# Unmanned Ships. Concerns



## alaric (Feb 27, 2012)

*As these notes extracted from the IMarEST e news show, there are many legal, insurance and cyber attack problems to be addressed before unmanned ships become a reality. Overcoming the Engineering and Technical issues is the easy part?*

_Concern over cyber liability and lack of regulation hindering implementation of unmanned ships 
•Concern over increased cyber security threat
•Uncertainty surrounding insurance cover availability
•Doubts raised over industry readiness for new technology
Almost two thirds (64%) of global marine industry executives believe there is uncertainty surrounding liability issues relating to unmanned ships should a vessel be involved in an incident as a result of a cyber-attack, according to a new report from global law firm Clyde & Co and the Institute of Marine Engineering, Science & Technology (IMarEST).
A survey of 220 marine industry executives from across the world also found that there is a lack of clarity around collisions involving unmanned ships, with 59% of survey respondents agreeing there is confusion surrounding the regulations in this area.
"Technology is today advancing at an unprecedented rate and promises a host of new solutions for the maritime industry in terms of improved efficiency, safety and environmental performance. However, we should not be blinded by the benefits. We must also remain alert to the potential risks. This joint research report examines these vulnerabilities and how they might be addressed and is an important starting point for the industry to begin preparing for the future." David Loosley, Chief Executive, IMarEST.
Clyde & Co explains that current international shipping law states that vessels must be properly crewed, which means that unmanned ships are not presently permitted to enter international waters.
However, the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), a UN agency that regulates shipping, announced in June of this year that it would begin to consider updating the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) to allow cargo ships with no captain or crew to travel between countries.
The Comité Maritime International (CMI) has also this year established a Working Group on 'Maritime law for unmanned craft' to consider how international conventions and regulations can be adapted to provide for the operation of unmanned vessels on the high seas.
Joe Walsh, Partner at Clyde & Co, comments: "The present state of SOLAS and collision avoidance regulations are being over taken by and holding back potentially industry-changing technology from being developed and implemented.
"Fortunately, the IMO, CMI and other industry interests appear to have recognised that there is a real appetite to test the water with unmanned ships at a commercial level. Industry will quickly need some legal clarity around cyber liability and collision regulations before any ground-breaking progress can be made."
The Cyber threat
Over two thirds (68%) of survey respondents fear that unmanned ships present a greater cyber-security risk than traditional ships.
Clyde & Co and the IMarEST acknowledge that unmanned ships are likely to have a greater array of digital infrastructure than traditional ones, in order to ensure that ship owners and operators are able to control and track their ships remotely.
Walsh comments: "Marine executives are right to be concerned about the potentially increased threat of cyber attack as a result of the use of unmanned ships. However, it is probably worth mentioning that the maritime industry as a whole has been criticised for being a bit slow in reacting to existing cyber threats, including fully crewed vessels and that the biggest threat to any organisation's cyber-security posture is still, in fact, human error.
"It is therefore possible that a transition to unmanned ships might actually reduce an organisation's profile and exposure to cyber risks. The cyber threat should certainly be taken seriously but it should not put the brakes on further exploration of the viability of unmanned ships."
Uncertainty surrounding insurance 
The report finds that another key issue is the availability of insurance cover for unmanned ships. Four of every five (80%) survey respondents think it is unclear how insurers will approach the new technology.
Patrick Murphy, Partner at Clyde& Co, says: "For a business to implement any new technology there is always a certain 'leap of faith' moment, especially when that technology could significantly change the way that organisation operates. Suitable insurance cover can help make this a much more calculated jump into the unknown."
Clyde & Co points out that the International Union of Marine Insurance (IUMI) has been discussing the implications of the new technology. While there are not yet any concrete answers, IUMI expects unmanned vessels to change the landscape of the traditional maritime insurance industry.
Murphy continues: "The current concern for the marine industry is that few insurers are yet in a position where they can advise on how they are approaching insurance cover for unmanned ships. This is perhaps unsurprising given the lack of legal framework on which to assess and base liability.
"Insurers are reacting to new cyber risks, so I would expect them to be able to underwrite risks relating to unmanned ships assuming the liability and regulatory framework can be sorted out.
"Currently autonomous cars and drones look to be near the top of insurers' agendas in terms of writing new technology risks. But the marine industry can push unmanned ships up the agenda by speaking with their insurers and asking how they are approaching the issue. As soon as the insurance industry realises there is genuine interest and can see the legalities starting to take hold then it will soon start to consider writing that risk."
Other key findings – industry unprepared for new technology
•Half (48%) of survey respondents predict unmanned ships will be implemented in the next 10-15 years
•Nearly two thirds (63%) believe that the industry is not at all prepared in terms of infrastructure requirements for unmanned ships
•Half (51%) think that crews do not currently have the skill sets needed to operate and maintain unmanned ships

