617
1 INTRODUCTION
The priority of safety at sea has never been out of
focus. For decades, maritime regulations have been
supplemented and upgraded in order to keep the
vessels and crews at the level necessary for safe
navigation, protection of the environment, property
and,aboveall,humanlives.Regulatorychanges
have
been followed by technological developments. The
accelerated development of the IT sector since the
beginningofthe2000shasnotbypassedthemaritime
sector. The International Maritime Organization
(IMO) launched the concept of e‐navigation in 2009,
and in 2014 upgraded it using the Strategic
ImplementationPlan(SIP)with
theaimofimproving
maritime safety and security, relying on the
improvement of Maritime Situational Awareness
(MSA) and on decision‐making [1], [2]. Maritime
industryisvulnerabletocyberriskandtendstowards
further digitalization. One of the key goals of the e‐
navigationconceptisthedigitalintegrationofcoastal
and ship technologies. For vessels equipped with
ECDIS,suchdigitalization isalreadyvisible through
electronic Aids to Navigation (e‐AtoN)
implementation. There are many reasons for the
transformationofexistingphysicalAtoNintoe‐AtoN
orinstallationofnewe‐AtoN.Therearethreetypesof
e‐AtoN[3],[4],
[5]:
reale‐AtoN:physicalAtoNsupplementedbyAIS
fromsamephysicalsource;
synthetic e‐AtoN or S‐AtoN: physical AtoN
supplementedremotelybyAIS;
virtuale‐AtoNorV‐AtoN:nophysicalAtoNatthe
location where solely remotely generated AIS
signalexistsorAtoNindigital
format.
Numerous studies were published on the subject
of V‐AtoN. V‐AtoN are installed in remote and
sensitive regions where physical AtoN are hard to
placeandmaintain[3],incongestedwatersfortraffic
monitoring [6] or in any other area where it is
believedthattheirinstallationwill
improvesafetyand
contributetoreduceriskofcollision.Researchrelated
totrafficflowchangesuponinstallationofV‐AtoN[7]
Comparative Analyses of Manoeuvring Patterns in Real
and Virtual AtoN Environment
I.Mraković
1
&R.Bošnjak
2
1
UniversityofMontenegro,Kotor,Montenegro
2
UniversityofSplit,Split,Croatia
ABSTRACT:Thispaperpresentsa comparativeanalysisofmanoeuvringpatternsthroughthefairwaywhichis
markedwithphysicalandvirtualAidstoNavigation(AtoN).TheimpactofV‐AtoNenvironmentondecision‐
makingandonconsequentmanoeuvreshasneverbeenstudiedinsuchaway.
Theresultspublishedinthis
paperwereobtainedusingTRANSASNaviTrainer5000andTRANSASECDIS4000simulatorswhere12deck
officers with at least 5 years of sea service participated. The results of the study indicate that there is a
significantdifferenceinmanoeuvringpatternsbetweenthetwoenvironments.In
caseofvirtualenvironment,
moreintensedriftangles,ROTsaswellasXTDsareobserved.Thepaperdemonstratessignificantimpactof
virtualenvironmentonbehaviourofOOW.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 17
Number 3
September 2023
DOI:10.12716/1001.17.03.13
618
showsthattheplaceswhereshipscollidedinthepast
“are not necessarily the most congested areas”. The
same source states thatdespitethe installationof V‐
AtoNmayhaveimprovedsafety,itisstill necessary
tonavigatevirtuallymarkedwatersmorecarefullyin
ordertopreventcollisionscausedby
humanerror.In
[8] authors proposed solution for calculation of
probability that the vessel will exceed fairway
boundariesonanyside,dependentontrafficdensity
andavailabilityofmanoeuvringscenarios.Despiteall
efforts and investments done for digitalization of
fairways, ship collisions are often caused by
navigatorsʹ lack of attention
to hazardous obstacle
facilities[9].
The problem of human error, which is still
consideredthebiggestcauseofmaritimeaccidents,is
being tried to be reduced by the intensive use of
simulators in the educational process of seafarers.
