Review of Autonomous and

Remotely Controlled Ships in

Maritime Sector
Karlo Bratić, Ivan Pavić, Srđan Vukša, Ladislav Stazić

This paper presents the extent of the currently achieved 1. INTRODUCTION

progress in autonomous and remotely controlled ships in the
maritime sector. Major researches, statements from relevant The concept of remotely controlled and autonomous ships
sources and various anticipations on this subject are presented reaches back to the 19th century (N. Tesla, 1898) when an idea
to outline a comprehensive scope of such progress. about autonomy in the maritime traffic was established. This idea
The engine room on conventional merchant ships is used is described under the patent named "Method of and apparatus
as a viewpoint because it comprises numerous and complex for controlling mechanism of moving vessels or vehicles". While
systems. The main purpose of this paper is to establish a link the concept of remotely controlled and autonomous ships may
between the levels of autonomy and the engine room with its not represent a new concept, the realization of this concept
associated systems on a conventional ship. At each level, the certainly does.
link should describe the relations between autonomy and the Lately, rapid progress is noted regarding the realization
systems which are commonly found in the engine room on of this concept. Research of various literature reveals numerous
conventional ships. reasons for the introduction of this concept into the maritime
To create this link, comparison analysis uses the latest sector. Impacts that these types of ships will have can only be
statements from the International Maritime Organization (IMO) anticipated. The initial period of exploitation should determine
and Classification Societies. Technical standards for autonomous the advantages and disadvantages of their introduction to
and offshore vessels are derived from the guidelines provided by maritime traffic. They should have the greatest impact on three
Classification Societies. Technical standards and requirements, aspects:
related to the engine room of such ships, are individually • Financial
described and compared to provide accurate and comprehensive • Environment protection
scope of their current progress. • Safety.
Safety should be of paramount importance. Figure 1 shows
KEY WORDS
that from a total of 880 accidental events analyzed during the
~~ Classification societies
investigations, 62 % were attributed to a Human Erroneous
~~ Autonomous ships
Action, which was followed by equipment failure presenting
~~ Remotely controlled ships
22 % (EMSA, 2016).
~~ Autonomy levels
Also, it was noted that the shipboard operations represented
~~ Engine room
the main contributing factor at 71 % of the total accidents. These
data lead to the presumption that if human action is less involved
University of Split, Faculty of Maritime Studies, Split, Croatia in shipboard operations, the likelihood of accident occurrence
e-mail: [email protected] should be reduced. A study from 2017 supports this presumption
(K.Wróbel, J. Matewka, P. Kujala, 2017). This study analyzed 100
doi: 10.7225/toms.v08.n02.011
accidents that occurred from 1999 to 2015. The goal of this
This work is licensed under study was to assess the occurrence likelihood of an accident if

Trans. marit. sci. 2019; 02: 253-265 TRANSACTIONS ON MARITIME SCIENCE 253
 Figure 1.
Distribution of accidental events 2011-2015 (EMSA, 2016).

the vessel had been unmanned. The results showed that the
likelihood of grounding and collisions might have significantly 2. PRESENT RESEARCHES (LITERATURE REVIEW)
decreased, while severe consequences might occur in case of
some accidents, such as a fire on board. The terms “unmanned” and “autonomous” ships, while
Also, a study among ship operators was conducted to having a different meaning, are often used as synonyms.
determine the technology impact on safety. It is noted that the Therefore, it is essential to describe the terms used. According to
higher the level of automation and technological processes, Rødseth and Nordahl (2017), the term “autonomous ship” refers
the fewer crewmembers are needed. The aim of higher levels to a ship that can perform a set of defined operations without or
of technological processes and automation is to improve with reduced supervision by the bridge crew. “Unmanned ship”
the efficiency of the vessel. The result of the study led to the refers to a ship on which the crew can be on board, but are not
conclusion that changes in work organization on board and present on the bridge for performing or supervision of the ship´s
technology advancement could add to the occurrence of human functions. Figure 2 shows the classification of autonomous ship
error (D. Mišković, T. Bielić, J. Čulin, 2018). types with the associated terminology.
This paper aims to provide a cross-section on the technical Maritime Autonomous Surface Ship (MASS) is a provisional
standard which Classification Societies have stated regarding term proposed by International Maritime Organization (IMO), and
the autonomous and remotely controlled ship as well as to that is the reason why this term can often be used as a general
relate autonomy levels with the engine room that can be found term for referring and defining an autonomous ship. The analysis
on such ships and compare this link with the engine room on a of terminology provides a basis for a comprehensive approach. In
conventional ship. Table 1, the term MASS is additionally classified.

254 Karlo Bratić et al.: Review of Autonomous and Remotely Controlled Ships in Maritime Sector
 Figure 2.
Classification of autonomous maritime system and autonomous ship types (O.J. Rødseth, H. Nordahl, 2017).

Table 1.
Description of MASS subdivisions.
Source: Made by author, using data from the Definitions for Autonomous Merchant Ships (Rødseth and Nordahl, 2017).

