327
1 INTRODUCTION
Modern digital technologies are assuming an
increasingly important place in shipping, changing
approaches to ship design, management, and
operation. A typical example of such a technology is
ECDIS, which reduces the adverse influence of the
human factor and ensures that routine navigational
operations are performed at a higher qualitative level.
The electronic navigational chart is a key navigational
tool within ECDIS, and the system itself has effectively
replaced paper charts as the primary means of
navigation and integrated other sources of
navigational information into a single information
environment.
At present, numerous studies are devoted to
assessing and improving the effectiveness of ECDIS
use, identifying the advantages and limitations of
ENCs, enhancing training with electronic charts, and
addressing problems related to the use and further
development of ECDIS technologies for the
improvement of navigational safety.
Typically, deficiencies in ECDIS use arise from
human negligence, overconfidence, and, in some cases,
insufficient competence. Common problems include
Production Challenges in the Transition from S-57
to S-101
M. Tsymbal
1
, V. Konon
1
, N. Konon
1
, O. Pipchenko
2
& V. Shevchenko
1
1
National University “Odesa Maritime Academy”, Odesa, Ukraine
2
Learnmarine, Houston, TX, USA
ABSTRACT: This paper examines the transition from S-57 to S-101 in the context of implementing the S-100
framework, with particular attention to dual-fuel ENC production and its broader operational implications. The
study is based on a comparative analysis of IHO normative documents, technical guidance on S-57-to-S-101
conversion, regulatory materials governing ECDIS use, and research literature on transitional production
architectures. The analysis identifies the principal structural and functional differences between S-57 and S-101,
including changes in data modelling, feature specification, portrayal logic, exchange mechanisms, validation
procedures, data protection, and interoperability with other S-100 products. It shows that S-57→S-101 conversion
cannot be understood as a simple format transformation, since it is constrained by semantic mismatches, differing
relationship models, the need to normalize source data, non-equivalent update mechanisms, and the necessity of
post-conversion validation and human review. The paper argues that dual-fuel production should be treated as
a distinct production and implementation problem affecting database design, workflow organization, quality
control, and transition planning. At the same time, the study emphasizes that these producer-side changes are
not isolated from practice, since the shift toward the S-100 environment also has implications for ECDIS
familiarization, training requirements, bridge procedures, and the broader conditions of navigational safety. The
findings suggest that product-neutral database architectures provide the most sustainable long-term basis for
parallel S-57 and S-101 production, although their adoption requires substantial institutional and technical
investment.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 20
Number 2
June 2026
DOI: 10.12716/1001.20.02.08
328
excessive reliance on automation, information
overload on the display, incorrect settings, fatigue, and
related human factors. These issues can be mitigated
only through a high level of competence and a
thorough knowledge of ECDIS capabilities [1], [2].
While the operational use of ECDIS forms part of
the competence requirements established by the STCW
Convention, the additional preparation expected after
assignment to a ship is regulated primarily through
company responsibilities for familiarization and
training. Regulation I/14 of the STCW Convention
requires that seafarers be familiarized with their
specific duties and with ship arrangements,
installations, equipment, procedures, and
characteristics relevant to those duties, while sections
6.3 and 6.5 of the ISM Code require proper
familiarization and procedures for identifying and
providing training in support of the safety
management system. As a result, the regulatory
framework does not establish a single uniform model
for ECDIS-related onboard familiarization, which
leaves room for different company practices,
manufacturer materials, and course formats [3]-[5].
Although the need for additional ECDIS
preparation is widely recognized, its practical delivery
remains uneven. The combination of generic
competence requirements, company-level
familiarization obligations, and manufacturer-specific
interface differences means that officers may satisfy the
formal competence standard while still requiring
system-specific familiarization with the equipment
actually fitted on board. Differences among
manufacturers, variations in flag-state expectations,
and the absence of a fully uniform approach to such
familiarization create uneven conditions of
preparation and may adversely affect navigational
safety.