Nauticalsimulatorsprovideasimulatedenvironment
thatallowstraineestoexperiencearange
ofscenarios
inasafeandcontrolledsettings,whichcanbedifficult
or impossible to recreate in real life. An interesting
study[10]showsthelevelofexistingvariationsinthe
Europeanfull mission simulator traininginstitutions
basedonimplementationofIMOModelcourse6.10–
Trainthesimulator trainer
andassessor. Apartfrom
the mentioned, there are other IMO model courses
that require the use of simulators. Certainly, an
extremelyimportantelementthatsignificantlyaffects
the effectiveness of education using the simulator is
itsfidelity[11].
In this paper, Chapter 2 compares real‐physical
and virtual AtoN. The same chapter
describes
differences between Automatic Identification System
(AIS) and VHF Data Exchange System (VDES).
Chapter3exploresimportanceofsimulatorusagefor
educationalpurposesaswellassituationalawareness
in virtual environment. In order to explain technical
background of research, nautical simulator setup as
well as scene setup are explained in
Chapter 4.
SimulationsandtheirresultsarepresentedinChapter
5. As virtual marine environment is so progressive
nowadays, the authors found it necessary to create
moredetailedelaborationofsimulatedmanoeuvring
patternsinbothrealandvirtualenvironmentthrough
Chapter6,followedbyconclusionsinChapter7.
2 PHYSICALVS
VIRTUALATON
Physical aids to navigation refer to structures or
devicesthatarephysicallypresentintheenvironment
and used to assist within navigation. Examples
include lighthouses, buoys, beacons, markers etc.
Thesephysicalaidsaretypicallyvisibletohumaneye
and can provide a visual reference point for
navigation. They
are often placed in areas where
visibility is limited or where there are hazards that
needtobeavoided.
AsstatedinChapter1,virtualAtoNisthesubtype
ofe‐AtoN.V‐AtoNiselectronicdeviceorsystemthat
provide navigational assistance through digital
means. These aids use digital signals
to provide
accurateandup‐to‐dateinformationonthelocationof
vessels,hazardsorotherimportantnavigationaldata.
There are several key points which distinguish
physicalandvirtualAtoN[4],[12]:
1. Reliability‐Physical aids to navigation are
generally more reliablethan virtual ones because
of their electronic or
technical vulnerabilities.
Physical aids are typically built to withstand
extremeweatherconditionsandcanlastformany
years without requiring significant maintenance.
Virtual aids, on the other hand, are reliant on
electronicdevices,whichcanmalfunctionorbreak
downovertime.
2. Accuracy – Virtual AtoN are generally more
accurate than
physical AtoN because of digital
signal usage which enables creation of precise
locationandnavigationaldata. GNSS is the most
common source of positioning with accuracy of
just few meters. Physical aids may not be as
precise, particularly in areas where visibility is
reduced.TherearemanyvulnerabilitiesofV‐
AtoN
astheymainlyrelyonGNSSandAIStechnology
[4], [13]. However, VHF Data Exchange System
(VDES)isseen as an alternative and successor to
AIS[14],[15].
3. Visibility– PhysicalAtoNaremorevisibledue to
theirphysicalstructure.Ontheotherhand,virtual
ones are mainly displayed
in electronic form on
ECDIS.Thisfactisalimitingsafetyfactorfornon‐
SOLASships.
4. Cost–PhysicalAtoNcanbeexpensivetobuildand
maintain, particularly in remote or hazardous
locations. Virtual ones can be more cost‐effective
becausetheydonotrequirephysicalstructuresor
ongoing
maintenance.
Insummary,physicalandvirtualAtoNeachhave
their own advantages and disadvantages. While
physicalaidsmaybemorereliableandvisible,virtual
aidscanbemoreaccurateandcost‐effective.
ThefollowingSubchapterdealswiththeriskand
limitationsofAIS–whichstillmaintainsitsprimacy
in e
‐navigation as backbone of V‐AtoN
implementation.
