Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s Perspective

Abstract

The transitional period of implementation of the Electronic Chart Display and Information System (ECDIS) expired on July 1st, 2018. As for this date onward, vessels of 3000 GT or more subject to the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention and engaged in international voyages, must be fitted with an official ECDIS system. The Convention furthermore requires mandatory possession of navigational equipment as an adequate back-up. In case that independent system is used for this purpose, there is no further obligation for a vessel to possess traditional paper navigational charts and it can be considered as paperless. Beside paper charts, this term also implies digital nautical publications and probably an electronic ship’s log in the foreseeable future. The interpretation of ECDIS differs considering particular rank of an Officer of the Watch (OOW) and its engagement towards the system. The system should be accepted by OOWs as true end-users. The proposed paper elaborates opinions and standpoints of decisive end-users towards the system, its role as a primary navigational means, and the fact that traditional navigation conduct is replaced by digital means. For this purpose a survey between OOWs was conducted focusing on their answers to respective questions. The sample size allowed for the observation of opinions over several years and the definition of the ECDIS acceptance level. Results are presented and discussed together with proposals of new activities which have to be carried out to improve the safety of navigation by the ECDIS system and its further development.

Full text

183
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
ISSN 0554-6397
UDK: 004.89:528.94
656.61.052
Original scientic paper
Received: 10.11.2018.
David Brčić
E-mail: brcic@pfri.hr
Srđan Žuškin
E-mail: szuskin@pfri.hr
University of Rijeka, Faculty of Maritime Studies, Studentska 2, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s Perspective
Abstract
The transitional period of implementation of the Electronic Chart Display and Information System
(ECDIS) expired on July 1st, 2018. As for this date onward, vessels of 3000 GT or more subject to the
Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention and engaged in international voyages, must be tted with
an ocial ECDIS system. The Convention furthermore requires mandatory possession of navigational
equipment as an adequate back-up. In case that independent system is used for this purpose, there is no
further obligation for a vessel to possess traditional paper navigational charts and it can be considered
as paperless. Beside paper charts, this term also implies digital nautical publications and probably an
electronic ship’s log in the foreseeable future. The interpretation of ECDIS diers considering particular
rank of an Ocer of the Watch (OOW) and its engagement towards the system. The system should
be accepted by OOWs as true end-users. The proposed paper elaborates opinions and standpoints
of decisive end-users towards the system, its role as a primary navigational means, and the fact that
traditional navigation conduct is replaced by digital means. For this purpose a survey between OOWs
was conducted focusing on their answers to respective questions. The sample size allowed for the
observation of opinions over several years and the denition of the ECDIS acceptance level. Results
are presented and discussed together with proposals of new activities which have to be carried out to
improve the safety of navigation by the ECDIS system and its further development.
Key words: maritime navigation, electronic chart display and information system, ocers of the
navigational watch, maritime education and training, ECDIS EHO
1. Introduction
After the ocial acceptance of the ECDIS system as meeting the chart carriage
requirements of the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention, the transitional period
of the system implementation commenced on July 1st, 2012 for the following 6 years
[28]. As safety improvement in conducting maritime navigation, the system represents
a substantial step towards digital navigation and its perception. The current year marks

