385
1 INTRODUCTION
The polar area has been explored in the search of
minerals,oilandgasformanydecades.Itshowsthat
thisareahaslargenaturalresources.Productionand
exploration is ongoing in the Beaufort Sea, the
GreenlandSea,theNorwegianSea,theBarentsSea,
theKaraSea,theLaptevSea,theEastSiberianSea
andtheChucksiSea.
Oil and gas developments and shipping have
grownrapidlysincethereductionoftheseaice;these
developmentsfacechallengingcondit
ions,
darknessinwinter
extremecoldness
remoteness
unpredictableweather
iceinmanyforms.
Thesechallengeshave notstoppedthedesiresto
develop the area in terms of collect
ing natural
resourcesforcommercialuse.
Thepolararea isauniqueenvironmentand itis
something that we want and need to protect from
anykindofpollution.Oilspillamongstarcticspecies
wouldbeutterlyharmful.
A disaster in these waters would create severe
environmental consequences and especially risk the
lifesofthecrew.
These environmental and life threatening
disasters can be av
oided with adequate bridge
simulatortraining.
Reducing Risks of Arctic Operations with Ice
Simulator
J
.Koponen
A
kerArcticTechnologyInc,Helsinki,Finland
ABSTRACT: During the process of development of the Full Mission Bridge Simulator, I have come in to a
conclusion that animportant part of a successful learning process is the ability to train witha highfidelity
bridgesimulator.ThePolarareasareharshenvironmentsandtosurvivethere,onemusthavespecialtraining
andexperience.Thissurvivingmea
nsthatthepolarecosystemwillsurvivefrompollutionandthevesselsand
theircrewfromthebadjudgmentsormisconductofvesseloperators.Themostcost‐effectivewaytoimprove
special skills needed in the Polar waters is to include bridge simulator training to the Deck Officers
requirements.In thi
spaper I will introducea real life situationinwhich an icebreaker assistinga merchant
vesselgetsintoa“closecall”situationandhowthiswashandled.Maritimeindustryhasn’tstudiedmuchabout
theinfluencesimulatortraininghastothenavigators. Herethema
ritimeindustrycouldlearn fromaviation
andmedicalindustry,sincetheyhavedonesomeextensivescientificstudiestoprovetheneedforsimulators.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 9
Number 3
September 2015
DOI:10.12716/1001.09.03.11
386
2 RISKMANAGEMENT
Many companies are now taking the risk of
commercializingnaturalresources.Ship‐ownershave
startedtousetheNorthernSeaRouteandtheNorth
West Passage for their ships. These areas are tough
on vessels and crew. If you are new to the job and
environment,learning
ontheactualworkplaceonan
unfamiliar vessel and inanunfamiliar environment
isariskybusiness.
I believe that companies which have arctic
experience plus are using technologies and services
speciallyadaptedtoarcticconditionsaretheonesto
succeed.
Partoftheriskmanagementishavingasuitable
ship with experienced ship crew. This crew in the
near future need (from the year 2017 onwards) a
certificate for operating in the polar waters (Polar
Code). In this accredited polar code certificate
trainingprocess,thebridgesimulatorwillmostlikely
beoneoftheapprovedmethodsoftrainingthepolar
navigators.
One important point in which the simulator is
reallyusefulandsuitable,isindesigninganewport
or a production plant. In my opinion these new
designs would require a feasibility study to be
performed. To make a study with exact port
visualization,vesselsandweatherconditionsone
can
find out design mistakes and set environmental
operationallimits.
3 SIMULATOR
3.1 Whyneedasimulator?
SomeyearsagoweinAkerArcticnoticedthattheIce
Simulations were not present, and that the ones we
sawweremerelyusingiceasacolorinvisualization.
We decided that we
will create a proper Ice
Simulatorinwhichtheactualiceforcestothevessel
wouldbepresentinvariousiceconditions.Ouraim
was to create a high fidelity simulator, i.e. a
simulator that physically and functionally imitates
the real equipment and environment as well as
possible.
The simulator
is needed for different reasons:
cost, safety, easiness of teaching, efficiency in
teaching, testing of design and in finding out
operational limits. It could also be used in accident
investigations by visualizing the incident. One can
make independent analyses of the accidents or
incidents.Itispossibletocreatemany“near
miss”or
“whatif”scenarios.Simulatorcanbetailoredjustfor
yourvesselanditsoperations.
