Most mariners donât like to hear about this, but for those who see a future in shipping, it is imperative to keep on top of this development and prepare themselves for the jobs of the future.
For us old farts, we can just keep on as before and complain about the whole thing, or kid ourselves that âit will never happen, at least in our lifetimeâ.
That depends on how long you are planning to live I presume.
Thanks for posting this article. I found it interesting. Ultimately itâs going to be the IMO, who decides on the fate of autonomous shipping. I imagine and hope that they generally follow the same footsteps as the ICAO for aircraft. I would love some of the advanced tech to make its way onto bridges, but you canât cut out the crewing element of probably 90+ percent of ships.
My strongest argument against it is: how does an autonomous vessel fulfil its responsibility to respond to distress at sea?
The vessel has no responsibility, the legal and moral responsibility lies with the master. Since an autonomous ship is umanned then what is already a very weak collection of law and treaties will become even less effective.
Some of the lawsuits based on failure to assist make for fascinating reading.
Yes it is primarily a moral obligation which has been brought down among seafarers for generations. The legal obligation is more circumspect and both are not always followed.
In 1979 I was Captain on a Drillship operating in the South China Sea, when the big exodus from Southern Vietnam happened. It was estimated that 40,000 people was afloat in the area in the period between the monsoons.
We were sitting on 8 anchors in the shipping lane in the disputed zone between Indonesia and Vietnam and unable to avoid the refugee boats, while watching ships of all nationalities giving them a wide berth around us.
During a single hitch in June-July 1979 we picked up abt. 2,200 people from boats that came for us like flies to a lump of dung, while other vessels were avoiding them like pests.
Both the Operator and the Indonesia authorities instructed me to not do so, but I insisted on following the time honoured maritime tradition of assisting people in distress, even if it was self-inflicted. (They axed holes in the boat when they got close)
Like in Diner for One - the same procedure as every year, James. Refer to sea-watch.org.
Some folks say it turns out to be a dubios business of escape-help rather than human help. This moral question is not decided between the big ship Captain and the poor guys in their boats with their self inflicted holes.
I was there in the same vicinity of South China sea in 1975 and later. We received orders from the company to avoid those boat people at any costs and alter course as necessary - we obeyed orders.
Just wonder if she can pass under the bridges at Bosphorus without removing top of the âtowerâ??
I was involved in preparing two Jackups for passage under those bridges, which involved not only removing most of the legs, but also top of the derrick.