Benson, D. R.

English

University of New Brunswick: Centre for Digital Scholarship Journals

LONG RANGE NAVIGATIONAL WARNINGS A  SUGGESTED IN T E R N A T IO N A L  W O RLD -W ID E  SCHEME by Lieutenant Commander D. R. B e n s o n , R. N.Captain O u d e t  in his article “ Towards a Progress in Nautical In for­mation ” published in the July 1968 issue o f the International Hydrographic Review  describes the difficulties o f promulgating hydrographic information o f importance rapidly to all those interested throughout the world. This is obviously best done by radio navigational warning but becomes exorbitantly expensive unless backed up by a system o f dissemination by the printed word.“ Short range ” navigational warnings from  coast radio stations through­out the world adequately cover ephemeral or very local occurrences; they are usually broadcast in English as well as the national language. They also cover the initial dissemination o f more important inform ation of an emergency nature; for instance they may be used to inform  shipping in the immediate area of a recent shipwreck which has become a danger to ship­ping.Captain O u d e t  states that there are only three countries (Great Britain, U.S.A. and France) which operate a world-wide broadcast coverage of navi­gational warnings, although other countries have long range stations. In point o f fact these three systems of “ long range navigational warnings ” are individually inadequate as none provides a comprehensive world-wide coverage, also duplication of effort inevitably occurs.For instance the British long range N A V E A M  covers the Eastern Atlan­tic north o f the Equator, the Baltic, Mediterranean and Red Seas. In this large area the majority of NAVEAM s issued concern information in British waters or waters round coufitries where the UK Hydrographer has a good liaison with the local hydrographic authority, such as Nigeria where a good link with the Nigerian Ports Authorities exists. This, of course, does not mean that there is nothing of importance to promulgate in other areas such as the Red Sea, or o ff the North African Coast, but merely that the UK H y­drographer is unaware of them unless a passing ship reports something of interest.As Captain O u d e t  points out, rigorous selection of inform ation is also a necessary function. W hat information can be classed as important, and what is merely of general interest, or else just “ nice to know ” ? A great volume of information w ill not only swamp the radio schedules but w illdevalue the whole system and be needlessly expensive. On the other hand if  warnings are very few  and far between many ships may tend to miss the navigational warning broadcast periods as there is rarely anything broad­cast. A happy medium must be struck.The UK Hydrographic O ffice drew up, for internal use, in 1954 a pam­phlet laying down rules for issuing navigational warnings. It gives guidance both on the type of information which should be broadcast and that which need not. It also gives guidance on the form  o f wording to be used when drafting navigational warnings. Both these points are important and must help in keeping expenses down as the emphasis on the drafting of messages is on clear, concise wording leaving out superfluous detail. Perhaps it may seem contradictory, but the use o f words rather than figures is also recom­mended when giving positions. This naturally increases the length of a mes­sage passed by W / T  but has the obvious advantage that the correct position can generally be deciphered even if  some corrupt letters have been received; errors in drafting or transmission are also not so likely.The instructions on information requiring navigational warning action given in this pamphlet may be summarised as follows :(a) Unexpected or sudden changes to navigational aids. These include lights extinguished, lightvessels or buoys o ff station, missing or irregular, interruption o f radio beacons or electronic aids such as Decca Navigator, etc. These occurrences are normally only promulgated by the local coast radio “ short range ” navigational warnings but may be broadcast as a “ long range warning ” depending on the importance and expected duration o f the occurrence.(b) Establishment o f new aids, or perm anent or temporary deliberate altera­tions to characteristics or positions. The same rule applies as at (a), but there is a greater likelihood o f the incident being suitable for promul­gation as a long range warning. I f  possible a warning should be issued 2 or more days before an intended change to ensure wide dissemination by the time it occurs.(c) F loa ting dangers to navigation. Information on these is normally issuedfor a short period only by “ short range ” warnings from Coast Stations. There is little point in such a warning lasting for more than a day as the danger’s probable position after 24 hours becomes very hypotheti­cal, but continued reports may enable a warning to be re-issued with up-to-date inform ation. It may be necessary, however, to issue a long range warning for a large derelict adrift in the open ocean outside the range o f coast radio stations. Another problem is to decide what float­ing derelict objects can be considered as dangerous to navigation. Ge­nerally speaking, anything which would produce more than a “ bump and a scrape ” to a coaster or larger vessel should be considered as dangerous to navigation. Tree trunks and timber do not normally fall into this category even though they may form a danger to small craft which do not normally listen to navigational warnings. Buoys adrift are borderline examples but normally would not cause any more than scratched paintwork or a dent if hit by a vessel.