2.1 AISvsVDES–whereisthefuture?
ThedevelopmentofAISbeganinthelate1990sasa
jointinitiativebetweentheIMOandtheInternational
ElectrotechnicalCommission(IEC).Theprima rygoal
wastoimprovethesafetyandefficiencyofmaritime
navigation by providing vessels with real‐time
information about nearby ships and other maritime
traffic.Itwas firstmandatedbytheIMOin2000for
vessels over 300 gross tons engaged in international
voyages, and the mandate was later expanded to
include smaller vessels and vessels engaged in
domesticvoyages.
The
AISsystemusesVHFradiosignalstotransmit
and receive data between vessels and shore‐based
stations. The system works by continuously
broadcasting a vesselʹs position, speed, course, and
other information, which can be received and
displayed by other vessels and shore‐based stations
equippedwithAISreceivers.Since
itsinception,AIS
hasbecomeanessentialtoolformaritimenavigation
and has contributed significantly to improving the
safety and efficiency of maritime traffic. In recent
years,thesystemhasalsobeenusedforavarietyof
619
other applications, such as marine research,
environmental monitoring, and search and rescue
operations[13].
Despite the positive aspects and advantages of
usingAIS,therearestillmanyvulnerabilitiespresent
in the system, as evidenced by the doubling of the
number of peer‐reviewed articles related to AIS
between 2015 and
2020 [16]. AIS has fallen behind
recent technological advances in the past few years.
ProblemofAISsignalpropagationisfarfromsolely
geometrical since it relies on VHF and GNSS
transmission. At present, AIS message transmission
utilizes the A and B channels, which often leads to
saturation of VHF
data channels. The situation is
expected to worsen with the expansion of AIS and
increase in traffic. In response to this issue, The
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) has
introducedtwoadditionalAISASMchannelsaspart
of the VDES [16], [17]. VDES is designed to be
backward‐compatible with AIS, which
means that
vessels equipped with AIS can still receive VDES
messages.
Here are the ma in advantages of VDES over AIS
[17],[18]:
1. Data transmission rate: AIS has a fixed data
transmission rate of 2.5 to 9.6 kbps, while VDES
hasavariabledatatransmissionrateofupto308
kbps.
2. Coverage: Unlike AIS, VDES provides ships with
possibilitytoexchangeinformationover satellites
providingglobalcoverage.
3. Security: VDES has enhanced security features,
suchasencryptedmessaging,whichmakesitmore
securethanAIS.
Despite all its shortcomings, AIS is still the
primary tool used to create V‐AtoN
environment.
With the further development of the of e‐navigation
concept, the decline of such a trend and the
promotion of VDES technology are expected,
especiallywhenitcomestosecurityofV‐AtoN.
3 USEOFSIMULATORSFOREDUCATIONAL
PURPOSES
Theusageofnauticalsimulatorsisanessentialtool
in
theeducationandtrainingofseafarers.Theycanhelp
seafarerstolearnandpracticearangeofskills,such
asnavigation,shiphandling,communication,etc.By
usingsimulators,seafarerscan learntorespondtoa
variety of situations, including adverse weather
conditions,equipmentfailure,andotheremergencies,
withoutputtingthemselves
orothersatrisk[11],[19].
IMOhasdevelopedandestablishedasetofModel
courses that include usage of nautical training
simulators.Someofthemare:
Model Course 1.07‐Radar Navigation at
OperationalLevel;
Model Course 1.08‐Radar Navigation at
ManagementLevel;
ModelCourse1.22‐Bridge
ResourceManagement;
ModelCourse1.27‐OperationalUseofElectronic
ChartDisplayandInformationSystems.
Itʹs worth noting that while the IMO provides
guidance and recommendations for training and
education in the maritime industry, individual
countries may have their own specific training
requirements for seafarers. International Convention
on Standards of
Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping(STCW)approvestheuseofsimulator
that are in compliance with Section A‐ I/12 as a
substitutionfor onboard training. Full affirmationof
sucharuleis recognized by the Netherlands,where
so‐called“equivalence”ofworkonthesimulatorand
seaserviceisapproved[19].
