, changing zooms does not change the presentation.

The detailed chart is a screenshot of my $25 Navionics subscription on my cell phone. The depths that we observed agree closely with the Navionics depths (we anchored in 15 ft of water).

So the questions.
* Are C-Map charts universally worthless?
* Did I buy the wrong chart package? This is the mega wide option that covers everything from the far north of Labrador down into the Caribbean.
* Have they been dumbed down to work on an obsolete piece of equipment?
* Is the operator not properly configuring his equipment?Attachment 261327Attachment 261328

that furuno looks like a base map and likly better ones can be bought. or maybe they just don't cover that area...

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by smac999

that furuno looks like a base map and likly better ones can be bought. or maybe they just don't cover that area...

That is not a base map, that is what C-Map produces for Canada. And because Furuno only uses C-Map, that is all you get. I have specifically confirmed this with Furuno technical support. It is atrocious. Awful in the extreme. I will not only not recommend Furuno, but will loudly recommend that they not be considered unless you remain in the United States. In the United States, they provide free and frequent updates using NOAA raster and vector charts -- making them an excellent choice for domestic users.

[Andrew Lippman]

I still have not gotten used to ENCs. They seem to either omit details like mark names or add too much clutter. Have tried C-Map and Navionics on built-in plotters but I tend to use TZiBoat more often. I can get AIS on it from the boat.

In theory, community updates sound in tune with the times but is it worth it in practice?

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

That is not a base map, that is what C-Map produces for Canada. And because Furuno only uses C-Map, that is all you get. .

Furuno supports both CMAP and Furuno. Has for a long time.

https://www.navnet.com/tzt3/en/models/

CMAP vs Navionics: out here on the West coast of Canada, CMAP and Navionics are very similar in content (CMAP not worse than Navionics, and often more up-to-date).

Neither CMAP nor Navionics are fully up-to-date compared to CHS.

[sv_pelagia]

Trois Riviere:


1. AquaMaps





2. Navionics





3. C-MAP


Not a lot of difference -- little more info on Navionics.





I do not have CHS charts for area,but the CHS online viewer suggests limited data for this bay.

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

Furuno supports both CMAP and Furuno. Has for a long time.

https://www.navnet.com/tzt3/en/models/

When I purchased my Furuno (some time ago...), I had choice of the system set for Navionics or for CMAP (but not both). Once I chose the CMAP version, Navionics was no longer an option.

That may still be the case - - I don't know (the link I provided indicates the TZ3 takes CMAP and Navionics (or NOAA), but perhaps one has to choose one or the other, and once choice is made, that's it).

[more]

all Mediterranean & Black Sea exclude Croatia
EXPIRED on May 21, 2023

$US 24.99

only Croatia 54,99€
simply not fer

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

Trois Riviere:


1. AquaMaps
Attachment 279647




2. Navionics
Attachment 279648




3. C-MAP
Attachment 279649

Not a lot of difference -- little more info on Navionics.





I do not have CHS charts for area,but the CHS online viewer suggests limited data for this bay.

Not a lot of difference, but I would still say that the Navionics shows much more information. We went up that creek running North along the island, the chart calls it Log Pond. We draw 7 ft. Which one of those charts would you like to be using to run in there? By the way, we saw no less than 12 ft, maybe even more -- it certainly wasn't at all concerning for our 7 foot draft.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

When I purchased my Furuno (some time ago...), I had choice of the system set for Navionics or for CMAP (but not both). Once I chose the CMAP version, Navionics was no longer an option.

That may still be the case - - I don't know (the link I provided indicates the TZ3 takes CMAP and Navionics (or NOAA), but perhaps one has to choose one or the other, and once choice is made, that's it).

Not sure about the one-time choice of either / or. But once Garmin bought Navionics, they modified their TOS such that they could no longer be used on Furuno or TZ. The problem is that Furuno/TZ reformat the data to work on their machine, and Garmin now prohibits that. Existing Navionics charts will work, but you can no longer buy or upgrade.