Issue №34

This study presents an algorithmic approach to finding an effective ζ-maneuver for multi-ship situations, where a ship deviates from its transition route to avoid collision with other vessels. The proposed algorithm involves the enumeration of a representative discrete set of solutions to find a ζ-maneuver that ensures a safe return to the transition route. The maneuver starts at the minimum distance from the own ship and has the required lateral distance and angle of approach to the route. The algorithm also addresses situations with several targets by introducing virtual targets and automatically finding a maneuver that avoids collision.
To aid decision-making, the study develops a two-dimensional matrix that provides the coordinates of the angle of approach to the route and the distance from the own ship to the start of the maneuver, where the cross-track distance is equal to a given value. The matrix presents the sufficient, acceptable, and unacceptable ζ-maneuver variants based on the shortest distance from the own ship to the targets. The matrix is represented by a color-coded diagram that allows for easy selection of a suitable maneuver providing the necessary offset from the track line.
The study accounts for the dynamics of the own ship in a simplified way by assuming that course changes are made within a given radius. To validate the proposed algorithms, a program was implemented in Delphi programming language, and tests were carried out in various multi-ship situations. The results confirmed the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms in selecting ζ-maneuvers for returning to the transition route while avoiding collisions.
In summary, the study presents a novel algorithmic approach for selecting an effective ζ-maneuver in multi-ship situations, accounting for the dynamics of the own ship and using a color-coded diagram for easy selection. The proposed algorithms have been validated through simulations, highlighting their potential for improving the safety and efficiency of maritime navigation.

Keywords: collision avoidance, ζ-manoeuver, enumerative method, diagram to select manoeuver.

1. Huang Y., Chen L., Chen P., Negenborn R.R., P.H.A.J.M. van Gelder, “Ship collision avoidance methods: State-of-the-art,” Safety Science, vol. 121, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.09.018, pp. 451–473, 2020.
2. Tam C., Bucknall R., Greig A., “Review of collision avoidance and path planning methods for ships in close range encounters,” The Journal of Navigation, vol. 62 (3), doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0373463308005134, pp. 455-476, 2009.
3. Burmaka I.A., Teoria i metody vneshnego optimal`nogo upravlenia sudami v situacii opasnogo sblizenia: monografia. Odessa: NU “OMA”, 2019. [in Russian].
4. Malcev A.S., Tjupikov E.E., Vorohobin I.I., Manevrirovanie sudov pri rashozdenii. Odessa: Morskoy trenazernyi centr, 2013. [in Russian].
5. Tsymbal N.N., Burmaka I.A., Tjupikov E.E. Gibkie strategii rashozdenia sudov. Odessa: KP OGT, 2007. [in Russian].
6. Kim, D.G., Hirayama K., Park G.K., “Collision Avoidance in Multiple-Ship Situations by Distributed Local Search,” Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, vol. 18(5), doi: 10.20965/jaciii.2014. p 0839, pp. 839-848, 2014.
7. Smierzchalski, R., Michalewicz Z., “Modeling of ship trajectory in collision situations by an evolutionary algorithm,” IEEE Transactions on evolutionary computation, vol. 4(3), doi: 10.1109/4235.873234, pp. 227-241, 2000.
8. Lazarowska, A., “Ship’s Trajectory Planning for Collision Avoidance at Sea Based on Ant Colony Optimisation,” Journal of Navigation, vol. 68(02), doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0373463314000708, pp. 291-307, 2014.
9. Tsou M.C., Hsueh C.K., “The Study of Ship Collision Avoidance Route Planning by Ant Colony Algorithm,” Journal of Marine Science and Technology – Taiwan, vol. 18(5), doi: 10.51400/2709-6998.1929, pp. 746-756, 2010.
10. Kang, Y.T., Chen W.J., Zhu D.Q., Wang J.H., Xie Q.M., “Collision Avoidance Path Planning for Ships by Particle Swarm Optimization,” Journal of Marine Science and Technology – Taiwan, vol. 26(6), doi: 10.6119/JMST.201812_26(6).0003, pp 777-786, 2018.
11. Savkin, A.V., Wang C., “A simple biologically inspired algorithm for collision-free navigation of a unicycle-like robot in dynamic environments with moving obstacles,” Robotica, vol. 31(06), doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0263574713000313, pp. 993-1001, 2013.
12. Zhang, J.F., Zhang D., Yan X.P., Haugen S., Soares C.G., “A distributed anti-collision decision support formulation in multi-ship encounter situations under COLREGs,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 105, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.06.054, pp. 336-348, 2015.
13. Zaccone R.A., “COLREG-Compliant Optimal Path Planning for Real-Time Guidance and Control OF AUTONOMOUS SHIPS,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol 9 (4), doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9040405, pp. 405, 2021.
14. Vagushchenko A.A., Vagushchenko L.L. “Numerical method for selection of maneuvers to avoid collisions with several vessels,” Science and Education a New Dimension. Natural and Technical Sciences, VIII(27), issue: 224, doi: https://doi.org/10.31174/SEND-NT2020-224VIII27-19, pp. 74-80, 2020.

The increasing automation of navigation is a key trend in the modern world, but it also poses significant challenges and risks for maritime safety. However, the use of terms such as ‘remote operation’, ‘automation’, ‘autonomy’, ‘artificial intelligence’, ‘unmanned ships’, ‘autonomous ships’, ‘cyber-enabled ships’, and ‘smart ships’ has created significant terminological confusion. This article is devoted to a generalized concept of autonomous vessels and their potential risks. This may lead to misunderstandings and inconsistencies in this area, which, in turn, can create a threat to maritime safety. A necessity of being defined and gaining a detailed explanation of some conceptions related to autonomous navigation exists. Moreover, legal problems should be described. For conceptual basis not only the identification of three different automation elements of the ship are used, but also a legal aspect between an autonomous voyage under the ship`s operator control to an autonomous voyage with limitations is considered. These aspects include legal, technical-technological, navigational, safety, economic, cyber-physical, and ecological-technogenic consequences.
An autonomous`s volume affects the reduction of crew members onboard. Due to the permanent reduction in the number of ship`s crew members the necessity of IT- technologies is being extended, because (of this reduction) tasks have to be executed remotely, or by the autonomous` level increasing. In addition, the reduction of the quantity of ship`s crew members to zero people demands new requirements of intellectual ship intelligence technologies, even if a ship is intended for permanent distance control. The analysis of the autonomous ship general conception has defined some legal collisions which nowadays do not allow to assume full functioning of pilotless autonomous ships. The article argues that autonomous ships are a complex and multidimensional phenomenon that requires comprehensive and interdisciplinary research and analysis.

Keywords: autonomous ships, automation, autonomy, сyber-enabled ships, remote operation, remote operability, safe maneuvering.