Additionally, the introduction of the new S-100
standards framework from 1 January 2026 has brought
producer-side issues of creating, converting,
validating, protecting, and distributing marine
cartographic data to the forefront of current
implementation research. The S-100 framework, based
on the ISO 19100 series [6], forms a multi-product
environment within which S-101 coexists with S-102, S-
104, S-111, S-124, S-128, S-129, S-131, S-164, and other
product specifications. Under these conditions, S-98
becomes central, as it defines the rules of
interoperability, joint portrayal, prioritization, and
conflict management for multiple S-100 products in the
S-100 ECDIS environment. Therefore, the transition
from S-57 to S-101 should be regarded not as a simple
update of the ENC format, but as a restructuring of the
data model, portrayal rules, quality-control
procedures, and production architecture. Particular
importance is attached to the transition period during
which hydrographic offices and publishers of
electronic navigational charts must simultaneously
support S-57 and S-101 products.
However, the regulatory and operational
dimension of the problem does not disappear.
Although the operational use of ECDIS is directly
linked to competencies under the STCW Convention,
Table A-II/1, the concrete organization of onboard
familiarization, equipment-specific instruction, and
competence maintenance largely remains within the
company’s area of responsibility in accordance with
Regulation I/14 of the STCW Convention and the
provisions of the ISM Code. Consequently, even purely
producer-side changes within the S-100 framework
will inevitably have implications for training
procedures, bridge practices, the allocation of
responsibility, and shipboard safety management
arrangements [3]-[5].
2 PREVIOUS RESEARCH ANALYSIS
The literature on S-100 has clearly evolved from
conceptual works on replacing S-57 to studies of
applied implementation. Whereas earlier articles
substantiated the very need for a universal
hydrographic model, studies from 2022–2026 already
focus on product specifications, portrayal,
interoperability, user interaction, weather routing, the
expansion of data domains, and cybersecurity.
Semantic and software compatibility has received
the greatest attention in the literature. It is also in this
area that the widest range of concrete problems has
been identified, including overlap between product
specifications, different ways of modelling similar
entities, duplication of features, symbol conflicts, and
difficulties in the simultaneous portrayal of different S-
100-based products. Taken together, these works show
that the principal challenge of S-100 is not simply to
“create a new standard,” but to make the various parts
of this ecosystem genuinely coherent with one another
[7].
Empirical studies of the human factor and
operational use still present a generally positive,
though not definitive, picture. The eye-tracking
experiment reported in [8], conducted with deck
officers who had more than three years of seagoing
experience and held second-class licenses, indicates
that S-100 ECDIS can accelerate voyage planning and
reduce the visual effort required for search. Weather-
routing research demonstrates the real potential of
integrating S-101, S-111, and weather products to
optimize ETA. At the same time, however, survey-
based studies record risks: overreliance on electronics,
loss of traditional navigation skills, difficulties in
personnel adaptation, and the need to update training
programs. Thus, the benefits of S-100 are already
discernible, but they do not eliminate human-factor
problems.
Finally, another relevant topic in this context is
cybersecurity. While interoperability and portrayal
problems are already actively discussed, the security
dimension is only beginning to enter the research field.
The 2026 article effectively shows that S-100 may
contain design-level vulnerabilities, which means that,
in the future, the certification of S-100-compliant
systems should evaluate not only functionality but also
security architecture [9].
Resolving problems related to the development,
use, and improvement of ECDIS technologies remains
a relevant scientific direction directly linked to the
enhancement of navigational safety. Against this
background, the present study focuses on IHO
requirements and standards governing the creation,
exchange, portrayal, and use of cartographic data in the
context of the transition to S-100. The aim of the study
329
is to identify and systematize the key differences
between S-57 and S-101 in structural and functional
terms, to determine the constraints accompanying S-57
→ S-101 conversion, and to substantiate existing
approaches to ENC production during the transitional
dual-fuel period, considering the broader
requirements of practical implementation.
3 MATERIALS AND METHODS
Methodologically, this study is based on a comparative
analysis of normative, technical, regulatory, and
scientific sources devoted to the development of IHO
standards for marine cartographic data. The corpus of
materials includes standards and supporting
documents within the S-57/S-100 framework, materials
on S-57→S-101 conversion and transitional production
architectures, in particular the approaches proposed by
NOAA, as well as documents defining the broader
regulatory context of ECDIS use, including the STCW
Convention, the ISM Code, and IMO and IHO
transition decisions.
Within the analysis, three interrelated steps were
applied. First, a comparative characterization of the S-
57 and S-101 standards was carried out at the level of
the data model, object vocabulary, portrayal
mechanisms, exchange mechanisms, metadata,
validation, data protection, and interoperability with
other S-100 products.