In many cases it is not possible to organize
training in a realenvironment, and arcticespecially
should not be the place where real life practicing
takes place. Simulator enables training of risky and
hazardous operations safely and operators’
insufficient skills can’t harm real nature, lives or
material. Risks on real life vessel operations are
smaller.
Simulator training is lessexpensive compared to
real vessel operations. Bridge simulator is cheaper
thanrealbridgeonavessel,andoperationalcostsare
low. Service and maintenance is
less demanding.
Timeaspectisalsofavorableforsimulator,theactual
place and a mission where the skills need to be
practicedcanbesetupimmediately,andnotimeis
wastedfortravellingtothejoborassignment.
3.2 BridgeSimulator
In Maritime Institutes where the deck officers are
educated, one of the first tasks is to learn how to
navigate in darkness with radar only as the
navigational aid. This is done by using a bridge
simulator.Whenthecourseis successfully over, the
student has gained self‐confidence on handling a
VLCC,RoRooranyothervesselin
congestedwaters,
or in a challenging archipelago like we have in the
south west of Finland. Then the students study
furtherandvesseloperationsinsimulatorplayakey
part in the process of becoming an experienced
seafarer.ThisishowIwastrainedandIthinkitwas
adequate
for me at that time. These kinds of
simulators are in every corner of the world and for
sure they have bought safety in navigation and
operationsperformedatsea.
Operations in ice and below freezing
temperatures are always challenging. The vessels
should be ice strengthened and winterized and
commercial vessels
should follow the pre‐set
procedures given by authorities of the area.
Icebreaker assistance and convoy has certain
procedures.Forapersonwhohasneverexperienced
suchthingstheonlywaytopracticeisinsimulator,
and I believe that the safe unexpected situation
trainingisonlypossiblewithsimulator.
TheIceSimulatorshouldhave:
Tailormadesimulationmodels
Accurate own ships with correct control systems
andrealequipment
Machinerybehaviorandinteractionwithice
Validatedshipandicebreakingbehavior
Dynamicicemodels
Good and tailored visual system (correct visual
observations)
Multipleshipoperations
(manybridges)
Iceloadcorrectness
Purposebuiltexercises
Portlayoutandoperationstudiespossibility
Routestudypossibility
Radar/Ice‐radarandECDISsimulation
Navigation in ice, practical training for the
icebreakers and operations with icebreaker and ice
navigation for ice strengthened vessels would be
most useful for personnel entering ice infested
waters. The Ice Simulator development Aker Arctic
has done is aiming to fulfill these abovementioned
needsandrequirements.
387
Figure1.BridgeofaBalticIcebraker(IBOTSO)
Figure2.IceSimulatorBridge(AboaMare)
Correctinteractionbetweenamerchantvesseland
an icebreaker is important for safe and successful
operations. There are certain procedures that the
escorted vessel should do and follow, and
icebreakershavetheirownprocedures.Afternormal
simulatorpracticesthestudent(operator) should be
familiar with the merchant vessel or icebreaker
procedures.
I believe that the role reversalexercises
wouldbeimportantinunderstandingthe actualice
operations and grasp what it is all about. Safely
practice icebreaker vs.merchant vessel role reversal
is only possible in simulator environment. It would
notbepossibletobeaCaptainofKaraSeaicebreaker
leadingaconvoyofmerchantvessels,oraCaptainof
the LNG tanker following that icebreaker in same
convoy.Withsimulatorthisispossible,andsafely.
What are the simulator properties that are
important for learning? In aviation industry this is
studied:KoonceandBramble (1998)statedthatitis
not
known why, in some complex cognitive
psychomotortasks,somesimulatorproperties affect
transfer more than others. They assume, based on
Lintern (1991), that certain cognitive principles are
important, not because the physical similarity of a
simulator to an airplane. Baudhuin (1987, p.218)
states that functional similarity rather than physical
similarity
affectsthetransferoflearning.