184 Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
the completion of this period, where possession of at least one ocial system on vessels
engaged in international voyages is required.
During the mentioned period (and earlier), the system evolved from its rst
concept, integrating more elements with display and operational enhancements as well.
So far, it represents a primary navigation means. In certain cases where an adequate
back-up of the system is provided, the vessel can sail without its updated paper
navigational charts (Appropriate Portfolio of Paper Charts – APC). In these terms, the
vessel can be considered as paperless, referring not only to APC, but also on digital
nautical publications, vessel’s logs and software incorporated both in the ECDIS system
or acting as standalone units.
The timeline of ECDIS implementation wasn’t straightforward all of the time.
Several issues were recognized during this process, which resulted in new standards,
regulations and guidelines to ease the implementation process, simplication of ECDIS
usage and handling and adaptation of Ocers of the Watch (OOWs). At the present
moment, certain problems still remain as potential threats for successful conducting and
completion of the sailing venture. Beside technical issues, it especially refers to proper
handling with the system, implying background knowledge and proper interpretation.
The means of navigation and required knowledge still persist; however, the navigational
tool is changing, which requires additional level of knowledge and understanding. It
is a specic period where reduction in the usage of traditional navigational means and
growing presence of digital ones can be noticed. Before any concrete education takes
place, the OOW should get familiar with the sole idea / concept of the system. This
is often misused.
Various OOW ranks perceive the system and new navigation dierently, depending
on their engagement, their experience as well as their role in the bridge team and their
respective tasks. In this accordance, there should be a clear interpretation by true end-
users regarding the system, eventual paper chart reduction or even withdrawal and
transferring to digital navigational means. This was the motivation for the proposed
research considering the interaction and perception of OOWs towards the system,
the completion of mandatory implementation period and handling. The aim of the
research was the denition of the level of ECDIS acceptance after the completion
of the implementation period as seen by Masters, regarding their participation and
involvement. The objectives can be stated as identication of opinions on suciency
of the system replacement for traditional paper charts and comparison of these two
means of navigation. The research is based on the survey conducted in the period 2014-
2018, covering the major portion of the ECDIS implementation period. The survey
in general was originally distributed among all OOW ranks at the international level,
including apprentice ocers but also ECDIS stakeholders other than active seafarers.
Results were summarized and discussed and main ndings are herein presented. The
study resulted in the emergence of new desirable activities and proposals representing
the continuation of the research.

185
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
2. Background
The ECDIS system has emerged as a hydrographic data exchange tool between
national hydrographic offices in terms of chart production and updating [1, 10].
Recognizing the potential of the new marine navigation system, the International
Maritime Organization (IMO) took over the coordination and guidance on the system
development. The idea was to integrate navigational data to the mariner, such as the true
position, environmental conditions, radar image and chart information [10]. Together
with the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), IMO initiated standards for
the industry, both the system-centered and chart-centered ones [1, 30, 9]. The rst
Performance Standards (PS) for ECDIS equipment were provided in 1995 [20]. With
the passing of time, the development of the system and the gained experience, including
the newly emerged issues, the PS was getting complemented by various amendments
making reference not only to performance standards but also to back-up arrangements,
good practice, new technologies and issues which emerged from the system’s usage
[21, 22]. In 2006, the revised edition of Performance Standards was adopted and has
remained in force still today [23].
ECDIS is a navigation information system having the purpose to assist mariners
in conducting the navigation, a process which implies a variety of tasks [23, 29]. It
should provide navigational and any additional navigation-related information required
for safe navigation. The main ECDIS tasks may be categorized as route planning and
route monitoring, being the main components of the sailing venture carried out by the
seafarer. One of the advantages of the system as compared to the paper chart navigation
is its ability to trigger alarms, alerts and indications for a variety of navigational
parameters, thus enabling a proper and timely reaction. The main features of the system
are the integration of navigational equipment and fusion of navigational data. The
architecture of a typical ECDIS system is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – ECDIS architecture. Based on the ©Transas NaviSailor 4000 example