Autonomy Assisted Bridge (AAB) The ship bridge is always manned and the crew can immediately
intervene in ongoing functions.
Periodically Unmanned Bridge (PUB) The ship can operate without the crew on the bridge for limited periods,
e.g. in the open sea and good weather. The crew is on board ship and
can be called to the bridge in case of problems.
Periodically Unmanned Ship (PUS) The ship operates without bridge crew on board for extended periods,
e.g. during the deep-sea passage. Occasionally ashore personnel arrives
to supervise ship.
Continuously Unmanned Ship (CUS) The ship is designed for unmanned operation of the bridge at all times,
except perhaps during special emergencies.

Also, actual researches and projects are presented to ship. According to Burmeister and Moraeus (2015), “In a base
highlight the progress made regarding autonomous ships. scenario, the MUNIN bulker is found to improve the expected present
“Maritime Unmanned Navigation through Intelligence in value by mUSD 7 over 25 years compared to the reference bulker."
Networks” (MUNIN) is a project that lasted for 36 months. It Equating costs between the concept used in the project and the
achieved a technical concept for unmanned merchant (cargo) conventionally manned bulker are established as differences

Trans. marit. sci. 2019; 02: 253-265 TRANSACTIONS ON MARITIME SCIENCE 255
 between additional investments (initial investments, shore to have a capacity of 120 TEU (twenty-foot equivalent unit) and
services) and cost savings (crew expenses, fuel efficiency). be used for commercial purposes. The ship should be free of
“Advanced Autonomous Waterborne Applications exhaust gases and ballast waters. To achieve this, the ship is
Initiative” (AAWA) is a project led by Rolls-Royce that consists of equipped with fully electric propulsion and uses a battery pack as
three phases. According to Laurinen (2016), this project “aims permanent ballast. Ship´s operation is planned in between three
to produce the specification and preliminary designs for the next ports and within 12 nautical miles from the shore. Figure 3 shows
generation of advanced ship solutions.” (Jokioinen et al, 2016). From the development and planned operation of YARA Birkeland. The
this initiative, a collaboration between Rolls-Royce and FinFerries autonomy level is planned to be achieved gradually, throughout
arose and resulted in a research project named “Safer Vessel with a few stages. The initial stage anticipates crew on board, the next
Autonomous Navigation” (SVAN). The result of this project was a stage is moving to a remote crew, and the final stage is complete
demonstration of the first fully autonomous ferry named – “Falco” autonomy, which should be achieved over several years.
(2018 Rolls-Royce plc, 2018). The demonstration consisted of two Comparison between YARA Birkeland and a similar-sized
voyages. The first voyage was autonomous, where the vessel conventional ship is used to predict significant cost savings.
was able to perform docking operations and avoid obstacles. Such savings are anticipated on the basis that there will be
The second voyage vessel was remotely controlled from Remote no requirements for fuel or crew. Benefits from using electric
Shore Centre (RSC) located 45km away from the vessel. propulsion should result in a reduction of greenhouse gas
Furthermore, collaboration between Rolls Royce and emissions (Kongsberg, 2017).
Svitzer resulted in the remote operation of a tug boat, Svitzer The project, as mentioned earlier, are not isolated researches
Herold. The operation of the vessel was conducted by the vessel´s regarding autonomous ships, these are some other researches
captain from a remote land location. During this demonstration, and project developed across the globe (B. Eder, 2018):
remotely controlled maneuvers such as piloting, turning the • • Katana - designed by Israel Aerospace Industries and
vessel, berthing and undocking were safely performed (Maritime represents an advanced, multi-purpose, unmanned surface
Cyprus admin, 2018). vessel (USV). It is produced for military services, uses dual-mode
YARA Birkeland is anticipated to be the first completely operation, meaning that it can be used as unmanned or as a crew
autonomous ship. Propulsion is intended to be fully electric and vessel.
designed as an open-top type containership. Also, it is planned

Figure 3.
Development timeline of YARA Birkeland.
(Source: Made by the author, using data of Autonomous ship project, key facts about YARA Birkeland (Kongsberg, 2017).