Joe Walsh concludes: "It's clear there is plenty of work to be done but currently it is very much a chicken and egg situation. The marine industry desperately needs more clarity on the legal framework if they're going to invest in the infrastructure and skills needed to roll out unmanned shipping on a commercial level. Meanwhile, regulators are unlikely to invest much time in assessing technology that they don't think the industry is considering for widespread use. "
"Of course something will move eventually, so the organisations that are taking a proactive approach towards this new technology are likely to have a competitive advantage once the regulatory landscape becomes clearer."
_


----------



## DeepSeaDiver (Jun 5, 2016)

Autonomous Shipping Test Site Opens in Norway

https://www.marinelink.com/news/autonomous-shipping431894


----------



## Peter Eccleson (Jan 16, 2006)

Unmanned or autonomous ships will come. Technology will catch up with the maritime industry as quickly as within other transport sectors. Look at the way drone aircraft technology has advanced over the past few years.

In the highways industry we have been trailing unmanned vehicles on sections of the M40 motorway in the Midlands of England and are currently looking at a 'connected vehicle' pilot along a whole section of road between London and Dover to join another European scheme joining Calais with Rotterdam, Brussels and Paris.

One big issue at sea must be the question of cyber security, piracy or hijacking of unmanned vessels and of course the laws around legal salvage of 'abandoned' vessels.


----------



## tsell (Apr 29, 2008)

An interesting future for navy subs, too!

http://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...ing-teaming-up-to-build-autonomous-submarine/

Taff


----------



## spongebob (Dec 11, 2007)

In this day and age it seems that the past's impossible is fast becoming tomorrow's probable future .
If it flys, floats , or runs on wheels technology will find a way to make it go as safely or better than with man's constant involvement.
At may age I can only sit back and wait and hopefully enjoy.

Bob


----------



## eigyro (Jul 10, 2007)

"Half (51%) think that crews do not currently have the skill sets needed to operate and maintain unmanned ships"

Did I read that right????

Also, how do you get a repair crew out to a broken-down ship in mid-ocean?


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

More importantly, how does an unmanned ship provide assistance in a distress situation?


----------



## DeepSeaDiver (Jun 5, 2016)

James_C said:


> More importantly, how does an unmanned ship provide assistance in a distress situation?


As it stands / Floats - They have a lot of figuring out to do. (Pint)


----------



## tsell (Apr 29, 2008)

eigyro said:


> "Half (51%) think that crews do not currently have the skill sets needed to operate and maintain unmanned ships"
> 
> Did I read that right????
> 
> Also, how do you get a repair crew out to a broken-down ship in mid-ocean?


Intelligent robots, silly...! This is Sophie - the one on the right, who looks less like a robot than the interviewer:






See what I mean?

Taff


----------



## callpor (Jan 31, 2007)

Hands up all those who have sailed on ships (for a significant period of time) that have not suffered a mechanical breakdown?
Whatever Joe Walsh thinks, reliability is a much greater risk to autonomous ships than cyber security.
Just imagine what will happen on an unmanned autonomous vessel if it suffers a major main engine failure mid ocean? It can be thousands of miles from any assistance! 
Ocean going ships cannot be compared with cars or other autonomous vehicles as their area of operation is far from shore support in many cases. They cannot just call the AA or RAC for assistance.
I recognise that the technology is available for this to happen, but the regulatory, legal and insurance issues are going to take decades to overcome, if ever. Not sure there is an economic case anyway.
Whatever happens, it won't make any difference to me in my lifetime, so why get involved in something that is unlikely to have an impact on our profession before 2050 or later. 
Cheers, Chris.


----------



## 5036 (Jan 23, 2006)

The hardest piece of equipment to replace shall be the Mk 1 Eyeball.