186 Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
If all requirements are satisfied, the system can be accepted as an adequate
replacement for paper navigational charts [28, 20, 23, 17]. Requirements refer to IMO
standards regarding the system’s performance, IHO standards regarding technical
specications regarding electronic data (Electronic Navigational Charts – ENC), and
standards related to equipment operational requirement and testing, regulated by the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). The system is accepted as meeting
the carriage requirements [10], however the Convention requires an adequate back-up
arrangement. According to [17], the following means are allowed for this purpose:
i. Paper charts,
ii. A second, independent compliant system with a separate power supply and
separate positioning sensor, and
iii. A chart radar unit with a separate power supply.
There are several statuses to be found on board vessels, varying from APC as a
back-up arrangement, to three or more ECDIS independent units tted on navigational
bridges. In case of ii) and iii), the vessel can be considered as paperless, without
the obligation to carry paper charts, although certain ag state administrations and
particular shipping companies do dictate an Emergency Set of Paper Charts (ESP).
According to the United Kingdom Hydrographic Oce [35], 51% of all vessels subject
to respective carriage requirements were ECDIS ready in 2015, which was in the middle
of the implementation period. Although the Organizations dictate rigorous (system-
centered, chart-centered and educational) requirements for the system or electronic
back-up arrangement, there is a growing trend in vessels without paper charts to rely
on electronic means only. The ECDIS system represents a basis towards digital ships
and the emergence of cloud-based technologies and e-Navigation [33].
During the period of system implementation, ocial reports and survey ndings
referring to ECDIS problems and handling issues [13, 25, 24, 27] resulted in edition
and implementation of revised standards, which had to be satised for the system to
be considered as approved [37]. From the technical aspect, the improved functionality
reects on the standardization of displays as well as of primary ECDIS functions,
including standardized route le formats, symbols and abbreviations, standardized
default control settings, system compliance with new polar requirements, improved
alarm management and system integration with other equipment (e.g. BNWAS, BAM
and VDR), etc. [11, 12]. Several IHO standards refer to revised technical specications
of ENCs’ display (presentation library), to the ENC data protection scheme and new
test data sets for the system [14, 15, 16, 18, 19]. IHO standards entered into force on
August 31st, 2017 and IEC standards aect all vessels from August 19th, 2015.
The ECDIS Education and Training (EET) are straightforward to some extent.
The Generic training is a basic, mandatory training, referring to navigation with the
system in general [26]. The familiarization or a type specic training is required for
the particular system that the OOW is to handle, be it the on-board handling or training
prior to embarkation. The latter is being often conducted in the form of Computer Based

187
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
Training (CBT). Entry standards for trainees attending the generic ECDIS course –
meaning also proper handling of the system in conducting navigation – are as follows:
formal, basic knowledge in terrestrial navigation, familiarization and experience with
visual navigation, accomplishment of supervised bridge watch keeping duties and
possession of basic radar equipment certicate [26]. The last stated entry standard
refers to considerable familiarization with computing operating systems, i.e. a certain
level of informatics literacy. Beside the technical aspect, among all recognized issues
in ECDIS handling, a signicant share refers to problems regarding training and
interpretation of the system in general. A number of ECDIS-related accidents support
this fact, together with vessels’ detentions and nes due to improper handling and lack
of required level of knowledge [5].
3. Previous research
Notwithstanding the fact that the system contributes to safe navigation, there
are several operational, functional and educational issues still persisting, which were
recognized during the implementation period [36]. Among all stakeholders, OOWs are
central ECDIS end-users. Considering system problems, issues are often intertwined
(Figure 2), potentially leading to near misses and marine accidents [3, 39, 31, 6, 7, 8,
34]. Growing emergence of additional system features are drawing attention away from
basic functions and the system’s initial purpose.
There have been several studies conducted on the ECDIS Education and Training
(EET). Considering the age of seafarers in relation to the acceptance of the system, it is
a common opinion that elder OOWs accept the system as a new, computing technology
harder than their younger colleagues. In 2017, considerable share of respondents
stated that 40 hours of ECDIS generic training is insucient [4]. It has been proven
and discussed in [32] that seafarers with little or no experience with the system
familiarization gain more learning potential than the experienced users. The authors
discuss the commonly accepted assumption that younger OOWs handle the system
better due to their information literacy [32], indicating that the age and the experience
of a particular user are not necessarily crucial factors for proper understanding and
system handling. Subtly, the system can be considered as the situation awareness
rising means, but also as a cause of over-reliance. Figure 2 shows the categorization
of problems with ECDIS handling [3].

188 Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
Figure 2 – Recognized problems in ECDIS handling as seen by OOWs [3]
Apart from training issues, certain misinterpretation between OOWs was found
regarding basic safety settings and primal system features [2, 38], recalling insucient
level of knowledge. Possible future reduction of paper charts and transferring to digital
navigation means were the motivation for the conducted study. Opinions from Masters
are considered as relevant in the navigation venture conduct. The respective survey
and the methodology are presented in the following section.
4. The survey and the methodology
The ECDIS EHO (Experience, Handling and Opinion) research commenced at the
beginning of the implementation period. It aims at the educational process improvement
and development of eective educational framework directed towards current, as well
as future ocers of the navigational watch. Among various educational, practical and
research activities it focuses on the development of a proper feedback from OOWs as
true end-users of the system. One of research tools is the international questionnaire,
consisting of basic and operational questions regarding system handling. The results
presented in this paper refer to opinions on the paper chart replacement and usage
of the ECDIS system as the primary (and possibly the only) navigational means.
The proposed research is focused on Masters and their standpoints as decisive and
responsible OOWs. One of the objectives focused on their opinion about the system
and its mandatory implementation although they were not necessarily directly involved
in system handling. It refers especially to opinions of Masters who have never had the
opportunity to work with the system. As for the general classication, the aim was to
nd proper guidelines and suggestions which should ease the communication between
ranks forming a bridge team.