1. “Commercial Drones are Taking Off,” Statista, 2022. [Online]. Available: statista.com/chart/17201/commecial-drones-projected-growth.
2. “5 ways drones are saving lives and the planet,” World Economic Forum, 2022. [Online]. Available: cutt.ly/KCstzV6.
3. Commercial Drone Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report By Product (Fixed-wing, Rotary Blade, Hybrid), By Application, By End-use, By Region, And Segment Forecasts, 2021 – 2028. Grand View Research. 2022. [Online]. Available: grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/global-commercial-drones-market.
4. Global Military Drone Market Report 2022: Featuring Key Players Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon & Others. Globe Newswire. 2022. [Online]. Available: cutt.ly/TCsyScs.
5. Mohammed M. N., “Personal Criminal Responsibility For Drone Crimes,” Polytechnic Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 3(1), doi: doi.org/10.25156/ptjhss.v3n1y2022, pp. 189-195, 2022.
6. Hartmann J., [et al.], “Artificial Intelligence, Autonomous Drones and Legal Uncertainties,” European Journal of Risk Regulation, doi: doi.org/10.1017/err.2022.15, pp. 1-18, 2022.
7. Enemark C., “Armed drones and ethical policing: risk, perception, and the tele-present officer,” Criminal justice ethics, vol. 40(2), doi: doi.org/10.1080/0731129X.2021.1943844, pp. 124-144, 2021.
8. Deshayes P.H., “First electric autonomous cargo ship launched in Norway,” Science X Network, 2021. [Online]. Available: techxplore.com/news/2021-11-electric-autonomous-cargo-ship-norway.html.
9. Vardhan, H., “Orca AI-driven Autonomous Ship Sails 800 Km In Tokyo Bay Without Human Assistance,” Republicworld.com, 2022. [Online]. Available: cutt.ly/sVIPcE6.
10. “New Chinese large autonomous research ship hits the water,” Baird Maritime, 2022. [Online]. Available: cutt.ly/jVIAAu0.
11. Bao, J., [et al.], “A novel approach to risk analysis of automooring operations on autonomous vessels,” Maritime Transport Research, vol. 3, 100050, doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.martra.2022.100050, 2022.
12. Fan C., Montewka J., Zhang D., “A risk comparison framework for autonomous ships navigation,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, vol. 226, 108709, doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2022.108709, 2022.
13. Kim T. E., [et al.], “Safety challenges related to autonomous ships in mixed navigational environments,” WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, doi.org/10.1007/s13437-022-00277-z, pp. 1-18, 2022.
14. Nguyen G. T. H., [et al.], “Insights on the introduction of autonomous vessels to liner shipping networks,” Journal of Shipping and Trade, vol. 7(1), doi: doi.org/10.1186/s41072-022-00113-w, pp. 1-27, 2022.
15. Ringbom H., Røsæg E., Solvang T, Autonomous Ships and the Law. Routledge, 2021. [Online]. Available: cutt.ly/xVIVk8T.
16. Savić, I., “Are We Ready for Autonomous Vessels?,” In The Science and Development of Transport—ZIRP 2021, Springer, Cham, doi: doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97528-9_6, pp. 75-89, 2022.
17. Hannaford E., Maes P., Van Hassel E, “Autonomous ships and the collision avoidance regulations: a licensed deck officer survey,” WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, doi: doi.org/10.1007/s13437-022-00269-z, pp. 1-34, 2022.
18. Li X., Yuen K. F., “Autonomous ships: A study of critical success factors,” Maritime Economics & Logistics, doi: doi.org/10.1057/s41278-022-00212-2, pp. 1-27, 2022.
19. Karatug C., Arslanoglu Y., Soares C. G., “Maintenance strategies for machinery systems of autonomous ships,” Trends in Maritime Technology and Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 517-523, 2022. [Online]. Available: cutt.ly/iVINbgK.
20. Munim Z. H., [et al.], “Autonomous ships for container shipping in the Arctic routes,” Journal of Marine Science and Technology, vol. 27(1), doi: doi.org/10.1007/s00773-021-00836-8, pp. 320-334, 2022.
21. Chou C. C., Wang C. N., Hsu H. P., “A novel quantitative and qualitative model for forecasting the navigational risks of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 248, 110852, doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.110852, 2022.
22. Hoem Å. S., Veitch E., Vasstein K., “Human-centred risk assessment for a land-based control interface for an autonomous vessel,” WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, vol. 21(2), doi: doi.org/10.1007/s13437-022-00278-y, pp. 179-211, 2022.
23. Kurt I., Aymelek M., “Operational and economic advantages of autonomous ships and their perceived impacts on port operations,” Maritime Economics & Logistics, doi: doi.org/10.1057/s41278-022-00213-1, pp. 1-25, 2022.
24. Tusher, H. M., [et al.], “Cyber security risk assessment in autonomous shipping,” Maritime Economics & Logistics, doi: doi.org/10.1057/s41278-022-00214-0, pp. 1-20, 2022.
25. Jovanović I., [et al.], “Effect of potential autonomous short-sea shipping in the Adriatic Sea on the maritime transportation safety,” Ocean Engineering, Elsevier, 2022. [Online]. Available: cutt.ly/9VOFW3E.

Remote methods of Earth’s surface research have become widely used in the 21st century, as they allow for a larger and more comprehensive observation area. These methods can provide valuable information about various Earth objects and phenomena, such as the changes in bottom topography in shallow water under navigation conditions. This article presents a novel approach to forecasting these changes by using natural processes as indicators and developing programs that can track and display them on electronic devices.
The article introduces the concept of “scale factor” to determine the significance of different dynamic processes for the research, depending on their spatial and temporal dimensions. The article also proposes a dynamic map modelling method that can predict the siltation of the sea/river bottom for a given period of time and improve the model by comparing the forecast with the actual result. The article suggests that research should take into account the changes in the object over time and under the influence of various factors in a dynamic way.
Based on the research, we draw the following conclusions:
1. The “scale factor” should be applied in dynamic navigation map research and compilation using different-scale data of the water surface and bottom topography;
2. A dynamic component should be added to the information block of the navigation cartographic systems ECDIS and Inland ECDIS, enabling the navigator to see the position of the vessel, taking into account the wave height relative to the bottom in real time;
3. The methods of parallel bottom topography transferring rely only on the data of statistical observations using iterations. These methods usually work well on sandy and silty soils, where the relief has clear wave-like forms, as well as frequent external influences following the main general direction.

Keywords: RIS, dynamic processes, “scale factor”, “chart dynamic model”, ECDIS.