Second, the conversion of cartographic data from S-
57 to S-101 was examined, with a focus on typical
semantic and technological divergences, the
limitations of automatic conversion, and the need for
manual correction.
Third, approaches to ENC production during the
transitional dual-fuel period, when S-57 and S-101
products must be maintained simultaneously, were
analyzed, and broader implementation barriers
extending beyond purely technical readiness were
outlined.
In this context, the dual-fuel mode gives rise to a
distinct set of challenges, ranging from the
impossibility of direct transformation of update files
and semantic divergences during conversion to the
need for product-neutral databases, new validation
schemes, updated data-protection mechanisms, and
interoperability assurance.
The study proceeds from the premise that dual-fuel
should be understood not as a temporary technical
inconvenience, but as a distinct production problem
that subsequently extends to the regulatory,
organizational, and operational levels. Accordingly,
the results are organized into two thematic blocks: first,
the normative and model differences between S-57 and
S-101; second, conversion problems and dual-
production architectures. To visualize the time frame
of the transition, a scheme of normative and
analytically inferred milestones was also used, making
it possible to distinguish officially established
deadlines from research-based assumptions regarding
ecosystem maturity.
In Figure 1, official dates are separated from
analytical windows. This distinction is important for
interpreting the dual-fuel transition, since it makes it
possible to avoid conflating mandatory regulatory
reference points with forecast assessments of
ecosystem readiness, dependence on test datasets, type
approval, and market availability.
Figure 1. Indicative timeline of the transition to global S-100
implementation (2025–2030), distinguishing normative
milestones from analytical assumptions. Note: bars under
'Analytical / inferred' are scenario-building assumptions
derived from official dependency chains, not formally
mandated dates. Source basis: [10]-[13].
4 RESULTS
4.1 Comparative Characteristics of the S-57 and S-101
Standards
According to the analyzed materials, S-57 and S-101
differ not only in the technical format of data sets, but
also in the standard architecture to which each belongs.
S-57 represents the earlier ENC regime built around the
S-57 transfer standard and its associated ENC product
specification, whereas S-101 has been developed as an
S-100-compliant ENC product specification intended
for use within the broader S-100 framework.
A more concrete difference concerns how the
content of the ENC is formally specified. In S-57,
Appendix A provides the official Object Catalogue,
that is, the data schema of the transfer standard, while
Appendix B contains the product specifications
applicable to particular applications, including ENC
[14]. In S-101, the product specification states that the
application schema is realized in the Feature
Catalogue, which describes the feature types,
information types, attributes, attribute values,
associations, and roles that may be used in an ENC
supporting controlled versioning, formal validation,
and greater semantic consistency of the feature
vocabulary [15]. The Feature Catalogue is available as
an XML document, while Annex A constitutes its
human-readable interpretation. In practical terms, this
means that, in S-101, the semantic structure of the ENC
is packaged as a formal S-100 product component,
rather than being divided between the transfer
standard and separate ENC-specific rule documents in
the S-57 manner.
Portrayal follows a similar logic: in S-57 it is defined
externally through the S-52 standard and implemented
largely through software developers’ interpretation of
that standard, while S-101 is supported by its own
Portrayal Catalogue as a machine-readable rule set that
helps standardize the application of conditional
symbology across different implementations [15], [16].
330
The exchange model also differs substantially. In S-
57, the exchange set consists of a single catalogue file
(CATALOG.031) and data-set files, including the base
file (.000) and successive updates (.001, *.002, etc.), but
does not include either the feature catalogue or the
portrayal catalogue. By contrast, S-101 delivery is
organized according to the S-100 Exchange Set scheme,
which may include feature and portrayal catalogues as
well as service descriptions (Exchange/Discovery
Catalogues), thus making delivery more self-sufficient
from the standpoint of semantics and visualization
[14], [15].
Additional differences concern scale handling,
object relationships, maintenance logic, data
protection, validation, and interoperability. Whereas S-
57 relies on SCAMIN/SCAMAX attributes and
historically established usage bands, S-101 introduces
new standardized
“minimumDisplayScale”/”maximumDisplayScale”
attributes together with a formal Dataset Loading
Algorithm, ensuring reproducibility in the selection of
coverages and greater control over system behaviour
during scale changes in the context of S-100
framework. [14], [15]. At the model level, S-57 does not
provide named relationships between objects; where
several objects must be related, collection objects such
as C_AGGR or C_ASSO are used as containers for
functionally linked entities, for example pairs of
leading lights or elements of traffic separation schemes
[14]. S-101, by comparison, supports named
associations and information types, thereby deepening
the descriptive capacity of the model and improving
interoperability, that is, the compatible and stable use
of data across different systems [15].
