Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-rcs6z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-03T06:01:17.758Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Planning Emergency Manoeuvres

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Rafal Szlapczynski
Rafal Szlapczynski*
Affiliation:
(Gdansk University of Technology, Poland)
*
(Email: rafal@pg.gda.pl)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper addresses the issue of planning emergency manoeuvres and re-planning ship trajectories in case of unpredicted target behaviour. It introduces two methods. The first is responsible for monitoring other ships parameters, estimating the probability of illegal target behaviour and re-planning own trajectory in case of unpredicted events. The second is a visualization tool that enables the navigator to assess collision risk in an encounter situation and choose a collision avoidance manoeuvre if necessary. This tool is based on the Collision Threat Parameters Area display and offers new features: fuzzy sectors of forbidden speed and course values and the possibility to use any given ship domain. Both methods are fast enough to be applied in the real-time decision-support system.

Keywords

NavigationCollision avoidanceEmergency manoeuvresCourse and speed alterations

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 79 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

[1].Cockroft, A.N., Lameijer, J.N.F. (1993). A Guide to Collision Avoidance Rules. Fourth Edition, An Imprint of Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.Google Scholar
[2].Coldwell, T.G. (1982). Marine Traffic Behaviour in restricted Waters. The Journal of Navigation, 36. 431–444.Google Scholar
[3].Davis, P.V., Dove, M.J., Stockel, C.T. (1982). A Computer Simulation of multi-Ship Encounters. The Journal of Navigation, 35. 347–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4].International Maritime Organization (1995). Resolution A.823(19).Google Scholar
[5].Lenart, A.S. (1982). Collision threat parameters for a new radar display and plot technique. The Journal of Navigation, 36, 404–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6].Lisowski, J. (2001). Determining the Optimal Ship Trajectory in Collision Situation. Proceedings of the IX International Scientific and Technical Conference on Marine Traffic Engineering, 192–201, AM, Szczecin.Google Scholar
[7].Lisowski, J. (2001). Game control methods in navigator decision support system. Archives of Transport, vol. 17, issue 3–4, Warszawa.Google Scholar
[8].Lisowski, J. (2005). Dynamic games methods in navigator decision support system for safety navigation. Proceedings of the European Safety and Reliability Conference vol. 2, p 1285–1292.Google Scholar
[9].Pietrzykowski, Z. (2001). Ship Fuzzy Domain on a Straight Section of a Fairway – Comparative Study. The IX International Scientific and Technical Conference on Maritime Traffic Engineering, Szczecin.Google Scholar
[10].Szlapczynski, R. (2006) A unified measure of collision risk derived from the concept of a ship domain, The Journal of Navigation, 59, 477–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11].Szlapczynski, R. (2008) A new method of planning collision avoidance manoeuvres for Multi target encounter situations, The Journal of Navigation, 61, 307–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12].Smierzchalski, R. (2001) Moving Object in Evolutionary Manoeuvre of Collision Avoidance at Sea. Proceedings of the IX International Scientific and Technical Conference on Maritime Traffic Engineering. 309–316. AM, Szczecin.Google Scholar