Maybe a little refit helps to avoid instrument failure:
Of course your view out the windows may get a bit more obstructed?
But who needs to look out the windows when it is all happening on the large shiny new screens in front of you.
Once upon a time THIS was how the bridge looked:
This is why I bought an AIS transponder, if you aren’t on the screen you do not exist.
… like social media!
(but that’s another problem 
)
The captain will be less likely to be written off as a Luddite if he is able to demonstrate skill with the tech aids available to him.
The vast majority of the captains lecturing about the shortcomings of modern technology are unable to do so. This comes across as cope and insecurity. Usually because it is.
Masters should not rely on junior officers as tech support. They should be as good and preferably much better.
If you make a dozen trips around the world including the Persian Gulf, Korea Strait, Sinagpore Strait, and through the fishing fleets in the S. China Sea with the typical academy-trained third mate you’d see what I’m talking about. Good technical skills are necessary but not sufficient.
From the linked article in the OP:“through the embodied learning that screens cannot provide.”
The screens (ARPA, ECDIS etc) are (obviously) useful and required, it’s just that there’s more out there
Found this article: The sea within: embodied sensemaking among seafaring leaders
From the article:
“How do seafaring leaders (captains and Chief Engineers) make sense of critical events that confront their practice? In particular, it explores the degree that sensemaking is an embodied phenomenon”
“the nature of sensemaking, revealing it to be a deeply embodied phenomenon”
…forms of sensemaking are largely hidden from the conscious awareness of seafaring leaders
I just became more familiar with the term “embodied” recently, but I’ve posted about things related to the concept here a few times.
Good P&I Bulletin on Bridge Watchkeeping and Collision Avoidance
From that article: “the visual check requires the navigator to become physically involved with the dynamics of the situation”
One thing I try to show junior OOW is not to mumble course changes into a screen instead walk over to the centerline gyro repeater to confirm that course matches visually the way they want the ship to go.
Another example is the practice of the conning officer, when giving a helm order, to point in the direction of the turn.
It’s not a matter of one way or the other, it’s both, embodied judgement and skilled use of the instruments.
Somewhere on the west coast of Norway:
No need for GPS or fancy aids to navigation
Local knowledge and “situation awareness” by looking out the wheelhouse window is important, however.
This is also from the west coast of Norway:
Same applies; use your eyes and local knowledge.
Its time there was an endorsement for bridge team management etc for loss of gps
Is there?
Regular trips to the simulator for aircraft pilots are all about failure handling.
Spoofed gps is scary as you can only know by comparing with something else.
There is no military grade accuracy from Navstar, they just get the second signal for atmospheric distortion which all vendors can decode and we have all been using offshore for DP systems.Plus the vendors own corrections.
Once they get the L5 sats up that will be free to everyone un encoded.
Selective availability was removed years ago.
Sun spot activity still an issue
Spoofing a huge issue
Crew that dont know what to do after loss of gps maybe biggest issue?
Inertial is a good fill in but only for minutes. Dp vessels in certain parts of the world have inertial in their DP systems as they get trouble every afternoon.
If I were to come up with a simulator exercise, I would have jamming and then I would have spoofing where you gradually get moved a little bit at a time so that if you hold the correct course as you see it on the plotter, you will hit something in reality.
hows that work with a gps compass?
Are their any class rules that one gyro must be a spinning mass one?
SOLAS ch.V reg.19 - but basically…
“GPS Compass” - IMO type-approved as THD (transmitting heading device) - is acceptable under 500GT.
Above that, spinning mass / laser ring / IFOG gyros are all acceptable - if type-approved - but not GPS compass. [great backup though, especially at high latitudes]
Mag compass always required.
www.imorules.com/GUID-9E0E8A48-0676-4C0A-9C10-DDB1CABF8A75.html
There are two methods of navigation : representational (use of symbols and procedures) and perceptional, which is embodied, direct observation of the world.
Representational methods are being used whether paper charts or an ECDIS are used and regardless if the positions are derived by GNSS or using terrestrial bearings and ranges.
Preparing for a loss or degradation of GNSS signals can be dealt with using representational methods (plot bearings and ranges using the ECDIS). This would be relatively easy to learn as most deck officer are already comfortable using representational methods/ procedures.
Preparing for a loss is easy.
Have you seen how far your ecdis will run in DR mode?
How about total loss when your not expecting it?
( and your dp3 pipelayer has a blackout and your trying to work out if your moving or not in zero vis)
Someone else can worry about that.
My point is that in the event of GNSS loss or degradation there will be elevated risk but it likely will be mitigated within the regulatory/procedural/checklist/representational framework. (required practice plotting LOPs on ECDIS)
What about “embodied learning that screens cannot provide”, as mentioned in the article?
Here, [Dreyfus’ model of skill acquisition] (Dreyfus model of skill acquisition - Wikipedia) is useful .
In my experience a new third mate can advance from the novice level to at least advanced beginner in a surprisingly short period of time in the right conditions, but most are very uncomfortable leaving the screens.
The other issue is the “erosion of professional trust” mentioned in the article. Most junior officers assume the motivation for teaching some basic (but at the margin, very useful) visual skills is based on some sort of nostalgia for doing things the old way.
I would hope at the very least that naval personnel are still trained in situations where all electronic aids are denied.
I well remember manoeuvres at night with darkened ship and radar silence and the anxiety that one felt.
There is a military only L2 channel. (The separate civilian L2 channel is still new enough that most GPS receivers don’t have that capability.)
If we had L2 and L5 channels we’d be immune to the current spoofing that’s going on like the Navy ships are.
What do paper charts have to do with it? Just plot your position on the ECDIS, it’s faster than walking back to the chart table.
The incident happened in 2024. I asked an aquaintance about this and his reply is as follows:
That was early last year, I was involved with the recovery of this incident. It wasn’t a positioning issue, it was an issue with the tensioner control system that caused an incorrect load to be fed into the dynamic positioning model - so the ship start surging fore and aft and this caused the pipe string to buckle just above the seabed.
I guarantee you I can cut a couple of arcs on a chart faster than you can plot on an ECDIS. During my nearly forty years of licensed time I rarely relied on electronics other than radar and gyro when terrestrial navigation was possible.
