International Journal

on Marine Navigation

and Safety of Sea Transportation

Volume 4

Number 1

March 2010

1 BACKGROUND

The concept of e-Navigation was first introduced to

the IMO in 2006 at the 81

session of the Maritime

Safety Committee (MSC 81 – May 06) at which

time the committee was requested to adopt this vast

new project as a work programme based on a com-

pelling need which remains as:

There is a clear and compelling need to equip

shipboard users and those ashore responsible for the

safety of shipping with modern, proven tools that are

optimized for good decision making in order to make

maritime navigation and communications more reli-

able and user friendly. The overall goal is to im-

prove safety of navigation and to reduce errors.

However, if current technological advances continue

without proper coordination there is a risk that the

future development of marine navigation systems

will be hampered through a lack of standardization

on board and ashore, incompatibility between ves-

sels and an increased and unnecessary level of com-

plexity.

At that time, the Secretary General of the IMO,

Efthimios Mitropoulos who has become a champion

of the e-Navigation concept warned that the role of

the mariner must not be relegated to that of a ‘moni-

tor’ and urged the Committee to take into account

the Human Element and all it’s frailty when devel-

oping the various aspects of e-Navigation.

To support this expectation, it was made clear

from the beginning that e-Navigation should be ‘user

needs led’ rather than led by technologists or regula-

tors.

During the period of 2006-2008, the IMO e-

Navigation Correspondence Group (CG) supported

by organisations such as the IALA and The Nautical

Institute carried out an international exercise to iden-

tify these needs. Potential users of e-Navigation both

afloat and ashore were contacted and asked to identi-

fy what their needs were in terms of harmonised col-

lection, harmonised integration, harmonised ex-

change, harmonised presentation and harmonised

analysis of maritime information onboard and ashore

by electronic means.

It is worth noting that this may have been the

largest user needs analysis ever conducted in the

maritime industry, and many lessons should be

learned from this experience. In particular, most end

users are not practiced in articulating their needs

well, and tended to identify what they had and what

they liked. This then required a good deal of analysis

to distil the ‘need’ from the ‘like’.

2 USER NEEDS

The ‘User Needs Analysis’ as conducted through the

IMO e-Navigation CG examined hundreds of feed-

back forms from around the world and categorised

these into needs of the generic SOLAS class ship us-

ers and the needs of generic shore authorities.

Much effort was put into analysing the needs

from descriptions of what was already in use, and

quite importantly, to take out any reference to exist-

ing technologies. For example there is a need to

identify and track a target in order to prevent a colli-

e-Navigation and the Human Element

D. Patraiko, FNI & P. Wake, FNI

The Nautical Institute, London, UK

A. Weintrit, FNI, FRIN

Gdynia Maritime University, Gdynia, Poland & Polish Branch of the Nautical Institute

ABSTRACT: e-Navigation is an IMO initiative defined as “the harmonised collection, integration, exchange,

presentation and analysis of maritime information onboard and ashore by electronic means to enhance berth

to berth navigation and related services, for safety and security at sea and protection of the marine environ-

ment”. IMO has dictated that e-Navigation should be ‘User Need’ led and take into account the Human Ele-

ment. This paper will explore some of the Human Element issues within e-Navigation and stress that for en-

hancement of safety, security and environmental protection, the decision maker must be supported not only

by the technology, but importantly with effective procedures and training.

sion, rather than there being a ‘need’ for a Radar

with ARPA (although it is recognised from a practi-

cal point of view that in the short term Radar will

certainly be a key tool within the e-Navigation con-

cept).

From these two analyses of shipboard and shore-

side needs, it was established that there were com-

mon ‘high level’ needs and these were consolidated,

presented, and ultimately accepted by the IMO

(MSC 85 – Dec 08) as the basis of an e-Navigation

strategy.

These consolidated user needs are reproduced

here with italic text used to emphasise some of the

major Human Element issues defined within e-

Navigation.

2.1 Common Maritime Information/Data Structure

Mariners require information pertaining to the plan-

ning and execution of voyages, the assessment of

navigation risk and compliance with regulation. This

information should be accessible from a single inte-

grated system. Shore users require information per-

taining to their maritime domain, including static

and dynamic information on vessels and their voy-

ages. This information should be provided in an in-

ternationally agreed common data structure. Such a

data structure is essential for the sharing of infor-

mation amongst shore authorities on a regional and

international basis.

