Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T11:40:28.369Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remote use of shiphandling simulator: BRM skill acquisition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2022

Seta Hiroaki Open the ORCID record for Seta Hiroaki [Opens in a new window] ,
Yoshino Shingo ,
Takashima Kyoko  and
Unno Teppei
Seta Hiroaki*
Affiliation:
School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University, Shizuoka, Japan
Yoshino Shingo
Affiliation:
School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University, Shizuoka, Japan
Takashima Kyoko
Affiliation:
School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University, Shizuoka, Japan
Unno Teppei
Affiliation:
School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University, Shizuoka, Japan
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: seta@tsc.u-tokai.ac.jp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cadets training to become licensed mariners based on the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) Code have been under pressure to keep up with the countermeasures against COVID-19 from the Spring of 2020. For several reasons, sea training voyages were restricted or cancelled, and the schooling style was drastically changed from face-to-face to remote. Since the research vessel owned by Tokai University is not a training vessel exclusively for cadets, the decision was inevitably made to make more effective use of the shiphandling simulator. Because training in the simulator also had to be done remotely, new ideas were put into practice to explore the possibility of building new educational methods. Numerous open-ended evaluation comments were submitted by the cadets who received remote training on the simulator. The results suggested that the remote use of the simulator is likely to be an effective method for training in bridge resource management (BRM).

Keywords

remoteshiphandling simulatorbridge resource managementeducation
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 75 , Issue 4 , July 2022 , pp. 813 - 831
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Institute of Navigation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baldauf, M. and Procee, S. (2014). Augmented Reality in Ships Bridge Operation. ISIS 2014 - International Symposium Information on Ships Conference, Hamburg, 170–178. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273057248_Augmented_Reality_in_Ships_Bridge_Operation [Accessed 20 Oct. 2021].Google Scholar
Baldauf, M., Dalaklis, D. and Kataria, A. (2016). Team Training in Safety and Security via Simulation: A Practical Dimension of Maritime Education and Training. The 10th annual International Technology, Education and Development Conference (INTED2016), Valencia, 8519–8529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castells, M. L., Ordás, S., Barahona, C., Moncunill, J., Muyskens, C., Hofman, W., Cross, S., Kondratiev, A., Boran–Keshishyan, A. and Popov, A. et al. (2015). Model course to revalidate deck officers’ competences using simulators. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 15, 163–185.Google Scholar
Charlott, S. (2017). Simulators in bridge operations training and assessment: a systematic review and qualitative synthe. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs volume, 16, 247–263.Google Scholar
Cwilewicz, R. and Tomczak, L. (2008). Improvement of ship operational safety as a result of the application of virtual reality engine room simulators. WIT Transactions on Information and Communication, 39, 535–544.Google Scholar
Hontvedt, M. and Arnseth, H. C. (2013). On the bridge to learn: Analysing the social organization of nautical instruction in a ship simulator. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8, 89–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ichikawa, Y. (2012). Evaluation of the simulator training for pilot training course in marine technical college. Attachment: Evaluation sheet in Japanese for advanced ship handling training in Licensed pilot training courses issued by Japan agency of Maritime Education and Training for Seafarers. Japan Institute of Navigation, NAVIGATION, 181, 17–21.Google Scholar
Inoue, K., Kuwano, T. and Takahashi, H. (2003). BRM learning from CRM – This is where the danger lies! BRM in Japan–. Japan Institute of Navigation, NAVIGATION, 157, 47–54.Google Scholar
International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2021). Outcome of the regulatory scoping exercise for the use of maritime autonomous surface ships (MASS). MSC.1/Circ.1638.Google Scholar
Japan Coast Guard (JCG). (2019). MDA (Maritime Domain Awareness) situational indication linkages. Available at: https://www.msil.go.jp/msil/htm/topwindow.html [Accessed 20 Oct. 2021].Google Scholar
Kobayashi, H. (2005). Use of simulators in assessment, learning and teaching of mariners. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs volume, 4, 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. S., Lee, J. B. and Oh, J. S. (2006). The effect of repeated mariner training using a ship-handling simulator system on ship control. Journal of Navigation and Port Research, 30(6), 427–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, B. (dir). (1993). Leonard, B. Human Factors Digest No. 7: Investigation of Human Factors in Accidents and Incidents. International Civil Aviation Organization.Google Scholar
Lundh, M., Mallam, S., Smith, J., Veitch, B., Billard, R., Patterson, A. and MacKinnon, S. (2012). Virtual Creative Tool-Next Generation's Simulator. Maritime Simulation (MARSIM), 23–27.Google Scholar
Mallam, S. C., Salman, N. and Sathiya, K. R. (2019). Rethinking maritime education, training, and operations in the digital era: Applications for emerging immersive technologies. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 7(12). doi:10.3390/jmse7120428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meadow, G. (2017). Redefining Seafaring Pedagogy–Impacts of Virtual Reality on Seafarer Training. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information, Communication Technologies in Education, Rhodes, Greece, 6–8.Google Scholar
Muirhead, P. M. (2004). New technology and maritime training in the 21st century: Implications and solutions for MET institutions. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 3, 139–158.Google Scholar
Nikitakos, N., Sirris, I., Dalaklis, D., Papachristos, D. and Tsoukalas, V. D. (2017). Game-based learning for maritime education and training: The case of Trader of the World. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 16, 265–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robert, M., Igor, R. and Dani, M. (2012). Problems during simulator training in ship handling education. Scientific Journal of Maritime Research, 26(1), 191–199.Google Scholar
Sanfilippo, F. (2017). A multi-sensor fusion framework for improving situational awareness in demanding maritime training. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 161, 12–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellberg, C. and Lundin, M. (2018). Tasks and instructions on the simulated bridge: Discourses of temporality in maritime training. Discourse Studies, 20, 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, A., Nazir, S., Wiig, A. C., Sellberg, C., Imset, M. and Mallam, S. (2018). Computer supported collaborative learning as an intervention for maritime education and training. Proceedings of the AHFE 2018 International Conference on Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences, Florida, 3–12.Google Scholar
Swift, A. (1993). Bridge Team Management: A Practical Guide. London: The Nautical Institute.Google Scholar
Valverde, H. (1973). A review of flight simulator transfer of training studies. Human Factors: The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 15(6), 510–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshino, S., Seta, H., Takashima, K., Sakakibara, S. and Unno, T. (2020). Remote sea training for COVID-19 infection prevention-efforts of Tokai University-. Japan Institute of Navigation, NAVIGATION, 214, 78–83.Google Scholar