1. Udin U.I., Sotnikov I.I., “Matematichni modeli plosroparalelnogo dvigenya sudna. Klasifikatsya ikriticheski analiz,” Vestnik MGTU, tom 9, No2, pp.200-208, 2016. [in Russian].
2. Samonov W.E., “Matematichne modelirovanie dvigenya tonkogo sloya gidkosti pod deystviem poverhnostnich sil,” diss. k.t.n. SGU, Stavropol, 2013. [in Russian].
3. Gladkich I.I., Geodezicheskie metodi kontrolya dinamiki podvodnogo relefa na uchastkach morskich truboprovodov. Odessa: OGMA, 1997. [in Russian].
4. Uchitel I.L., Yaroshenko V.N., Gladkich I.I., Osnovi geodinamiki. Odessa: Astroprint, 2000. [in Russian].
5. Dvoretsky V.A., “Atomatizatsya ucheta radiolokatsionnoi deviatsii,” Sudovogdenie: Sbornik nauchnich trudov, ONMA, № 2, pp. 47–49, 2000. [in Russian].
6. Raynov A., Kulakov M., Medvedeva I., Oleynik J., “Develoment of a digital RIS index in Ukraine’s inland water-ways in process of implementing the information portal of the European Union,” Proc. Of 24th Internanional Scientific Conference Transport Means, Scopus, pp. 785-789, 2020.
7. Bulgarian National Committee of Geodesy and Geophysics, “National Report on Geodetical and Geophysical Activities in Bulgaria 2007 – 2011,” Prepared for the XXVth IUGG General Assembly, Melbourne – Australia, 28 June – 7 July, 2011.
8. Romanian National Committee of Geodesy and Geophysics, “National Report on Geodetic and Geophysical Activities 2007-2010,” XXVth IUGG General Assembly, Melbourne, Programme 2007-2013, 28 June -7 July, 2011.
9. Dragomir P., Rus T., Avramiuc N., Dumitru P., “EVRF2007 as Realization of the European Vertical Reference System (EVRS) in Romania,” International Symposium GeoCAD08, Alba Iulia, Romania, 09-10 May, 2010.
10. Gladkov G.L., Bekryashev V.A., Brodski E.L., Soderganie vnutrennich vodnich putei. Navigatsionno – gidrograficheskoe obespechenie sudochodstva. SPb.: Izd-vo GUMRF im. adm. S.O. Makarova, 2018. [in Russian].

The article examines the challenges of operating large container ships in difficult navigational and hydrometeorological conditions. The latest research and publications on the peculiarities of such vessels, such as their large windage area, which depends on their size and carrying capacity are reviewed. Some cases of maneuvering large container ships and the reasons why they become almost uncontrolled at low speeds even with little wind are analysed. The article also discusses the features of the engines and propulsion of these ships, which limit their minimum speed and affect their controllability. The article shows how the rudder and propeller interact with the wind force to create a torque that influences the ship’s stability. A mathematical condition for maintaining the ship’s controllability under wind influence is provided. The article suggests some promising ways of increasing the safety of large container ships by using navigation and control systems, tugs, and new rules for regulating their movement. Attention was drawn to the need to use optical-electronic observation of space satellites to monitor the weather conditions in the busiest sea routes and to predict the weather changes that may affect the ship’s operation. This way, it will be possible to forecast the weather for the next day with sufficient accuracy, which is essential for the safe navigation of canals, challenging areas or port calls of large vessels.

Keywords: navigation safety, control and navigation, container ship, windage area of the ship.

1. Cristian Ancuta, Costel Stanca, Cristian Andrei, “Behavior analysis of container ship in maritime accident in order to redefine the operating criteria,” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Volume 227, ModTech International Conference – V 14–17 June 2017, Sibiu, Romania, doi:10.1088/1757-899X/227/1/012004, 2017.
2. China Shipbuilding Corporation, Maneuvering information for USCG. K3979103, pp. 2-4, 2004.
3. Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal, Marine Safety Investigation Report on Milano Bridge MSI Report 2021-001, p. 6-78, 2021.
4. Sergiienko V.V., “In the emergency trap,” Morskiie vesti, №12-2020, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://www.morvesti.ru.
5. Prpić-Oršić Jasna, Parunov Joško, Šikić Igor, “Operation of ULCS – real life,” Int. J. Nav. Archit. Ocean Eng., 6:1014~1023, http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/IJNAOE-2013-0228, 2014.
6. Maltsev A.S., “Theory and practice of safe ship control during maneuvering,” Dissertation: 05:22:16 – Navigation. – О.: 2007. [in Russian].
7. United Arab Insurance Federation, “Insurance Report on Ever Given grounding in Suez Canal,” pp. 2-7, 2021.
8. Deawoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co. Ltd., Final Trim & Stability Booklet 7G-7000-010, p.7, 2010.
9. Diomin S.I., Zhukov E.I., Kubachev N.А., Kurguzov S.S., Tsurban А.I., Upravleniye sudnom. М.: Transport, p. 38-51, 1991. [in Russian].
10. Yavtushenko A.M., Kozelkov S.V., Bogomya V.I., Stavytskyi S.D., Modern Space Systems for Optical Imaging of the Earth: Manual. К.: NAOU, 2004. [in Ukrainian].

This paper proposes a method of decomposing a set of initial bearings into subsets, each of which corresponds to a type of vessel passing strategy based on their initial parameters and the nature of the close-quarters situation. The method aims to perform a vessel evasive action and return it to the programmed (given) course.
The paper investigates the problem of collision avoidance between vessels during their passing using methods of the theory of optimal discrete processes. The paper determines the most hazardous initial vessel bearing in a situation of approaching a target (another vessel, hereafter referred to as the target vessel or TV) by decomposing the set of initial bearings into subsets based on vessel movement and distance between them in the case of a close-quarters situation.
The paper examines in detail the process of vessel evasive action in a close-quarters situation with a target vessel using computer simulation models in various initial conditions to choose the most optimal safe vessel passing strategy. The paper discusses the peculiarity of choosing possible safe vessel passing strategies.
The paper examines different types of vessel return courses to the programmed course, depending on the situation of close-quarters situation with a target vessel, using computer simulation models. The paper determines possible risks and hazards that arise when returning the vessel to the given course during the safe vessel passing process with a target vessel.
The paper presents examples of typical vessel passing situations with a target vessel at short distances using computer simulation models, including the circling maneuver of a vessel during passing with another vessel and overtaking maneuver of one vessel by another.

Keywords: safety of navigation, prevention of collision of vessels, passing of vessels by evasion, the maneuver of returning the vessel to the programmed track.

