It’s hard to tell what actually happened aboard the recent Italian shipwreck that led to this horrendous accident. Not much has appeared in the press, and the reporting has been focused on the rescue, not the navigational issues involved. Given the abysmal technical expertise of the media, I have a feeling we’ll have to wait for the results of the inevitable inquiry to tell us what happened.

I’d like to make some comments because I feel I have technical experience in navigation, and because I believe what happened here is relevant to our interests as techies, and our relationship to modern technology and how it affects day-to-day life.

All we know for sure so far is that the ship wandered too close to shore, probably as a deliberate deviation from the ship’s planned course. The island the ship was buzzing had personal connections with the ship and crew, and it is insinuated the captain deliberately went off course to give the passengers and the crew a thrill. Whether or not this actually happened is still not established, but just how is a ship like this navigated? What procedures are usually in place to prevent an accidental grounding or collision?

In a large commercial or naval vessel, where there are sufficient trained officers on board capable of doing so, common sense and maritime regulations expect certain practices and procedures to be carried out. This is not related to the ship’s navigational technology, regardless of the ship’s equipment, there are specific actions which it is expected will be followed.

At all times, but especially when there is the remotest possibility of a collision or grounding, the ship’s position must be known as accurately as possible. If possible, the ship’s position must be revised as frequently as practicable. If it is not possible to do so, then the best possible estimate of the position must be plotted on the chart, available to the bridge watch for immediate inspection at any time.

Along with the position (true or estimated) there must be a track of the ship plotted on the chart showing where the vessel can expect to find itself at any time in the near future. This provides the watch with information about potential hazards or aids to navigation in the area. It is my understanding this part of the Italian Coast is extremely well surveyed and charted, and if it isn’t, then this kind of deviation from plan is totally unacceptable. If it actually happened, it is inconceivable it occured without the captain’s direct orders.

For example, If the watch wants to know “when will that next lighthouse up the coast be visible, how far away will it be and in what direction from us?” A glance at the ship’s course on the chart will instantly provide that information. On large ships, there is a man with the responsibilty to keep up the “dead reckoning track” up to date all the time. It’s what I used to do in the Navy. At any moment the officer of the deck could either ask me a question, or come look at the chart for himself.

Every time the ship maneuvered, or a new position was determined, this DR track would be updated. This must be done even under ideal conditions of visibility or safety, because conditions can deterorate swiftly and unexpectedly at sea and if they do the best possible position data must be available to the bridge watch.

Any deviation from the ship’s track, or a speed change, say to avoid a collision or hazard, should immediately be plotted and a DR track layed out to see if the maneuver places the ship in danger, and to reveal any new navigational aids that might become visible, or be obscured.
You are on a very large ship looking out of tiny windows, often in poor visibility, at a vast sea whee it is very easy to become disoriented. Situational awareness is vital.

On my ship, I was expected to not only maintain the DR track, plot new fixes (positions) but also to cross check all my real time navigational resources such as visual landmarks, radar, and electronic fixes. There was a Quartermaster on the bridge 24 hours a day while the ship was underway to do this, to answer any questions from the officer of the deck, and to alert him of any new factors that might conceivably affect the ship’s navigation. “Fowey Rocks Light should be visible on the port bow, bearing 080, range 11 miles, in 20 minutes, sir.”

I don’t know what caused this accident, but I can speculate. On a modern ship, paper charts would be replaced by a colorful screen (with an image of the same out-of-date paper chart), and a GPS-generated dot would represent the ship’s position. People will get lazy, over-reliant on the electronics, eventually even be tempted to save money by not requiring a Quartermaster to be on watch around the clock. After all, in familiar waters, an already overworked officer can quickly take a glance at the screen and verify his location.

The performance and reliability of modern technology breeds indifference to danger. It lets old skills get rusty, and it generates bad work habits and overconfidence. Any deviation from routine can lead to disorientation, panic and error, or loss of confidence in the diplayed data, even IF the equipment is functioning perfectly. Regardless of what kind of navigational, sensor and communications gear you have aboard, sometimes you just need to look out those little round windows.