Australian approach to e-navigation Importance of the Human Element

Australian approach to e-navigation
Importance of the Human Element
Nick Lemon
Australian Maritime Safety Authority
Presentation overview
Background - user needs issues
Human Centred Design, Software Quality
Assurance and Usability Testing for enavigation
e-navigation in Australia
What next?
Emerging challenges
Allianz Report, 2012
Ship size
Ultra large cruise ships and container ships
Ship complexity and automation
rapid technological change
complex, less observable systems
over-reliance on technology
large volumes of information
Training and labour
Crewing levels
Emerging challenges
Allianz Safety and Shipping Review 2015:
2014 losses (75) down 32% on 2013 (110)
Primary cause of losses – foundered (65%), followed by
groundings (17%)
Overreliance on electronic navigation - a rising safety
concern
Lessons learned related to ECDIS not feeding into training
[and the design of new systems]
Ref. http://www.agcs.allianz.com/assets/PDFs/Executive%20Summaries/Shipping%20Review/ShippingReview-2015-Exec-Summ.pdf
Automation – path to new types of errors?
•
Automation bias
•
Over reliance
Positive correlation between loss of SA
and increasing level of technology
120
100
Loss of situation awareness
Why is this so?
Its all under control
Well, if it says so I
guess it is……
Loss of SA
•
Attentional tunnelling
(based on Jones and Endsley
(1996), SA taxonomy)
•
R² = 0.8344
80
60
40
20
0
2000
Grech & Horberry (2002)
Seastreak Wall Street (2013)
Seastreak Wall Street (2013)
True recognition of the issues....
“….the final error was made by the Captain on the day of the
accident, but the first vulnerabilities were designed into the
system years before.
Accidents, like a fraying rope, are always a series of
missed opportunities, but the blame typically falls on the final
strand in a rope that breaks - often it is the human being”.
(Deborah Hersman, chair of NTSB, April 8, 2014.)
The case for a guideline on SQA, HCD and UT
Design issues that affect
performance:
lack of integration and
standardisation;
highly complex systems;
lack of system usability; and
minimal and too late end
user involvement in design
and build process
Software is everywhere....
• Older generation equipment had little if
any reliance on software, but
• Fast growing use of software in modern
equipment and systems, and
• Increasing use of information systems
and automated communication of
data/information, hence
• Need for an overarching approach to
SQA in maritime applications
Genesis of SQA, HCD and UT
2008 - Japan provided inputs on usability of navigation equipment
2008 - IMO e-nav Strategy “Potential users of e-navigation and their
high level needs” - Human Machine Interface and Human Centred
Presentation
2010 - User needs analysis: “Improved Ergonomics - Mariners express
desire for bridge layouts, equipment and systems to be better designed
from an ergonomic and user friendly perspective.”
2011 – Australia shares research on Human Element and e-nav,
including Human-System Integration and Human Centred Design
Genesis of SQA, HCD and UT
2012 - NI e-Navigation Usability Workshop at WMU, Malmo, Sweden
2012 - NI provided inputs on usability, Australia on IMO HEAP and
human error management, Republic of Korea on SQA, Japan on
usability guidelines
2013 - AMSA e-Nav Usability Workshop – initial HCD guideline
2013 – Australia provided inputs on design useability principles,
Republic of Korea on SQA
2013 - IMO NAV 59 endorsed development of three draft guidelines on
HCD, UT and SQA
Genesis of SQA, HCD and UT
2014 – IMO NCSR 1 received further draft
guidelines on HCD, UT and SQA
2014 - NCSR 1 Correspondence Group
combined and harmonised SQA, HCD and
UT guidelines
SQA and HCD Guideline for e-navigation
• Human Centred Design Guideline (Australia)
• Usability Testing Guideline (Japan)
• Software Quality Assurance Guideline (Republic of Korea)
and now
• IMO NCSR 2 agreed one harmonised Guideline on SQA and
HCD for e-navigation (sent to MSC 95 in June 2015 for
approval)
SQA and HCD Guideline for e-navigation
• The Guideline’s aim is to ensure quality design processes are
used in the development of e-navigation systems
• Based on existing quality management methodology and on
relevant ISO standards and system design research
• Goal-based (aligns with IMO approach)
• Not intended to specify or discourage the use of any particular
design solution or SQA or UT method
• Applied early and throughout a system’s design and
development process – else it will cost more
• Their use will play a critical role in identifying and mitigating
operational risks
Generic life cycle
HCD
and
SQA
Who is involved?
Manufacturers/system designers,
users, ship owners/operators,
regulatory authority
Manufacturers/system
designers, users
Users,
owners,
operators
Manufacturers,
system designers,
users, approval and
regulatory authorities
And the result should be....
Future systems that:
• are designed with end users in mind
• match user skills and training
• be easy to understand and intuitive
to use
• reduce opportunities for errors
• not need a lesson or tutorial, post
its, labels or other work-arounds
E-navigation in Australia
• Continue to promote HCD
• Continue to promote VHF Date Exchange
Service (VDES)
• Australian vessel monitoring and advisory
system (AVMAS)
AVMAS – four capabilities
Vessel tracking
• Use data better and access more data
– AIS - identify port arrival time – levy
management system
– Trial new and different satellite AIS data
providers
– Proof of concept using small format AIS
transmitter with VHF Data Exchange
capabilities
Vessel monitoring
Alerting
Automate Alert
Messages
Auto-Alert vessels
entering EEZ
Enable ‘focused’
vessel alerts
Information exchange
Route exchange / Maritime Safety Information
VTS exchange
VHF Data Exchange System
AVMAS Time-Line
2013/15
Horizon 1 –
Define & Scope
2015/17
Horizon 2 –
Build Capability
2017/19
Horizon 3 –
Deliver & Revise
2019+
BAU –
Maintain & Evaluate
E-navigation at the IMO (MSC 95/19/8)
MSC 95 - six outputs for the IMO’s High-level Action
Plan for 2016-17 and 2018-19
1.
Standardized modes of operation (S-Mode)
2.
New INS modules (harmonization of bridge design
and display of information)
3.
Guidelines and criteria for ship reporting systems
4.
Requirements for shipborne radio equipment
forming part of the GMDSS (to include Built In Integrity
Testing)
E-navigation at the IMO (MSC 95/19/8)
5.
Guidelines on harmonized display of
navigation information
6.
Consideration of reports on development and
implementation of Maritime Service Portfolios
(MSPs)
To conclude and what next for Australia?
1. Internationally:
- IMO with the six(?) outputs
- HCD and S-Mode focus
- VHD Data Exchange System (VDES)
2. Regionally:
- work cooperatively (e.g. APHoMSA and supporting regional
collaborative mechanisms, such as this forum)
3. Domestically:
- Deliver the Australian Vessel Monitoring and Advisory System
Acknowledgements (SQA and HCD Guideline)
•
•
•
•
•
•
RoK and Japan (Seojeong Lee and Junji Fukuto)
IMO NCSR 1 e-navigation Correspondence Group
Australian Corro Group team (Mel Clarke, AMSA, Margarita
Lutzhoft and Ben Brooks, AMC)
Lloyds Register, Human Factors expert, Jonathan Earthy
Erik Styhr Petersen, engineering useability (U-TEA), 2012
Jillian Carson-Jackson, AMSA (AVMAS program manager)
END
Nick Lemon
Australian Maritime Safety Authority