2.2 Automated and Standardized Reporting

Functions

E-navigation should provide automated and stand-

ardized reporting functions for optimal communica-

tion of ship and voyage information. This includes

safety-related information that is transmitted ashore,

sent from shore to shipborne users and information

pertaining to security and environmental protection

to be communicated amongst all users. Reporting

requirements should be automated or pre-prepared to

the extent possible both in terms of content and

communications technology. Information exchange

should be harmonized and simplified to reduce re-

porting requirements. It is recognized that security,

legal and commercial issues will have to be consid-

ered in addressing communications needs.

2.3 Effective and Robust Communications

A clear need was expressed for there to be an effec-

tive and robust means of communications for ship

and shore users. Shore-based users require an effec-

tive means of communicating with vessels to facili-

tate safety, security and environmental protection

and to provide operational information. To be effec-

tive, communication with and between vessels

should make best use of audio/visual aids and

standard phrases to minimize linguistic challenges

and distractions to operators.

2.4 Human Centred Presentation Needs

Navigation displays should be designed to clearly

indicate risk and to optimize support for decision

making. There is a need for an integrated “alert

management system” as contained in the revised

recommendation on performance standards for Inte-

grated Navigation Systems (INS) (resolution MSC

252(83)). Consideration should be given to the use

of decision support systems that offer suggested re-

sponses to certain alerts, and the integration of nav-

igation alerts on board ships within a whole ship

alert management system. Users require uniform and

consistent presentations and operation functionality

to enhance the effectiveness of internationally

standardized training, certification and familiariza-

tion. The concept of S-Mode

has been widely sup-

ported as an application on board ship during the

work of the Correspondence Group. Shore users re-

quire displays that are fully flexible supporting both

a Common Operating Picture (COP) and a User De-

fined Operating Picture (UDOP) with layered and/or

tabulated displays. All displays should be designed

to limit the possibility of confusion and misinterpre-

tation when sharing safety-related information. E-

navigation systems should be designed to engage

and motivate the user while managing workload.

2.5 Human Machine Interface

As electronic systems take on a greater role, facili-

ties need to be developed for the capture and presen-

tation of information from visual observations, as

well as user knowledge and experience. The presen-

tation of information for all users should be designed

to reduce “single person errors” and enhance team

operations. There is a clear need for the application

of ergonomic principles both in the physical layout

of equipment and in the use of light, colours, sym-

bology and language.

2.6 Data and System Integrity

E-navigation systems should be resilient and take in-

to account issues of data validity, plausibility and in-

tegrity for the systems to be robust, reliable and de-

pendable. Requirements for redundancy, particularly

in relation to position fixing systems, should be con-

sidered.

S-Mode is the proposed functionality for shipborne navigation displays

using a standard, default presentation, menu system and interface

Figure 1. Potential components of an e-Navigation implementation plan [IMO NAV 54/WP.6 2008]

2.7 Analysis

E-navigation systems should support good decision

making, improve performance and prevent single

person error. To do so, shipboard systems should

include analysis functions that support the user in

complying with regulations, voyage planning, risk

assessment, and avoiding collisions and groundings

including the calculation of Under Keel Clearance

(UKC) and air draughts. Shore-based systems should

support environmental impact analysis, forward

planning of vessel movements, hazard/risk assess-

ment, reporting indicators and incident prevention.

Consideration should also be given to the use of

analysis for incident response and recovery, risk as-

sessment and response planning, environment pro-

tection measures, incident detection and prevention,

risk mitigation, preparedness, resource (e.g., asset)

management and communication.

2.8 Implementation Issues

Best practices, training and familiarization relating

to aspects of e-navigation for all users should be ef-

fective and established in advance of technical im-

plementation. The use of simulation to establish

training needs and assess its effectiveness is en-

dorsed. E-navigation should as far as practical be

compatible forwards and backwards and support in-

tegration with equipment and systems made manda-

tory under international and national carriage re-

quirements and performance standards. The highest

level of interoperability between e-navigation and

external systems should be sought where practicable.

It is clear from these ‘user needs’ that there is a

major emphasis on supporting the decision making

process, not only by better technology, but through

the establishment of best practices for the use of

such technology and the training needs that apply to

both the technology and the procedures.