Cuesarethosesimulatorproperties,propertiesof
thesimulatordisplayorsoundsthattheuserusesto
make decisions. These are, for instance, the center
line of the runway that helps the pilot to land, or
sound of an engine: they provide the user with
information
thathelpshim/hertomakedecisions.In
asimulator,thesecueshaveanessentialrolebecause
the user’s decisions are based on them. In many
simulators, the characteristics providing essential
information have been enhanced. This is called
augmentedcueing(augmented=havingbeenmade
greaterinsizeorvalue).(Taylor
&Lintern1993)
3.3 Learning,actionandtechnology
Learning to use a simulator is based on doing,
experimenting and making errors to a great extent
(learning‐ by‐doing approach). The focus is on
learningpracticalskills.
Whenactualworkenvironmentissimulated, the
realequipment,‐materials and –timeframeisused,
sotheorycanbeputtotests.Itisimportantthatskills
learnedinsimulatorcanbepracticedsoonthereafter
inrealenvironmentinordertomakethetransferof
learningmoreeffective.
Venkula (1993, p.61‐80) studied the connection
betweenactivityandcreationofknowledge.Thefact
thatthe
individualdoessomethinghim/herselfandis
thus concretely involved in events has a significant
effect on the creation of knowledge. To achieve
technical knowledge (psychomotoric skills and
learning theory) importance is in repeated practice
and periodic refresh. When we do something in
practiceweuseanddevelopourmentalcapacityin
a
holisticway,notonlymemorizingdetails.
Chainofeventsthatendsincollisionissomething
everybody wants to avoid. Hours spent in bridge
simulatorwillpaybackwhentheoperatorwillactin
real life situation safely and as practiced. With
simulatoritispossibletopracticevarioussituations
under circumstances that closely resemble real
situations. Learning in virtual environment is
different from the traditional learn‐by‐doing in real
environments. It is possible to experiment without
risks,andtrytofindnewwaystoperformthetask.
One can use the imagination and create new
innovative solutions. A simulator
is a safe
environmentbecausethe actualaccidentsandfaults
donotleadto any casualties or majoroil pollution.
This “without risk” learning may bring to some
operators wrong self‐confidence and may lead to
practiceswheretheoperatortakestoohighrisks.In
simulator training it is possible
to create situations
thatsubjecttheoperatortoerrors,andthusdecrease
operators’excessiveself‐confidence.
Aviation industry has studied much about the
simulator in training the pilots and crew, and their
goal is to make operator and airplane work in
effortless cooperation. They also have the most
advanced simulators giving
an authentic immersive
experienceofflyinganairplane.
Medical education has adapted the simulation‐
basedtrainingenvironmentsforthereasonitisasafe
way to teach and practice practical skills, without
endangering the patients. Smith (2000, p.633)
388
characterizessimulationbasedtraininginsurgeryas
follows: it enables activeparticipation and makes it
possibletousescenariosthataresuitablefortheskill
level of the student. Performance can be evaluated
andfeedbackgivenimmediately.Inmyopinionthis
samecanbesaidaboutmaritimesimulationtraining.
After
the practices the important part of the
learning process is the Debriefing.My own
experienceofthisisthatdebrief/feedbackaftereach
ship bridge simulation session was of utmost
importance.Valuablecommentsfrominstructorwere
helpful, and finding out what went well and what
was the reason for
something that didn’t go as it
should. An important part after the exercises and
debriefingwastheopportunitytogetbackandcarry
on with exercises. Dismukes, McDonnell and Dope
(2000)studieddebriefingsessionsafterLOFT((line‐
orientedflighttraining)theentireflightissimulated
instead of isolated tasks) training. According
to the
resultsoftheirresearch:
in addition to the instructors evaluation, the
students/operatorsself‐evaluationisimportant
duringthedebriefing,theinstructorshouldactas
afacilitatorsothatthestudents willtakeamore
activeroleindiscussion
instructor needs training how to lead debriefing
session
student/operatorneedstobetrainedtoparticipate
indebriefingsession.
4 STUDYCASE
4.1 Exampleofrealicebreakingoperation
I give a real life example of the icebreaking escort
that could have ended in a collision. This was
avoidedduetotheexperiencedicebreakercrewand
pilotinescorted
vessel.
ThishappenedApril2014inTheGulfofBotnica.I
wasonboarddoingresearchoficebreakeroperation.