Human error is a major factor in accidents and
incidents in the maritime industry, and it is often
causedbyalackofexperienceorinadequatetraining
[11], [20]. By providing realistic simulations of
different scenarios, nautical simulators can help
seafarerstogainexperienceandpracticetheirskillsin
a safe
and controlled environment. In that way,
likelihoodofmistakesbeingmadeintherealworldis
reducedsincetheseafarerswillbebetterpreparedto
handlearangeofsituations.
Social fidelity is very important for simulator‐
basedtraining.In[20]authorsconcludethatadequate
collaborative learning activities in simulator‐
based
training improve marine engineersʹ training and
enhances the reliability of marine engines. The
question arises whether the existing way of nautical
simulator usage improves the skills and abilities of
OOWinavirtualenvironment.
Since the goal of V‐AtoN implementation is to
increasesafetyatsea,itisnecessary
todiscussinmore
detail how such an environment affects perception
andbehaviourofOOW.
3.1 Situationalawarenessinvirtualenvironment
From perspective of OOW, situational awareness
means being aware of the current position, passage
plan,environment,aswellaswhetheranyothership
or factor triggers augmentation of safety
or security
risk level [21], [22]. In order to be able to base
commanddecisions,OOWmustbeawareandrelyon
all availableresources including own ship’s sensors,
aswellasonsightandhearing[23].
V‐AtoNis considered asa digital presentation of
physicalAtoN. Virtualbuoyscan
provideadditional
information that may not be available through
traditional navigational aids. For example, they can
provide real‐time data on weather conditions, water
depth, and other environmental factors that may
impactnavigation.Takingintoaccountthesimilarities
and differences of these two, as described in the
Chapter2,the
questionarisestowhatextentV‐AtoN
affectsthesituationalawarenessofseafarers.
Actually, they can influence and enhance their
situational awareness of seafarers by providing
additional information about the surrounding
environmentandatthesametimeboostsafetyatsea
[4].However,itisimportanttonotethattheyshould
notberelieduponexclusivelyandshouldalwaysbe
usedinconjunctionwithothernavigationalaidsand
in accordance to best practices [23]. Jaram et al.[24]
state that comparing influence of technology on
situational awareness results in conclusion that
620
benefitsoftechnologyoutweighthedisadvantagesof
the same. These and other similar statements
prompted the authors of this paper to conduct a
simulation and evaluate whether the virtual
environment has a negative effect on seafarersʹ
decisions or not. Results are obtained by simulating
ship transit through marked fairway. The
following
chapterdescribesthesimulationsetupindetails.
4 SIMULATIONSETUP
4.1 Nauticalsimulator
Asstatedin[25],“thefirsttestoftheformulationof
the human element is the ability to execute
manoeuvres and achieve the desired result”. For the
purposeofthisresearchTRANSASNaviTrainer5000
and
TRANSAS ECDIS 4000 simulators were used.
Prior running the exercise for totally48 times by 12
deck officers with at least 5 years of sea service in
officerrank,therewereseveralsetupscompleted.
Areaofsimulationwaschosenrandomly,andthe
fairwaywascreated3NMsouthofMamulaIsland
at
theentrancetoBokaBay.Plannedroutewascreated
withminorcoursealterationswhicharelargeenough
toensurethatalldatarelevantforthisresearchwillbe
evaluated.Eachlegoftheroutewas0.3NMlongand
totaldistanceis1.2NM.Largest course alterationas
per
plannedrouteis010°(Figure1).
Figure1.Routeplannedforthepurposeofsimulation.
Wind and waves are among the main
environmental factors affecting ship’s behaviour.
However, in order to eliminate external factors, sea
state was set to calm with no wind at all. Water
currentwaseliminatedaswell.Depthinandaround
fairwayremainunchangedreadingmorethan100m.