189
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
The following introductory questions were used to categorize the profile of
respondents:
•Rank,
•Working experience,
• ECDIS experience,
• Type of ECDIS education.
The survey contains answers from 353 respondents: 99 Masters (M), 77 Chief
Ocers (1/O), 67 2nd Ocers (2/O), 13 3rd Ocers (3/O), 2 Superintendents (SI),
2 Supervisors (SV), 3 Safety Ocers, 1 Marine Safety Consultant (MSC), 8 Sta
Captains (SC), 3 Environmental Ocers (EO), 4 Dynamic Positioning Ocers (DPO),
17 Port State Control Ocers (PSCO), 1 Pilot (P) and 31 Undened respondents (U).
Among all respondents who fullled the questionnaire, 312 (88%) are active seafarers
ranging from apprentice ocers to Masters (Figure 3). Although unknown, undened
respondents form part of the bridge navigational watch team.
Figure 3 – All (left) and OOW (right) ECDIS EHO respondents
Answers of 99 respondents were further elaborated, presenting the target group
of the study. After the analyses of answers and their share, as well as the denition of
groups according to various criteria, the following questions and respective answers
were used:
•Do you agree with the fact of withdrawal of the paper charts from the service,
if certain conditions are met regarding ECDIS system, i.e. there is no further
obligation to possess the same? (Q1)
•Do you think that there are still advantages of paper charts and traditional
navigation means over ECDIS/ENC? (Q2)
This allowed that beside their answers, respondents’ comments can also be
considered. The comments refer to all of the 99 Master respondents, notwithstanding
their experience with the system and seagoing experience. Figure 4 presents the
distribution of Masters’ category of respondents by their seagoing experience.

190 Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
Figure 4 – Distribution of seagoing experience (in years) of Master (M) category of
respondents
Years of service range from 9 to 41, with the mean value of 23.2, standard
deviation of 9.1 and the median value amounting to 21. Respondents were generally
classied according to years of their experience in the following categories: A (0 - 10);
B (11 - 15); C (16-20); D (21-25); E (26-30); F (31-35); G (36-41) and H (undened).
The respondents were further categorized according to their experience with
the system, as shown in Figure 5. The categories were dened as a – Never had the
opportunity to operate with the ECDIS system; b – Less than 6 months; c – Between 6
months and one year; d – Between one and two years; e – Between two and three years;
f – Between three and four years; g – Between four and ve years; h – more than ve
years and i – other (more than 10 years of ECDIS experience).
Figure 5 – Share of Masters by their ECDIS experience
After the described categorizations of Masters, the obtained answers and comments
were analyzed and discussed as shown in sections that follow.
Cat No.
a 13
b 10
c 6
d 5
e 7
f 5
g 13
h 33
i 7

191
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
5. Results
The general share of answers on Q1 is shown in Figure 6. Most of respondents do
not agree with the paper chart withdrawal, although the share is close to one half. The
NA answer (blank column or ambiguous answer) was present in few cases, making a
3% share of total responses.
Figure 6 – General share of answers regarding agreement with paper chart
withdrawal (Q1)
The answers were further elaborated regarding the seagoing experience (Figure
7) and the experience with the system (Figure 8). The share of answers is presented in
percentages of the relative sample: the number of respondents for each dened category
equals to 100%, with the share of three possible answers (Yes/No/NA) distributed
within the bars.
Figure 7 – Master’s share of answers on agreement with paper chart withdrawal
(Q1: seagoing experience categories
Considering Yes/No answers it can be seen that, as the seagoing experience
increases (Figure 6), the agreement with paper charts withdrawal roughly decreases,
Cat Yes No NA
A 5 3 0
B 4 10 0
C 13 13 0
D 6 6 0
E 7 7 2
F 4 8 0
G 1 7 1
H 2 0 0