256 Karlo Bratić et al.: Review of Autonomous and Remotely Controlled Ships in Maritime Sector
• Joint research of Shenzhen HiSiBi Boats Company and After defining what autonomous ship is, the next issue is
Harbin Engineering University in China resulted with Tianxing-1, to define the degrees of autonomy. The degrees of autonomy, as
an unmanned surface vehicle (USV) primarily made for military defined by IMO, are set out for mentioned exercise (IMO takes
operations. first steps to address autonomous ships, 2018):
• L3 ASV Company is a UK Company that currently provides • “Degree one: Ship with automated processes and decision
surface vessels from 10 to 42 feet with matched control systems, support: Seafarers are on board to operate and control shipboard
software, and autonomous unmanned systems. Capabilities systems and functions. Some operations may be automated and
were time-tested and demonstrated on multiple types and sizes at times be unsupervised but with seafarers on board ready to
of vessel, throughout 1,500 operating days of service (ASV 2018, take control.
2018) • Degree two: Remotely controlled ship with seafarers on
Lately, in parallel with the accelerated and extended board: The ship is controlled and operated from another location.
development of autonomous vessels, a need for testing areas Seafarers are available on board to take control and to operate
arises. This indicates that testing areas are becoming a necessity the shipboard systems and functions.
for the safe introduction of these types of ships into maritime • Degree three: Remotely controlled ship without seafarers
traffic. Current testing areas for autonomous and remotely on board: The ship is controlled and operated from another
controlled ships are (International Network for Autonomous location. There are no seafarers on board.
ships, 2019): • Degree four: Fully autonomous ship: The operating system
• Storfjorden, Horten, and Trondheim test areas in Norway. of the ship is able to make decisions and determine actions by
The Trondheim fjord came to existence as the world's first test itself.”
area for vehicles moving below, on and above the water surface Safety, feasibility, and legislation are the main issues
and are remotely or autonomously managed. that need to be addressed. To resolve these issues safely, the
• Jaakonmeri test area is located off the coast of Finland, and Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), which is IMO´s technical
it has an additional offer for testing ships under ice conditions. body, has approved research of MASS. On the 99th session of MSC
• De Vlaamse Waterweg nv has opened test area in Belgium. (Report of the Maritime Safety Committee on its ninety-ninth
• In 2018, the construction of the Wanshan Marine Test Field session, 2018), the framework for researching was endorsed,
in China has begun. It is an offshore test field for unmanned which will be realized through regulatory scoping exercise.
surface vehicles (USVs). Upon completion, it will be the largest The completion date for this exercise is targeted for 2020. For
unmanned marine testing ground in the world. the exercise, correspondence group and methodology are
• In the USA, the Smart Ships Coalition announced that The established, holistic approach is proposed, whereas the extent
Keweenaw Peninsula Waterway area should be a testbed area for should cover risks and benefits concerning any aspect of safety.
autonomous surface and sub-surface vehicles. Any MASS definitions and concepts of different types and levels
of autonomy, automation, operation, and manning should be
3. IMO AND AUTONOMOUS SHIPS provisional. The working orientation of this exercise should be
focused on the user, not technology.
Highlighted researches and achievement indicate The scoping exercise consists of two steps. In the first
accelerated and continuous progress of autonomous and step, present provisions for IMO´s instruments list need to be
remotely controlled ships on a global level. Accordingly, that recognized. IMO´s instrument list consist of (IMO takes first steps
is why implementation, means of regulation, and legislative to address autonomous ships, 2018):
framework need to be appropriately addressed. • The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
International Maritime Organization (IMO) sets global – SOLAS.
standards and regulations concerning international shipping. • The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at
Consequently, IMO has a responsibility to make the introduction Sea – COLREG.
of these types of ships to international shipping safe, secure, and • The International Convention on Load Lines – CLL.
environmentally acceptable. In 2018, IMO began to investigate • The International Convention on Standards of Training,
the introduction of autonomous and remotely controlled Certification, and Watchkeeping for Seafarers - STCW, and STCW-F
ships. It was announced that investigation will be conducted – concerning training of fishers.
via regulatory scoping exercise. To address autonomous and • Search and Rescue – SAR.
remotely controlled ships, the term Maritime Autonomous • International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of
Surface Ships (MASS) is proposed for this exercise. For regulatory Ships.
scoping exercise, MASS is defined as: “A ship which, to a varying • Convention for Safe Containers – CSC.
degree, can operate independently of human interaction.” • Special trade passenger ship Agreement - STP.

Trans. marit. sci. 2019; 02: 253-265 TRANSACTIONS ON MARITIME SCIENCE 257
 During this step, the application of these instruments to Aside from IMO´s statements, during the 99th session of
the MASS needs to be assessed. Additional information about the MSC, additional considerations on definitions for levels and
deployed methods, results, and exact time needed for each step concepts of autonomy were suggested. Regarding definitions
is anticipated for MSC 102 session, scheduled for May 2020. For and levels of autonomy, six suggestions were proposed. Proposals
instruments associated with autonomy degrees and maritime were given by two Classification Societies, two industry/
safety, the following is determined: research associations, one company involved in autonomous
• Apply to MASS and prevent MASS operations. technologies, and one consultant. In Table 2, four suggestions
• Apply to MASS and do not prevent MASS operations and are shown because all the suggestions given by Classification
require no actions. Societies are examined in a separate table.
• Apply to MASS and do not prevent MASS operations, but In this session, the background was presented to point
may need to be amended or clarified, and/or may contain gaps. out the progress that has been marked regarding autonomous
• Have no application to MASS operations. ships. It was underlined that a few projects were conducted
The objective of the next step is to determine the most on autonomous maritime traffic, such as MUNIN and AAWA
suitable way of addressing MASS operations. It is achieved by project, emphasizing the progress achieved in this aspect.
conducting analysis in which the human element, technology, Project One Sea – Autonomous Maritime Ecosystem, which is a
and operational factors are taken into account. The main goals of collaboration between shipyards and ship owners, is highlighted
the analysis are to determine the necessity for (Maritime Safety as ongoing work on the subject of autonomous maritime traffic.
Committee, 100th session, 2018): Also, a recently achieved joint point of view regarding levels
• Equivalences as provided for by instruments or developing of autonomy in the automotive industry was mentioned. This
interpretations and/or achievement outlines potential direction concerning levels of
• Amending existing instruments and/or autonomy in shipping (Considerations on definitions for levels
• Developing new instruments and/or and concepts of autonomy, Submitted by Finland, 2018).
• None of the above as a result of the analysis.