Crosstrackdistance
(XTD)foreachlegwassetto0.02
NM. Lateral buoys were employed at WP0 and
consecutivelyevery0.15NMapartoneachsideofthe
fairway,at theXTDdistance fromits middle. Buoys
were physical and virtual depending on simulation
sequence – each participant passed twice through
physically
marked channel and then twice through
virtualone.
Thorough examination was made in order to
isolate important parameters which have to be
monitored.Thefollowingparameterswereobserved:
Distancemadegood;
Heading;
Driftangle;
Rudderangle;
Rateofturn(ROT).
4.2 Subjectshipmodelasthe
testcase
Thesubjectvesselusedasatestcaseinthissimulation
isbulkcarrier.Herprincipaldimensionsareshownin
Table1.
Table1.Principaldimensionofbulkcarrierusedfor
simulationpurposes
________________________________________________
ShiptypeBulkcarrier
Loadingcondition Ballast
Displacement23565m
M/ESlowSpeedDieselx1
PowerofM/E8827kW
Maximumspeed15.0kt
LOA182.9m
Breadth22.6m
Draftforward7.5m
Draftaft7.6m
Typeandno.ofpropeller FPPx1
No.ofrudders1
________________________________________________
Exercise was run in manual steering mode with
M/E set at Dead Slow Ahead. Participants were not
allowedtochangeanysettingsduringthesimulation.
5 SIMULATIONRESULTS
Figure 2. represents typical graphical presentation
upon simulating passage through marked fairway.
The most important data required for proper
interpretation and understanding of
different
manoeuvresispresented.InordertomaketheFigure
2clearer,ashortexplanationfollows.
Figure2.Typicalgraphicalpresentationofsimulatedpassagethoughfairway(ExportfromTRANSASNaviTrainer5000)
621
X‐axisistime‐stampedandtheirverticalgridlines
aretwo minutesapart.Y‐axiscontainsseverallabels
presenting measured parameters. If horizontal
gridlinesareextendedoutwardstolabelledscales,it
ispossibletoreadavalueofthespecificparameterat
agiventime.
Redlinepresentsvessel’sprogress
[NM]reaching
1.2NMattheendofthesimulation.Itcanbeusedas
areferencepointforexplorationofotherparameters.
Green line presents ship’s heading [°] where gyro
compass is used as a data source. Large amplitudes
are consequence of N‐orientated fairway. When
heading is being
altered from first quarter (course
range 0‐90°) to fourth quarter (heading range 270‐
359°),thereisahugeamplitudeascanbeseen after
running total distance of 0.5 NM and 1.0 NM,
respectively. Due to frequent course alterations,
difference between heading and course over ground
areevidentthroughdrift
angle[°]showninblue.In
thisexample,driftanglereachesvalueofalmost10°.
Rudder angle [°] is teal‐colored while rate of turn
[°/min]ispink.Theyarecorrespondingtoeachother,
whereformergoesupto21° while latter goesupto
15°/min.
In order to simplify
obtained results, data from
eachexecutedsimulationwasexportedin.csvformat.
Afterwards,datafrom .csvtablesaresortedoutand
processed.
The authors believe that the most important
parameterstobeanalysedaredriftangle,rateofturn
and XTD. Average values of drift angle in different
environmentsareshown
inFigure3.Similarly,Figure
4.presentsaverageROT.
Figure3.Comparison ofaveragedriftangleinreal and V‐
AtoNenvironment
Figure4. Comparison of average ROT in real and V‐AtoN
environment
Betterpictureofthemovementofshipsduringthe
simulationcanbeachievedbyanalysingXTDvalues.
Sincethefairwayismarkedwithtotally18AtoN–9
on each side, it was necessary to record XTD value
abeamofeachone.Obtainedaveragevaluesfornon‐
virtual and V‐AtoN
environment are presented in
table2.Positivesignindicatesthatthevesselisonthe
starboardside,whilenegativesignindicatesthatthe
vesselisontheportsideofthefairway.
