Article Review Of: "Are Unmanned Vessels the Future for the Ocean?"

The idea of boarding an unmanned airplane and taking off into the sky seems like a bridge too far for some. Many skeptics say that humans will never be flown around on airplanes without pilots. I am not sure if I agree of disagree with this concept, but what if you boarded a boat with no captain? Would that cause the same controversy? Due to the slower speeds and less congested areas on the open oceans, the future of shipping may lie in unmanned systems.

 Large cargo ships go out to sea for months at a time and due to the increased cost of fuel, cruising at slower speeds makes the overall voyage longer but more economical. For the people that work on these ships, this increased time away from home is causing hardship on both them and their families. Not only do the crewmembers suffer from the current economical environment, but in general, crews cost the shipping industry about 44 percent of the entire freighter cost. If we were able to remove the crew from the ship, we could not only let the ships cruise even slower, but shipping lines could save even more money on operational costs. In a world where globalization is outpacing resources, cutting costs and increasing efficiencies in the transportation sector is key to the future. I feel that supporting legislation and investing in the technology required to achieve the goal of unmanned cargo shipping is vital the economy of the future.  

A large debate has been stirring over the unmanning of large cargo ships. Much different than automating, the concept unmanning ships places the captain on land and allows him or her to control the ship remotely from a simulated bridge that is fed with real time information. The process would not only include modification to ships that would include additional sensors and communication devices, but it would also include integration into a global navigation network. Similar to the air control network that aircraft operate in, this marine navigation coordinated system could provide time and space deconfliction all over the world. The largest hurtle at this time in not the technology; it’s the international politics. In aviation, only part of the industry is based on international use, where as large cargo ships are used primarily to ship internationally. When you add the complexities of international law, the timeline to change current polices grows. The director of the International Chamber of Shipping believes it will be 20 to 30 years before we see unmanned ships on the ocean. A two-pronged effort must be made, one in the side of policy and procedure and the other in technology. The European Union (EU) has been one of the largest proponents out side of the military when it comes to investing in technology that supports unmanned shipping. In a program called MUNIN (Maritime Unmanned Navigation through Intelligence in Networks) the EU is trying to see how far they can automate all functions of a ship. The EU has invested a total of 4.8 million dollars to start the project.

The US department of defense is also concerned with automation of ships, but for a different reason. Right now the Navy is working on the Anti-submarine warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel (ACTUV). This vessel can track and follow subs long distances without risking human lives. The same technology that would apply to unmanning the ACTUV can be carried over to large cargo ships. Like so many times in the past, a conglomeration of defense technology and commercial technology leads to huge advancements in the way the world does business.

The largest group of people against the unmanning of cargo ships is the1.2M crews and families that depend on the shipping business for their livelihood. Fortunately, the unmanning process wont hurt everyone; the captains and officers would now be able to go home to their families at night instead of being gone for months at a time. Also, the technology sector that creates and builds the new components that will be required to unman ships would bluster. The people again the unmanning of ships use safety and piracy as the two main arguments. On the positive side, piracy may decrease if there is no ransom to be paid for crewmembers.

Overall, the article reviewed above sheds light into a future where shipping is safer and cheaper. The technology of unmanned systems is growing at a rapid rate, and I only hope that politics and laws can match the rate of technological innovation. Some workers would lose jobs, but overall, the world as a whole would benefit from this technology reaching the shores of every country.       

References:   

Carroll, M. (2014, July 3). Are Unmanned Vessels the Future for the Ocean? Retrieved April 12, 2015, from http://www.newsweek.com/2014/07/11/are-unmanned-vessels-future-ocean-257091.html

Data Depiction and Presentation of the Protector Unmanned Surface Vehicle

Unmanned marine systems are categorized into two categories, one category is unmanned surface vehicles (USVs), and the other is unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs). When analyzing the method of data depiction and presentation between the two, it is vastly different. For underwater systems high bandwidth communication is often difficult, therefore missions are usually preprogrammed and the systems often operate with an increased level of autonomy. This makes the mission control aspect of these systems relatively simple. For systems such as the Bluefin 21, the control station and data processing system is a Windows based laptop loaded with the company’s proprietary software (Bluefin Inc., 2015). For surface based systems such as the Protector USV the mission control of the system is more similar to an unmanned aerial system. When operating on the surface, weather, sea conditions, ship traffic, and precision targeting are required in real time. Having to remotely interpret the USV’s immediate environment requires complex depiction and presentation strategies. Studying current systems used in data depiction and presentation as well as being able to identify their shortfalls will help engineers in the future develop new methods and techniques in the realm of data depiction and presentations for unmanned systems in general. 