The two standards also differ in their
developmental logic. The evolution of S-57 has
effectively stabilized at Edition 3.1 and proceeds
mainly through maintenance documents, whereas S-
101 continues to develop as a product specification
with a clear system of editions, revisions, and
clarifications coordinated within the broader S-100
framework.
Data protection and licensing reflect the same shift:
S-57 has historically relied primarily on S-63, while S-
101 is integrated with S-100 Part 15 (“Data Protection”),
thereby aligning security approaches across the S-100
product family [17]. Quality assurance is likewise more
formalized in S-101. While S-57 checks were
historically standardized through separate lists such as
S-58, S-101 contains formalized validation checks in
Annex C, which facilitates automation and is consistent
with the general methodology of S-100. This broader
logic of integration is also reflected in the operational
role of S-101. Unlike the mono-product nature of S-57-
format ENCs, S-101 is designed for use within the
broader S-100 environment and for coordinated
operation with other products such as S-102, S-104, and
S-111 in accordance with the interoperability
requirements of S-98 [15], [18].
Structurally, S-100 is not simply a “new chart
format,” but a universal hydrographic framework in
which the basic standard is separated from specific
product specifications. Its architecture encompasses
the geospatial registry and concept vocabularies,
machine-readable feature catalogues, metadata and
data-quality models, exchange mechanisms, portrayal
catalogues, and data-protection mechanisms. Within
this system, S-101 is only one of the products, whereas
S-98 plays a coordinating role by establishing
principles for the joint use and portrayal of S-101
together with S-102, S-104, S-111, and other layers in
the S-100 ECDIS environment [15], [18]. For that
reason, the dual-fuel question is not limited to a
comparison of two ENC standards but is embedded in
the broader problem of how the multilayer S-100 stack
functions.
Accordingly, the most significant differences
between S-57 and S-101, together with their place
within the broader S-100 architecture, are summarized
in Table 1.
Table 1. Comparative Characteristics of the S-57 and S-101
Standards.
Aspect
S-101 (S-100-based ENC)
Basic nature
of the
standard
An ENC product
specification based on S-
100. It is the basic
navigational layer for S-100
ECDIS and is intended for
joint operation with S-102,
S-104, S-111, etc.
Schema
definition
XML Feature Catalogue
that formally defines
feature types, information
types, attributes, values,
associations, and roles;
Annex A provides the
human-readable
interpretation.
Portrayal
XML Portrayal catalogue,
which may be supplied
together with the data
through the Exchange Set.
Portrayal rule
mechanism
Support for scenario-based
rules (via the Lua
language) in the Portrayal
Catalogue.
Dataset
encoding
Encoding under S-101 on
the basis of S-100 and an
XML exchange catalogue.
Exchange
package for
data delivery
S-100 exchange packages
may include feature
catalogues, portrayal
catalogues, and auxiliary
files.
Associations
and
information
types
Named associations and
information types provide
richer semantics.
Metadata and
quality
Comprehensive metadata
and quality schemes in the
context of ISO 19115/19157,
inherited through S-100.
Versioning
and
maintenance
Formalized editions,
revisions, and
clarifications; maintenance
within the S-100
framework.
Data
protection
S-100 Part 15 for S-100-
based products.
Checks /
validation
Annex C – S-101 Validation
Checks; further
formalization through S-
158.
331
4.2 Constraints of S-57
→
S-101 Data Conversion and
dual-production architectures
In the context of implementing the new framework of
cartographic data standards, the question of S-57→S-
101 conversion becomes especially relevant. IHO
guidance documents [19] describe typical conversion
problems, including object mapping, the transfer of
textual information to the corresponding S-101
information types, semantic discrepancies, and
differences in relationships between objects. They also
emphasize the need to normalize certain S-57 classes
prior to conversion in order to increase the proportion
of automatically convertible data.