(d ) New or amended shoal depths. Their importance depends on their posi­tion and depth. Valid ity is not important at this stage and a navigationalwarning, probably a long range one, should be issued even if  this is in doubt. It may be necessary to check accuracy or validity at a later date before issuing a Notice to Mariners.(e ) Sunken wrecks, obstructions etc. The same remarks apply to these as to(d ). Also there is no need to broadcast the non-existence o f a charted danger which has been removed or disproved.(f )  M arine or Submarine disasters, searches fo r  air or sea survivors. Theseare normally adequately covered by lifesaving radio services, but details may require to be broadcast by navigational warning to achieve the widest possible promulgation. Reports o f overdue vessels are normally adequately covered by operational signals on distress traffic.(g ) Large scale emergencies. This includes the blocking of a port, an explo­sive ship or tanker on fire in harbour, areas affected by earthquake, etc. I f  necessary use should be made o f the facilities o f local or national broadcasting stations and distress schedules.(h) Naval exercises. These are normally only “ nice to know about ” and do not normally constitute navigational dangers. F iring exercises are very frequent and “ clear range procedure ” is normally operated because the onus on safety to other shipping rests w ith the firing ships. Norm ally inform ation concerning such exercises is not broadcast except in the case o f extensive night exercises involving darkened ships, submarines and flares or exercises involving the laying or sweeping of dummy mine­fields. Such warnings are purely cautionary and are never prohibitive or restrictive on the high seas.(i) Unexploded torpedoes, depth charges, etc. Information on these should bebroadcast only when they constitute a definite danger to shipping in water under about 200 fathoms, especially in main shipping routes. F loating mines come under the category o f (c ) above and information on these need only be broadcast for a short period.( j )  Salvage, diving, cable laying and seismic operations and the laying of salvage, cable, oceanographic or surveying buoys and floa ting  beacons. This inform ation generally comes under the category of “ nice to know ” but there may be an element of danger, and the interference in these important operations m ight cause great inconvenience and loss of valu­able time and equipment, so this inform ation is normally broadcast. If the operations are likely to be o f long duration, then a “ long range ” broadcast is obviously warranted.(k ) Fishing vessel concentrations. Tow ing operations involving large, un­wieldy or long tows. Dredging operations. The same remarks as in ( j )  apply here.(1) The establishment o f d rilling  rigs, o il wells etc. in the open sea. Broad­casts need not be made about these dangers if they only exist in very shallow water or very close inshore and out o f the way o f possible ship­ping. They are a relatively new source of danger to shipping and in many areas are so numerous that the situation has got out o f hand.(m ) The establishment of new separation routes or routes in m ined danger areas. These are normally promulgated well beforehand by a compre­hensive series (i.e prelim inary and permanent) of Notices to Mariners, but may merit a navigational warning to achieve w ider dissemination.There may of course be other items which fall outside the above cate­gories. Each should be judged on its merits using the general principles described above.In the last two paragraphs o f his article, Captain O u d e t  suggests that world-wide international co-operation is necessary and should be possible in the matter of long range navigational warnings. This is an idea to which I, too, have been putting a little thought and Captain O u d e t ’s article has spurred me on to putting some ideas down on paper. An international organ­isation would, I should say, be comparatively easy to arrange, and I would like to suggest a possible system which generally coincides with Captain O u d e t ’s broad principles. However, probably the greatest d ifficu lty is the financial one. W ho pays ? A lot of expense is involved by those tele­graphing information and those issuing and broadcasting the warnings. As an example, the broadcasting costs for NAVEAM S are about £  2000 a year for about 300 messages. In some cases these expenses may devolve on small, relatively poor organisations and countries. Unless some form of re-imbur- sement is possible from  a central fund, many smaller authorities may be unwilling to take part.Leaving the financial aspect aside, I would recommend that the world be divided into about half a dozen “ long range navigational broadcast areas ” . These should be chosen with the follow ing points in mind :(ij The main shipping routes.(ii) The disposition of long range radio stations capable of broadcasting navigational warnings.(iii) The availability of major Hydrographic Offices to issue area warn­ings. For example, the world division could be made up as follows :(a) The whole o f the eastern Atlantic including the Baltic and Mediter­ranean. W arnings could be originated by the UK Hydrographic Office and broadcast by all the long range radio stations in the area (Europe, W est A frica and the Mediterranean).(b) The whole o f the Indian Ocean including the East coast of Africa, the west coast o f Australia, the Red Sea, Persian Gulf and the Indian sub­continent westward of the meridian of about 95° E (i.e. west of Sumatra). W arnings could be originated by possibly the Indian, Pakistan, South A fr i­can or Australian Hydrographic Offices.(c ) The Far East, which would include Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, China and Japan and possibly New Guinea and northern and eastern Aus­tralia. W arnings could be originated by the Japanese or Australian Hydro- graphic Offices.