Costa Concordia and ECDIS

COSTA CONCORDIA wreck off Isola del Giglio, Photo credit Uaohk, GNU Free Documentation License

Obviously it's too early to know what happened aboard the Costa Concordia but I wonder; were the rocks the ship struck displayed properly on the bridge navigation display?

If this article from Lloyd's List Exclusive: Costa Concordia in previous close call is accurate  the Costa Concordia passed closer to shore on an earlier voyage.  From the article:

"intelligence tracking data shows that Costa Concordia sailed within 230 m of the coast of Giglio Island on a previous voyage, slightly closer to the shore than where it subsequently hit rocks on Friday."

The intent was to pass about 500 meters off the rocks (which is very little margin for error at 15 kts). Evidently the ship struck the rocks  because of the  increased sweep path due to the turn to starboard. Did the watch officers realize how close they were passing to the rocks?

There has been reports of ECDIS failing to show underwater hazards. From MarineLink -
ECDIS Users Warned Some Displays Fail to Deliver:

Most of the remaining third failed to display some significant underwater features in the "Standard" display mode. Under various conditions, mostly related to safety depth settings and other variable factors, these underwater features can include some types of wrecks and other obstructions.

Anyone who understands human nature knows many ship's officers will  rely entirely upon the ECDIS display regardless of how much nagging is done not to.

It remains to be seen if the ECDIS display was a factor in this incident. In any case perhaps a high profile investigation will  shed some light on how poorly this critical technology is being implemented aboard ship.

Clearly something  is wrong if the  navigation system  aboard a ship fails to properly display underwater rocks, a hazard as old as seafaring itself.

K.C.

____________________________________________
Some links:

Another article on the poor implementation of ECDIS: From Marine Cafe Blog;  How to fix ECDIS: an expert’s view

From Pear Link: Bulker Grounds Crew knowledge deficient.

With regards to the Costa Concordia Grounding:

Some good graphics showing the path of the ship, also some good insights about over confidence Perspectives James Hamilton's  blog:  Studying The Costa Concordia Grounding


Costa Concordia 3D Google Earth Animation


The Cost of Complacency – Costa Concordia

E Navigation - Shore Side Control on the Way?

VTS Conning the ship from shoreside? (photo from Wikipedia)

e Navigation is, according to the Marine Safety Committee of the IMO:

“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”.

At 59-56N - 10 technologies to change shipping - #3 ECDIS Ryan Skinner links ECDIS and e Navigation to integrated operations, -the link is to Wikipedia, the key phrase there is "Splitting the team between land and sea"

At present the process of getting a ship safely into or out of port is a shared responsibility between the bridge navigation team and the pilot while the VTS (Vessel Traffic Service) role is limited (at least in the U.S.) to advising the vessel regarding other maritime traffic. If the VTS had an electronic chart display which included the vessel's planned track line they could take a more active role in reviewing and then monitoring the vessel's progress.

Before entering or leaving port a vessel could be required to electronically create and then transmit a planned track-line. If the shipboard and shoreside displays were synchronized so that during the passage, if the trackline was modified by the pilot or crew, the modifications could be instantly be transmitted and seen by personnel shoreside in real time.

The key to bridge team management is that each team member share the same understanding of the passage plan. The shoreside VTS cannot esily monitor a plan they can not see. These capabilities would likely have prevented incidents such as the Casco Busan or the Exxon Valdez.

K.C.

ECDIS requirments and training

Photo from Mariners Weather Log .
With regards to ECDIS (Electronic Chart Display and Information System) my attitude is, any tool that aids the watch officer and leads to an increased situational awareness is good thing. Every new tool has its traps however:

From this post at MTVA Lack of ECDIS training leads to grounding

"time and again, we find that the adoption and implementation of exotic and complex new technologies often leads to the improper use of said equipment."

When radar was first installed aboard merchant ships it lead to what was called "radar assisted collisions." The collision between the Andrea Doria and the Stockholm in 1956 is often cited as an example. As a result of that incident deck officers are required to receive training in radar plotting in spite of the fact that this training has been made largely obsolete by ARPA.

ECDIS will be mandatory for some vessels starting in 2012 - two articles here at The Art of Dredging IMO backs mandatory ECDIS and an earlier ECDIS may prevent groundings.

Will the requirement to renew the radar endorsement every 5 years still be in place after 2012 when the first required ECDIS first start showing up on new builds?

K.C.

Electronic charts may prevent groundings

How could you not love a site called "The Art of Dredging"?

From that site, this is worth a read: Electronic charts may prevent one in three groundings.

"If Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS) are made mandatory on board ships, the number of groundings is likely to be reduced by a third according to a study carried out by Det Norske Veritas, a Scandinavian classification society."

I found site The Art of Dredging from the "recent remarks" at Bob Couttie's Marine Accident Casebook.