192 Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
with the strongest disagreement present in the category of Masters with the longest sea
experience (categories F and G). This was somehow expected, given that these seafarers
have used paper charts and traditional navigation means for the major portion of their
years of service. However, except for categories A (0-10 years) and H (undened
experience), the share of answers goes in favor of paper charts’ retention.
Figure 8 – Master’s share of answers on agreement with paper chart withdrawal
(Q1): ECDIS experience categories
As for the ECDIS experience (Figure 8), the share of answers by the category does
not follow a regular trend. Disagreement with paper chart withdrawal prevails in each
case except for d (1-2 years) and f (3-4 years) category, being also present in categories
of most experienced Masters (categories h and i). Again, the expected share regarding
paper chart retention is obvious within the group of Masters who have never had the
opportunity to work with the system (category a). Among all inexperienced users (41
respondents), 13 of them were Masters (Figure 9).
Figure 9 – Venn diagram showing Masters (left circle), ECDIS inexperienced users
(right circle) and share of inexperienced users in Masters’ category of respondents
Cat Yes No NA
a 4 9 0
b 4 5 1
c 1 4 1
d 3 2 0
e 3 4 0
f 3 2 0
g 6 6 1
h 15 17 1
i 3 4 0

193
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
The share of Q1 answers of inexperienced Masters is shown in Figure 10 with
the categorization of respondents according to their years of seagoing experience.
Considering opinions of inexperienced Masters, it can be seen that their disagreement
with paper chart withdrawal is mainly prevailing, notwithstanding the small sample
of this specic category.
Figure 10 – Inexperienced Masters: share in answers on agreement with paper chart
withdrawal (Q1)
It is quite unlikely that there are ECDIS inexperienced OOWs still today. However,
the share of answers in this category was somehow expected, given that they have
never had the opportunity to work with the system. However, the share of answer is
similar compared to the overall Masters’ share (Figure 6) with various levels of ECDIS
experience: 55 of respondents (56%) do not agree with the paper chart withdrawal, 41
(41%) agree, while 3 Masters did not answer the respective question.
Figure 11 shows the general share of answers to Q2. Advantages of the traditional
navigation means over the electronic charts and navigation with the ECDIS system are
recognized by 62% of the total number of respondents. The NA answer is here more
pronounced than in the previous share.
Figure 11 – Share of answers to the question regarding advantages of paper charts
and traditional navigation means over ECDIS system and electronic charts (Q2)
Cat Yes No
A 0 2
B 0 0
C 1 0
D 1 1
E 1 3
F 0 2
G 0 1
H 1 0

194 Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
The survey was conducted during 5 years. During this major portion of the
transitional period, several changes occurred regarding the system, standards and
the ease in system handling and perception (as described in the background chapter).
In 2018, up to the completion date, nine Masters among all respondents lled in the
questionnaire. Only one respondent stated that there were no advantages of paper
charts and traditional navigation means compared to the ECDIS/ENC navigation. All
9 Masters had experience with the system, mainly over ve years (category h). On
their vessels, there was at least one ocial system installed and in all cases ECDIS
was approved as the primary navigational means. Furthermore, all except one were in
possession of the ECDIS Generic Certicate and at least one familiarization. Be it by
chance or not, that respondent was the one whose answer to the respective question
was negative.
6. Discussion
In general, the system is accepted as a primary navigational means, future
navigation tool and technical improvement. Although a certain share of respondents
agrees with the paper chart withdrawal, they mostly maintain that a minimum set
of paper charts should be kept as a back-up, either as an emergency means (power
dependent) or for preferred usage in certain situations, like port approaching and coastal
navigation. They favor coastal and small scale paper charts. According to worst case
scenarios, paper charts (even outdated) are considered better than the (faulty) ECDIS
system. Some of respondents state that despite their paperless status on-board they feel
safer with a take-me-home set of paper charts. Figure 12 shows the trend of opinions
regarding paper chart withdrawal over the years.
Figure 12 – Trend of opinions regarding paper chart withdrawal agreement (Q1) in
the period 2014-2018