The existence of ready-made conversion tools
confirms the technical feasibility of such a transition,
but it does not eliminate the problems of divergent
outputs and potential data loss. Several studies note
that automatic conversion has clear limits of
applicability and that errors or omissions may affect
navigational safety. For this reason, the results of
conversion require additional checks and manual
correction.
The IHO Conversion Sub-Group report defines
objectives for increasing the consistency of S-57 data in
order to raise the share of automatically convertible
data [20] and identifies classes that require
normalization prior to conversion. The National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
presented a transition plan from S-57 to S-100 [21],
comparing several strategies: direct conversion,
maintaining two separate databases, complete
abandonment of legacy standards, and the creation of
a product-neutral database. Among other things, the
plan highlights the impossibility of direct
transformation of S-57 update files and indicates that
generating both products in a dual-fuel mode is more
efficient than maintaining S-57 alone with continuous
conversion to S-101. In turn, ArcGIS Maritime offers a
ready-made conversion tool [22], which confirms the
technical possibility of implementation, although it
does not eliminate discrepancies and errors arising
during the process.
Studies [23], [24] likewise indicate that, despite the
relevance of the proposed methods, automatic
conversion remains limited in its applicability, while
errors and data loss may affect navigational safety.
Consequently, conversion should not be understood as
a one-time automated procedure, but as a multi-stage
process involving prior preparation of S-57 data,
automated transformation, validation, and subsequent
human review.
In this context, NOAA outlined an architecture (Fig.
2) that combines the preparation of S-57 data for
conversion, automated transformation into S-101, and
subsequent loading into a product-neutral database
from which data may be exported in both S-57 and S-
101 formats [21]. In this scheme, the earlier S-101 stage
represents converted input prepared for database
loading, whereas the later S-101 stage denotes final
product generation.
Figure 2. Basic components of the NOAA ENC production
system using two product databases [21]
Practical testing of the IHO/ESRI/NOAA converters
[23] made it possible to identify those elements that are
converted relatively successfully and those for which
systematic discrepancies arise. This confirms that the
transition from S-57 to S-101 cannot be reduced to a
purely technical format transformation.
One of the central issues in the transition from S-57
to S-101 is the choice of production architecture. The
NOAA transition plan compares several strategies [21]:
maintaining a single S-57 database with subsequent
conversion to S-101, transitioning to a single S-101
database, maintaining two separate databases, or
constructing a unified product-neutral database.
Comparison of these approaches shows that dual-fuel
should be understood not merely as a temporary phase
in the coexistence of two standards, but as a distinct
problem of organizing ENC production, maintenance,
and updating.
In light of the analyzed sources, the most effective
long-term approach appears to be the architecture
outlined by NOAA, which combines the preparation of
S-57 data for conversion, automated transformation
into S-101, and subsequent loading into a product-
neutral database from which both products may be
generated directly [21]. At the same time, this option is
also the most resource-intensive at the implementation
stage. The key conversion-related issues identified in
the analyzed sources are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Summary of the Key Problems of S-57→S-101
Conversion
Problem
Manifestation in the
conversion process
Consequence for the
dual-fuel workflow
Semantic
discrepancies
Not all S-57 objects,
attributes, and textual
elements have direct
and unambiguous
counterparts in S-101.
The need for
normalization rules,
semantic mapping, and
manual post-processing
increases.
Different tool
results
Different S-57/S-101
converters may yield
different results for the
same data.
Ensuring consistency of
products across different
production lines
becomes more difficult.
Limitations of
automatic
conversion
Automatic conversion
does not cover all cases
without losses or errors.
Additional checks,
human review, and local
corrections after
conversion are required.
Indirect
transformation of
update files
S-57 and S-101 update
files are not subject to
direct reciprocal
conversion.
Updates become a
separate production
problem rather than a
simple consequence of
converting base cells.
Need to
normalize source
data
Some S-57 classes and
structures require prior
ordering before
conversion.
Without preparation of
the source data, the
share of data suitable for
automatic conversion
decreases.
332
4.3 Discussion
The results obtained indicate that the transition to S-
100 constitutes a systemic shift in the production,
distribution, and use of marine cartographic data. For
the industry, this means not a linear upgrade of S-57,
but the deployment of a multi-product environment in
which S-101 coexists with other S-100 products under
the interoperability framework defined by S-98. In such
a configuration, production architecture becomes no
less important than the data model itself, since errors
arising at the producer-side stage may propagate to
subsequent levels of the stack.