There were a lot of drifting ice‐fields, new and old
ice, big ice foes and smaller ones in the area of
vicinity. Icebreaker had two engines running, since
theicehad
beensoftalldayandshehadfullspeed
duringtheincident.WhenIB suddenlyencountered
afieldofhardice,twoengineswere not enough to
keepupthemarchingspeed.Tostarttheadditional
twoengineswouldhavenothelpedinthissituation
because in 80 seconds it is
not possible to get the
propulsionupandrunning.Escortedvesselspeedis
not known, but engine command is expected to be
fullahead.
IB OOW was First Officer / Captain, a very
experienced sailor and has been working in
icebreakersforover10years.
Escortedvessel:
GeneralCargo,GT
12993,length143m,beam22,8
m,draft7m.
Icebreaker:
Balticicebreaker,GT7066,length99m,beam24,2
m,draft8m.
Figure3.0sec.IBmeetthehardlevelice
Figure4. 40 sec. IB speed reducing, IB evaluate the
situation
Figure5. 52 sec. IB informs escorted vessel pilot to take
“hardtoport”
Figure6.65sec.Distancecloses,nocoursechange
389
Figure7.74sec.Vesselstarttoturn
Figure8.86sec.Vesselsteerawayfromthechannel
Figure9.99sec.Vesselcutintohardlevelicefield
Figure10.110sec.Situationclear
This situation could have ended in a collision if
eitheroneofthesepartieswouldhavebeenoccupied
withanydistractingelement,causingescortedvessel
hittingthefork,orsideoftheIB.Inimage8onecan
clearlyseethatescortedvesselsbowwasnotfarfrom
theIB’smade
channelsedge.Ifthebowwouldhave
enteredtheIB’smadechannel,thevesselwouldhave
not been able to break out from the channel, the
impactangelbeingtoosmallandvesselwouldstay
on the channel. The time in which the important
decisionsweremadewasamatter
oftensofseconds.
4.1.1 AlternativemanoeuverforIBtoavoidcollision
FromIBpointofviewtherewouldhavebeenone
more thing to do, if the vessel would have not
succeeded to avoid the channel and would have
approachedoncollisioncourse.IBwouldhavemade
hardtoStarboard
intendingtomakewayoutofthe
straight channel she has made, thus allowing
escorted vessel a change to break out from the
channelinthecurveIBjustmade,maybetherecould
besomeothersolutionsaswell,butthisistheknown
andusedwaytoreactin
thissituation.
Thisreallifeoperationcouldbeeasilytransferred
tosimulatorexercises.In myopinionthisandother
dangerous operations should be practiced in
simulatorbeforeenteringtherealvessel.Operational
simulationsandvesselfamiliarizationwouldleadto
saferoperationsinpolarwaters.
Figure11.IBoperatorstationinstarboardbridgewing,180°panoramicview
390
REFERENCES
Baudhuin, S. 1987. The Design of Industrial and Flight
Simulators.In:Cormier,StephenM.,&Hagman,Joseph
D. (Eds). 1987. Transfer of Learning, pp. 217‐237
Alexandria,Virginia:AcademicPress.
Dismukes, R., McDonnell, K. &Jobe, K. 2000. Facilitating
LOFT Debriefings: Instructor Techniques and Vrew
participation. International Journal of Aviation
Psychology(200)10(1).
IMO,
PolarCode,2014
Koonce, J.&Bramble, W. 1998. Personal Computer‐Based
Flight Training Devices. The International Journal of
AviationPsychology.(1998)8(3),p.277‐292.
Lintern,G.AnInformationalperspectiveonskilltransferin
human‐machine systems. Human Factors (1991)p.33,
251‐266
Smith, D. 2000. Simulation Technology: A Strategy for
Implementationin
SurgicalEducationandCertification.
MIT Press. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual
Environments,(2000)9(6)p.632‐637.
Taylor,H.&Lintern,G.1993.Quasi‐transferasapredictor
ofquasi‐transferfromsimulatortoairplane.Journalof
GeneralPsychology,Jul93,Vol.120.
Venkula J. 1993. Tiedon suhde toimintaan. Tieteellisen
toiminnanulottuvuuksiaI.Helsinki:
Yliopistopaino.