Table 2.
Proposals on levels of autonomy presented during MSC´s 99th session.
(Source: Made by the author using data from Considerations on definitions for levels and concepts of autonomy, Submitted by
Finland, 2018).

The UK Marine Industries Alliance

Level of autonomy Description
Level 0 - Manned Ship/craft is controlled by operators aboard.
Level 1 - Operated Under Operated control, all cognitive functionality is within the human operator. The operator
has direct contact with the unmanned ship over, for example, continuous radio (R/C) and/or cable
(e.g. tethered UUVs and ROVs). The operator makes all decisions, directs, and controls all vehicle
and mission functions.
Level 2 - Directed Under Directed control, some degree of reasoning and ability to respond is implemented into the
unmanned ship. It may sense the environment, report its state, and suggest one or several actions.
It may also suggest possible actions to the operator, such as, for example, prompting the operator
for information or decisions. However, the authority to make decisions is with the operator. The
unmanned ship will act only if commanded and/or permitted to do so.
Level 3 - Delegated The unmanned ship is now authorized to execute some functions. It may sense the environment,
report its state and define actions, and report its intention. The operator has the option to
object to (veto) intentions declared by the unmanned ship during a certain time, after which the
unmanned ship will act. The initiative emanates from the unmanned ship and decision-making is
shared between the operator and the unmanned ship.

258 Karlo Bratić et al.: Review of Autonomous and Remotely Controlled Ships in Maritime Sector
 Level 4 - Monitored The unmanned ship will sense the environment and report its state. The unmanned ship defines
actions, decides, acts, and reports its action. The operator may monitor the events.
Level 5 - Autonomous The unmanned ship will sense the environment, define possible actions, decide, and act. The
unmanned ship is afforded a maximum degree of independence and self-determination within
the context of the system's capabilities and limitations. Autonomous functions are invoked by
the on board systems at occasions decided by the same, without notifying any external units or
operators.
The Ramboll
Level of autonomy Description
M - (Manual) The operator (master) is on board controlling the ship, which is manned as per current manning
standards. Subject to sufficient technical support options and warning systems, the bridge may at
times be unmanned with an officer on standby ready to take control and assume the navigational
watch.
R - (Remote) The ship is controlled and operated from shore or another ship, but a person trained for
navigational watch and maneuvering of the ship will be on board on standby ready to receive
control and assume the navigational watch.
RU - (Remote, unmanned) The ship is controlled from shore or another ship and does not have any crew on board.
A - (Autonomous) The operating system of the vessel calculates consequences and risks. The system can make
decisions and determine actions. The operator onshore is only involved in decisions if the system
fails or prompts for human intervention.
The Norwegian Forum for Autonomous Ships (NFAS)
Level of autonomy Description
Decision support Decision support and advice to crew on the bridge, the crew decides.
Automatic bridge Automated operation, but under continuous supervision by the crew.
Remote ship Unmanned continuously monitored and direct control from shore.
Automatic ship Unmanned continuously monitored and direct control from shore.
Constrained autonomous Unmanned, partly autonomous, supervised by the shore.
Fully autonomous Unmanned and without supervision.
Rolls-Royce
Level of autonomy Description
Level - 0 No autonomy All aspects of operational tasks performed by the human operator, even when enhanced with
warning or intervention system. The human operator safely operates the system at all times.
Level 1 - Partial autonomy The targeted operational tasks performed by the human operator but can transfer control of
specific sub-tasks to the system. The human operator has overall control of the system and safely
operates the system at all times.
Level 2 - Conditional autonomy The targeted operational tasks performed by an automated system without human interaction
and the human operator performs the remaining tasks. The human operator is responsible for its
safe operation.
Level 3 - High autonomy The targeted operational tasks performed by an automated system without human interaction
and the human operator performs the remaining tasks. The system is responsible for its safe
operation.
Level 4 - Full autonomy All operational tasks performed by an automated system under all defined conditions.

Trans. marit. sci. 2019; 02: 253-265 TRANSACTIONS ON MARITIME SCIENCE 259
 In addition, it was noticed how suggested levels of • Pilot project for selected IACS Resolutions (2018)
autonomy varied numerously as well as in their definitions. • Basic Principles for drafting New and revised IACS
During this session, definite number or definitions were not Resolutions (2018)
achieved, but it was noted that levels of autonomy should be • Establishment of IACS Task Force on MASS (2019)
comprehensive, applicable to real projects, and numerously • References to IACS’ Leadership or Participation in external
minimalized if possible. Meetings/Activities
According to Musonov (2018), shifting from ships with
4. CLASSIFICATION SOCIETIES AND AUTONOMOUS personnel to autonomous ships will evolve gradually. It is hardly
SHIPS realistic to expect that fully autonomous vessels commence
worldwide operation in a short period, such as several years.
As mentioned, IMO has already started to identify the Shifting should be perceived as a step-by-step process in which
safety, security, and environmental aspects of MASS operations the phased implementation of various technologies is observed.
in line with the existing IMO standards. In parallel with MASS As the main technical advisor to IMO, IACS intends to contribute
introduction, the need for a new and possibly additional level in future work by:
of technical requirements arose. The International Association of • Continuing its participation in the IMO Working Group
Classification Societies (IACS) aims to contribute to this subject by at MSC 101 (June 2019) and MSC 102 (May 2020) as well as
designing requirements and processes for identified emerging at scheduled Intersessional MSC Working Group on MASS
areas and gaps (Position paper MASS, 2019). IACS included this (September 2019).
MASS agenda on its strategic Action Plan: • Monitoring the development of Guidelines on MASS trials
• Review of all IACS Resolutions and Recommendations to initiated by MSC 100, and providing comment as necessary.
recognize possible requirements that might obscure technical • IACS intends to continue its active participation in IMO
development of MASS. regulatory scoping exercise on MASS (February 2019 – February
• Address possible issues that might obscure the technical 2020).
development of MASS. • IACS plans to monitor ISO/TC8/WG10’s work program
• Also, IACS has conducted several initiatives on this matter, on the development of new ISO standards related to MASS
such as: terminology and concepts for ship autonomy.
• Internal review of all Resolutions (2017)

