Statement of Chris Winkley, Broadgate

MR. WINKLEY: Thank you, Chairman.

Ladies, gentlemen and fellow IEC Working Group members, good morning to you. And a special good morning to mariners.

I'm delighted to have been asked to present a paper entitled "Future Recorder Requirements for the Maritime Industry." For years there have been moves to legislate for voyage data recorders, and although we are still not quite there, we have come a long, long way.

To begin at the beginning, I would like to take you quickly through the story so far.

Back in the 1980s, several high profile marine casualties, such as the loss of the DERBYSHIRE and HERALD OF FREE ENTERPRISE highlighted the problems of unexplained marine accidents. At the same time, advances in technology and improved data processing allowed the development of recording systems. And the P&O Group asked my company to look into the development of a marine blackbox similar to those used on aircraft.

We set up various meetings with the UK Air Accidents Investigations Branch, with ship operators representing virtually every kind of vessel, with recording specialists and so on. We established early on that the marine blackbox would have to be different from those fitted to aircraft.

This, as most of you know in the room, is an aircraft blackbox, and this is the sort of equipment which we used to do the initial trials. And from these, we formulated various criteria for the development of the marine voyage data recording, the very first of which my company introduced in March 1991.

This is a marine data recorder, and unfortunately I could not get them at the same scale. Somebody yesterday or the day before was inquiring about the physical size. The one on the right is the marine VDR. It is obviously much bigger. And that was largely due to the size of the original recording mechanism which, as some people have said, was in fact an industrial VHS cassette.

As I say, we established some key criteria from the start. And although not formalized as legal requirements initially, these criteria are still being used after 10 years and, I shall show, at the core of the new International Maritime Organization's IMO regulations soon to come into force.

For those of you unfamiliar with the marine industry, I should explain that the IMO is a United Nations body which formalizes all safety legislation with regard to merchant shipping.

Looking at these key criteria, the first thing is a marine voyage data recorder should allow analysis of all types of incidents or near misses, not just major catastrophes. The idea being that lessons could be learned from even minor mishaps and near misses.

The system had to produce hard information, so there was no reliance on human memory. The information had to be presented in a user friendly manner, so both sea staff and supervisory personnel could so what happened in real time. And the system had to work on any type of vessel.

Tremendous importance was attached to capturing audio, which was seen as a major contributor in any subsequent analysis scenario, a lesson learned from the aircraft industry.

As I mentioned, we'd asked to develop a VDR by the ship operating companies as a P&O Group, and by the mid-1990s nearly every ship in their fleet had fitted these blackboxes. A number of other owners also invested in them and we began to build up quite a body of experience.

It was also recognized that capturing audio from the large bridges that exist on some deep sea vessels was considerably more demanding technically than from the relatively confined space of an aircraft cockpit where the pilot is equipped with his own microphone. The IMO started looking at VDRs in the early '90s, and by November 1997 they had established a performance standard for shipborne VDRs. This was a very big step forward.

I won't go into too much detail about this, but essentially the IMO has proposed that there is a single type of VDR which will record over a period of 12 hours a range of information, including time, date, position, heading, speed, audio, radar and other information, and that this recorded information should be adequately protected. I'll come back to that later.

The way the IMO works is to use the International Electrotechnical Commission, the IEC, to give technical clarification to IMO resolutions. So a working group for the IEC's Technical Committee 80, called TC-80, was set up, with yours truly as convener, to develop and clarify the performance standards.

We took advice and comment from around 60 worldwide representatives from the marine and aviation industries, many of whom are here today. And we've just distributed the first draft of what is IEC 61996, entitled, "Shipborne Voyage Data Recorder Performance Requirements, Methods of Tests and Required Test Results." A long name, but I guess you get the picture.

During 1999, our working group will be taking comments and reviewing the document. And as long as there are no major delays, we expect that IEC 61996 will be approved through the normal voting channels by January 2000, providing of course that the millennium bug doesn't get in the way.

Incidentally, at any one time there are a dozen or more working groups preparing similar technical documents, and another one which has major implications for the future of VDRs is involved in preparing IEC 61162, which I'll be referring to later.

Put simply, IEC 61162 is laying down internationally agreed standards for digital interfaces so that marine equipments can work together, interpret each other's signals, or even talk to each other. A lot of this work relates to message structuring and the development of sentences specifying how onboard communication equipment talks to each other.