1. Kulikov A.M., Poddubny V.V., “Optimalnoe upravlenie rashozhdeniem sudov,” Sudostroenie, № 12, pp. 22-24, 1984. [in Russian].
2. Tsymbal N.N., Burmaka I.A., Tyupikov E.E., Gibkie strategii rashozhdeniya sudov. Odesa: KP OGT, 2007. [in Russian].
3. Pavlov V.V., Sen`shin N.I., “Nekotorye voprosy algoritmizacyi vybora manevra v situaciyah rashozhdeniya sudov,” Kibernetika i vychislitelnaya tehnika. № 68, pp. 43-45, 1985. [in Russian].
4. Kudryashov V.E., “Sintez algoritmov bezopasnogo upravlenia sudnom pri rashozhdenii s neskolkimi ob`ektami,” Sudostroenie, №5, pp. 35-40, 1978. [in Russian].
5. Lisowski J., “Dynamic games methods in navigator decision support system for safety navigation,” Advances in Safety and Reliability, vol. 2, pp. 1285-1292, 2005.
6. Pyatakov E.N., Zaichko S.I., “Ocenka effectivnosti parnyh strategiy rashodyashchihsya sudov,” Sudovozhdenie: Sb. nauchn. Trudov / ONMA, vol.15, pp. 166 – 171, 2008. [in Russian].
7. Vagushchenko L.L., Rashozhdenie s sudami smeshcheniem na parallel`nuyu liniyu puti. Odesa: Fenix, 2013. [in Russian].
8. Pyatakov E.N., Buzhbetsky R. Yu., Burmaka I.A., Bulgakov A.Yu., Vzaimodeystvie sudov pri rashozhdenii dlya preduprezhdeniya stolknoveniya. Kherson: Gryn` D.S., 2015. [in Russian].
9. Burmaka I.A., Pyatakov E.N., Bulgakov A.Yu., Upravlenie sudami v situacyi opasnogo sblizheniya. Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2016.
10. Burmaka I.A., Bulgakov A.Yu., “Manevr rashozhdeniya treh sudov izmeneniem kursov,” Avtomatizaciya sudovyh tehnicheskih sredstv: nauch. – tehn. sb., vol. 20, pp. 18-23, 2014. [in Russian].
11. Burmaka I.A., Kulakov M.A., Kalinichenko G.E., “Opredelenie dopustimogo mnozhestva manevrov rashozhdeniya sudov izmeneniem skorostey,” Suchasni tehnologiyi proektuvannya, pobudovy, ekspluataciyi i remontu suden, mors`kyh tehnichnyh zasobiv i inzhenernyh sporud: Materialy Vseukrayins`koyi nauk.-teh. konf., May 17-18 2017, pp. 21–23. Mykolaiv: MUK, 2017. [in Russian].
12. Burmaka I.O., Yancetskyi O.V., Fedorov D.B., Petrichenko E.A., “Imitation design of determination of optimum strategy of divergence of ships in the situation of their dangerous rapprochement,” Science and Education a New Dimension. Natural and Technical Sciences, IX (32), Issue: 255, Jul., pp. 31–34, 2021.

The article examines the challenges of global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) functioning at sea under unintentional and intentional interference. The article reviews the vulnerability of GNSS, the methods of protection against interference and the ways of mitigating their impact based on the marine concept of positioning, navigation and time synchronization (PNT). The main goal of this concept is the guaranteed obtaining of reliable data on coordinates, navigation and exact time due to the combined use and comparison of indication for disparate systems and sensors under the influence of natural or intentional interference (attacks) on ship’s GNSS equipment.
The article analyzes various open sources of information to identify two methods of ensuring the integrity and accuracy of PNT data according to IMO documents and standards. The first method is the detection and direct countermeasures against attacks on shipboard GNSS equipment. The article determines that the most common and easy-to-implement type of attacks are jamming attacks of satellite signals, unlike the more complex and challenging spoofing attacks. The main approach to protection against jamming attacks is spatial signal processing using adaptive marine antenna arrays with a controlled pattern. Examples of modern practical developments of adaptive antenna arrays are given.
The second method to ensure reliable PNT data is the use of alternative navigation systems, redundant capabilities and non-traditional methods using the existing systems. Technical solutions in this method have limitations due to the requirements for the vessel’s conventional navigation and radio communication installation. IMO has suggested structures of multisensor and multisystem receivers for obtaining reliable PNT data. These structures combine primary data from different systems based on different principles, such as satellite, terrestrial and augmented correction systems, vessel navigation data and reference systems. The processed PNT data must be accompanied by accuracy and integrity indicators.

Keywords: positioning, navigation, time synchronization, jamming, spoofing, spatial processing, antenna arrays, cyber risks, information protection.