Table2.AverageXTDvaluesintwoAtoNscenarios[m]
________________________________________________
Abeamof WPno. XTDXTD
AtoNRealAtoN V‐AtoN
________________________________________________
1&2 0+10
3&4‐9‐11
5&6 1‐4+4
7&8+10+11
9&10 2‐8‐20
11&120+15
13&14 3+10‐20
15&16‐10‐10
17&18 4‐15+28
________________________________________________
Furtherdiscussiononobtainresultsispresentedin
Chapter6.
6 DISCUSSION
By analysing graphical presentation (Figure 3), it is
evident that in virtual AtoN environment, average
driftangleincreases,insomeinstancesbymorethan
twice.Suchship’sbehaviourisconsequenceofintense
rudderorders.ThesamecausedhigherROT
intensity
(Figure4).Comparingthosetwographs,itisevident
thatcurvepeaksofdiagramsareatsimilarpositions.
The XTD values help in better inferring the
difference of the simulated manoeuvres. During the
numerous simulations, many participants
occasionallydisregardedV‐AtoNsetupandrunover
them(Figure5,blue
squares),passingtheboundaries
ofthefairway.
Figure5. Vessel running over fairway boundaries marked
withV‐AtoNbuoys
Such behaviour forced the authors to conduct an
informal interview with the participants. Their
general attitude is that use of nautical simulator
cannotleadtotheeliminationofhumanerrorinreal
situations. However, the participants believe that
more intensive simulator workout in a virtual
environment setup could lead to their
better
performanceatsea.
Variability of simulated transits can be weighted
further on with range, variance and standard
deviation.Ascanbeseenfromthe Table2,rangeof
XTDincaseofrealAtoNis25m whileincaseofV‐
AtoNis48m.
Further calculation is dependent on
population
mean (μ) which is calculated by equation (1), where
622
ΣXpresentsthesumofalltheobservations(x)inthe
populationof48whichsizeismarkedbyN:
X
N
(1)
Populationvariance(σ
2
)iscalculatedbyequation
(2):
22
1
1
σ()
N
i
i
x
N
(2)
Usingequations(1)and(2),realAtoNpopulation
meanis
1=‐2,7778whileV‐AtoNpopulationmean
is
2=‐0,3333. Population variance in case of real
AtoN is
2
1=68.61728 and in case of V‐AtoN is
2
2
=240.66667.
Squarerootofpopulationvariance(
2
),bringsthe
standarddeviation()incaseofrealAtoN
1=8.28355,
and in case of V‐Aton
2=15.51343. Values of XTD
withstandarddeviation()barsareshownonfigure
5.
Figure5. Comparison of average XTD [m] in real and V‐
AtoNenvironment
AsshowninFigure5,therearesomeoverlapping
ofstandarderrorbars,markedonX‐axisas1,2,4and
8. Intense overlapping in these areas means that
deviation from the middle of the fairway was not
muchdifferentinrealandvirtualenvironment.Also,
thereisaslight
overlappinginarea3.Inotherareas,
there is no overlapping at all. Deviations from the
middleofthefairwayareintensifiedinarea7,where
vessels are trying to get back on track, experiencing
highdriftanglesandROTs,whichculminatesinarea
9attheendofthe
markedfairway.
7 CONCLUSIONS
The objective of this study was to evaluate
manoeuvring patterns of vessel transiting through
deep water fairway marked with real and virtual
AtoN. Simulations using TRANSAS Navi Trainer
5000 and TRANSAS ECDIS 4000 simulators are
executed assuming that the ordinary seamanship
practice is applied all the time.