195
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
The main reason why paper charts should be kept is the vulnerability of the system,
considered as prone to failure and black-out consequences. Unreliability of the system
is recognized as a relevant factor but also due to issues regarding electronic charts,
ranging from their lack of clarity/readability, cartographic errors, insucient coverage
(including inappropriate ENC scales) and low-grade ENC and updating services. The
last two factors are not end-user dependent; they are rather a matter of higher-instance
problem solving. The same goes for ag state administrations and regulations which
dier between countries, starting from education means onwards. Changes in higher
instances are also reected on end-users’ opinions, together with their interpretation
and handling.
Readability/legibility acts as the main feature of paper charts advantages over
the ECDIS system. This is a concrete end-user issue, resulting from a particular
respondent level of familiarization. The majority of respondents still nd paper charts
and traditional navigation more reliable. In their opinion, the new equipment does not
satisfy safety standards for reliable navigation conduct. Several respondents propose
certain improvements/additional services, such as chart-on-demand and possibility of
printing on board. The same goes for updates, where they propose availability of chart
updates by means of satellite communication.
There is no straightforward regularity in answers, i.e. Masters’ answers regarding
paper chart withdrawal (Q1) and traditional navigation advantages over the ECDIS
system (Q2). Regardless of their (system and seagoing) experience and their generic and
type specic education, both possible answers are present in each dened category. For
example, the agreement with paper charts withdrawal does not grow with the ECDIS
experience (Figure 8). Moreover, advantages of ECDIS over traditional navigation were
not recognized over the years of the transitional period (Figure 13). On the contrary,
in 2018, 89% of respondents have claimed paper chart advantages as compared with
the system. It could be a matter of familiarization, but also a recognition of drawbacks.
Figure 13 – Trend of opinions regarding advantages over ECDIS system (Q2) in the
period 2014-2018

196 Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
The problem is how one is used to, and how much time he needs for a certain
information to gain. Whether paper or electronic, charts (with accompanying means)
represent a navigational aid only. Several key points can be extracted as summarized
ndings:
•The ECDIS system is accepted as a new primary navigational means, however
there are certain issues remaining, diering in their nature; there are several
problems which Masters and other ocers are pointing to, and they are completely
justied;
•The level of technical fulllment of all ECDIS components still remains
incomplete;
•The level of qualication/education is not yet satisfactory;
•For the time being, the ocial ECDIS and APC on board are the preferred solution
among the elaborated group of survey respondents;
•Although already recognized, there appears the problem of over-reliance as seen
from the decisive end-user’s point of view.
This must be confusing for seafarers to a certain extent. There is the emergence
of new technologies with e-Navigation representing one of them, perhaps the most
ambitious one. On the other hand, there has been no satisfactory level of understanding
and perception of the accepted system – the ECDIS – as yet. Several respondents
consider themselves older, justifying in this way their support to traditional navigation.
This fact represents a potential problem because considering their responsibilities on
board they have to be familiar and versed with the system, regardless of their opinion.
The question which arises is how much they really get in contact with the system. There
should be no place for intentional ignorance. The diering role of a navigational rank
requires a certain level of interpretation, skills and knowledge. Therefore, the emphasis
should be put on the particular OOW involvement and a proper approach.
7. Conclusions and future tendencies
Since 2018 onwards, an ECDIS system is mandatory on board all respective vessels
subject to the SOLAS Convention. Moreover, in case certain requirements are satised,
the obligation to possess APC ceases. In this case, OOWs are relying on electronic
means only, unless the ESP is required. The ECDIS system is recognized as a means
of navigation safety improvement. The vision of navigation with ECDIS keeps up with
new technologies, such as integrated navigation systems, cloud-based technologies and
e-Navigation. The survey-based study presented in this paper focused on opinions of
end-users regarding the system and its role as a replacement for traditional navigational
means. Among all respondents, the category of Masters as decisive and responsible
end-users was elaborated. Answers and opinions were analyzed as collected over
the years of the transitional period. The research results opened several questions
regarding involvement of particular rank on board vessels with the system. There is