----------



## alaric (Feb 27, 2012)

Re post #10 
Your concerns with reliability can be largely overcome by adopting twin, independent screws Chris.
I spent the majority of my time at sea on twin screw ships, and although having to shut down an engine at sea occasionally, I never actually stopped.
Twin engine aircraft make many trans ocean flights daily with a very high level of reliability and safety.


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

alaric said:


> Re post #10
> Your concerns with reliability can be largely overcome by adopting twin, independent screws Chris.
> I spent the majority of my time at sea on twin screw ships, and although having to shut down an engine at sea occasionally, I never actually stopped.
> Twin engine aircraft make many trans ocean flights daily with a very high level of reliability and safety.


Comparison with aircraft is a bit of a misnomer as the distance travelled isn't the important point but rather the frequency and intensity of maintenance.
It's been well over a decade since I sailed in a single screw ship - everything since has been twin, usually twin CPP and occasionally entirely separate E/R's - and breakdowns are still a fact of life, as are stoppages.
If anything it's worse today due to the high levels of automation and instrumentation with modern machinery - there doesn't need to be anything physically wrong with the engine to "stop the job", just a faulty sensor, microswitch, temperature probe or even some wiring that's rattled loose and then you go into an auto-shutdown sequence. That applies equally to main engines and generators.
Now such instances are usually a quick fix for the engineers and we're off again, but how do you accomplish that hundreds of miles from land? Especially in ships which by their nature will have even more automation, instrumentation and monitoring equipment - with of course complimentary safeguards to protect the machinery than do vessels at present?
That the technology exists to take an unmanned ship from A to B is beyond doubt, but is it simply robust enough to last the distance over the average life of a merchant ship? I really doubt it.
One of the big barriers to automation is that flag state are going to have to be much more heavily involved with both the regulatory and monitoring/compliance side of things than they have ever been before and in doing so take real responsibility for what's going on in their name. That in itself shall probably mean unmanned ships won't happen for some time yet.


----------



## John Dryden (Sep 26, 2009)

My money would be on the Chinese being the first to have them.


----------



## callpor (Jan 31, 2007)

alaric said:


> Re post #10
> Your concerns with reliability can be largely overcome by adopting twin, independent screws Chris.
> I spent the majority of my time at sea on twin screw ships, and although having to shut down an engine at sea occasionally, I never actually stopped.
> Twin engine aircraft make many trans ocean flights daily with a very high level of reliability and safety.


Take your point, but a what cost? I would like to see the economic case for autonomous vessels objectively argued by all parties - not just those that are there to make a profit.


----------



## callpor (Jan 31, 2007)

John Dryden said:


> My money would be on the Chinese being the first to have them.


...funded by Amazon?


----------



## eigyro (Jul 10, 2007)

You could reduce the crew to two engineers and a microwave using currently available technology.


----------



## Erimus (Feb 20, 2012)

Well as someone mentioned Chinese:-

Here is a cutting from today's Lloyds Loading List....

This shows the first fully automated container terminal, man free, where? Shanghai!

Shanghai International Port Group launched a trial of the fourth phase of its Yangshan Deepwater Port, a Yuan12.8bn ($2.1bn) fully-automated container terminal, on Sunday.

The 2.2m sqm project consists of seven containership berths, with an initial annual handling capacity of 4m teu. After the three-year construction and 18-month equipment testing period, the terminal now has 10 quay cranes, 40 rail-mounted gantry cranes (AMG) and 50 automated guided vehicles (AGV) in position for the trial run.

Eventually, the unmanned terminal will be equipped with 26 quay cranes, 120 AMGs and 130 AGVs and have an annual capacity of 6.3m teu.

SIPG president Yan Jun told Lloyd’s List in an earlier interview that operation of fully automated terminals still had plenty of room for optimisation, as the facilities have only recently been completed.

The goal of the one-year test run is to make the remote-controlled port more productive, namely by increasing the crane moves per hour over the traditional 28-33 moves per hour.

Moreover, the new terminal, when fully operational, can reduce the workforce by two thirds to just 500 workers, significantly bringing down the cost of labour, Mr Yan added.

Yangshan Phase 4 will formally start operations at the end of next year.

The port of Shanghai, where SIPG is the main operator, remained the busiest container port in 2016, with 37.1m teu in throughput.

The tally is expected to reach 40m teu this year, helped by a substantial improvement in China’s foreign trade.