The key changes for hydrographic offices and ENC
publishers concern the way data are modelled, and
production databases are constructed. Formats S-
100/101 rely on machine-readable feature catalogues
and portrayal rules, which makes rigid hard-coding of
symbology impossible and requires controlled
catalogue management and updating. During the
transitional period, production databases must either
be maintained in parallel for S-57 and S-101 or be
transformed into product-neutral schemas. The latter
approach minimizes discrepancies between products
but requires the largest one-time investment in schema
design and data migration.
Quality-control procedures are also undergoing
revision. Whereas for S-57 test datasets and checks
described in S-58 have traditionally been applied, for S-
101 the emphasis shifts to formalized validation
checks, including Annex C and the S-158 validator
series. This shifts the focus from purely syntactic errors
to semantic and topological consistency, control of
associations, verification of boundary intersections,
and correctness of portrayal.
The implications, however, extend beyond data
producers. For ECDIS manufacturers, the transition to
portrayal engines capable of dynamically interpreting
feature catalogues and portrayal rules, as well as
ensuring interoperability among S-101, S-102, S-104, S-
111, and other layers, becomes critical. It is precisely at
this point that the significance of S-98 comes to the fore,
since the issue is not merely the technical
superimposition of several layers, but the application
of formalized rules governing their priority,
compatibility, contextual display, and conflict
management. Accordingly, producer-side bottlenecks
may be transformed into user-facing consequences,
including differences in portrayal, instability of
updates, the complexity of product integration, and
new requirements for bridge practices.
Another implication of interoperability concerns
the practical usability of integrated multi-layer
portrayal. Since the S-100 environment is designed for
the coordinated display of several interoperable
products, the expansion of available layers may raise
questions regarding the clarity of presentation, the
management of information density, and the ease with
which navigators interpret information under
operational conditions. In this sense, the significance of
interoperability is not limited to technical compatibility
alone but also extends to the practical conditions of
information use on the bridge. This aspect is especially
relevant during the transitional period, when new
portrayal logics are being introduced alongside
established operational routines. Although the issue
lies beyond the direct scope of the present study, it
represents a plausible implementation challenge that
merits further examination in connection with
interoperability, bridge ergonomics, and practical
ECDIS use.
However, even a technically sound S-100 stack does
not guarantee problem-free implementation.
Questions remain concerning crew training and
familiarization, the revision of bridge procedures, the
proper allocation of responsibility among data
producers, distributors, OEM manufacturers, and
shipping companies, as well as alignment between
regulatory requirements and the actual maturity of
software and test datasets.
Thus, dual-fuel should be interpreted as a distinct
research and production problem. Its substance lies not
only in the parallel maintenance of two ENC formats,
but also in the need to ensure semantic consistency,
stable validation, predictable update logic,
compatibility of data-protection mechanisms, control
over discrepancies between end products, and an
acceptable level of operational readiness of the systems
that consume these data.
Accordingly, S-100 should at present be
characterized as a normative and technical framework
that has already formally entered into force and moved
into a phase of practical implementation. The IHO
officially put the first phase of the S-100 product
specifications into force on 1 January 2026 and
explicitly indicated the possibility of their production,
testing, and use in the operational environment.
At the same time, this does not mean that S-100
ECDIS has already reached full operational maturity as
a mass commercial solution. Although the new IMO
standards opened the possibility of voluntary use of S-
100 ECDIS from 1 January 2026 and provide for its
mandatory application to new installations from 1
January 2029, the currently available IHO materials
indicate that the supporting framework is still being
refined, particularly in the areas of interoperability and
testing. This suggests that S-100 ECDIS should not yet
be regarded as a fully mature mass commercial
solution for vessels subject to SOLAS requirements.
Therefore, the current state of S-100 should be defined
as one of real, but still incomplete, implementation:
formally, the standard is already suitable for practical
use and is being applied in test and selected
operational scenarios; however, its full-scale
integration into everyday shipboard practice is still
constrained by certification, technical, and
infrastructural factors.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The transition from S-57 to S-101 is not merely an
update of the ENC format, but a shift to a new logic of
modelling, portrayal, validation, protection, and
distribution of marine cartographic data within the
broader S-100 framework.
