SIGHTS
Printed From: Jobships.com
Category: Maritime Knowledgebase
Forum Name: Navigation
Forum Discription: All discussions related to Navigation Equipments, aids and developments can be discussed here.
URL: http://www.jobships.com/forum//forum_posts.asp?TID=250
Printed Date: 09 Nov 2024 at 7:30am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 8.02 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: SIGHTS
Posted By: Rajesh Thamara
Subject: SIGHTS
Date Posted: 17 Sep 2006 at 9:49pm
 AS I WAS SAILING I GOT AN INTRESTING REMARK FROM MY CHIEF OFFICER WITH THE ADVENT OF ALL TECHNOLGY AND LIKE HAVING TWO GPS AIS WHAT IS THE USE OF TRADITIONAL USE OF TAKING SIGHTS.
I KNOW LOTS YOUNGER GENERATION OF SEAFARER BELIEVE IN IT AS I HAVE HEARD IT SO MANY TIMES.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS DIFFRENT VIEWS ABOUT THIS
RT
|
Replies:
Posted By: Sunil Parashar
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2006 at 10:27am
|
There can be only reply to such a query and i think there couldn't be any contest to that. All the high tech equipment available on todays bridge are run by electricity - one blown fuse and all that high tech equipment is useless. Ofcourse they have all backups, but tnothing can beat the best backup of all - the Navigator. Secondly all the output available from these equipment is as accurate as the data fed into it, the way it is processed and also the way it is analyzed. One mistake in any one of the steps and you can be in danger without you even realizing it. A classic example of that is the TP ship which ran aground on Batu Beranti in Singapore Straits.
We as competent navigators should realize and always remember that all these equipments are an aid to navigation and not the ultimate means of navigation. Personally in my experience over last ten years i have felt that nothing can beat the traditional means of navigation.
I am not an old timer and i have myself used all the latest high tech equipment, but i would advise all of those out there that always be ready to take over when the equipment fails(remember murphy's law).
With rigrous practice and rote (fixed procedures) using these high tech equipment even a layman can drive a ship, but its only a Navigator who will con the ship without these equipments, if required!!!!!
|
Posted By: KUMAR N. IYER
Date Posted: 11 Nov 2006 at 8:41pm
| The knowhow and skill of taking sights are very much to be highly valued. But with today's work pressure on board it is highly unfair to be compulsive on this issue especially as highly accurate means of position fixing with back ups are provided. However this should not apply to the so called traditional methods of postion fixing when making landfall, utilising visual and radar information. These are counter checks to ensure vessel's safety by keeping the navigator aware of what he is doing and keeping him in picture at all times. As far as postion fixing using astronomical observation goes enough is being dealt with during training and competency courses to ensure that the skill is not lost. Also the training requirements for cadets does cover this. As it is fixing position by astronomical observation hardly gives accurate fixes and serves no purpose in navigating the vessel. In todays world it is quite unbelievable that any vessel will be forced to rely on this method and that is what makes it irrelevant. |
Posted By: ARUN VISVANATHAN
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2006 at 9:15am
|
The value of astro navigation in today's high tech world is debatable. Given that there are now multiple systems on board vessels providing redundancy, you don't need it to navigate a ship across the oceans. The time spent in learning this arcane science, swotted for COC exams and never used thereafter, could be better utilised on other topics. The US Navy stopped teaching astro nav at the Naval Academy many many years ago. |
Posted By: Sunil Parashar
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2006 at 10:30am
|
I would say in todays high tech world, even the value of human beings(us navigators) on board the ship is debatable. Already they are combining the job of navigators with that of engineers by providing dual qualification. More and more decesions(including routes to use for navigation across oceans) are being made by company and not by the master of the ship. the day isn't far when they won't need human navigators at all on the bridge. But till the time a human navigator is there on the bridge the knowledge of astronavigation in his hands will be valuable asset. Just because US navy does not teach astro navigation doesn't mean that its not useful. and i am sure if we dwell deep into their course structure we will find astro navigation an integral part of their studies.(i have checked the cadet trng program at SUNY maritime college and astro naviagtion is there in their syllabus!!!!!!!!!!!).