Data Depiction and Presentation for the Protector  

The Protector USV is an advanced surface warfare platform that can be utilized for anti-terror/ force protection missions, port security, and intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance. The system consists of a 30ft inflatable rigid hull boat, an interchangeable mission payload, and a two person command and control station that can be either placed on a larger ship or on shore (Rafael LTD., 2010). In terms of data depiction and presentation, the command and control station is broken down into two separate functions. There is a vessel control station and a payload control station. The mission payload for this system is very similar to UASs, therefore, for the purpose of this study, understanding and studying the vessel control station is paramount to the payload control. Controlling a surface vessel is very difficult when there is no proprioceptive feedback being given to the operator. In order to compensate for the lack of proprioceptive feedback, the Protector has been designed with a higher degree of autonomy than most other unmanned systems. The system features cameras, sensors, and algorithms that pick optimal sea paths and account for weather, waves, and currents. The system also has a dynamic stabilization capability as well as autonomous sense and avoid capability. All these systems are overlaid and presented to the vessel operator in a control station that is a replica of the ships actual controls. There is not only a replica of the vessel’s control, but there is also a display of an overhead map as well as a view from the safety camera which is located similarly to wear the skipper would actually be sitting or standing if they were on the vessel (IWeapons.com, 2007).  The operator can either control the system in a manual or semi-autonomous mode. During docking and precision maneuvers, manual control is ideal. At high speeds in the open ocean, the semi-autonomous method of control is better suited for the mission.

Data Depiction and Perception Challenges  

One of the largest challenges for any surfaced based marine system is the lack of situational awareness and proprioceptive feedback. Compared to a manned surface vessel, the unmanned skipper receives all feedback in the form of quantifiable numbers and sensor readings rather than actual feedback like wind being blown through hair, boat movement, and engine sound. Not being able to feel the waves under the boat, compounded with poor visibility of the surface conditions during night operations or in dense fog makes it more challenging to get the most out of the USVs performance. Not having these physical cues makes piloting an unmanned surface vessels a complex task, but there are a few methods to mitigate this challenge. One method is turning to a computer system to add a high degree of automation that will off load some environmental based decisions from the skipper, such as sea path selections and stabilization. This helps to a degree during simple maneuvers, but in terms of precision maneuvers or extreme weather and sea conditions, this solution does not provide the best outcome (Gilat, 2012). Another tool used to help USV skippers is training. Similar to pilots training to fly with just flight instruments, conditioning USV skippers to learn how to effectivly turn numerical data into a cognitive picture of the remote environment is essential (Gilat, 2012). In order to aid in this process, I propose to include proprioceptive feedback in the command and control station via full motion simulations.  

    

Alternative Data Depiction and Presentation Strategies

In aviation, pilots that are training to fly with only instruments first train on simple computer based simulators. Once the pilot can gain the ability to cognitively process numerical and instrument data into spatial awareness, they graduate to a full motion simulator. This helps them become physically aware of the simulated environment as well as be able to physically sense the aircrafts performance. The real time motion simulation helps the pilot manage their control inputs as well as determine aircraft health and performance. If engineers can create the same full motion feedback for USV skippers, I feel that it would help bridge the gap from numerical sensor data to real life spatial and environmental understanding. Not only simulating the motion of the vessel, but being able to provide simulated wind speed and direction, as well as engine sound would also help the skipper gain clear understanding of the environment as well as the USVs performance. The key to this system would be real time feedback. If there is just a few second delay between the USVs actual movement and corresponding simulated movement of the command and control station, the required control inputs to correct for environmental influence would be too late to be effective. Another difficulty of this system is the size and complexity of a full motion command and control station. This system would be better suited for a land based control facility rather than a ship based facility. If proper training and full motion feedback is designed into the Protector, an unmanned skipper could manually control the vessel to perform more complex and precise maneuvers as well as allow for operations in more severe sea and weather conditions.

Increasing the complexity and simulated feedback of an USV skipper’s control station is a decision that needs to be made based on mission limitations and mission profiles. For a steady state harbor protection mission that requires precise maneuvering around ships, docks, and the shoreline, the full motion command and control station may increase the Protectors effectiveness and allow more complex manually controlled missions. In expeditionary missions, a mobile form factor and highly automated mission control method may be a more effective solution. Either way, as a study in design, engineering a full motion command and control station for something like the Protector USV could also provide valuable insight for land based unmanned systems or even rover based systems that operator on the surface of Mars. The most difficult aspect to this type of integration is the need for real time data connections that could prove difficult over large distances. An emerging methodology involving laser based communication could be the key to decreasing data latency between vehicle and control station.       

References

Bluefin Inc. (2015). Operator Software » Bluefin Robotics. Retrieved February 21, 2015, from http://www.bluefinrobotics.com/technology/operator-software/

Gilat, E. (2012, August 5). The Human Aspect of Unmanned Surface Vehicles. Retrieved February 21, 2015, from http://defense-update.com/20120805_human_aspects_of_usv.html#.VOYIWfnF9AU

Iweapons.com. (2007, March 29). Protector. Retrieved February 21, 2015, from http://web.archive.org/web/20070329024450/http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/naval/protector/Protector.html

Rafael LTD. (2010). PROTECTOR: Unmanned Naval Patrol Vehicle. Retrieved February 21, 2015, from http://www.rafael.co.il/Marketing/288-1037-en/Marketing.aspx