In this context, although automatic S-57 → S-101
conversion is technically possible, it is accompanied by
semantic discrepancies, heterogeneous outputs from
different tools, the need to normalize source data, and
mandatory human review. A particularly critical
limitation is the difficulty of direct reciprocal
333
conversion of update files, which complicates support
for both products during the transitional period.
From the standpoint of practical use, the
simultaneous portrayal of several S-100-based
products raises an additional human-factors issue: the
need to control screen complexity and information
overload. This question is especially important during
the transitional period, when interoperable portrayal
rules are still being operationalized and the practical
implementation of S-100 ECDIS remains at an early
stage. For that reason, the ergonomics of multi-layer
display and the cognitive effects of integrated portrayal
warrant separate empirical study.
In summary, even if the technical S-100/S-101 stack
is fully equipped with the necessary converters,
validators, and portrayal mechanisms, practical
implementation will remain complicated by a number
of broader problems. These include user training and
familiarization, revision of standard bridge
procedures, allocation of responsibility and liability for
data and portrayal errors, regulatory alignment
between IMO/IHO/IEC requirements and the actual
readiness of the market, the maturity of OEM software,
the availability of representative test datasets and a
type-approval baseline, as well as the organizational
readiness of hydrographic offices, flag administrations,
distributors, and shipping companies.
Therefore, the success of the transition will be
determined not only by the quality of producer-side
solutions, but also by the degree of coherence across
the entire ship-shore implementation chain.
REFERENCES
[1] D. Brčić, S. Žuškin, and M. Barić, “Observations on ECDIS
Education and Training,” in Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Marine
Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation (TransNav),
Gdynia, Poland, 2017, pp. 29-36, doi:
10.1201/9781315099132-5.
[2] O.D. Pipchenko, O. Burenkov, M. Tsymbal, V. Pernykoza,
“Identification of Weak Links in the ECDIS - Operator
System Based on Simulator Training,” TransNav, the
International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of
Sea Transportation, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 83-88, 2021,
doi:10.12716/1001.15.01.07
[3] D. Komitov and B. Belev, “Status of ECDIS type specific
training and gap in the rules,” Scientific Journal of Gdynia
Maritime University, no. 117, pp. 27-36, Mar. 2021, doi:
10.26408/117.03.
[4] European Maritime Safety Agency, International Safety
Management (ISM) Code, 2018 ed. [Online]. Available:
https://www.deutsche-
flagge.de/de/redaktion/dokumente/interpretationen/sola
s/ix/ism-code-2018-emsa.pdf
[5] International Maritime Organization, “International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW).” [Online].
Available:
https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/humanelement/pages/
stcw-conv-link.aspx
[6] R. Ward and B. Greenslade, “S-100: The Universal
Hydrographic Data Model,” International Hydrographic
Bureau, Jan. 2011. [Online]. Available:
https://legacy.iho.int/mtg_docs/com_wg/TSMAD/TSMA
D_Misc/S-100InfoPaper_FinalJan2011.pdf
[7] S. Lee, C. Lee, G. Kim, et al., “A study of S-100 based
product specifications from a software implementation
point of view: Focusing on data model representation,
similar features and symbols, and ECDIS and VTS
software,” Journal of Navigation, vol. 75, no. 5, pp. 1226-
1242, 2022, doi: 10.1017/S037346332200039X.
[8] J. Jang, S. Park, S. Oh, and I. Kim, “The effectiveness of S-
100 ECDIS capable of ENDS in the view of ship officers’
visual characteristics,” The International Hydrographic
Review, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 164-171, 2023, doi: 10.58440/ihr-
29-2-a27.
[9] H. Cho, C. Lee, and S. Lee, “Analysis of Security
Vulnerabilities in S-100-Based Maritime Navigation
Software,” Sensors, vol. 26, no. 4, p. 1246, 2026, doi:
10.3390/s26041246.