It should also be noted that needs such as “E-

navigation systems should be designed to engage

and motivate the user while managing workload”

are easier said than done and will require a tremen-

dous amount of research and testing to achieve.

3 S-MODE

In the description of ‘Human Centred Presentation

Needs’ it is stated that “Users require uniform and

consistent presentations and operation functionality

to enhance the effectiveness of internationally stand-

ardized training, certification and familiarization.”

The Nautical Institute through consultation with

its members has proposed a concept called S-Mode

to address this need for the shipboard users.

The concept calls for all navigation systems in the

future to have a standard ‘S-Mode’ switch, that

when activated defaults to a standard display (e.g.

head-up display, relative vectors, etc.) that can then

be fully manipulated through a standard menu sys-

tem where functions (such as for changing range,

aspect, or using EBL/VRM, parallel indexing, …)

would all be standardised, and the input interface

with the systems (perhaps track ball, joystick or

keyboard) would be standard. The concept for S-

Mode is to create standard features. S-Mode is not

envisaged as a simplified or restricted display mode,

but instead would offer a high degree of functionali-

ty. However, the use of these functions would all be

standard and anyone trained in the use of S-Mode

would therefore be competent and confident to make

the best use of navigation systems on any ship so

equipped.

S-Mode may also incorporate provisions for the

use of personal settings that may be stored within the

system or on a personal memory device that would

allow a pilot or mariner to rapidly configure the sys-

tem to their preferred settings, overlay custom dis-

play features or give access to specialist information.

S-Mode would not preclude the use of other nav-

igation features that could be provided by a manu-

facturer. These may be designed to take advantage

of cutting edge technology, advanced programming

or innovative presentation options that would be op-

erated outside of S-Mode.

It is the intention of The Nautical Institute to se-

cure funding to implement a phased project ap-

proach to the development of S-Mode. The Nautical

Institute considers it will be necessary for: the user

needs of mariners to be defined; to work with indus-

try to create mock-up variations; and then to test the-

se variations using simulation and other techniques

with representative bridge teams. After thorough

testing and evaluation, the system and training re-

quirements would be put forward to the International

Maritime Organization for consideration. Further in-

formation about S-Mode is contained in (IMO NAV

54/13/1, 2008) which is a copy of the submission of

the S-Mode proposal to the IMO Sub-Committee on

Safety of Navigation July 08 (NAV 54).

4 PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS

One of the fundamental premises of e-Navigation is

to create a ‘wider area’ navigation team that will fa-

cilitate better decision making by the sharing of in-

formation between ship’s navigation team and all the

shoreside support organisations. This is of course a

valid objective, and if managed properly will create

a more effective navigation team that minimises the

risk of single person errors.

The maritime industry has of course spent a lot of

effort during the past few decades learning how to

implement effective teams and this has resulted in

much discussion of effective Master/Pilot relation-

ships; Bridge Team Management (BRM) training;

and shipboard resource training. From this experi-

ence comes recognition that for teams to work effec-

tively, it is absolutely essential that there be a com-

mon platform for communication (including

language and terminology) and that there needs to be

mutual professional respect between team members.

As e-Navigation develops and greater communi-

cation is established between mariners and shore au-

thorities, will we have addressed these issues? At

present, within a port that utilises VTS, it is usually

the Pilot who acts as a communicator between the

VTS staff and the shipboard staff. The Pilot has an

established working relationship with the VTS staff,

and while onboard, can make best use of interper-

sonal skills to establish a working relationship with

the ship’s crew (in an ideal situation). However how

can we ensure that without this interpersonal interac-

tion, the wide area navigation team will work well

together?

Ongoing research by The Nautical Institute indi-

cates that in order to communicate effectively and

foster professional respect, clear procedures may

have to be established possibly based on a far greater

use of the IMO’s Standard Maritime Communica-

tion Phrases (SMCP) and for training exercises to be

conducted focusing on the various stakeholders

within this evolving relationship. Even without the

concept of e-Navigation, such issues will need to be

addressed as the establishment of ‘coastal surveil-

lance’ becomes more common and IALA develops

the concept of Vessel Traffic Management (VTM)

based on the management of traffic outside tradi-

tional VTS areas.

5 FURTHER RESEARCH

The success of e-Navigation will rely heavily upon

the proper application of the Human Element

throughout its development and implementation.

