ecdis with a critical view

ECDIS: With a Critical View

Workshop Rotterdam, 11 December 2013

Hydrographic Society, Benelux Branchby

Horst HechtDirector (rtd.) Hydrography, BSH Germany

Present: Senior Scientific Advisor to Caris bv

Overview

• Historical flashback• Current situation• Problem areas• Strengths• Weaknesses• Threats• Outlook

Horst Hecht: ECDIS – With a Critical View HSB, 11 Dec 2013

Some historical notes

• First ideas and proposals for an Electronic Chart System already at the end of 70ies.

• First prototype: 1983 (USA, M. Rogoff)– Port of Baltimore, already with Radar overlay

• 1986-1997: IMO and IHO address ECDIS; result: Performance Standards for ECDIS as basis for industrial development– Netherlands (RAdm van Opstal) initiated first steps

• 1988-1997: IHO develops S-52 and S-57 standards• Since 1997: HOs produce ENCs and updates• 2010: 95%-level of data coverage reached


Where do we stand today with ECDIS?

• ECDIS – a new database-driven, GPS-controlled navigation information system replacing paper charts, regulated by IMO, data to be produced under authority of national HOs following worldwide IHO standards

• Phased carriage requirement (since July 2012)• Component of an integrated bridge system• Data available for about 95% of oceans • Heterogeneous system of data distribution and service supply• Core of future e-Navigation (IMO)



International Organisations responsible for ECDIS regulation and standardisation

IHOIMO

IEC

ECDIS Performance

StandardsSOLAS V

Carriage requi-rement

ECDIS Standards

S52

S57/S100

S63

Test-Standard

IEC 61147

MaritimeAdministrations

Hydrographic Offices

Industry

IMO: International Maritime Organization

IEC: International Electrotechnical Commission

ECDIS carriage requirement(IMO NAV 54/25 Annex 14 [2009])


Tonnage Bis Juli 2012 Juli 2013 Juli 2014 Juli 2015 Juli 2016 Juli 2017 Juli 2018 Danach

≥50,000

≥20,000

≥10,000

≥3,000

<3,000

All ≥3,000

<3,000

All ≥500

<500

Type

Tanker

Passenger

Cargo ships

Requirement valid for newbuilds from 1 July on [of the first year coloured green] , additionally for all other vessels of that class from the date on of first inspection on or after 1 July [of the first year coloured red]

ships

No mandatory carriage, ECDIS optional

Requirement valid for newbuilds from 1 July on [of the first year coloured green]

Integrated Bridge System(Schematic example)


Source: http://www.syberg.no/ibs-integrated-bridge-systems/integrated-bridge-and-navigation-system-synapsis-bridge-control-article127-153.html

Worldwide availability of official ENCs Source: http://iho-wms.net/wms/ENCatFrame.htm (as of June 2013)


http://iho-wms.net/wms/ENCatFrame.htm

Current state - SummaryECDIS .....• is gradually becoming the standard equipment• is the backbone of all bridge systems• is the by far most complex navigation system ....

– integrating real-time input from a variety of sensors (GPS, radar, AIS, gyro, rudder and other ship sensors) ...

– with GPS driving the functions of a complex GIS database, which is to be continually kept up-to-date

– controlling a complex real-time graphic display and real-time warning functions

• has overcome most of the initial problems and difficulties

But ........Horst Hecht: ECDIS – With a Critical View

HSB, 11 Dec 2013

Problem areas

• Regulatory– IMO– IHO

• Organisationally– Data services– Quality assurance

• Technically– Standardisation– Hydrographic data quality


Strengths

Organisationally:• In principle, worldwide ENC service provision system in

place

Technically:• Based on worldwide data and presentation standards

supporting complex functions• Migration path to S-100 standards suite: imbedded in the

family of ISO 191xx family of GIS standards• Ready for the future: S-100 adopted by IMO as basis of the

“Common Marine Data Structure” (CMDS) for e-Navigation


Weaknesses (1)Generally: Strengths are confined to technical potential, problem: reality!