|
Posted By: ARUN VISVANATHAN
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2007 at 6:30am
| Of course astro nav is useful. Question is - can the time spent learning this subject not be better used. I have sailed for 15 years as a Master and have yet to find one graduate of our nautical training system who can plot a ship's position using the sun and the stars. They can all calculate long by chron etc, but actually find the ship's position!!! |
Posted By: Sunil Parashar
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2007 at 7:09am
|
I very much agree with the fact that officers on board can't practically use astro navigation, due the reason of either not knowing it or not actually interested in practising it. I don't claim to be master in use of astro navigation, but i do claim that if a situation arises i can confindently use it. and thats only for one reason, that when i was cadet my seniors had forced me to practice it and later on i developed interest in it for other reasons. Speaking simply its a question of interest and motivation. Today on board we find people who wouldn't be interested in even doing 8 hrs of watchkeeping duty diligently, so the chance of such people being interested in practicing astro nav(time permitting during long ocean crossings) is out of question. Such people even find using radar bearings during coatal navigation a painful task!!!!!!!!! |
Posted By: Reynante Naras
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2007 at 8:36pm
|
Most probably your C/o does'nt know how to take sight. It is a common excuse of those who don't know how to. Please don't take this negatively. |
Posted By: Reynante Naras
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2007 at 8:38pm
Same view! Sail on!
|
Posted By: ARVIND LOBO
Date Posted: 01 Jun 2007 at 4:45am
|
Most modern navigators do not know how to spell the word "SEXTANT"
its a shame on all of us
|
Posted By: robin george
Date Posted: 07 Jun 2007 at 10:26am
|
Rajesh brought a very relevant point for discussion.
As we know, today's deck officers are spending lot of time for astro nav and sights while doing their tickets. The efforts spend for gasping the theory and practicing the art of plotting position using astronomical position lines and data are enormous. It is always better to have a thorough knowledge of your field of interest or work. In today's scenario of one contract each at every rank before getting promotted to master and the era of mass produced master mariners and Chief Engineers, it might appear that most of the traditions and proven basics can be by-passed. It is a common knowledge that vessels do not rely on sights to make land fall or reach ports and hence sights are not taken seriously, apart for training and record keeping purpose. Administrations are relectunct to remove astro nav/Sights from the Syllaby because no other fool proof system are in existence. GPS and Glosnass systems are operated by Particular Govt. agencies, and Accuracy for non military operations are never guaranteed at all the time. These agencies are capable of introducing an error to the GPS and DGPS systems if required or the situation warrants.
(Deliberate Introduction of such an error would have deffinitely set all the planes bound for world trade centre and Pentagon off course and would averted 9/11 tragedy)
Such a conspicous uncertainity is foring administrations to keep astro nav and Sights very much in the syllabus of deck officers.
Most of the ships are fitted with two stand alone GPS/DGPS and in addition, most of the Sat B and Sat C systems incorporate independant GPS receivers. So many GPS receivers are available on board as back ups. It is of no use to hard press the need of taking sights every day and at the same time it is better to know the basics of astro navigation and taking sights so that one can feed the Sextant altitude, GMT etc in one of the computers loaded with astro programmes to save precious time.
It is worth remembering that those who sailed before the advent of GPS/DGPS systems are the ardent supporters of astro Nav due to their experience and they still cherish the memmories of those days with nostalgia.
I would like to conclude saying that in GPS/DGPS systems are the only feasible alternative in today's shipping industry where fast turn arounds and precise navigation are the most cost effective factors.
|
Posted By: PIJUSH MUKHERJEE
Date Posted: 15 May 2009 at 11:15pm
|
It is required to learn all latest technical developements while keeping the basics in tact -- just like no matter how successfull one may become but he should nevver forget thecontributions of his ancestors or superiors.
GPS & Satalite navigation did'nt drop from space or emerge from ocean, computers & electronics are developed by human -- accordingly one should not forget that they may someday provide errors too.
Present day navigation system also follows the basics of Astro-navigation and US-Navigators may have to kiss their ass good-bye faster than any other modern-day Navigators in the event of Solar-Storm when there will be Global Disaster of Electricity.
We must learn to respect the ancient system of nature and always try to continue learning advanced procedures for survival -- Sextant & Astro Navigation will be required after 2012. Good luck to all.
|
Posted By: SHAMMI LALA
Date Posted: 17 Jul 2009 at 11:26pm
| Not knowing how to take sights is like not knowing what multiplication is and using a excel sheet to feed in numbers and getting your multiplacation answers. |