(d ) The Southern Pacific, which would include New Zealand, the West coast of South Am erica and all islands, say, south of the Equator and east of 160° E. The New Zealand or Chilean Hydrographic Offices could be respon­sible for originating navigational warnings in this area.(e ) The Northern Pacific which would be the area north of the Equator and east of the Date Line. The US Naval Oceanographic Office would pro­bably be the most suitable authority to originate warnings within this area.( f )  The W estern Atlantic including the Caribbean and east coast ofSouth America. Here once again the US NAVOCEANO would probably be the most suitable originating authority.The system would then be simple. Any national hydrographic or port authority or ship should report any items considered as possibly suitable for a long ranee navigational warning, by radio or cable to the originating authority for the area. The authority should then assess its importance; it must have the absolute right to decide, but may be open to question later if the choice is bad. I f  important enough, the originating authority may then issue the information as a long range warning for that area. The warnings for each area must be in a numbered series with messages in force issued monthly. The messages would be in English and drafted in a standardised form  to ensure clarity and conciseness and to ease the burden o f translation for non-English speaking users possibly equipped only with a dictionary.A fter being drafted by the originating authority, the message may then be transmitted to the long range radio station or stations covering the area concerned. Each station would then start a series o f broadcasts, similar to the series used in promulgating a NAVEAM . Broadcast schedules should be arranged at least once a day and a broadcast of each message should be made on the day of receipt at the station (on the next day i f  received after the last schedule) and once daily on the 2nd, 5th, 8th and 12th days after the first broadcast. Broadcasts normally cease thereafter, but may cease earlier if the message is subsequently cancelled before the 12th day after issue.Generally speaking a single long range radio station could cover the whole of one o f the areas described above. This should be adequate; but careful consideration as to which stations are most suitable to give good coverage must be given. However, to give wider promulgation and a w ider choice o f schedules, more than one country may like to participate in the broadcasting of long range warnings although, of course, only one authority in each area would be responsible for initiating the messages. Thus, for instance, long range navigational warnings for the Indian Ocean area may be broadcast from South Africa, India and Australia. Some countries may wish to translate them into their national language before broadcasting.Meanwhile national hydrographic offices which wish to reprint long range navigational warnings may have all the messages o f any or all the series cabled directly to them by the originating authorities. These can then be printed in their national issue o f Notices to Mariners, weekly or fortn ight­ly; the numbers of national charts affected may be added at this stage, if  desired. This is done in Section III  o f British Adm iralty Notices to Mariners. Thus by the 12th day after issue, all long range navigational warnings w ill be printed by many hydrographic offices and should be available to many ships. It may be considered necessary to extend the period o f broadcast long­er to permit a more satisfactory overlap between the broadcast and the receipt o f the printed versions, but this w ill increase the expense accordingly. A cheaper method would be to institute a special weekly schedule which broadcasts the more important area warnings which are between 12 days and say 28 days old.For permanent or very long standing items of hydrographic in form a­tion, national hydrographic offices may then institute proceedings to issuea Notice to Mariners as and when fu ll details are available. This then leaves one last problem, that o f cancellation after promulgation by a Notice to Ma­riners. N AVEAM s are cancelled six weeks after the issue o f the relevant Adm iralty Notice to Mariners by the w'ords “ NAVEAM... cancelled on receipt o f AN M .../68 ” , when the navigator can delete it from  his list of messages in force, provided he has inserted the appropriate correction on his chart. Ships reading NAVEAM  broadcasts, but not using Adm iralty Charts, may perhaps insert a bracket or other symbol against the listed NAVEAM , indi­cating that an ANM  had been issued; this would enable the operator to look out for his own national Notice on the matter, and on receipt he should can­cel the message. The same method could be used in an international system: hydrographic offices reprinting the message may add their own relevant Notice i f  issued at that stage.Adm inistratively il may be cheaper and more convenient io arrange for one authority —  one of the larger Hydrographic O ffices —  to originate long range navigational warnings for all the areas of the series. This would be quite possible but would increase telegraph and cable costs between the sup­pliers of information, the issuing authority and the radio stations broadcast­ing the series. Tim e delays in telegraphing great distances may also come into it, but should not make a lot of difference with modern communication systems.

Long Range Navigational Warnings — A Suggested International World-Wide Scheme

https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/ihr/article/download/23941/27726

Long Range Navigational Warnings — A Suggested International World-Wide Scheme

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of New Brunswick: Centre for Digital Scholarship Journals