[10] International Maritime Organization, Resolution
MSC.530(106): Performance Standards for Electronic
Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS), Nov. 7,
2022. [Online]. Available:
https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/KnowledgeC
entre/IndexofIMOResolutions/MSCResolutions/MSC.530
(106).pdf
[11] International Hydrographic Organization, “S-100
Standards in Force.” [Online]. Available:
https://iho.int/en/s-100-standards-in-force-0
[12] International Hydrographic Organization, Roadmap for
the S-100 Implementation Decade (2020-2030), ver. 5.0,
Oct. 2025. [Online]. Available:
https://iho.int/uploads/user/About%20IHO/Council/S-
100_ImplementationStrategy/S100_Roadmap_Decade_v
5.0_clean_October2025.pdf
[13] CIRM, Transition to S-100 Based ECDIS, Position Paper,
Jan. 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://cirm.org/storage/files/CIRM%20Position%20Pape
r%20%E2%80%93%20Transition%20to%20S-
100%20based%20ECDIS%20-%20January%202024.pdf
[16] International Hydrographic Organization ENC
Working Group, “S-57 to S-101 Conversion Sub-group
Update,” ENCWG6, 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://iho.int/uploads/user/Services%20and%20Standar
ds/ENCWG/ENCWG6/ENCWG6_2021_EN_6-10_S-
57toS-101.pdf
[14] International Hydrographic Organization, S-57
Appendix B.1, Annex A: Use of the Object Catalogue for
ENC, ed. 2.0, Nov. 2000. [Online]. Available:
https://iho.int/uploads/user/pubs/standards/s-
57/20ApB1.pdf
[15] International Hydrographic Organization, “S-101:
Electronic Navigational Chart,” IHO Geospatial
Information Registry, ver. 2.0.0, Dec. 2024. [Online].
Available:
https://registry.iho.int/productspec/view.do?category=pr
oduct_ID&domainS=ALL&idx=214&product_ID=S-
101&searchValue=&statusS=5
[16] International Hydrographic Organization, S-52:
Specifications for Chart Content and Display Aspects of
ECDIS, ed. 6.1.1, Jun. 2015. [Online]. Available:
https://iho.int/uploads/user/pubs/standards/s-52/S-
52%20Edition%206.1.1%20-%20June%202015.pdf
[17] International Hydrographic Organization, S-100
Universal Hydrographic Data Model, ed. 5.2.0, Jun. 2024.
[Online]. Available:
https://registry.iho.int/productspec/view.do?category=pr
oduct_ID&domainS=ALL&idx=207&product_ID=S-
100&searchValue=&statusS=5
[18] International Hydrographic Organization, S-98: Data
Product Interoperability in S-100 Navigation Systems, ed.
1.0.0, May 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://iho.int/uploads/user/pubs/standards/S-98/S-
98%20Main_Ed%201.0.0_Final.pdf
[19] International Hydrographic Organization, S-57 to S-101
Conversion Guidance, ed. 0.0.1 (draft), Jan. 2021.
[Online]. Available:
https://iho.int/uploads/user/Services%20and%20Standar
ds/S-100WG/S-101PT6/S-101PT6_2021_INF02A_EN_S-
57%20to%20S-
101%20Conversion%20Guidance_Draft.pdf
334
[20] International Hydrographic Organization ENC Working
Group, “S-57 to S-101 Conversion Sub-group Update,”
ENCWG6, 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://iho.int/uploads/user/Services%20and%20Standar
ds/ENCWG/ENCWG6/ENCWG6_2021_EN_6-10_S-
57toS-101.pdf
[21] NOAA Office of Coast Survey, NOAA’s S-57 to S-101
ENC Production Transition Plan, ver. 1.0, Nov. 21, 2023.
[Online]. Available: https://iho.int/uploads/user/Inter-
Regional%20Coordination/WEND-
WG/WENDWG14/WENDWG14_2024_05.1Ac_EN_NOA
A%20US%20Transition%20Plan%20S-
101%2021%20November%202023.pdf
[22] Esri, “Convert S-57 to S-101 Cell (Maritime),” ArcGIS Pro
Documentation, ver. 3.6. [Online]. Available:
https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/tool-
reference/maritime/convert-s-57-to-s-101-cells.htm
[23] G. N. Vieira and F. Mandarino, “Conversion of
Electronic Navigational Charts from S-57 to S-101
Standard Format,” The International Hydrographic
Review, no. 26, pp. 39-60, 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/ihr/article/view/331
19
[24] K. Xu and W. Man, “A method for converting electronic
nautical charts from S-57 to S-101 based on semantic
mapping relationships,” in Proc. 2024 3rd Int. Conf.
Networks, Communications and Information
Technology (CNCIT), 2024, doi: 10.1145/3672121.3672143.