The Nautical Institute believes that there are some

major Human Element aspects that deserve further

development and research to be done on an interna-

tional basis to support the IMO’s e-Navigation con-

cept. These can be summarised as:

− Proper balance of information levels and work-

load on mariners and shore based operators.

− Effective display options to support good deci-

sion making (including the development of S-

Mode).

− Tools and procedures for reducing ‘rouge behav-

iour’ or complacency and keeping the operator

actively engaged in the process of safe naviga-

tion.

− Methods and procedures for reducing ‘single per-

son errors’.

− Optimum use of ‘decision support systems’ in-

cluding the best use of alarms and alerts.

− Effective procedures for ship/shore communica-

tion and teamwork.

− Supporting decision making capabilities of indi-

viduals through self-esteem and confidence build-

ing.

− Ensuring that all technical developments within

the concept of e-Navigation are supported by ef-

fective procedures and training.

− Developing effective tools for capturing and ana-

lysing user needs within the maritime industry.

It is recognised that much of this research and

testing will best be done through using scenarios

representing all appropriate stakeholders, and that

the use of simulation may be a highly effective tool

for testing, documenting and ultimately training for

such aspects of e-Navigation.

6 CONCLUSION

e-Navigation is a broad concept that is aimed at en-

hancing navigation safety, security and the protec-

tion of the marine environment through the harmo-

nised collection, integration, exchange, presentation

and analysis of maritime information onboard and

ashore by electronic means.

It is envisioned that e-Navigation will be a ‘liv-

ing’ concept that will evolve and adapt over a long

time scale to support this objective. During this time

information will change, technologies will change,

political and commercial objectives will change, and

tasks will change. However it is unlikely that the

need for safe and efficient seaborne transport will

change significantly.

It is also certain that the safe and efficient

transport will continue to rely on good decisions be-

ing made on an increasingly constant and reliable

basis. Some decisions may be made with increased

dependence on technology, but at some level we will

always rely on good human decisions being made

and therefore every effort needs to be made to apply

an understanding of the Human Element at all stag-

es, of design, development, implementation and op-

eration of e-Navigation.

The Nautical Institute as the leading international

body for maritime professionals will continue to use

the resources of its members, branches, officers and

staff to promote the effective application of the Hu-

man Element for e-Navigation and other industry

developments, and invites all maritime professionals

to join in this critical effort.

REFERENCES

Basker S. 2005. E-Navigation: The way ahead for the maritime

sector. Trinity House, London, September.

Bibik L., Krolikowski A., Czaplewski K., Duda D. 2007. Vi-

sion of the Decision Support Model on Board of the Vessel

with Use of the Shore Based IT Tools. Advances in Marine

Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, Chapter 10:

E-Navigation. TransNav’2007 Monograph edited by A.

Weintrit. Gdynia Maritime University and the Nautical In-

stitute, Gdynia.

U MARINE STRATEGY. 2007. An Integrated Maritime Policy

for the European Union. SEC(2007) 1278, COM(2007)

575, October.

Graff J. 2007. The Role of Operational Ocean Forecasting in e-

Navigation. Advances in Marine Navigation and Safety of

Sea Transportation, Chapter 10: E-Navigation. TransNav’

2007 Monograph edited by A. Weintrit. Gdynia Maritime

University and the Nautical Institute, Gdynia.

IALA 2007a. The IALA Definition and Vision for E-

Navigation. E-Nav 2-output 11, March.

IALA 2007b. E-Navigation, Frequently Asked Questions.

IALA e-Nav OPS WG MTG WP1, July.

IMO MSC 81/23/10 2005. Work Programme. Development of

an e-Navigation strategy. Submitted by Japan, Marshall Is-

lands, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, the United

Kingdom and the United States, International Maritime Or-

ganization, London, 19 December.

IMO NAV 52/17/4 2006. Any other business. An approach to

E-Navigation, submitted by Japan. Sub-Committee on Safe-

ty of Navigation, International Maritime Organization,

London, 12 May.

IMO NAV 53/13 2007. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. Report of the Correspondence Group on e-

navigation, submitted by the United Kingdom. Sub-

Committee on Safety of Navigation, International Maritime

Organization, London, 20 April.

