"From Paper Charts to Advanced Pixel Charts: Are Electronic Charts Making Us Forget the Art of Reporting Navigational Hazards?"

A question to Masters, Navigators, DPAs, and Marine Superintendents: When was the last time your Navigators reported a discrepancy to the UKHO using the form UKHO H.102 for a new or suspected danger, missing light, change of light characteristics, new port developments, or even depth soundings? In an age when a telephone has a camera, video, and internet, we are not doing -in large numbers- what was appreciated in pre-ENCs times.

Can these reports be added to our Company's SMS? Even added to the KPI requirements for the Ship′s Fleet? It seems to me they can be counted not only as good working practices promoted by OCIMF, IMCA, IMPA, and many other important bodies but also as a Near Miss, which aligns fully with the ISM code...

In the age of electronic nautical charts (ENCs) and GPS, maritime navigation has transformed dramatically from paper charts and manual updates. While these advancements have brought convenience and precision, they have also introduced a critical issue: the need for more proactive reporting and updates on navigational data.

As mariners, we’ve transitioned from manual tasks—analyzing paper Notices to Mariners, visualizing corrections, and checking manual entries for permanent, temporary and preliminary notices—to a system where we rely heavily on automatic updates and the assumption that authorities -and others: nameless- keep charts and publications current. Unfortunately, this assumption doesn’t always hold true.

The Problem

Newly developed ports and port improvements are undergoing rapid industrial and infrastructural changes, highlighting this gap. Expanding LNG plants, refineries, and massive port developments are altering geography, navigational lights, channels, and rivers at an unprecedented pace. Yet, these changes often fail to appear promptly on nautical charts, creating potential hazards for vessels navigating these waters.

While electronic charts offer unparalleled positional accuracy, they are only as reliable as the data they contain. A lighthouse might no longer emit the same light, a buoy might be out of position or missing, and a depth sounding might no longer reflect reality. The responsibility for these discrepancies doesn’t rest solely on authorities; it also lies with us as mariners to report and verify.

I do Navigational Assessments as part of my many consultancy jobs for owners and shipping companies, and it is very common to note that when comparing chart information, discrepancies are noted, and the reaction, the feeling to be helpful when sending a "correction" on a newly acquired competence by the OOWs it is gratifying for them and myself...the recognition email from the UKHO is also motivating and rewarding...they usually post it on their chart tables for others to see their contribution recognized.

What Can We Do?

Historically, mariners were responsible for identifying, classifying, and reporting discrepancies through tools like the H102 form and Notices to Mariners (well explained on the NP100 The Mariners Handbook. These practices should not become relics of the past. They remain vital, especially when the sea is as unpredictable as ever.

As Rudyard Kipling wisely said: "This new ship here, is fitted according to the reported increase of knowledge among mankind. Namely, she is cumbered, end to end, with bells and trumpets and clocks and wires which, it has been told to me, can call Voices out of the air or the waters to con the ship while her crew sleep. But sleep thou lightly, O Nakhoda! It has not yet been told to me that the Sea has ceased to be the Sea.."

We must ask ourselves:

• How many Mariners actively report anomalies or discrepancies to authorities like the UK Hydrographic Office (UKHO)?
• How often do we verify the accuracy of our electronic chats beyond trusting the system?
• Are we prepared for the day when a navigational aid fails, and outdated data threatens safety?

A Call to Action

1. Masters and Mariners: Take responsibility. Observe and report discrepancies, whether they pertain to depths, aids to navigation, or ENC display issues. Utilize tools like the H102 form to ensure your findings reach the appropriate authorities.
2. Authorities and Inspectors: Prioritize updates to nautical charts and address the lag in reflecting changes from fast-developing regions. Collaboration with mariners on the front lines is key.
3. Hydrographic Offices: Streamline the reporting process and encourage submissions from mariners. Please continue to acknowledge the contributions and act quickly to incorporate updates into ENCs.

Creating a Culture of Accountability

Suppose we want to improve and involve navigators in the chart correction process. In that case, we must integrate the H102 form into our Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Near Miss Reporting systems. Treating chart corrections as part of our safety culture—not as an optional or outdated practice—will help build the habit of constant observation and proactive reporting.

Including H102 reports within KPIs ensures that chart corrections become a measurable, actionable part of a navigator’s responsibilities, just like other critical safety tasks. Doing so reduces the risk of incidents and fosters a sense of ownership and pride among mariners in maintaining safe navigation practices.

In today’s world, where GPS offers constant positional monitoring, it’s easy to grow complacent. But safety at sea demands vigilance, collaboration, and a shared commitment to accurate, up-to-date navigational information. Let’s ensure we’re part of the solution, not contributors to the problem.

Your Thoughts

How can we better encourage mariners to report observations? What challenges have you faced with outdated navigational data? Should chart corrections be formally included in KPI evaluations? Let’s discuss and drive change together.

#MaritimeSafety #NauticalCharts #CallToAction #Navigation #KPIs