197
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
no straightforward proof of ECDIS acceptance either with the increase of experience
with the system or regarding several levels of education. Advantages of traditional
navigational means over the ECDIS system are highly represented, as derived from
respondents’ comments and discussions. As the most responsible subjects on board,
Masters simply have to be versed in the system, notwithstanding their involvement in
the navigation conduct, as well as their certain attitudes. This is often not the case, and it
represents a potential safety threat. At the very current stage, it has become intolerable.
Improvements of educational processes are essential in order to gain a clean,
undisturbed interaction among ECDIS stakeholders, especially among OOWs.
Improvements are reected in further activities that will take place in the time to
come. One of the proposals is certainly the development of new courses customized to
a particular rank, according to their role in the system handling. It especially refers to
Masters, where the system should be interpreted on a management level. It is obvious
that future ocers, eventually Masters will have a direct contact with the system,
since for the time being it represents mandatory navigational equipment. However, a
signicant and responsible task is EET, which should also develop in pace with the
system evolvement.
Acknowledgements
This study has been nancially supported by the University of Rijeka under the
Faculty of Maritime Studies projects. Authors are grateful to all the ocers of the
navigational watch for their time and willingness for the fulllment of the survey,
discussions and their opinions. Authors believe that their answers have an immense
signicance for the appropriateness of the research deliverables.
References
1. Becker-Heins, R. (2014) ECDIS Basics. Lemmer: Geomares BV.
2. Brčić, D., Kos, S. & Žuškin, S. (2015) Navigation with ECDIS: Choosing the proper secondary
positioning source. TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea
Transportation. 9(3), 317-326.
3. Brčić, D., Kos, S. & Žuškin, S. (2015) Partial structural analysis of the ECDIS EHO research:
The handling part. In: Rijavec, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the 24th International Symposium on
Electronics in Transport (ISEP24). Ljubljana: Electrotechnical Association of Slovenia & ITS
Slovenia, 2016, pp. 80-87.
4. Brčić, D., Žuškin, S. & Barić M. (2017) Observations on ECDIS Education and Training. In:
Weintrit, A. (ed.) Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Marine Navigation and Safety
of Sea Transportation (TransNav 17). Gdynia, Poland, 21-23.06.2017. London: CRC Press, 2017.
pp. 29-36.
5. Brčić, D., Žuškin, S., Valčić, S. & Frančić, V. (2018) Implementation of the ECDIS system: An
OOW perspective as an integral part of educational improvement. In: Grifoll, M. et al. (eds.)
Proceedings of 19th IAMU AGA Conference (IAMU 19). Barcelona, Spain, 17-19.10.2018.
Barcelona: Universitat Politecnica de Catalunia/International Center for Numerical Methods in
Engineering. pp. 121-128.