SIPG chairman Chen Xuyuan is ranked eighth in Lloyd’s List’s Top 10 most influential people in the container port sector for 2017.

Today, SIPG has port partnerships in Seattle, Barcelona, Nagoya among other locations, and has teamed up with Cosco Shipping Holdings to buy Hong Kong operator Orient Overseas (International) Ltd.

That will give SIPG joint ownership of OOIL’s state-of-the-art Long Beach Container Terminal, the most automated facility in the US.

First published on www.lloydslist.com

geoff


----------



## spongebob (Dec 11, 2007)

Where is the suggestion for electric ships. An array of Teslar batteries in the double bottoms fully charged on departure and supplemented in transit by solar cells In all sorts of places. So few moving parts , so little trouble.

Bob


----------



## eigyro (Jul 10, 2007)

spongebob said:


> Where is the suggestion for electric ships. An array of Teslar batteries in the double bottoms fully charged on departure and supplemented in transit by solar cells In all sorts of places. So few moving parts , so little trouble.
> 
> Bob


Unfortunately, one of those non-moving parts would be the ship. 
Batteries have a long way to go afore this happens.


----------



## eigyro (Jul 10, 2007)

*Who writes this stuff?*

Shanghai International Port Group launched a trial of the fourth phase of its Yangshan Deepwater Port, a Yuan12.8bn ($2.1bn) FULLY-AUTOMATED container terminal, on Sunday.


Moreover, the new terminal, when fully operational, can reduce the workforce by two thirds to just 500 workers, significantly bringing down the cost of labour, Mr Yan added.

???????

It is always the objective of companies to reduce the cost of labour so as to maximise their profit. Nothing new here, and nothing to get excited about unless you are an accountant/investor/owner.

Been there, seen that. MIMCO and IBM.

P.S I hate American spell-checkers.

Only 13 *****ing days left til Christmas.


----------



## John Dryden (Sep 26, 2009)

I watched a video recently of the terminal geoff mentioned and sure enough not a human in sight on the wharf and in the trucks.I guess the crew of the ship being loaded were all up the road on the lash letting them get on with it.
Haha..as if!You have to feel sympathy for the owners of dock side bars though.


----------



## tunatownshipwreck (Nov 9, 2005)

It doesn't matter what laws get passed, if the insurance companies won't insure them, except at very high rates, they won't happen.


----------



## Peter Eccleson (Jan 16, 2006)

Automation! What are all the worlds humans going to do in the future? Spend time creating more humans? &#55357;&#56833;


----------



## BobClay (Dec 14, 2007)

I seem to remember when I sailed on my first UMS ship many of the same arguments were made about that.

If an automated vessel breaks down at sea we just get on the satcom and ask the on board computer what the problem is ... :sweat:

(.... and hope it doesn't answer as follows:

*HAL: It can only be attributable to human error.* 

[=P] )


----------



## Ian Lawson (Apr 30, 2017)

Nothing new here. I have handled quite a few accidents where UMS on both bridge and ER were the root cause.


----------



## BobClay (Dec 14, 2007)

Sailed on quite a few of those myself. And worked on the systems. But then they were all new ships, and hadn't yet crept toward the end of the _'bathtub curve.'_ (Smoke)


----------



## Varley (Oct 1, 2006)

One should take a long list at the accident statistics and the honesty of those reporting before it is assumed that autonomous vessels are panacea to safe operations. There are many, and some more suotmated and regulated than we, with far worse accident/performance records. It is the perception of the press.

40 tons of diesel dumped in over New York and in the Hudson in an effort to save his aircraft and passengers - hero. 40 tons done to save a ship sailing in the Hudson. 40 Months in clink.


----------



## BobClay (Dec 14, 2007)

Then again pilot error is a major factor in a very large number of air crashes. 

Personally, while I would always like there to be pilot of a Cessna, or a video game, sitting in the passenger aisle (Hollywood Ho*** Style, :sweat I've definitely come to the conclusion that the machine is in the main, more reliable than the possibly _ hungover/emotionally disturbed/fatigued/unwell/suicidal/just had a row with his missus_ (delete which not applicable) pilot.[=P]


----------



## alaric (Feb 27, 2012)

If considering a long term career at sea, there will be one sector which will offer secure employment; Deep Sea Salvage Tugs.
There will need to be a lot of them, and there is little scope for unmanned vessels.


----------