The results of this
study indicate that there is a difference in
manoeuvring trajectory of vessel sailing through the
fairway marked with real or virtual AtoN,
respectively.Analysingshiptrajectoriesuponrunning
totally48simulations,itisconcludedthatmovement
patterns in case of virtually marked fairway are
significantly different. Several important parameters
such as drift angle and ROT found with huge
discrepancies.Also,XTDundoubtfullyshowsthatoff
route deviations are larger in case of V‐AtoN
environment. Such results indicate that OOW feels
more relaxed in virtual AtoN environment thus
reducing overall level of safety at sea. Contrary, in
case when the fairway is marked with real AtoN,
passage is smoother, with smaller drift angles, ROT
andXTD.Despitealltheeffortsmadeinrecentyears
bytheIMOandotherstakeholdersforthesakeofthe
virtual maritime environment in order to improve
digitalization, connectivity, and reduce costs,
it is
necessary to make additional efforts, primarily in
terms of increasing awareness of the risks coming
from the V‐AtoN environment. Undoubtedly, one
way to achieve that is through implementation of
additional‐specific ECDIS training which will enable
OOW to become better acquainted with virtual
environment. Such specific training should
focus on
peculiaritiesofvirtualenvironmentanditsdifferences
in relation to physical one. Through different
scenarios OOW should be able to become more
competent,skilledandaware.Futureresearchshould
focusonfindingwaystomakeusageofV‐AtoNmore
usefulandsafer.
REFERENCES
[1]A.Weintrit,J.Pietraszkiewicz,W.Piotrzkowski,andW.
Tycholiz,“e‐Navigatinginhighly‐constrainedwaters:a
casestudyoftheVistulaLagoon,”J.Navig.,vol.74,no.
3, pp. 505–514, May 2021, doi:
10.1017/S0373463320000661.
[2]K. An, “E‐navigation Services for Non‐SOLAS Ships,”
Int.J.e‐NavigationMarit. Econ.,
vol. 4, pp. 13–22,Jun.
2016,doi:10.1016/j.enavi.2016.06.002.
[3]R.G.WrightandM. Baldauf,“VirtualElectronicAidsto
Navigation for Remote and Ecologically Sensitive
Regions,”J.Navig.,vol.70,no.2,pp.225–241,Mar.2017,
doi:10.1017/S0373463316000527.
[4]R. G. Wright and M. Baldauf, “Correlation of Virtual
Aids to
Navigation to the Physical Environment,”
TransNav, Int. J. Mar. Navig. Saf. Sea Transp., vol. 10,
no.2,pp.287–299,2016,doi:10.12716/1001.10.02.11.
[5]F.DiCiaccio,P.Menegazzo,andS.Troisi,“Optimization
of the Maritime Signaling System in the Lagoon of
Venice,”Sensors,vol.19,no.5,p.1216,Mar.2019,
doi:
10.3390/s19051216.
[6]F.Bojic,I.Karin,I.Juricevic,andM.Cipcic,“Designand
ApplicationofanAutomatedSmartBuoyinIncreasing
Navigation Safety and Environmental Standards in
Ports,” TransNav, Int. J. Mar. Navig. Saf. Sea Transp.,
vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 373–380, 2021, doi:
10.12716/1001.15.02.14.
[7]G. Fukuda, H.
Tamaru, and R. Shoji, “Estimation of
Changes in Marine Traffic Flow Due to Installation of
Virtual Buoys Based on the OZT Method,” TransNav,
Int. J. Mar. Navig. Saf. Sea Transp., vol. 15, no. 2, pp.
445–453,2021,doi:10.12716/1001.15.02.24.
[8]N.M.Quy,K.Łazuga,L.Gucma,J.K.Vrijling,and
P.H.
A. J. M. van Gelder, “Towards generalized ship’s
manoeuvremodelsbasedonrealtimesimulationresults
inportapproachareas,”OceanEng.,vol.209,p.107476,
Aug.2020,doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107476.
623
[9]S.‐L.Kao,K. ‐Y.Chang,andT.‐W.Hsu,“AMarineGIS‐
based Alert System to Prevent Vessels Collision with
OffshorePlatforms,”J.Mar.Sci.Technol.,vol.29,no.5,
pp.597–608,Nov.2021,doi:10.51400/2709‐6998.2462.
