# ECDIS Set-Up and Alarms **URL:** \ **Category:** Professional Mariner Forum\ **Created:** [January 2, 2023, 11:17pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/ecdis-set-up-and-alarms/65077 "2023-01-02T23:17:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 30
**Author:** ![Sirk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/74df32/32.png) [@Sirk](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/Sirk)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2023, 11:00pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/ecdis-set-up-and-alarms/65077/30 "2023-01-07T23:00:10Z")
> [@Slocum](#): > > Wish we could. SIRE however takes a different view of the topic. Almost all SIRE/OCIMF and/or CDI recommendations are based on current law. > [@DamnYankee](#): > > Most that I have used will turn off once the helm is switched from auto to hand steering, but some do not. If there are ships requiring this system to be functional with a pilot onboard, or even two officers on the bridge, they should probably revisit that policy and change it. You are wrong; > 4 From the operational point of view, automatic interface with activation of the ship’s heading or track control system (HCS/TCS) is a superfluous function because SOLAS [regulation V/19.2.2.3](https://www.imorules.com/SOLAS_REGV.A.19.html) requires the **BNWAS to be in operation whenever the ship is under way at sea**. This creates an inconsistency between SOLAS [regulation V/19.2.2.3](https://www.imorules.com/SOLAS_REGV.A.19.html) and the “Automatic mode” provisions in the performance standard. In addition, from the technical point of view, it is noted that this issue is also addressed in the “note” to section 3.1.1 of IEC 62616:2010 – Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems – Bridge navigational watch alarm system (BNWAS), which states: > > - _“NOTE: The Automatic mode is not suitable for use on a ship conforming with regulation [SOLAS V/19.2.2.3](https://www.imorules.com/SOLAS_REGV.A.19.html) which requires the BNWAS to be in operation whenever the ship is underway at sea”_ . > > 5 Accordingly, as an _interim_ measure and pending a revision of the _Performance standards for a bridge navigational watch alarm system (BNWAS)_ – (resolution [MSC.128(75)](https://www.imorules.com/MSCRES_128.75.html)), the automatic operational mode, if it is available, should not be used. > > **Parent topic:** [MSC.1/Circular.1474 – Guidance on the Bridge Navigational Watch Alarm System (BNWAS) Auto Function – (23 May 2014)](https://www.imorules.com/MSCCIRC_1474.html) > > > > [@Kennebec\_Captain](#): > > I’ve no problems with shutting off alarms that are doing more harm then good but that action should be based on a solid understanding of why they are going off. You should have a valid reason for non-compliance with the bridge procedures, and any such occurrence should be properly reported. Ignorance of the applicable law and/or lack of skills would not be a good reason to do so. According to MSC Resolution 232(82) there is a list of mandatory alarms and indications which must be active. You are not allowed to turn off the audible alarm, certified ECDIS does not even have such a technical possibility. Of course you can always act like the captain of the tanker Genesis River. He, at the clear suggestion of the pilot, simply turned off not only ECDIS but also ARPA. Amazingly, this did not surprise officials, as well as many of our forum colleagues. > [@NTSB Report Genesis River and Voyager Tow](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/ntsb-report-genesis-river-and-voyager-tow/59133/3): > > Yeah, there’s a lot in that report. Could be that the accident rate in the Houston Ship Canal is considered acceptable. Making it safer would require reducing the output of the entire system. As far the situation with the EOT, a Nabtesco, same one we had. With a fully loaded ship a by-pass order won’t give much more before another load limit of some kind is reached. Just a few RPM at best. --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/ecdis-set-up-and-alarms/65077)._