A large majority of grounding and other ship loss incidents that we studied or investigated in the Navy in the "pre-chartplotter" days turned out to be caused by the familiar "failure to keep a proper DR" problem.
In other, simpler, terms, no one bothered to check the road ahead for potholes and detours. The reason large area paper charts were physically big was so a navigator could lay out his entire track from departure to arrival that would show possible hazards like islands and reefs enroute. Scaling limitations make this unreliable on a chartplotter.

It's ironic that in a multimillion dollar machine like the Volvo boats, apparently no one took the trouble to lay out a track on a paper chart with dividers, a straight edge and a pencil, an operation that would probably cost less in time and money than a pair of offshore gloves.

In a larger sense, there is beginning to be some concern that over-reliance on automation and computers is eroding our ability to think and act for ourselves. A recent WSJ piece described a study of commercial airline pilot proficiency that concluded that there was a real and growing problem here. Consider the example of the Korean airliner that went down in San Francisco a year or so ago , partly because the pilot and copilot were too accustomed to flying by computer and autopilot.