Regulatory:• IMO:

– Despite SOLAS being international law: virtually no enforcement mechanism in case of contraventions (e.g. insufficient fulfilment of national responsibilities for hydrography, data production)

– Type approval mechanism (approval authorities, equipment test standard) of nautical equipment flawed. For ECDIS there is particular risk that unfit equipment enters the market

– No mandatory upgrading of older ECDIS equipment versions• IHO

– No enforcement mechanism for HOs to adhere to WEND principles


Weaknesses (2)

Organisationally (IHO):• No central quality assurance system in place

– HOs handle QA differently, – most countries participate in QA centres, but important

countries (e.g. USA, Canada, Japan) stay out• No agreed common distribution system:

– Two (competing) QA centres (RENCs) as outlets– Other countries via distributors direct

• Consequence: Service Providers must handle multiple data sources of variable, sometimes even questionable quality


WEND Conceptual Model

RENC B

RENC A

RENC C

HO Reg B

HO Reg B

HO Reg B

HO Reg A

HO Reg A

HO Reg A

HO Reg C

HO Reg C

HO Reg C

NationalShipping

InternationalShipping

ENCAgents

REGIONB

REGIONA

REGIONC

IHO WEND

COMMITTEE

Annex 6 to CL27/1994 –Report of the Special Committee on WEND

Reality (as of 2004 – but still valid in principle ....)

IC-ENC

PRIMAR-Stavanger

DISTRIBUTORS

U

S

E

R

S

Hong Kong, Philippines

Australia, Canada

(Greece)

Singapore

USA, Chile, Japan

(Bahrain), Belgium, Cyprus Egypt, Germany, (India),

Jamaica, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, South Africa, Spain,

Sri Lanka, UK

Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Latvia, Norway, Poland,

Russia, Sweden

Others ?

An analogy: Committee Design


What the customer wanted

How it was defined by standards

What the committee agreed

What industry delivered

Threats

• For navigational equipment, everything that doesn‘t work as it should constitutes a potential risk and must be considered a threat to the customer as well to the idea of the system– Conceptual Issues– Legacy Issues– Certification Issues– Data Quality Issues


Conceptual Threats

• First and important point: Overreliance !– “Computers do not err”– Neglection of traditional watchkeeping duties

• Complexity of ECDIS handling• Crews frequently changing ships always new

equipment with different MMI

Possible action:• Training, training, training .... (general and type-

specific)


Legacy issues

• Old equipment, partly 1st generation ECDIS still in use• Software errors in ECDIS • Incomplete test standards (IEC) and test data set (IHO)

special data combinations lead to incorrect functions• Only one third of all ECDISes perform correctly!• IMO Circular SN1-Circ 312 - ECDIS anomalies.pdf

warns of specific errors Action:• New standard S100/S101 for ECDIS allowing updating of

data standard• Introduction of methods for underway software upgrades


Certification

• Mostly carried out by classification societies • Should involve thorough independent testing in

laboratory– But often only relied on manufacturer’s

documentation• Competitive business, competition often over

cost, not over quality of certification• In EU, any certificate issued by a recognized

EU body must be accepted

Action:• ??


Data Quality• Generic:

– Outdated surveys (partly no competent HO!)– „Zone-of-Confidence“ (ZOC) Parameter in ENCs not adequate:

No relation to water depth (much better: IHO S-44!) No relation to time/temporal variability of seafloor

• Specific:– Some ENCs published with no independent QC (e.g. USA!)– Updating slow or much delayed in some countries

• Potential Risk:– Any data deficiencies may lead to accidents and casualties!

Action:• Improvement of international cooperation, correction of quality parameter


Conclusion(1) Theory – OK, practical implementation flawed

(2) International coordination and cooperation should be improved: WEND WENC

(3) Improvement by new IHO standard S-100 (e.g. Upgrading of data standard)

(4) More stringent certification procedures

(5) Reality Check:- ECDIS, as the most complex navigation system, will never

be perfect, neither in terms of technology nor of data- ECDIS must still be operated by intelligent human beings, not

the other way around!



Thanks for your kind attention!

ecdis with a critical view

Technology

ecdis regulation

critical view hsb

iho address ecdis result

worldwide iho standards

electronic chart system

level of data coverage

historical notes

authority of national