1. Advanced Shipborne Galileo Receiver Double Frequency (Project ASGARD). [Online]. Available: https://asgard.gmv.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/ASGARD-Technical-Brochure.pdf. [Accessed: 15.03.2023].
2. Anti-Jam Antenna for Marine. [Online]. Available: https://www.unmannedsystemstechnology .com/company/novatel/gajt-710ms-anti-jam-antenna-for-marine/ [Accessed: 15.03.2023].
3. Buesnel G., “Thousands of GNSS Jamming and Spoofing Incidents Reported in 2020,” December 2, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://rntfnd.org/2020/12/24/thousands-of-gnss-jamming-and-spoofing-incidents-reported-in-2020-guy-buesnel/. [Accessed: 15.03.2023].
4. Burgess M., “GPS Signals Are Being Disrupted in Russian Cities,” December 15, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www-wired-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.wired.com/story /gps-jamming-interference-russia-ukraine/amp. [Accessed: 15.03.2023].
5. Chen X., Luo R., Liu T., Yuan H., Wu H., “Satellite Navigation Signal Authentication in GNSS: A Survey on Technology Evolution, Status, and Perspective for BDS,” Remote Sensing, vol. 15(5):1462, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15051462, 2023.
6. Gewies S., Grundhöfer L., Hehenkamp N., “Availability of Maritime Radio Beacon Signals for R-Mode in the Southern Baltic Sea,” TransNav, The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, vol. 14(1), DOI: 10.12716/1001.14.01.21, pp. 173-178, March, 2020.
7. Goudossis A., Katsikas S.K., “Towards a Secure Automatic Identification System (AIS),” Journal of Marine Science and Technology, vol. 24(2), pp. 410-423, DOI: 10.1007/s00773-018-0561-3, June, 2019.
8. Goward D.A., “Why Isn’t Russia jamming GPS harder in Ukraine?” July 22, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2022/07/22/why-isnt-russia-jamming-gps-harder -in-ukraine/.
9. Hansen A., Mackey S., Wassaf H., et al, “Complementary PNT and GPS Backup Technologies Demonstration Report,” Cambridge (MA): U.S. Department of Transportation, John A Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Report DOT-VNTSC-20-07. 2021, January.
[Online]. Available: https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2021-01/FY% 2718%20NDAA%20Section%201606%20DOT%20Report%20to%20CongressCombinedv2 _January%202021.pdf.
10. IEC 61108-1:2003, Maritime navigation and radio communication equipment and systems – Global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) – Part 1: Global positioning system (GPS) – Receiver equipment – Performance standards, methods of testing and required test results. 2003.
11. IEC 61108-3:2010, Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems – Global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) – Part 3: Galileo receiver equipment – Performance requirements, methods of testing and required test results. 2010.
12. IEC 61162-1:2016, Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems – Digital interfaces – Part 1: Single talker and multiple listeners. 2016.
13. IMO MSC.1/Circ.1595, E-NAVIGATION STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – UPDATE 1. 25 May 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/ eNavigation.aspx.
14. IMO MSC.1/Circular.1575, Guidelines for Shipborne Position, Navigation And Timing (PNT) Data Processing. 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.imorules.com/MSCCIRC_ 1575.html.
15. IMO Resolution A.1046(27), Worldwide Radionavigation System. Dec, 2011.
16. IMO Resolution MSC.401(95), Performance Standards For Multi-System Shipborne Radionavigation Receivers. Adopted 8 June 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.imorules.com /MSCRES_401.95.html.
17. IMO Resolution MSC.428(98), Maritime Cyber Risk Management in Safety Management Systems. 2017.
18. IMO Resolution MSC.432(98), Amendments to performance standards for multi-system shipborne radionavigation receivers. 2017.
19. IMO Resolution MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3, Guidelines on Maritime Cyber Risk Management. 2021.
20. IMO SUB-COMMITTEE ON SAFETY OF NAVIGATION NAV 53/22, Report of the E-Navigation Working Group. i.13.24: session paper. 14 August 2007. [Online]. Available: https://www.safety4sea.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/pdf/nav53-22.pdf.
21. Jamming and Spoofing of Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS). INTERTANKO, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.maritimeglobalsecurity.org/media/1043/2019-jamming-spoofing-of-gnss.pdf
22. López M., Antón V., “SBAS/EGNOS Enabled Devices in Maritime,” TransNav, The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, vol. 12(1), pp. 23-27. DOI: 10.12716/1001.12.01.01, March, 2018.
23. Major F.G., Quo Vadis: Evolution of Modern Navigation. The Rise of Quantum Techniques. Springer, 2013.
24. Marcos E. Pérez, Konovaltsev A., Caizzone, S., et al, “Interference and Spoofing Detection for GNSS Maritime Applications using Direction of Arrival and Conformal Antenna Array,” 31st International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation: conference paper. ION GNSS+, pp. 2907-2922. https://doi.org/10.33012/2018.15901, 2018.
25. MarRINav, Maritime Resilience and Integrity in Navigation. [Online]. Available: https://marrinav.com. [Accessed: 15.03.2023].
26. Oruç A., Gkioulos V., Katsikas S., “Towards a Cyber-Physical Range for the Integrated Navigation System (INS),” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol. 10, 107, DOI: 10.3390/jmse10010107, 2022.
27. R-Mode Baltic, Baseline and Priorities. [Online]. Available: https://interreg-baltic.eu/project/ r-mode-baltic/. [Accessed: 15.03.2023].
28. Świerczyński S., Zwolan P., Rutkowska I., “Jamming as a Threat to Navigation,” ANNUAL OF NAVIGATION, vol. 23/2016, pp. 219-233, DOI: 10.1515/aon-2016-0016, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316358430_Jamming_as_a_Threat_to_ Navigation.
29. The Guidelines on Cyber Security Onboard Ships, version 4. BIMCO et al, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.bimco.org/-/media/bimco/about-us-and-our-members/publications/ ebooks/guidelines-on-cyber-security-onboard-ships-v4.ashx
30. Weintrit A., “The Concept of Time in Navigation,” TransNav, The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, vol. 11(2), DOI: 10.12716/1001.11.02.01, pp. 209-219, June, 2017.
31. Westbrook T., “The Global Positioning System and Military Jamming: The Geographies of Electronic Warfare,” Journal of Strategic Security, vol. 12(2), pp. 1-16. DOI: 10.5038/1944-0472.12.2.1720, 2019.

Nowadays container transportation occupies more than 90% of the non-bulk cargo market. At the same time, the growing demand for the transportation of this type of cargo contributes to the replenishment of the container fleet with extra-large container ships. It was determined that between 2011 and 2019, the volume of the container fleet had increased by about 15% with the respective part of the vessels over 10,000 TEU by approximately 500%. On the other hand, despite the advantages of containerized cargo transportation, the intensification of maritime transport flows, the increase in the number of cargoes, the growth of ship sizes, constant changes in the maritime industry, as well as human errors are the factors that increase the risks of maritime accidents. The present study is aimed at analyzing the risks inherent to the container fleet to determine ways of safety improvement in the industry. Since the formulated direction covers a wide range of tasks, this article attempts to focus on the issue of navigational safety, sea container transportation and the influence of the human factor. In the course of the study, the grouping of various types of emergency situations on the container fleet was carried out in accordance with the appropriate categories for the further determination of cause-and-effect relationships and the formation of a fault tree for the purpose of maritime operations’ analysis in general. The formation of the specified model provides an opportunity for the determination of independent factors contributing to the development of emergencies at the first approximation. Within the framework of the established goal, the work presents the relevant risk matrix, scales for assessing the probability and consequences of a potentially dangerous situation, the risk assessment in accordance with the identified factors, and the pre-formulated means of control and minimization of such risks.

Keywords: safety of cargo transportation, navigational safety, containerized cargo, risk analysis, human factor.

