Note: These FAQ’s are maintained up-to-date by the IALA e-Navigation Committee at its biannual meetings usually held during March and September. e-Navigation is a rapidly evolving IMO concept and IALA takes all reasonable efforts to reflect the most current IMO decisions in these FAQ’s.
e-Navigation is an International Maritime Organization (IMO) led concept based on the harmonisation of marine navigation systems and supporting shore services driven by user needs.
e-Navigation is currently defined as:
‘e-Navigation is 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 environment’
It should be noted that the term e-navigation is often used in a generic sense by equipment and service providers. This claim should be seen as an aspiration, rather than an indication of compliance.
It is envisioned there will be at least three broad significant outcomes from e-Navigation that are currently being used as the basis of establishing user needs. These are represented by ship based systems, shore based systems and a communications infrastructure as outlined here:
It is generally accepted that the IMO concept of ‘e-Navigation’ can be thought of as a brand, without the need for ‘e’ to be specifically defined.
The concept of e-Navigation was proposed by IMO Member States in 2006 as a process for the harmonisation, collection, integration, exchange and presentation of maritime information. As such, the ‘e’ could have stood for ‘enhanced’ or ‘electronic’, but this would unnecessarily limit what can be done within e-Navigation. It must be noted that generic electronic marine navigation already exists in many forms and should not be confused with this specific IMO initiative.
The IMO has agreed that the core objectives of an e-Navigation concept should:
There is a clear and compelling need to equip the master of a vessel and those ashore responsible for the safety of shipping with modern, proven tools to make maritime navigation and communications more reliable and user friendly and thereby reducing 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 standardisation onboard and ashore, incompatibility between vessels and an increased and unnecessary level of complexity.
According to the IMO Strategy, the main broad benefits of e-navigation are expected to be:
e-Navigation, as agreed by the IMO, is a ‘user led’ initiative, and the users include those who navigate vessels of all sizes and types, and a broad section of shore based authorised users. At the IMO Safety of Navigation Sub-committee (NAV55) during July 09, it was agreed that the preliminary shipboard needs included:
Shores based needs are currently being developed with the assistance of IALA and are anticipated to fall into the categories of:
It is understood that improvements in all these areas will not solely rely on technology, but will require attention to training and procedures as well.
e-Navigation is a broad, long-term concept, involving many stakeholders and having the potential to impact on the entire maritime community. However amongst those likely to be affected are mariners, marine pilots, equipment manufacturers, Vessel Traffic Services (VTS), RCCs, Coastal States, Port States and Flag States, Hydrographic Offices, ship owners, ship operators and ship charterers. Further, the development of e-Navigation will have a significant impact on all facets of training and the modification of operating procedures.
No, IMO intends that e-Navigation be ‘scalable’ and could benefit all vessels.
e-Navigation is an evolutionary and dynamic concept that will continue to develop as new user needs arise and emerging technological opportunities become available. In December 2008 the IMO Maritime Safety Committee adopted an e-Navigation ‘Strategy’. This plan calls for a ‘Strategy Implementation Plan’ comprising user needs; architecture; and making use of Gap, Cost Benefit and Risk Analysis, to be developed, with the current deadline being set for 2014. This implementation plan may set timetables for the initial phases of
e-Navigation implementation. It is expected that the strategy will embody a framework for continuously assessing how best to meet user needs with evolving technology and the use of cost benefit analysis.
Yes. e-Navigation will bring improvements to navigation safety through the reduction of risk, and so help protect the marine environment from shipborne pollution stemming from collisions and groundings.
Further work and analysis is being carried out to determine if e-navigation may have uses to help reduce carbon, sulphur and nitrogen emissions from ships through more efficient vessel routeing and handling, and how e-navigation could be used as an audit tool for the measurement of emissions offset claims and credits trading.
No. However, Electronic Chart Display and Information System (ECDIS) is anticipated to form an important enabler for e-Navigation.
The systems and technologies that are being developed and used within ECDIS, Integrated Navigation Systems (INS), Integrated Bridge Systems (IBS) and VTS developments will form key elements of the over-arching strategy for e-Navigation in order to harmonise the collection, integration, exchange and presentation of maritime information onboard and ashore.
Yes. e-Navigation will involve the use of technology hand-in-hand with appropriate procedures, and as such there will need to be significant changes to training that is given to all users, ashore and afloat.
There will be implications for small commercial and recreational craft since e-Navigation is intended to be scalable across all vessels in order to improve safety for the entire maritime community. Benefits for smaller vessels are expected to include improved navigational capability and vessel detection by all.
The vision for e-Navigation is to enhance the best practices of traditional navigation, by better integrating humans and machines to take advantage of both their unique skills. Electronics have proven excellent at continually monitoring and checking mundane routines such as comparing various sources of navigation inputs, a task that most mariners can’t accomplish as quickly and eventually find tedious. Humans excel in intuitive skills and addressing abstract challenges such as ship handling and resource management. The enhancements brought in by e-Navigation are to optimise the support technical systems give to the human decision making process for the safe operation of shipping.