198 Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
6. Danish Maritime Accident Investigation Board (DMAIB) (2015). Available from: http://www.
dmaib.com/Sider/Home.aspx [Accessed October 3rd, 2018]
7. Federal Bureau of Maritime Casualty Investigation (BSU) (2018). Available from: http://www.
bsu-bund.de/EN [Accessed October 3rd, 2018]
8. French Marine Accident Investigation Oce (BEAmer) (2018). Available from: http://www.
beamer-france.org/index-en.html [Accessed October 3rd, 2018]
9. Grant, S.T. & Goodyear, J. (2004) ECDIS: Past, Present and Future. Intergovernmental
Oceanographic Commission. Available from: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/
ioc-oceans/ [Accessed September 21st, 2018]
10. Hamilton, A. C. & Nickerson, B. G. (1982) The Electronic Chart. Fredericton: University of New
Brunswick. Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering.
11. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) (2014). IEC 62288: Presentation of navigation-
related information on shipborne navigational displays - General requirements, methods of testing
and required test results, Edition 2.0. Geneve: IEC.
12. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) (2015). IEC 61174: Electronic chart display and
information system (ECDIS) - Operational and performance requirements, methods of testing and
required test results, Edition 4.0. Geneve: IEC.
13. International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) (2014). IHO Report on the results of the ECDIS
survey conducted by BIMCO and Denmark. Monaco: IHO.
14. International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) (2014). S-52: Presentation Library, Annex A,
Edition 4.0. Monaco: IHO.
15. International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) (2014). S-52: Specications for Chart Content
and Display Aspects of ECDIS, Edition 6.1. Monaco: IHO.
16. International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) (2015). S-63: Data Protection Scheme, Edition
1.2. Monaco: IHO.
17. International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) (2017). Information on IHO Standards related
to ENC and ECDIS. Version 1.1. Monaco: IHO.
18. International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) (2017). S-64: Test Data Sets for ECDIS, Edition
3.0. Monaco: IHO.
19. International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) (2018). Current IHO ECDIS and ENC Standards.
Available from: http://bit.ly/2pjmCyW [Accessed May 1st, 2018]
20. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (1995). A.817(19): Performance standards for
Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS). London: IMO.
21. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (1996). MSC.64(67): Adoption of new and amended
performance standards. London: IMO.
22. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (1998). MSC.86(70): New and amended performance
standards for navigational equipment. London: IMO.
23. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2006). MSC.232(82): Adoption of the revised
performance standards for Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS). London:
IMO.
24. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2009). NCSR 2/22/2: Report on monitoring of ECDIS
issues by IHO. London: IMO, 2009.
25. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2010). MSC.1/Circ. 1391: Operating anomalies
identied within ECDIS. London: IMO.
26. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2012). Model Course 1.27: Operational use of
Electronic Chart Display and Information System. London: IMO.
27. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2013). NAV 59/12/1: Report on monitoring of ECDIS
issues by IHO. London: IMO.
28. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2014). International Convention for the Safety of
Life at Sea, 1974 as amended. London: IMO.
29. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2017). MSC.1/Circ.1503 Rev.1: ECDIS – Guidance
for good practice. London: IMO.
30. Kerr, A. (1990) Status report on activities of IMO and IHO concerning the electronic chart.
International Hydrographic Review. 7-16.
31. Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) (2018). Available from: https://www.gov.uk/
government/organisations/marine-accident-investigation-branch [Accessed October 1st, 2018]

199
Pomorski zbornik 55 (2018), 183-199
Towards Paperless Vessels: A Master’s PerspectiveDavid Brčić, Srđan Žuškin
32. Overgard, K. I. & Smit, P. N. (2014) Eect of sea experience and computer condence in ECDIS
training. In: Martinez de Oses, F. X. & Castells Sanabra, M. (eds.) Proceedings of 6th International
Conference on Maritime Transport (MT14). Barcelona, Spain, 25-27.2014. Barcelona: UPC. pp.
297-310.
33. Powell, J. (2011) the New Electronic Chart Product Specication S-101: An Overview. In:
Weintrit, A. (ed.) International recent issues about ECDIS, E-navigation and safety at sea. Boca
Raton: Taylor & Francis Group Ltd. pp. 69-73.
34. The Nautical Institute (NI) (2015). Navigation Accidents and their Causes. London: The Nautical
Institute.
35. United Kingdom Hydrographic Oce (UKHO) (2016). Majority of global SOLAS eet now ECDIS
ready. Press release. London: UKHO.
36. Weintrit, A. (2011) International recent issues about ECDIS, E-navigation and safety at sea:
Introduction. In: Weintrit, A. (ed.) International recent issues about ECDIS, E-navigation and
safety at sea. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis Group Ltd. pp. 9-12.
37. Weintrit, A. (2015) ECDIS issues related to the implementation of the carriage requirements in
SOLAS Convention. Archives of Transport System Telematics. 8(1), 35-40.
38. Žuškin, S., Brčić, D. & Kos, S. (2016) Partial structural analysis of the ECDIS EHO research:
The safety contour. In: Martinez de Oses, F. X. & Castells Sanabra, M. (eds.) Proceedings of
7th International Conference on Maritime Transport (MT16). Barcelona, Spain, 27-29.06.2016.
Barcelona: UPC. pp. 246-262.
39. Žuškin, S., Brčić, D. & Šabalja, Đ. (2013) A contribution to improving the standards of ECDIS
training. Pomorstvo - Scientic Journal of Maritime Research. 27(1), 131-148.