1. Callesen F.G., Blinkenberg-Thrane M., “Container ships – Fire related risk”. [Master’s thesis]. Kgs. Lyngby: Technical University of Denmark, 2017.
2. Callesen F. G., Blinkenberg-Thrane M., Taylor J. R., Kozine I., “Container ships: fire-related risks,” Journal of Marine Engineering & Technology, vol. 20, no. 4, doi: 10.1080/20464177.2019.1571672, pp. 262–277, Jan. 2019.
3. European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), Annual overview of marine casualties and incidents 2020. Lisbon, 2020.
4. European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), European maritime safety report 2022. Luxembourg, 2022.
5. European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), Safety Analysis of Data Reported in EMCIP – Analysis on Marine Casualties and Incidents involving Container Vessels. 2020.
6. Federal Bureau of Maritime Causualty Investigation, Explosion and fire on board CMV PUNJAB SENATOR in hold No. 6 on 30 May 2005 on the way to Sri Lanka. Federal Bureau of Maritime Causualty investigation (BSU). Hamburg: EMSA, 2006.
7. Federal Bureau of Maritime Causualty Investigation, Fire and explosion on board the MSC Flaminia on 14 July 2012 in the Atlantic and the ensuing events. Federal Bureau of Maritime Causualty investigation (BSU). Hamburg: Federal Bureau of Maritime Causualty Investigation (BSU), 2014.
8. Hasanspahić N., Vujičić S., Frančić V., and Čampara L., “The Role of the Human Factor in Marine Accidents,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol. 9, no. 3, doi: 10.3390/jmse9030261, p. 261, Mar. 2021.
9. Haugen S. and Kristiansen S., “Formal safety assessment,” Maritime Transportation, doi: 10.4324/9781003055464-12, pp. 353–400, Oct. 2022.
10. IMO, Revised guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process. MSC-MEPC.2/Circ.12/Rev.2. London: IMO, 2018. [Online] Available: https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/OurWork/Safety/Documents/MSC-MEPC%202-Circ%2012-Rev%202.pdf [Accessed: March 11, 2023].
11. Konon V.V., Savchuk V.D., “Risks during the transportation of cargo in containers,” Materials of the scientific and technical conference “Transport technologies (marine and river fleet): infrastructure, shipping, transportation, automation” 15-16 November 2018, Odesa: NU «ОМА», pp. 298-302. [in Ukrainian].
12. Konon N. M., “Control of the navigational safety during the Suez Canal passage on the example of the incident with M/V “EVER GIVEN”,” Materials of the 13th international scientific and practical conference «Modern information and innovation technologies in transport (MINTT – 2021)» 25-27 May 2021, Kherson: KGMA, pp. 118-121. [in Ukrainian].
13. Konon N., Pipchenko O., “Analysis of marine accidents involving container ships,” Shipping & Navigation, vol. 32, doi: 10.31653/2306-5761.32.2021.46-55, pp. 46–55, Dec. 2021.
14. Le Bureau d’enquêtes sur les événements de mer, Fire of the cargo aboard the container ship CMA CGM Rossini on 15 June 2016, in the port of Colombo. Lorient: BEAmer, 2017.
15. Murdoch E, Tozer D., A Master’s Guide to Container Securing. 2nd Edition. The Standard & Lloyd’s Register. London: The Standard & Lloyd’s Register, 2012.
16. Pillay A., Wang J., “Chapter 5 Formal safety assessment,” in Technology and Safety of Marine Systems, doi: 10.1016/s1571-9952(03)80007-7, pp. 81–115, 2003.
17. Pipchenko O. D. Development of the theory and practice of risk management when solving complex navigational tasks: dissertation for obtaining the scientific degree of Doctor of Technical Sciences: National University “Odessa Maritime Academy”, Odesa, 2021. 286 p. [in Ukrainian].
18. Pipchenko O.D., Tsymbal M., Shevchenko V., “Features of an Ultra-large Container Ship Mathematical Model Adjustment Based on the Results of Sea Trials,” TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, Vol. 14, No. 1, doi:10.12716/1001.14.01.20, pp. 163-170, 2020.
19. Wang J. and Foinikis P., “Formal safety assessment of containerships,” Marine Policy, vol. 25, no. 2, doi: 10.1016/s0308-597x(01)00005-7, pp. 143–157, Mar. 2001.
20. Wróbel K., “Searching for the origins of the myth: 80% human error impact on maritime safety,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, vol. 216, doi:10.1016/j.ress.2021.107942, p. 107942, Dec. 2021.

The availability of adequate mathematical models of the ship propulsion system is essential for developing effective ship control systems, building high-quality simulators, and studying the ship’s maneuvering behavior. With the advancement of new computing and information technologies, the mathematical models of the ship propulsion system need to meet higher requirements and cover wider applications. This leads to the need for continuous improvement of mathematical models, especially those of non-inertial forces acting on the ship.
This work investigates the influence of the ship’s curvilinear movement on the rudder performance. Mathematical models of the forces and moments acting on the rudder at different values of the local drift angle and the rudder angle are derived. The resultant force on the rudder is decomposed into components due to the rudder lift, drag, normal force, and tangential force. Expressions for the coefficients of rudder hydrodynamic quality, reverse quality, and normal force are obtained. The existing mathematical models of the rudder hydrodynamic coefficients are analyzed and their limitations and applicability are discussed. New mathematical models of the rudder lift and drag coefficients are proposed, which take into account the aspect ratio, relative thickness, and angle of attack of the rudder. The proposed models are validated by comparing them with experimental data for NACA series rudders. t is shown how the lift and drag of the rudder, as well as the components of the resulting force, change for the maximum possible range of changes in the local drift angle and the rudder angle, for different values of the rudder aspect ratio and relative thickness.

Keywords: mathematical models, ship rudders, curvilinear movement, longitudinal and transverse components of forces, dimensionless hydrodynamic coefficients.