Figure 4.
International regulations and technical standards for autonomous ships (Source: Made by the author, using data
Guidelines for Autonomous Shipping (2017), LR Code for Unmanned Marine Systems (2017), Autonomous and remotely
operated ships (2018), Guidelines for autonomous cargo ships (2018).

260 Karlo Bratić et al.: Review of Autonomous and Remotely Controlled Ships in Maritime Sector
 Table 3.
Autonomy levels, according to Classification Societies.
(Source: Made by the author using data of Guidelines for Autonomous Shipping (2017), LR Code for Unmanned Marine
Systems (2017), Autonomous and remotely operated ships (2018), Guidelines for autonomous cargo ships (2018).

Bureau Veritas
Level of autonomy Definition Acquisition Analysis Decision Action
0 Human operated Human makes all decisions System Human Human Human Human
and controls all functions.
1 Human directed System suggests actions System System Human Human Human
Human makes decisions and
actions.
2 Human System invokes functions System System System Human Human
delegated Human can reject decisions
during a certain time.
3 Human System invokes functions System System System System Human
supervised without waiting for human
reaction.
4 Fully System invokes functions System System System System
autonomous without informing the
human, except in case of
emergency.
Lloyd´s Register
Level of autonomy Description
0 / *AL 0 1) No cyber access – no assessment – no descriptive note – included for information only. 2) Manual: No
autonomous function. All action and decision-making performed manually (N.B. systems may have level of
autonomy, with Human in/ on the loop.), i.e. human controls all actions.
1 / AL 1 1) Manual cyber access – no assessment – no descriptive note – included for information only. 2) On-board
Decision Support: All actions taken by human Operator, but decision support tool can present options or
otherwise influence the actions chosen. Data is provided by the systems on board.
2 / AL 2 1) Cyber access for autonomous/remote monitoring. 2) On & Off-board Decision Support: All actions taken by
human Operator, but decision support tool can present options or otherwise influence the actions chosen.
Data may be provided by systems on or off-board.
3 / AL 3 1) Cyber access for autonomous/remote monitoring and control (on board permission is required, on board
override is possible). 2) `Active´ Human in the loop: Decisions and actions are performed with human
supervision. Data may be provided by the system on or off-board.
4 / AL 4 1) Cyber access for autonomous/remote monitoring and control (on board permission is not required, on
board override is possible). 2) Human on the loop. Operator/Supervisory: Decisions and actions are performed
autonomously with human supervision. High impact decisions are implemented in a way to give human
Operators the opportunity to intercede and over-ride.
5 / AL 5 1) Cyber access for autonomous/remote monitoring and control (on board permission is not required, on
board override is not possible). 2) Fully autonomous: Rarely supervised operation where decisions are entirely
made and actioned by the system.
AL 6 2) Fully autonomous: Unsupervised operation where decisions are entirely made and actioned by the system.
*AL – Autonomy level (stands for second set of levels of autonomy and their definitions)
Det Norske Veritas Germanischer Lloyd & China Classification Society
Degrees of autonomy Description
1 Ship with automated processes and decision support.
2 Remotely controlled ship with seafarers on board.
3 Remotely controlled ship without seafarers on board.
4 Fully autonomous ship.

Trans. marit. sci. 2019; 02: 253-265 TRANSACTIONS ON MARITIME SCIENCE 261
 Classification societies provide technical standards contents and definitions of autonomy levels are extracted from
regarding construction and operation of ships and offshore each guideline.
structures. The required standards will apply to autonomous and Table 3 shows each level of autonomy described
remotely controlled ships. Also, compliance with the standards individually for a comprehensive overview. DNV GL and CCS have
required by certain classification society is accomplished via the same autonomy levels and definitions, which are replicated
regular inspections or additional surveys. As defined by the from IMO´s degrees of autonomy. In contrast, BV and LR have a
Classification Society, these types of ships need to comply with different organization of autonomy levels and related definitions.
the same or higher standards than conventional ships. BV´s levels of autonomy define the difference between the role of
Figure 4 shows progress regarding autonomous ships, the human and the role of the system. The role of the human or
which is provided by certain classification societies. Since, these the system is shared on four functions, which are based on a four-
guidelines represent the manifest of each classification society stage model of human information processing. These functions
regarding autonomous ships, for the purpose of this paper are (Guidelines for Autonomous Shipping, 2017):

Table 4.
Contents from different guidelines for autonomous ships.
(Source: Made by the author, using data of Guidelines for Autonomous Shipping (2017), LR Code for Unmanned Marine
Systems (2017), Autonomous and remotely operated ships (2018), Guidelines for autonomous cargo ships (2018).

