1 / 17

Inland ECDIS standard 2.3

Inland ECDIS standard 2.3. UNECE June 16, 2011. Inland ECDIS expert group and Inland ENC Harmonization Group (IEHG) Overview of editions What’s new in edition 2.3 Procedures in different international organizations Questions to SC.3/WP.3. Content. Inland ECDIS expert group and IEHG.

eydie
Download Presentation

Inland ECDIS standard 2.3

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Inland ECDIS standard 2.3 UNECE June 16, 2011

  2. Inland ECDIS expert group and Inland ENC Harmonization Group (IEHG) Overview of editions What’s new in edition 2.3 Procedures in different international organizations Questions to SC.3/WP.3 Content www.ris.eu

  3. Inland ECDIS expert group and IEHG The Inland ECDIS expert group is an independent European (including the Russian Federation) expert group, working for EC, UNECE, CCNR, DC, Sava Commission, etc. The Inland ENC Harmonization Group (IEHG) is a worldwide expert group for electronic charts for inland navigation, which is recognized by IHO. Active members: Inland ECDIS expert group, USA, Brazil, Venezuela, China, South Korea www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 3

  4. Inland ECDIS expert group and IEHG The first Inland ECDIS standard was a European project Now the charts (Inland ENCs) are standardized by IEHG and the Inland ECDIS applications for the display of these charts are standardized by the Inland ECDIS expert group The Inland ECDIS standard is containing both parts www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 4

  5. Overview of editions Edition 2.0 of the Inland ECDIS Standard: CCNR: adopted and published in 2006 UNECE: adopted and published as resolution 48 in 2007 Danube Commission: adopted in 2007 EU: adopted in the written procedure by the RIS Committee in Jannuary 2009, not published In use in BE, CH, CZ, DE, HR, NL www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 5

  6. Overview of editions Edition 2.1 of the Inland ECDIS Standard: CCNR: adopted, but formally not set into force UNECE: content accepted, but formally not set into force Danube Commission: adopted and published EU: --- In use in AT, DE, HR and PL, in preparation in BG, HU, RO, SK, SR, UA www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 6

  7. Overview of editions Edition 2.2 of the Product Specification for Inland ENCs: Edition 2.2 has only been adopted as an edition of the Product Specification for Inland ENCs to take into account the requests of South America An edition 2.2 of the (European) Inland ECDIS standard has not been produced www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 7

  8. Overview of editions Edition 2.3 of the Inland ECDIS standard: CCNR: accepted by RIS/G in May 2011 UNECE: discussion in June 2011 Danube Commission: accepted in April 2011 EU: presented in the RIS Committee in March 2011, publication planned for summer 2011 EU member states will have to comply with this edition within 30 months after publication www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 8

  9. What’s new in Edition 2.3? Alignment with the latest versions of the IHO and IEC standards Therefore compatible with ECDIS carriage requirement of IMO Improved presentation of Inland AIS information based on experiences Improved presentation of notice marks Improved connection to other RIS via location codes Errors of earlier versions corrected and results of the task force Quality Standards taken into acount Full editorial alignment of all international standards www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 9

  10. Improved presentation of Inland AIS • If the heading of a vessel is not available the blue sign may not be displayed on one side of the symbol, because it could be displayed on the wrong side if a vessel is drifting backwards www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 10

  11. Improved presentation of notice marks • General symbols in older versions: No indication if there are several notice marks in this location and no priority rule (a prohibition mark might be hidden behind a recommendation mark)The skipper had to check the pick report for every notice mark • New symbolization with priority rule • May also be used for display of older IENCs www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 11

  12. Procedures for changes CCNR has provided a mandate to the expert group for changes of the annexes(with explicit restrictions regarding e.g. changes that cause financial burdens) The expert group confirmed that such a mandate is necessary to be able to make corrections and clarifications without delay The EC is not able to provide such a mandate because of formal restrictions The expert group recommends to keep the mandate (as only difference to the Commission Regulation) in the regulations of CCNR and UNECE www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 12

  13. Corrections Several corrections of the first proposals for the annexes of Edition 2.3 have been distributed by the expert group The paper parts of the annexes have more than 800 pages, in addition there are the electronic parts (lookup tables, symbol library, test charts). A lot of resources are needed to find errors, most of them were only typing errors. Some are only found during implementation. Therefore a mandate for the expert group is really necessary www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 13

  14. Corrections An omission in the Presentation Library of Editions 2.0, 2.1 and 2.3 has only been detected now (after 5 years) The Conditional Symbology Procedure for underwater rocks has to be modified to ensure the correct display of rocks which are encoded with the inland specific waterlevel references The objects have not been used in official Inland ENCs until now, therefore no immediate danger The correction has to applied to all editions www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 14

  15. The consequences of adopting 2.3 Inland ECDIS applications will have to be updated, but all application builders have supported the adoption of 2.3 in the expert group Countries that do not want to use the newly introduced objects or attributes can continue to produce IENCs in accordance with 2.0 or 2.1 2.0 and 2.1 IENCs can be converted to 2.3 automatically, only new objects and attributes have to be added (if needed) www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 15

  16. The consequences of not adopting 2.3 Countries who need the new objects (e.g. rescue stations, marine cultures) or attributes (e.g. location codes that provide a link to Notices to Skippers for overhead cables or overhead pipelines) would not be allowed to use them Application builders would be forced to follow outdated IHO and IEC standards The display of AIS information on the blue sign might be misleading The display of vessels with Class B AIS might be misleading www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 16

  17. Inland ECDIS expert groupwww.ris.euinland-ecdis@ris.eu Bernd Birklhuber Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology Radetzkystrasse 2 A-1030 Wien Tel.: +43 1 71162 655902 Mobile: +43 664 8188909 E-mail: bernd.birklhuber@bmvit.gv.at www.ris.eu ienc.openecdis.org 18

More Related