1. Pershytz R. Y., Dynamic control and handling of the ship. L: Sudostroenie, 1983. [in Russian].
2. Sobolev G.V., Dynamic control of ship and automation of navigation. L.: Sudostroenie, 1976. [in Russian].
3. Gofman A. D., Propulsion and steering complex and ship maneuvering. Handbook. L.: Sudostroyenie, 1988. [in Russian].
4. Miyusov M. V., Modes of operation and automation of motor vessel propulsion unit with wind propulsors. Odessa, 1996. [in Russian].
5. Kryvyi O. F., Methods of mathematical modeling in navigation. ONMA, Odessa, 2015. [in Ukrainian].
6. Kryvyi A. F., Miyusov M. V., “Mathematical model of the plane motion of the ship in the presence of wind turbines,” Sudnovodinnya, vol. 26, pp.110-119, 2016. [in Russian].
7. Inoe S., Hirano M., Kijima K, “Hydrodynamic derivatives on ship maneuvering,” Int. Shipbuilding Progress, v. 28, № 321, pp. 67-80, 1981.
8. Kijima K., “Prediction method for ship maneuvering performance in deep and shallow waters. Presented at the Workshop on Modular Maneuvering Models,” The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineering, v.47, pp.121 130, 1991.
9. Yasukawa H., Yoshimura Y., “Introduction of MMG standard method for ship manoeuvring predictions,” J Mar Sci Technol, v. 20, doi:10.1007/s00773-014-0293-y, pp.37–52, 2015.
10. Yoshimura Y., Masumoto Y., “Hydrodynamic Database and Manoeuvring Prediction Method with Medium High-Speed Merchant Ships and Fishing,” International Conference on Marine Simulation and Ship Maneuverability (MARSIM 2012), pp.494-504, 2012.
11. Yoshimura Y., Kondo M., “Tomofumi Nakano, et al. Equivalent Simple Mathematical Model for the Manoeuvrability of Twin-propeller Ships under the same propeller-rps,” Journal of the Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers, v.24, №.0, https://doi.org/10.9749/jin.133.28, p.157, 2016.
12. Zhang Wei, Zou Zao-Jian. “Time domain simulations of the wave-induced motions of ships in maneuvering condition,” J Mar Sci Technol, v. 21, doi: 10.1007/s00773-015-0340-3, pp. 154–166, 2016.
13. Zhang Wei, Zou Zao-Jian, Deng De-Heng, “A study on prediction of ship maneuvering in regular waves,” Ocean Engineering, v. 137, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.oceaneng.2017.03.046, pp. 367-381, 2017.
14. Erhan Aksu, Erkan Köse, “Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Tankers’ Maneuvering Motions,” JEMS Maritime Sci, v.5 №1, doi: 10.5505/jems.2017.52523, pp. 95-109, 2017.
15. Kang D., Nagarajan V., Hasegawa K., et al, “Mathematical model of single-propeller twin-rudder ship,” J Mar Sci Technol, v. 13, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00773-008-0027-0, pp.207–222, 2008.
16. Shang H., Zhan C., Z. Liu Z., “Numerical Simulation of Ship Maneuvers through Self-Propulsion”, Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 9(9):1017, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9091017, 2021.
17. Shengke Ni., Zhengjiang Liu, and Yao Cai., “Ship Manoeuvrability-Based Simulation for Ship Navigation in Collision Situations,” J. Mar. Sci. Eng, doi:10.3390/jmse7040090, 2019.
18. Sutulo S. & C. Soares G., “Mathematical Models for Simulation of Maneuvering Performance of Ships,” Marine Technology and Engineering, (Taylor & Francis Group, London), p 661–698, 2011.
19. Kryvyi O. F, Miyusov M. V., “Mathematical model of hydrodynamic characteristics on the ship’s hull for any drift angles”, Advances in Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. Taylor & Francis Group, London, UK, pp. 111-117, 2019.
20. Kryvyi O. F, Miyusov M. V., “The Creation of Polynomial Models of Hydrodynamic Forces on the Hull of the Ship with the help of Multi-factor Regression Analysis,” 8 International Maritime Science Conference. IMSC 2019. Budva, Montenegro, pp.545-555. [Online]. Available: http://www. imsc2019. ucg.ac.me/IMSC2019_ BofP. pdf.
21. Kryvyi O. F., Miyusov M.V., “Construction and Analysis of Mathematical Models of Hydrodynamic Forces and Moment on the Ship’s Hull Using Multivariate Regression Analysis,” TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, Vol. 15, No. 4, doi:10.12716/1001.15.04.18, pp. 853-864, 2021.
22. Kryvyi O. F, Miyusov M. V., “Mathematical models of hydrodynamic characteristics of the ship’s propulsion complex for any drift angles,” Shipping & Navigation, v. 28, doi: 10.31653/2306-5761.27.2018.88-102, pp. 88-102, 2018.
23. Kryvyi O. F, Miyusov M. V., “New mathematical models of longitudinal hydrodynamic forces on the ship’s hull,” Shipping & Navigation, v. 30, doi: 10.31653/2306-5761. 30. 2020.88-98, pp. 88-89, 2020.
24. Kryvyi O. F, Miyusov M. V., Kryvyi M. O., “Mathematical modelling of the operation of ship’s propellers with different maneuvering modes,” Shipping & Navigation, v. 32, doi: 10.31653/2306-5761.32.2021.71-88, pp. 71-88, 2021.
25. Molland A.F., Turnock S.R., Wind tunnel investigation of the influence of propeller loading on ship rudder performance. Technical report. University of Southampton, Southampton, UK, 1991.
26. Molland A.F., Turnock S.R., Further wind tunnel investigation of the influence of propeller loading on ship rudder performance. Technical report. University of Southampton, Southampton, UK, 1992.
27. Molland A.F., Turnock S.R., Marine rudders and control surfaces: principles, data, design and applications. 1st edn. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2007.
28. Ladson C.L., Effects of Independent Variation of Mach and Reynolds Numbers on the Low-Speed Aerodynamic Characteristics of the NACA 0012 Airfoil Section. Technical report. Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, USA, 1988.
29. Bertram V., Practical Ship Hydrodynamic. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 2nd ed., 2012.
30. Liu J., “Hydrodynamic Characteristics of Ship Rudders,” in Mathematical Modeling of Inland Vessel Maneuverability Considering Rudder Hydrodynamics, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47475-1_4, 2020.
31. Shin Y-J, Kim M-C, Kang J-G, Kim J-W, “Performance Improvement in a Wavy Twisted Rudder by Alignment of the Wave Peak,” Applied Sciences, 11(20):9634, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11209634, 2021.
32. Veritas D.N., “Hull equipment and appendages: stern frames, rudders and steering gears,” in Rules for Classification of Steel Ships, part 3, chapter 3, section 2, pp 6–28, 2000.
33. Aoki I., Kijima K., Furukawa Y., Nakiri Y., “On the prediction method for maneuverability of a full scale ship,” Journal of the Japan Soc of Nav. Archic. and Ocean Eng., 2006, 3, 157-165.
34. Lee H. Y., Shin S. S., Yum D. J., “Improvement of Prediction Technique of the Ship’s Maneuverability at Initial Design Stage,” J Soc Naval Archit Korea, 35, pp. 46-53, 1998. [in Japanese].
35. Lee, H.Y., Shin, S.S., “The prediction of ship’s manoeuvring performance in initial design stage,” Practical Design of Ships and Mobile Units, pp. 633–639, 1998.

The study aims to improve the safety of ship traffic by improving the methods of formalizing the decision-making process for preventing dangerous situations in a single e-navigation concept. The goal is achieved by a clear statement of the problem and the choice of appropriate approaches to its solution. The main stages of the decision-making cycle performed by the navigator in collision prevention are analysed. Particular attention is paid to the operations performed at the decision-making stage on the further movement of the vessel. The ship’s movement plan is described by models of elementary behaviour, each of which consists of elementary actions represented by a set of fuzzy logic rules for performing a certain subtask. The structure of a system that implements the behavioural approach to decision-making by a navigator is proposed. Emphasis is placed on the need to coordinate vessels when deciding to plan a route based on models of elementary behaviours, and a method for coordinating the planning of the vessel’s trajectory is developed. The sequence of stages of the method for coordinating the planning of the ship’s trajectory is performed cyclically until the target point of the route is reached. At each stage of the vessel’s movement, the navigation obstacles and other vessels entering the area of interest of the navigator are monitored and potential hazards from them are identified. A method for tracing the vessel’s movement and existing vessels in the navigator’s interest area has been developed, which allows for predicting the location at subsequent moments and identifying the coordinates of the conflict site where a situation of dangerous proximity occurs. To formalize the areas dangerous for vessel traffic, a method for generating a map of navigational hazards and conflict situations in the navigator’s interest area has been developed, based on a modified method of potential fields. To formally describe the space, only the concept of a potential function is used to represent the space as a matrix of values. The most significant scientific result is the proposed approach to solving the problem of supporting the decision-making of a navigator based on a combination of methods using fuzzy logic and allowed domains, which allows obtaining options for actions that ensure the safety of ship movement in a dangerous situation.