Bureau Veritas - Guidelines for Autonomous Shipping Lloyd´s Register - LR Code for
Unmanned Marine Systems
Section 1-4 Chapters 1-9; Annexes A, B
General Guidelines for Functionality of Guidelines for Reliability of Chapters
Autonomous Systems Autonomous Systems • General
• General • General • General • Structure
• Safety and • Navigation system • Navigation system • Stability
• security conditions • Communication network and • Communication network and • Control system
• Regulations system system • Electrical systems
• Machinery system • Machinery system • Navigation systems
Risk and Technology • Propulsion and maneuvering
Assessment • Cargo management system • Cargo management system
• Passenger management • Passenger management • Fire
• General system system • Auxiliary systems
• Risk assessment • Shore control center • Shore control center Annex A – Concept of
• Technology assessment operations
Annex B – Verification
methods
DNV GL - Autonomous and remotely operated ships CCS – Guidelines for autonomous cargo ships
Sections 1-7 Appendixes A-E Chapters 1-14
• General •List of potential minimum risk • General
• Main principles conditions (A) • Situation awareness
• Qualification and approval • List of potential autoremote • Navigation control
process functions (B) • Machinery installations
• Navigations functions • Navigation systems – • Mooring and anchoring
• Vessel engineering functions applicability of conventional • Electrical installations
• Remote control centers carriage requirements for • Communication and signal equipment
• Communication functions autonomous vessels (C) • Hull construction and safety
• Navigations systems – • Fire-fighting
additional systems for • Environmental protection
autoremote vessels (D) • Ship security
• Simulator based testing (E) • Remote operation center
• Cyber security
• Survey and certification

262 Karlo Bratić et al.: Review of Autonomous and Remotely Controlled Ships in Maritime Sector
• Information acquisition. vessel´s functions by automation systems, which do not need
• Information analysis. crew intervention. Automatic Support is defined as the operation
• Decision and action selection. of the vessel´s functions by automation systems that operate in
• Action implementation. combination with the crew.
LR´s levels of autonomy are shown as a duplicate to highlight If engine room machinery is under AO, then manual
their progress on this matter (Design Code for Unmanned Marine operations are replaced by automation systems. In that case,
Systems, 2017). Differences that exist among levels of autonomy remote supervision and emergency control should be arranged
provided by Classification Societies are presented through in the Remote Control Centre (RCC). For resolving unexpected
comparison in Table 4. These differences are shown through: and abnormal events automation functions should be redundant
• Numbers of levels of autonomy or augmented by independent automatic safety systems. For
• Definitions of autonomy levels example, a power management system on a conventional vessel
• Used terminology. is in general not provided with redundant control (Autonomous
All autonomy level definitions do not refer to the engine and remotely operated ships, 2018).
room, which is an essential part of every ship. Also, some If engine room machinery is under AS, then manual
definitions (Ramboll) in their nature refer only to the bridge, i.e. to operation on board will be performed by the remote engineering
navigation. When comparing all definitions of autonomy levels, watch in RCC. For engineering watch to manage properly,
autonomy is most commonly referred onto the whole ship or a functions that provide decision support should be properly
single system. arranged. Propulsion and steering system, along with associated
Table 4 shows the content of the guidelines provided auxiliary systems, can be automatically operated or supported.
by Classification Societies. This indicates how the provided In the case when propulsion or steering function is under
guidelines, through technical standards, anticipate that AS, then:
numerous and miscellaneous systems will be fitted on such ships. • Propulsion and steering machinery is under engineering
The systems fitted on autonomous or remotely controlled ships watch control and all actions are manually conducted.
may not mutually be at the same autonomy level, or with regard • In the case of poor decision making, a warning should be
to the ship in general. issued by the decision support system.
Also, all the contents include a variety of systems which • The decision support system should be integrated with
are usually fitted to a conventional ship. As the applicability of other systems.
autonomous and remotely controlled ships is brought closer In the case when propulsion or steering function is under
to the merchant (cargo) ships, it is unlikely to expect that they AO, then:
may be defined and referred to as a single system. So, it is safe to • Propulsion and steering machinery is completely controlled
presume that additional distributions or definitions of autonomy by automation systems as well as supporting auxiliary systems.
levels among ships and fitted systems, following the achieved • Automation systems should be capable of issuing a notice
progress will be needed. A similar conclusion is drawn during in due time, before performing a certain order. Propulsion and
the MSC 99th session, where it is noted that marine ships are steering system should be arranged so that manual control and
comprised of many systems and that autonomy among these intervention can be performed from the RCC. Restoration of
systems can vary. propulsion and steering functions should be arranged in a way
Apart from this, in each content a segment regarding that now manual actions are needed.
engine room is provided. In the cross-section of this segment, • If unexpected failures and events are not eliminated
significant deviations are noted. Classification Societies state that by automatic control functions, then alerting, diagnostics,
each segment from Table 3 should at least match the same level monitoring, and controlling functions should provide adequate
of safety and performance as the same system on a conventional data and control for the responsible personnel in RCC to manage
ship. Moreover, according to the provided technical standards, the same.
these ships when compared to conventional ships should ensure • The engineering watch in RCC should be provided with
an equivalent or higher level of safety. Guidelines provided by sufficient monitoring, alerting, diagnostic functions and controls
BV and LR give mostly generic information on this segment. to intervene in case of unexpected events and failures which are
For this reason, a further comparison is conducted between the not safely handled by the automatic control functions.
guidelines provided by DNV GL and CCS. In its guidelines, CCS requires additional provisions
Regarding engine room, DNV GL in its guidelines regarding the engine room. It is stated that, unless provided
differentiates Automatic Operation (AO) and Automatic Support otherwise, autonomous ships must comply with Chapter 4 of
(AS). Automatic Operation is defined as the operation of the the Rules for Intelligent Ships (Guidelines for Autonomous Cargo