IMO NAV 53/13/1 2007. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. A method for identifying essential functions of

shipboard system under the e-Navigation strategy, submit-

ted by Japan. Sub-Committee on Safety of Navigation, In-

ternational Maritime Organization, London, 18 May.

IMO NAV 53/13/2 2007. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. Position-Fixing for E-Navigation, submitted by

the United Kingdom. Sub-Committee on Safety of Naviga-

tion, International Maritime Organization, London, 18 May.

IMO NAV 53/13/3 2007. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. IALA and e-navigation, submitted by the Inter-

national Association of Maritime Aids to Navigation and

Lighthouse Authorities (IALA). Sub-Committee on Safety

of Navigation, International Maritime Organization, Lon-

don, 18 May.

IMO NAV 53/13/4 2007. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. Display of Automatic Identification System (AIS)

as an Aid to Navigation (AtoN), submitted by the Interna-

tional Association of Maritime Aids to Navigation and

Lighthouse Authorities (IALA). Sub-Committee on Safety

of Navigation, International Maritime Organization, Lon-

don, 18 May.

IMO NAV 54/13 2008. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. Report of the Correspondence Group on e-

navigation, submitted by the United Kingdom. Sub-

Committee on Safety of Navigation, International Maritime

Organization, London, 28 March.

IMO NAV 54/13/1 2008. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. The concept of S-Mode for onboard navigation

displays, submitted by the International Federation Of

Shipmasters’ Associations (IFSMA). Sub-Committee on

Safety of Navigation, International Maritime Organization,

London, 24 April.

IMO NAV 54/13/3 2008. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. IALA and e-Navigation, submitted by the Interna-

tional Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Light-

house Authorities (IALA). Sub-Committee on Safety of

Navigation, International Maritime Organization, London,

25 April.

IMO NAV 54/WP.6 2008. Development of an E-Navigation

Strategy. Report of the Working Group. Sub-Committee on

Safety of Navigation, International Maritime Organization,

London, 2 July.

Korcz K. 2007. GMDSS as a Data Communication Network

for e-Navigation. Advances in Marine Navigation and Safe-

ty of Sea Transportation, Chapter 10: E-Navigation.

TransNav’2007 Monograph edited by A. Weintrit. Gdynia

Maritime University and the Nautical Institute, Gdynia.

Mitropoulos E. 2007. E--navigation: a global resource. Sea-

ways, The International Journal of the Nautical Institute,

March.

Patraiko D. 2007a. Introducing the e-navigation revolution.

Seaways, The International Journal of the Nautical Institute,

March.

Patraiko D. 2007b. The Development of e-Navigation. Advanc-

es in Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation,

Chapter 10: E-Navigation. TransNav’2007 Monograph ed-

ited by A. Weintrit. Gdynia Maritime University and the

Nautical Institute, Gdynia.

Patraiko D. 2007c. The shipborne E-Navigation System – The

Mariner’s View and the need for S-Mode. eNavigation 07 -

Electronic Navigation and the Application of Information

Technology to Short Sea Shipping and Waterborne Com-

merce. November.

Patraiko D. 2008a. Implementing eNavigation: Defining User

Needs within the context of an overall strategy for imple-

mentation. eNavigation 08 - The role of e-Navigation in

waterborne commerce and coastal zone management. Seat-

tle, November.

Patraiko D. 2008b. e-Navigation - A User Needs Led Strategy.

Human Element Conference. Delhi, December.

Pillich, B. 2007. Developing e-Navigation, the early stages.

U.S., Hydro Conference, 2007.

Weintrit A. 2006. Navitronics and Nautomatics. Advances in

Transport Systems Telematics. Section III: Systems in Mar-

itime Transport. Monograph edited by J. Mikulski, Faculty

of Transport, Silesian University of Technology, Katowice.

Weintrit A., Wawruch R. 2006. Future of Maritime Navigation,

E-Navigation Concept. Proceedings of 10

International

Conference “Computer Systems Aided Science, Industry

and Transport” TransComp’2006, Zakopane, Poland, De-

cember.

Weintrit A., Wawruch R., Specht C., Gucma L., Pietrzykowski

Z. 2007a. Polish Approach to e-Navigation Concept. Ad-

vances in Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transporta-

tion, Chapter 10: E-Navigation. TransNav’2007 Mono-

graph edited by A. Weintrit. Gdynia Maritime University

and the Nautical Institute, Gdynia.