Keywords: ship, navigator, collision, navigation situation, navigation systems, e-navigation, tracing method, navigation hazard, navigation hazard map

1. Shumilova К., “A systematized approach to the classification of navigational risks of the voyage cycle of a sea vessel,” Scientific Collection «InterConf+», vol. 24(121), https://doi.org/10.51582/interconf.19-20.08.2022.032, pp. 337–358, 2022. [in Ukrainian].
2. Vagushchenko L.L., Modern information technologies in navigation [Electronic textbook]. Odessa: ОNМА, 2013. [in Russian].
3. Vagushchenko L.L., Vagushchenko А. L., Support for decisions on disagreement with the courts. Odessa: Fenyks, 2010. [in Russian].
4. Tsymbal N.N., Bulhakov M.А., Bairak V.V. “Determination of a group of interacting ships in a dangerous approach situation,” Sudovozhdenie, № 16, pp. 193-197, 2009. [in Russian].
5. Volkov Ye.L., “Improvement of the method of locally independent management of the process of separation of ships using areas of unacceptable parameter values,” dis. cand. tech. Sciences: 05.22.13. Odesa, 2018. [in Ukrainian].
6. Paulauskas V., Paulauskas D., Steenberg С. M., “External forces influence on ships steering in extreme conditions,” Transport Means 2006: Proceedings of the 10 International Conference, Kaunas, Oct. 19-20, 2006. Kaunas: Technologija. 2006, pp. 158-160.
7. Daki О.А., Dorosheva A.O., Ivanenko V.M., Cheban V.I., “Agent-oriented model of implementation of the decision support system for the safety of navigation,” Weapon systems and military equipment, № 3(63), doi: https://doi.org/10.30748/soivt.2020.63.18, pp. 122-129, 2020.
8. Sikirin V.Ye., “Optimization of ship movement control by minimum trajectory error,” dissertation. … candidate technical of science: 05.22.13. Odesa, 2018. [in Ukrainian].
9. Fusheng Zha, Yizhou Liu, Xin Wang, Fei Chen, Jingxuan Li, Wei Guo, “Robot motion planning method based on incremental high-dimensional mixture probabilistic model,” Control Design for Systems Operating in Complex Environments, № 5, doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4358747, pp. 3-14, 2018.
10. Melnyk O.M., “Operation of non-specialized vessels in the transportation of oversized and heavy cargo: dissertation,” Dis. candidate technical of science: 05.22.20. Odesa, 2021. [in Ukrainian].
11. Burmaka I.A., Piatakov Ye.N., Bulhakov A.Yu., Ship control in dangerous proximity situations. Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2016. [in Russian].
12. Zazirnyi А., “Method for forming dynamic space hazard levels in zones in the navigation area when solving the problem of discovering a vessel with navigation hazard,” Cybernetics And Systems Analysis, № 1(67), doi: 10.30748/zhups.2021.67.15, pp. 110-118, 2021.
13. Yang C., Peng G., Li Y., Cui R., Cheng L., and Li Z., “Neural networks enhanced adaptive admittance control of optimized robot-environment interaction,” in IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, Vol. 49, no. 7, doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2018.2828654, pp. 2568-2579, 2019.

Establishment of the appropriate communication with the pilot, exchange of all the necessary information for the safe passage of the vessel, awareness by all responsible parties of their duties and the correspondence of their competency to the positions held, as well as knowledge and understanding, among other aspects, of the elements of bridge resource management theory, not only do not lose but even acquire greater relevance today. This fact is confirmed not only in practice but is also reflected in the relevant statistical materials. This partially appears in the following: despite the recommendations of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), other sources and the requirements of the relevant regulatory documents, many ship captains put too much trust in pilots when maneuvering the ship in port waters or channels.
This paper examines the issue of sailing in port and inland waters from the perspective of the human factor’s influence when using pilot services. The effectiveness of training for seafarers in the first approach has been evaluated with the aim of increasing the level of navigational safety and promoting responsibility awareness for all parties involved with regard to their duties, as well as assessment of their competency.
In accordance with the obtained results, only 9.7% of seafarers out of the total number of participants were able to complete the set task of exiting the port water area in the Bay of Haydarpaşa (Istanbul, Turkey) and the Bosporus Strait in a safe and successful way on the first attempt and with-out pilot’s and/or tugs’ assistance. At the same time, this task did not cause difficulties for the respondents who undergo regular training in their companies and increase their level of competence. The experiment was conducted using a navigational simulator by means of simulation modelling methods.

Keywords: ship handling, pilotage, certification and training, competence assessment.

1. ADMIRALTY TotalTide. [Software]. [Online]. Available: https://www.admiralty.co.uk /publications/admiralty-digital-publications/admiralty-totaltide [Accessed: February 26, 2023].
2. Atiyah A. Atiyah, “Reliability analysis of marine pilots using advanced decision making methods,” 2018. [Online]. Available: http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/10034/ 1/2019atiyah phd.pdf [Accessed: February 26, 2023].
3. Bridge watchkeeping and collision avoidance. Loss prevention bulletin. Japan P&I club. Vol. 34, 2015.
4. COLREGS. International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea. Consolidated Edition, IMO, 2003.
5. Demirci SE, Canımoğlu R, Elçiçek H., “Analysis of causal relations of marine accidents during ship navigation under pilotage: A DEMATEL approach,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment. 2022; 0(0). doi:10.1177/14750902221127093.
6. European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), Annual Overview of Marine Casualties and Incidents, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.emsa.europa.eu/publications/reports/item/ 4266-annual-overview-of-marine-casualties-and-incidents-2020.html [Accessed: February 26, 2023].
7. Kevin Gregory, Alan Hobbs, Bonny Parke, Nicholas Bathurst, Sean Pradhan & Erin Flynn-Evans, “An evaluation of fatigue factors in maritime pilot work scheduling,” Chronobiology International, vol. 37, pp. 9-10, 1495-1501, DOI: 10.1080/07420528.2020.1817932, 2020.
8. Maritime Traffic Regulations for the Turkish Straits and the Marmara Region, 1994. [Online]. Available: https://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TUR _1994_ Regulations.pdf. [Accessed: February 26, 2023].
9. Pipchenko O. D., “Monitoring and identification of errors during training on navigation simulators “, Shipbuilding №2, doi: https://doi.org/10.15589/znp2020.2(480).1, pp. 3 – 11, 2020.
10. STCW. International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers Including 2010 Manila amendments. Consolidated edition. IMO: 2017.
11. Swift A. J., Bailey T. J. Bridge Team Management. 2nd ed. Nautical Institute, London, UK, 2004.
12. “Turkish Straits: difficulties and role of pilotage,” SeaNews Turkey – International Shipping Magazine, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.seanews.com.tr/turkish-straits-difficulties-and-role-of-pilotage/160485/ [Accessed: February 26, 2023].
13. Republic of Turkey / Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure / Directorate General of Coastal Safety, User’s Guide of Turkish Straits Vessel Traffic Service, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://kiyiemniyeti.gov.tr/Data/1/Files/Document/Documents/9S/6R/yY/wu/TSVTS_User_Guide_21.05.20.pdf [Accessed: February 26, 2023].
14. “What is meant by a Master-Pilot Relationship?,” Maritime Page. [Online]. Available: https://maritimepage.com/master-pilot-relationship [Accessed: February 26, 2023].