With the advent of electronic navigation (not to be confused with e-Navigation), such as electronic charts and positioning systems, the role of the mariner has changed without the change being holistically addressed by the maritime community. These conditions also exist with shore-side operations. e-Navigation is a process that seeks to reassess these roles and ensure that mariners and shore operators are actively engaged in the process of navigation and not just monitoring it. This will enable mariners and operators ashore to make better decisions, supported by robust electronic technology and information management systems that reduce existing distractions.
As per the SOLAS 74 Convention (Chapter V, Regulation 13), Contracting Governments undertake to provide aids to navigation in accordance with the volume of traffic and degree of risk.
Aids to navigation authorities should continue to take the above into account, along with the requirements of e-Navigation, when they evaluate the provision of the overall aids to navigation service.
e-Navigation is a harmonised concept, which will take into account both traditional and modern aids to navigation, aimed at improving the safety of navigation.
No. e-Navigation will not change the responsibilities of the persons onboard the vessel with regard to the safe navigation of the vessel.
The following are possible consequences of e-Navigation:
1 There will be a continuing need for more efficient and harmonised data transfer between ships, and between ships and shore.
2 There will be a need for improved communication facilities between shore and ship to exchange information such as polling and a positive means to offer warnings, advice and directions to ships.
3 There will be a need to automate or poll ships for the provision of information without the need for human intervention.
4 Advances in technology will make possible the detection, identification, and precise tracking of vessels outside existing VTS areas. These will include Long Range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) as well as terrestrial and satellite-based reception of AIS signals.
5 Comprehensive and effective risk assessment using e-Navigation will increasingly become the basis for the safe management of navigation.
6 There will be greater management and organisation of vessel traffic within the limits of liability.
7 There will be an increased need to assure and certify the competency of mariners and shore-side users so as to make best use of e-Navigation facilities.
8 In areas of high density or co-existing commercial and recreational traffic, there may be an application within e-Navigation to better manage recreational and small craft to ensure the safety of navigation for all.
No. But it will include a framework of technical and operational services that will aim to harmonise and provide capabilities to enhance the exchange and sharing of navigational information within the maritime domain.
The architecture forms a framework and will assist in the development of e-Navigation applications, while promoting international harmonisation and standardisation.
Supporting quotes from IMO MSC 85 Report, Annex 21:
No-5: ‘The architecture should include the hardware, data, information, communications technology and software needed to meet the user needs. The system architecture should be based on a modular and scaleable concept. The system hardware and software should be based on open architectures to allow scalability of functions according to the needs of different users and to cater to continued development and enhancement.’
The architecture includes models for the hardware, data, information, and communications technology and software needed to meet the user needs.
IMO has defined an overarching architecture for e-Navigation as given in the following Figure. IALA focuses its attention on the shore sideof the overarching e-Navigation architecture, including the Maritime Service Portfolios (MSPs), in accordance with the mandate of IALA. This is illustrated by the highlighted area on the shore side in Figure 1 (source: IMO NAV57/15, paragraphs 6.31ff, explicitly referencing NAV57-WP.6, paragraphs on the overarching e-Navigation architecture and in particular Figure 1).
Yes. The relevant elements of the IMO defined e-Navigation architecture can be re-arranged in the image of the ‘Seven pillars of e-Navigation’ (or ‘e-Navigation Platform suite’). This is shown in Figure 2.
IALA is leading the architecture work for e-navigation for shore systems and ship-shore/shore-ship services by publishing manuals, guidelines, and recommendations. That is part of the existing mandate of IALA. The recommendations provide the necessary framework for e-Navigation from the shore side
Additionally, at the request of IMO, IALA is supporting IMO in the development and implementation of e-navigation by offering architecture proposals for coordinated review by IMO.
IALA is also contributing to the Common Maritime Data Structure (CMDS), as based on the IHO S-100 standard that has been designed to model data object related aspects of e-Navigation.
Supporting quotes from IMO MSC 85 Report, Annex 21:
5: ‘The architecture should include the hardware, data, information, communications technology and software needed to meet the user needs. The system architecture should be based on a modular and scalable concept. The system hardware and software should be based on open architectures to allow scalability of functions according to the needs of different users and to cater to continued development and enhancement’.
Compare also Annex 20: 8.2.1, 9.1.1, 9.1.5, and 9.7.2.1.
Yes. That is its purpose. IMO has stated that e-navigation will be a single integrated concept with an internationally agreed common data structure. The CMDS does not impose restrictions on encoding or implementation. Rather, the data model is an abstract framework that defines the semantics of the data. Different encoding and implementation techniques in different technical and operational contexts are possible with no changes to the data model. IMO has established a dedicated group, the IMO/IHO Harmonisation Group on Data Modelling (HGDM) that is expected, once inaugurated, to co-ordinate international work on the CMDS.