For instance, this is a sentence to provide scanning frequency information from communications transmitter.

Okay. So this is the story so far. We have regulations almost ready to put in place; we have the interfacing standards being established; and we have a few models of VDRs on the market being fitted voluntarily to ships.

However, the VDRs currently available were all designed prior to the introduction of the IMO performance standards. And although most of these devices cover most of the requirements, the recording requirements have been interpreted in different ways.

I suppose it is natural for manufacturers whose expertise is strong in one area, such as radar, to emphasize the importance of this if they design a VDR. A rather more balanced approach can be seen in the VDRs designed by companies unconnected with specific marine electronics products.

I'd like to turn now to the future and what changes are likely to happen once the regulations are finally in place and approved VDRs are being installed.

Firstly, it's worth making the point that the basic VDR called for in the proposed regulations will be fitted to very few ships. The proposal for storing and protecting the recorded information is for the actual recording medium to be stored in a crash protected memory unit, a CPMU. This will be sealed device which will only be recovered in the event of a catastrophic incident.

However, I am sure that nearly every manufacturer will offer some system for downloading the recording information from the CPMU without interfering with the basic memory. The reason is that the CPMU will only ever be examined in the event of a catastrophe and shipowners and their staffs, and dare one say insurance companies, will want to know what happened if there is a non-catastrophic incident. What's more, some owners will want to record much more information than is called for in the regulatory unit.

Looking to the future, there will be much more information which can be recorded and which currently either is not available or cannot be recorded. Take GMDSS, the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System, which became mandatory in February of this year. One effect of GMDSS has been the end of compulsory carriage of radio officers, leaving the operation of communication equipment in the hands of nontechnical personnel.

Many of the new GMDSS communication centers are now fitted on ship's bridges enabling the officer of the watch to have instant access to the equipment. This has led to changes in onboard operational procedures and given a real opportunity for all GMDSS communications and information to be recorded.

For example, careful location of area microphones on the bridge should make it possible for all internal and external communications to be recorded during an incident.

Current IMO requirements already call for the VHF dedicated to GMDSS duties to be hard wired to a VDR, thereby enabling both sides of VHF communications to be recorded. In the future, it may well be a requirement for the design of VDRs to allow for all GMDSS data to be recorded in its own area within the equipment.

To use language from old technology, this would be a dedicated channel. The move of communications to the bridge into the responsibility of the officer of the watch or a nominated deputy provides the ideal opportunity for such a concept.

GMDSS requirements also create opportunities for further types of data to be recorded by VDRs. In particular, it will be possible to monitor the status of digital selective calling, or DSC equipment, which is used as a principal method of transmission for GMDSS traffic.

I mentioned IEC 61162 earlier. Standardization of digital interfaces will eventually make more information available for VDR recording. It will also make the process of recording simpler and cheaper. Already the working group has specified sentences which will provide information, such as confirmation that calls took place, nature of call, category and so on. The availability of such data through a VDR after an incident would also provide a very useful reference on the effectiveness of the overall GMDSS service. It may even help to eliminate one of the current bugbears with GMDSS equipment; that of false alarms.

The number of inadvertent alerts being raised has increased because of the inexperience -- I'm not going to use the word incompetence -- of users. Coast Guards and other emergency services are becoming increasingly concerned about this. It's the false car alarm syndrome and it's not unknown for ship's officers to ignore or even mute alarms with potentially disastrous consequences. VDRs could be used to monitor the incidence of false alarms, highlighting volume and the need for revised procedures and staff training.

Other information which may become available for recording in the future depends on the continuation of technological advancement or changes in the way in which ships operate. For example, as electronic charts become more integrated into bridge systems, there will be a call to record this information. It is also likely that the division between electronic charts and radar data will fade, with the same result.

In addition, as data networks are implemented to a higher degree on ships, it will become easier to record more engine room and cargo control room information.

As I mentioned earlier, technological advances and developments currently underway mean that VDRs can now be developed with specifications exceeding those set out in the IMO performance standards. Data capture devices and electronic technology have already improved, and research is well advanced into fireproofing, particularly considering the latest storage mediums.

Flash memory is expected to become the standard memory used for recorders. Continuing technological developments will lead to a rise in memory capacity and costs will fall. Look at your desktop PC to see the speed with which this is happening.