[10]S. Nazir, S. Jungefeldt, and A. Sharma, “Maritime
simulatortrainingacross
Europe:acomparativestudy,”
WMU J. Marit. Aff., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 197–224, Mar.
2019,doi:10.1007/s13437‐018‐0157‐0.
[11]S. K. Renganayagalu, S. Mallam, S. Nazir, J. Ernstsen,
and P. Haavardtun, “Impact of Simulation Fidelity on
StudentSelf‐efficacyandPerceivedSkillDevelopmentin
Maritime Training,” TransNav,
Int. J. Mar. Navig. Saf.
Sea Transp., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 663–669, 2019, doi:
10.12716/1001.13.03.25.
[12]R.Redondo,R.Atienza,L.Pecharroman,andL.Pires,
“Aids to Navigation Improvement to Optimize Ship
Navigation,”2023,pp.803–813.
[13]A. Androjna, M. Perkovič, I. Pavic, and J. Mišković,
“AIS Data
Vulnerability Indicatedby a Spoofing Case‐
Study,”Appl.Sci.,vol.11,no.11,p.5015,May2021,doi:
10.3390/app11115015.
[14]F.Lázaro,R.Raulefs,W.Wang,F.Clazzer,andS.Plass,
“VHF Data Exchange System (VDES): an enabling
technologyformaritimecommunications,”CEASSp.J.,
vol.11,no.1,pp.
55–63,Mar.2019,doi:10.1007/s12567‐
018‐0214‐8.
[15]M. Luglio, C. Roseti, and F. Zampognaro, “VDES
Performance Evaluation for Future e‐navigation
Services,”inProceedingsofthe15thInternationalJoint
Conference on e‐Business and Telecommunications,
2018,pp.67–75,doi:10.5220/0006850200670075.
[16]S.D.Meyers,L.Azevedo,andM.E.
Luther,“AScopus‐
basedbibliometricstudyofmaritimeresearchinvolving
the Automatic Identification System,” Transp. Res.
Interdiscip.Perspect.,vol. 10, p. 100387, Jun. 2021,doi:
10.1016/j.trip.2021.100387.
[17]R. Proud, P. Browning, and M. D. Kocak, “AIS‐based
Mobile Satellite Service expands opportunities for
affordable global ocean observing and monitoring,” in
OCEANS 2016 MTS/IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–8, doi:
10.1109/OCEANS.2016.7761069.
[18]E. Batty, “Data Analytics Enables Advanced AIS
Applications,”2018,pp.22–35.
[19]Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate,
“STCW.2/Circ.7‐Simulator training as an equivalency
forapprovedsea‐goingserviceaspartoftheinternship
period for dual certificated certificated cadets,” 2022.
https://puc.overheid.nl/nsi/doc/PUC_2378_14/1/
(accessed
Apr.18,2023).
[20]A.Sardar,V.Garaniya,M. Anantharaman,R.Abbassi,
and F. Khan, “Comparison between simulation and
conventional training: Expanding the concept of social
fidelity,” Process Saf. Prog., vol. 41, no. S1, Apr. 2022,
doi:10.1002/prs.12361.
[21]I. Stanovčić and I. Mraković, Pravila držanja
navigacionestraže
nabrodu.Kotor:3MMakarije,2020.
[22]The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), Bridge
ProceduresGuide,6thed.Marisec,2022.
[23]R. G. Wright, Virtual aids to navigation. PhD
dissertation,2017.
[24]H.Jaram,P.Vidan,S.Vukša,andI.Pavić,“Situational
Awareness– Key SafetyFactor ForThe Officer Of
The
Watch,”Pedagogika‐Pedagogy,vol.93,no.7s,pp.225–
240,Aug.2021,doi:10.53656/ped21‐7s.20situ.
[25]K. G. Aarsæther and T. Moan, “Adding the Human
Element to Ship Manoeuvring Simulations,” J. Navig.,
vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 695–716, Oct. 2010, doi:
10.1017/S037346331000024X.