Trans. marit. sci. 2019; 02: 253-265 TRANSACTIONS ON MARITIME SCIENCE 263
 Ships, 2018). According to these rules, autonomous ships are through navigation or bridge autonomy. The autonomy levels
provided with intelligent machinery system, which carries out mentioned in this paper may be sufficient for the current extent
condition monitoring and fitness management of: autonomy progress in shipping, i.e. smaller vessels listed in
• Main propulsion machinery the introduction. Their main purpose is testing and ultimately
• Auxiliary machinery installations proofing applicability of autonomy across entire shipping.
• Boilers and machinery piping systems. Therefore, currently provided guidelines for autonomous
An intelligent machinery system should perform automatic and remotely controlled ships, levels of autonomy and achieved
recording of diverse information from all systems in the engine progress in this field do not prove to be sufficient for creating
room. Some of this information is navigation instructions, a tenable relation of autonomy or remote control to the
respective action responses from the engine room, operational conventional merchant ships deployed in modern shipping.
records specified by regulations, e.g. fuel change-over and
maintenance records. REFERENCES
Additionally, intelligent machinery system needs to
ASV, 2018. C-3 Worker 7. Available at: https://www.asvglobal.com/wp-content/
provide:
uploads/2018/06/C-Worker-7_Datasheet_2018.pdf, accessed on: 15 March, 2019.
• Automatic reporting
Bureau Veritas, 2017. Guidelines for Autonomous Shipping. Available at: https://
• Automatic output of various records and reports
www.bureauveritas.jp/news/pdf/641-NI_2017-12.pdf, accessed on: 5 January, 2019.
• Feedbacks to RCC.
Although DNV GL and CCS provide detailed information Burmeister, H.C., Moræus, J.A., 2015. D8.7: Final Report: Autonomous Engine
Room. Available on: http://www.unmanned-ship.org/munin/wp-content/
concerning the engine room, in spite of the differences all
uploads/2015/09/MUNIN-D8-7-Final-Report-Autonomous-Engine-Room-MSoft-
the presented guidelines provide sufficient basis in a form of final.pdf, accessed on: 15 January, 2019.
technical standards for the development of autonomous ship
CCS, 2018. Guidelines for Autonomous Cargo Ships. Available at: http://www.ccs.
and remotely controlled ships. From engine room aspect, when
org.cn/ccswzen/font/fontAction!article.do?articleId=4028e3d6660ffd5f01692c60fe
relating autonomous or remotely controlled ship concept to the 9a02e3, accessed on: 7 January, 2019.
currently deployed merchant or commercial ships, e.g. passenger
DNV GL, 2018. Autonomous and remotely operated ships. Available at: http://rules.
or cargo ships, some difficulties arise. Such difficulties are mainly
dnvgl.com/docs/pdf/DNVGL/CG/2018-09/DNVGL-CG-0264.pdf, accessed on: 7
based on the complexity of the engine room and the need for January, 2019.
personnel to perform maintenance during exploitation.
Eder, B., 2018. Inaugural Francesco Berlingieri Lecture Unmanned vessels: Challenges
ahead. Comité Maritime International. Available at: https://comitemaritime.org/wp-
5. CONCLUSION content/uploads/2018/05/Sir-Bernard-Eder-Berlingieri-Lecture-London-Assembly-
2018-geconverteerd.pdf, accessed on: 25 January, 2019.
Even though human action is stated as the most common
EMSA, 2016. Annual overview of marine casualties and incidents 2016. Available
cause of accidents on board, it is an indispensable element at: http://www.emsa.europa.eu/news-a-press-centre/external-news/item/2903-
needed for the exploitation of ships today. Due to their high level annual-overview-of-marine, accessed on: 25 January, 2019
of development and thermal efficiency achieved, most commonly International Association of Classification Societies, 2019. Position paper MASS,
used propulsion systems in modern shipping are two-stroke available at: http://www.iacs.org.uk/media/5962/iacs-mass-position-paper.pdf,
diesel engines, steam and gas turbines or combination marine accessed on: 15th June 2019.
propulsion systems. These propulsion systems are comprised of International Maritime Organization, 2018a. Considerations on definitions for
heavy-duty machinery which for their operation use different levels and concepts of autonomy - Submitted by Finland. Available at: https://
types of fuel oil, lubricants, coolant medium with aggressive www.transportstyrelsen.se/contentassets/814ad4d3513a461db47cfe377cd
additives, etc. That is why engine room on conventional ships 1d892/99-5-6.pdf, accessed on: 21 January, 2019.
is comprised of numerous and complex systems, which require International Maritime Organization, 2018b. IMO takes first steps to address
adequate personnel on board for constant monitoring and autonomous ships, available at: http://www.imo.org/en/mediacentre/
maintenance. As progress approaches closer to the complete pressbriefings/pages/08-msc-99-mass-scoping.aspx, accessed on: 20 January, 2019.

