e-Navigation is perhaps the most controversial issue in the future technological direction of the shipping industry. Regulators and regional authorities are actively pursuing it, with the EU taking a leading role.
Both advocates and regulators see e-boating as a universal force for good that, among other things, will; improve safety, protect the environment and improve the commercial operation of ships and ports.
Others view it with suspicion believing that there are ulterior motives behind its development and that there is little support for some of the stated goals of the various projects that advocate it.
Before exploring the concept further, it is necessary to look at the developments that have taken place in navigation technology and regulatory movements in the last two decades.
ESSENTIAL ELECTRONIC NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT
Modern ships are required to carry a wide range of bridge navigation and control systems and equipment, most of which have evolved in different periods over the last 60-70 years. The most recent system that has been made mandatory under SOLAS is ECDIS, but it will still be some time before all affected ships are required to be equipped and there will also be a significant number of 'small' ships below 3,000 gt that are not required. to install an ECDIS.
As a consequence of the continuous addition of new equipment, many ships have a bridge made up of disparate independent systems. On newer ships, it is possible to integrate systems so that two or more can share data or sensor inputs with most newer ships that have Integrated Navigation Systems (INS) or Integrated Bridge Systems (IBS).
There is a lot of confusion about the difference between the two terms and many consider them interchangeable. However, the IMO has different definitions, an IBS is defined in resolution MSC.64(67) and an INS in MSC.86(70).
A comparison of definitions shows that an INS is a combination of data and navigation systems interconnected to enhance the safe and efficient movement of the ship, while the IBS interconnects various other systems to increase efficiency in overall ship management. More specifically, the IMO definition of an IBS applies to a system that performs two or more operations from:
• execution of the passage;
• communication;
• machinery control;
• Loading, unloading, and control of cargo and security and surveillance.
Rather, IMO defines three versions of an INS and each upstream category must also meet the requirements of the lower categories:
• INS(A), which as a minimum provides position, speed, course, and time information, each clearly marked with an indication of integrity.
• INS(B), which automatically, continuously, and graphically indicates the ship's position, speed, and heading and, where available, depth in relation to the planned route, as well as known and detected hazards.
• INS(C), which provides means to automatically control heading, track or speed and to monitor the performance and status of these controls.
The two definitions do not have a common navigation element requirement, so an IBS cannot be said to be an extended INS, although many consider it to be so.
The difference between the two is likely to gradually fade as most shipowners are specifying high degrees of integration for new ships, in many cases beyond what is defined as IBS. Both systems, together with ECDIS, are considered essential to give a framework and direction to the e-navigation concept.
Embedded and VDR systems have a common element in that they both bring together data from disparate systems. In fact, VDRs, unlike the stripped-down versions (S-VDRs), was made possible more by embedded systems than perhaps by any other development in navigation technology or regulation.
There is no question that there are significant benefits to mariners of integrated systems, as it is possible to monitor and operate all systems and instruments from a single workstation. In addition, an integrated system with several workstations and display confers a high degree of redundancy and availability of the system. The inclusion of ECDIS also allows for pitch planning and chart work to be carried out on the main bridge rather than in the chart room.
All of the major navigation system providers offer an integrated system of some description, as well as offering standalone systems. Systems are sold under brand names including SAM Electronic's NACOS, Kelvin Hughes' Manta Bridge, Sperry Marine's Vision Master, Raytheon Anschütz's Synapsis, and Kong's K-Master
DEFINITION OF ELECTRONIC NAVIGATION
It is difficult to pin down exactly what constitutes e-navigation. As far as IMO is concerned, it has its roots in the 2006 MSC(81) meeting, when a roadmap was drawn up with the aim of implementing it in 2013. By 2009 it had defined e-navigation as;
• E-navigation is the harmonized collection, integration, exchange, presentation, and analysis of marine information on board and on land by electronic means to improve mooring to mooring navigation and related services for safety at sea and environmental protection. marine environment.
• E-navigation aims to meet the present and future needs of users through the harmonization of maritime navigation systems and ground support services.
IMO is currently still discussing e-navigation with the latest developments described later in this chapter. However, the idea has much older roots and could be traced back to the EU's ATOMOS project which began in 1992. ATOMOS was an acronym for Advanced Technology for Optimizing Manpower on Ships, and its aim was simply to find ways to reduce manning on ships. EU ships. as a means to make them more competitive.
At the time, the EU felt that European shipping was losing out to Asian and Eastern European competitors who had lower wage costs and were thus able to constantly undercut European operators. In the early 1990s, it was wage, not fuel, that made up the bulk of an owner's expense.
The summary document of the first ATOMOS project (there should be at least three more stages) contained the following conclusion:
In terms of importance, many of the ATOMOS results should prove to be of great value. It is no secret that competition in the shipping industry is increasing by the day, and European shipowners are under constant pressure from third-world shipowners or shipowners operating under third-world flags. Events in the Soviet Union have not alleviated the situation of the EU fleet.
Closely related to the issue of competition is the issue of maritime safety, although very often in inverse proportion. ATOMOS research has found that other things being equal, a small-crewed ship equipped with ATOMOS technology is more competitive than a similar ship equipped with conventional technology.
Another finding from the research is that modern, low-crew, high-tech ships are (at least) as safe as conventional ships. Many of the technologies analyzed during the ATOMOS project show great potential for an even greater increase in maritime safety, an increase that could easily become mandatory and an increase that might not be possible for ships with conventional equipment.
Given the trends described very briefly above, and given that any EU owner operating conventionally equipped vessels profitably today, the combined results from ATOMOS indicate that competitiveness, safety, and profits would be increased by using conventionally equipped vessels. of high technology.
While it may not be recorded in the ATOMOS documents, there was a belief that the project could eventually lead to shipping companies and shore-based traffic controllers remotely operating unmanned ships. Perhaps realizing that such a scenario was not going to be an easy sell, the project morphed into something less revolutionary and aimed more at safer shipping.
The first overview document contains suggestions on what IMO will be asked to promote and which will be recognized as the core elements of e-navigation.