Supporting quotes from IMO MSC 85 Report, Annex 20:
8.2.1: ‘Mariners require information pertaining to the planning and execution of voyages, the assessment of navigation risk and compliance with regulation. This information should be accessible from a single integrated system. Shore users require information pertaining to their maritime domain, including static and dynamic information on vessels and their voyages. This information should be provided in an internationally agreed common data structure. Such a data structure is essential for the sharing of information amongst shore authorities on a regional and international basis’.
There is no such thing as an ‘e-Navigation system’. The e-Navigation concept is broad in scope and will have many users both ship-board and ashore and many components. No users will use all possible components defined by the complete e-Navigation concept. Individual users will use components appropriate to their activities.
While there is presently no direct definition of ‘e-Navigation compliancy’ or of an ‘e-Navigation compliant’ operational or technical service or device provided by IMO, the working and therefore tentative definition can be inferred from the IMO e-Navigation strategy. ‘e-Navigation compliant’ would mean that an operational or technical service or device has been proven, tested, or checked by a competent body to be in conformity with relevant IMO performance standards, which were explicitly created or revised as part of the implementation of IMO’s e-Navigation strategy.
You cannot buy certified components until IMO has adapted their existing performance standards to the e-Navigation paradigm and has written performance standards for new services or components. Likewise, other recognized international bodies need to adapt their existing recommendations and standards to the e-Navigation paradigm and write new recommendations and standards as appropriate for new services or components.
Supporting quotes from IMO MSC 85 Report, Annex 20:
9.1.3: ‘The provision and development of e-navigation should consider relevant international conventions, regulations and guidelines, national legislation and standards. The development and implementation of e-navigation should build upon the work of IMO.’
9.1.7 ‘This part of the work will follow the development of performance standards and will involve users and manufacturers’.
9.9.3 ‘Implementation itself, in phases, perhaps based on a voluntary equipage of (integrated) existing systems to begin with, but with mandatory equipage and use of a full e-navigation solution in the longer term.’
Annex 1.5 ‘taking the lead in setting the performance standards appropriate for e-Navigation covering all the dimensions of the system: shipborne, ashore and communications. These standards should be based on user needs and should encourage technology neutrality and interoperability of system components’.
No. The current technical environment will still be relevant as IALA members move towards a Common Shore-based System Architecture (CSSA). However, in the usual course of upgrading, recapitalisation, changing user requirements and new regulations, the IALA member will eventually be ‘e-Navigation compliant’. IMO has stated that e-navigation implementation will take place in phases. The first phase will be most likely to integrate existing technology and systems. It is possible that in this phase some new services, systems, and/or technologies will also be introduced. It should be noted that IMO has also stated that ‘e-navigation compliance’ is eventually expected.
Supporting quotes from IMO MSC 85 Report, Annex 20:
9.9.1 ‘transition planning, taking into account the phasing needed to deliver early benefits and to make the optimum use of existing systems and services in the short term. The implementation plan should be phased such that the first phase can be achieved by fully integrating and standardizing existing technology and systems (the reduced architecture identified during the gap analysis) and using a reduced concept of operations. Subsequent phases should develop and implement any new technology that is required to deliver the preferred architecture and implement the overall concept of operations;’
9.1.5 ‘Communications technology and information systems will have to be identified to meet user needs. This work may involve the enhancement of existing systems or the development of new systems. Any impacts affecting existing systems will need to be identified and addressed, based on technical standards and protocols for data structure, technology, and bandwidth and frequency allocations.’
9.9.3 ‘implementation itself, in phases, perhaps based on a voluntary equipage of (integrated) existing systems to begin with, but with mandatory equipage and use of a full e-navigation solution in the longer term.’
There may be incentives in the future for shore authorities to migrate towards the Common Shore-based System Architecture, in order to support the IMO intended ‘mandatory equipage’ and ‘defined service levels’ (compare Annex 20, 5.1.6 and 9.9.3). Although the full impact is not known yet, the IMO Member State Audit Scheme, which is mandatory by the 1st January 2015, may have an impact on the migration towards an ‘e-Navigation compliant’ shore-based infrastructure.
Should an IALA member intend to set up a shore-based system this IALA member may consider a system adhering to the Common Shore-based System Architecture.
Participate in the e-navigation work being done at IALA and elsewhere. IMO’s e-Navigation Strategy Implementation Plan (SIP) is presently being developed and is expected to be ready in 2014. Based on that plan it is most likely that several concurrent initiatives regarding the above architectural elements will be launched, thus affecting IALA, amongst other bodies.
Yes. There are several things that an IALA member may wish to start doing today:
IALA will maintain what it has developed; hence IALA will maintain and further develop its own documentation regarding the Common Shore-based System Architecture.
Yes. Various administrations and organisations are conducting test beds and providing services under the generic banner of e-navigation. Some of these examples can be found at www.e-navigation.net. However, it must be emphasised that in the current development of the IMO-led concept of e-navigation, no official status has been given to the results of these test beds by the IMO.
Guidelines for the harmonisation of test beds are currently in the process of being developed by IMO.
IMO, IALA, IHO and other websites have information documents. Additionally, Norway, which chairs the IMO Correspondence Group on e-navigation, has a website (www.e-nav.no).
聯(lián)系客服