autonomy, the number of crew on board will appropriately be International Maritime Organization, 2018c. Maritime Safety Committee (MSC),
reduced and labor organization on board will change. Therefore, 100th session, 3-7 December 2018. Available at: http://www.imo.org/en/
the personnel involved in navigation and engineering functions MediaCentre/MeetingSummaries/MSC/Pages/MSC-100th-session.aspx, accessed
on: 20 January, 2019.
on those types of ships should undergo specific training and
education. International Maritime Organization, 2018d. Report of the Maritime Safety
All these reasons emphasize that autonomous and Committee on its 99th Session. Available at: http://www.iadc.org/wp-content/
uploads/2018/07/MSC-99-22-Report-Of-The-Maritime-Safety-Committee-On-Its-
remotely controlled ships cannot be observed exclusively
Ninety-Ninth-Session-Secretariat.pdf, accessed on: 20 January, 2019.

264 Karlo Bratić et al.: Review of Autonomous and Remotely Controlled Ships in Maritime Sector
International Network for Autonomous Ships, 2019. Available at: http://www. royce-worlds-first-remotely-operated-commercial-vessel-video/, accessed on: 17
autonomous-ship.org/testarea.html, accessed on: 31 January, 2019. March, 2019.

Jokioinen, E. et al., 2016. Remote and autonomous ships – The next steps. Available Mišković, D., Bielić, T. & Čulin, J., 2018. Impact of Technology on Safety as Viewed
at: https://www.rolls-royce.com/~/media/Files/R/Rolls-Royce/documents/ by Ship Operators. Transactions on Maritime Science, 7(1), pp.51–58. Available at:
customers/marine/ship-intel/aawa-whitepaper-210616.pdf, accessed on: 9 January, http://dx.doi.org/10.7225/toms.v07.n01.005.
2019
Musonov, M., 2018. Making moves towards autonomous ships. IACS Annual Review.
Kongsberg Autonomous Ship Project, 2019. Key facts about YARA Birkeland. Available at: http://www.iacs.org.uk/about/iacs-annual-review-2018/ .
Available at: https://www.km.kongsberg.com/ks/web/nokbg0240.nsf/AllWeb/4B
Rødseth, O.J., Nordahl, H., 2017. Norwegian Forum for Autonomous Ships.
8113B707A50A4FC125811D00407045?OpenDocument, accessed on: 24 January,
Definitions for Autonomous Merchant Ships. Available at: http://nfas.autonomous
2019.
ship.org/resources/autonom-defs.pdf, accessed on: 10 March, 2019.
Laurinen, M., 2016. Advanced Autonomous Waterborne Applications Initiative
Rolls-Royce PLC, 2018. World´s first fully autonomous ferry demonstration.
AAWA, AAWA Seminar – Helsinki, Finland. Available at: https://www.rolls-royce.
Available at: https://www.breakingwaves.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/SVAN-
com/~/media/Files/R/Rolls-Royce/documents/customers/marine/ship-intel/12%20
presentation.pdf, Accessed on: 15 February, 2019.
-%20AAWA%20Coordinator.pdf, accessed on: 10 January, 2019.
Tesla, N., 1898. Method of and apparatus for controlling mechanism of moving
Lloyd´s Register, 2017. Design Code for Unmanned Marine Systems. Available at:
vessels and vehicles. Available at: http://www.nuenergy.org/uploads/tesla/
https://www.cdinfo.lr.org/information/documents/ShipRight/Design%20and%20
US613809.pdf, accessed on: 12 March, 2019
Construction/Additional%20Design%20Procedures/Design%20Code%20for%20
Unmanned%20Marine%20Systems/Design%20Code%20for%20Unmanned%20 Wróbel, K., Montewka, J. & Kujala, P., 2017. Towards the assessment of potential
Marine%20Systems,%20February%202017.pdf, accessed on: 5 January, 2019. impact of unmanned vessels on maritime transportation safety. Reliability
Engineering & System Safety, 165, pp.155–169. Available at: http://dx.doi.
Maritime Cyprus Administration, 2018. Rolls Royce – Wolds´s first remotely operated
org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.03.029.
commercial vessel. Available at: https://maritimecyprus.com/2018/01/09/rolls-

Trans. marit. sci. 2019; 02: 253-265 TRANSACTIONS ON MARITIME SCIENCE 265