Increased memory will allow for more data to be collected, both in type and in volume, providing a greater number of audio inputs or a more frequent radar update, for example. It may also allow for the maximum recording time to be extended. This could lead to the development of concepts such as automated operations log to be permanently retained rather than overwritten say every 12 hours.

In addition, the fairly aggressive compression currently required because of limited memory would no longer be needed. In any case, compression methods are expected to improve, making recording of more and more data an economic proposition. Increased memory could also hep to make software more accessible as processors are able to work faster.

Current software tends to be written in complex programming language. As the process becomes quicker and cheaper, less cryptic code and programs with a lower and cheaper skill level could be used.

It is probable that the physical size of components and circuitry will continue to fall, reducing the size and the cost of equipment both above and below deck. A reduction in power supply requirements is also expected to have a corresponding reduction in the cost of the battery size.

There are many changes in the pipeline which will have an effect on the use of VDRs. For example, automatic identification systems, AIS, are set to become fact and will generate additional information which could be recorded by VDRs. While the International Safety Management ISM code is expected to bring a greater reliance on quality and traceability, both these requirements could be verified using the VDR as a tool.

The ship's bridge is also changing. The subject of one-man bridges continues to be discussed and will have a substantial impact on the way ships run. This will greatly increase the importance of recording information electronically.

In addition, the introduction of integrated bridges with vessel management systems will make the recording of data simpler. As much of the output data will arrive at one central source, IBS systems will have to communicate in a common language, making interfacing simpler.

As we can see, the scope for use of VDRs, not just as catastrophe recorders, but as an integral tool for improved ship operation can only increase as generally the level of digital equipment onboard increases and becomes more integrated. VDR information can already be played back at limited resolution on a standard PC. It is likely that playback facilities will be in far greater evidence in ship operators' offices, providing considerable information either directly into their own PCs or as operational information from the ship. This could be used in training or in establishing future maintenance requirements.

While the growth of global communications and the current trend of falling transmission costs, the digital transfer of VDR information from ship to shore will become a real possibility. This will allow even quicker analysis of incidents. It could also be beneficial in distribution of information throughout a fleet, either through staff training or by changes in procedures, all of which will take us one stage further in the quest to avoid reoccurrences.

I mentioned earlier that VDRs could be used for automated logging to complement existing logbook systems which rely on human memory and are limited by individuals' levels of attention to detail. It is conceivable that shore staff may eventually be able to gain access to this or other information via a satellite link.

Although the technology exists now, price prohibits the possibility of remote locations dialing into a ship to monitor this information or receiving data during or after an incident. Again, as the cost of global communication falls and satellite links improve to allow higher data rates, these could become common practices, and so on and so forth.

The potential is virtually limitless. But in looking to the future, it is worth recalling these four key criteria because they still apply.

Regulatory VDRs, both now and for the foreseeable future will allow analysis of all types of marine incidents. They will produce hard information in a user friendly manner. Even the most cutting edge VDRs that I've outlined will enable anyone to see what happened in real time. And all of the systems will be able to work on any type of vessel.

It's been a long haul, but to misquote Churchill, it's not the end of the road; it's not the beginning of the road, but maybe it's that bit of the road where you can see just how far you've come or how much further you can go if you keep at it.

At long last we can foresee a time when the unexplained marine incident is a thing of the past.

I would like to conclude by reading from a paper entitled, "Voyage Data Recorders," submitted by the NTSB's Mike Brown and published in the main proceedings document. I believe that these paragraphs sum up the immediate future of VDRs in a very clear and concise way. I also commend the whole paper to you, as it certainly demonstrates the long and torturous route already taken. Let us all be very mindful of this during this critical and hopefully final legislative stage.

From Mike Brown: "VDR. The installation of VDRs is an important safety issue for all marine operators, especially for operators of passenger vessels. Automatic data recording devices provide crucial factual information for accident investigation and play a key role in identifying and addressing causal factors. Whilst it can be argued that the VDR may not be a first line safety tool, such as a life jacket or a fire extinguisher, it certainly has great value in ensuring that a vessel is operated safely, that its gear is performing as intended and that the crews are performing as required by regulation, company policy and the general rules of good seamanship.

"The VDR provides the vessel operator and owner with information that can be used to better manage the vessel operation. It also provides the owner-operator with a comprehensive record of what occurred in an event, thereby assisting in the event of some tort action. The management benefits derived from installing a VDR system would quickly offset the cost of its installation."

Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, thank you.