DCPA is on the increase in all the scenarios though analysis time decreases in case as way point indication when it is compared with the case that there is no support indication.

　

　

　

　

　

 In other words, the processing time which is necessary for the analysis of the ship operator and decision making can be shortened by the way point indication. And, DCPA increases from the case that there is no support indication because a ship operator can make a collision avoidance plan in the high precision. Therefore, a ship operator is safe, and it is decided securely that he can perform a maneuvering in collision avoidance by the way point indication.

　

(2) Level 2

　

 A difference due to the existence of the support isn't recognized in case as the case that there is no support indicates, and the way point indication.

　

 It says way point indication only to use and not to use actively to support the judgment of the ship operator when it seems to navigate without the other ship changing a course, a speed like a level 2.

　

 When there is no support indication, a ship operator maneuvers based on the own other ship movement estimation in case as way point indication as well, as this result. Then, it is considered that a difference in the ship operator is formed.

　

(3) Level 3

　

 DCPA is on the increase in all the scenarios though analytic time decreases when there is no support indication when it is compared with the case of the way point indication.

　

 A ship operator steers to the right at once when the other ship is judged crossing vessel when there is no support indication. Then, a ship operator avoids the other ship with confirming that a change with the movement of the other ship. In this case, though the other ship changes a course to the right from the middle, the other ship alters course from the ownship in the direction which it goes away from. Therefore, a ship operator judges the other ship concerned the thing which never gives an ownship a menace after this, and a collision avoidance operation is finished.

　

 Because the plan line of the other ship can be grasped at the same time when a ship operator discovered an other ship in case as way point indication to this, a maneuvering in collision avoidance is decided to be done based on the collision avoidance plan that it was made based on the way point indication, and it is decided that it can have proper DCPA.

　

 In other words, the behavior of the ship operator is influenced by whether a future other ship movement becomes a menace in case of no support indication. When there is way point indication, the behavior of the ship operator isn't influenced by the uncertain behavior of the other ship.

　

(4) Destination indication

　

 To indicate that destination about the other ship is to give some of the information about the other ship movement to it to the ship operator. Partial information gives the ship operator the prediction related to the movement estimate of the other ship. The destination of the other ship concerned is definite, and the case that it can guess other ship action after that easily is removed, and such imperfect information confuses a ship operator.

　

 In other words, destination indication provides imperfect information to the ship operator. Therefore, as for the destination indication, it found that it was inappropriate for the ship operator support in the maneuvering in collision avoidance.

　

3.4 Consideration

　

 Way point indication is effective when an other ship movement specially influences an ownship when an other ship movement is uncertain. In this case, the analysis time of the ship operator is shortened. It is found that the ship operator avoid the other ship safely and certainly using appropriate DCPA.

　

 As for the estimated precision of the movement of the other ship, it found that it got bad in case as destination indication. As for the information support about the other ship movement to the ship operator, it found that it became a counter result from this when it was imperfect.

　

 From the above, it found that to make the other ship movement defined information, it is effective to do the plan course (way point) indication of the other ship. And, it found that it can get proper DCPA and analysis time shortening of the ship operator by the way point indication.

　

 Support to the ship operator was explained about the maneuvering in restricted water area and the maneuvering in collision avoidance in this research. Making use of the adaptive control characteristic of the ship operator, it became possible to improve the ship operator characteristic by indicating the controlled variable concerned with the ship control. A ship operator can control which ship maneuverability was used for to a limit by using this indication.

　

 And, as for the maneuvering in collision avoidance, it aimed at the reduction of the load factor in the information processing from the viewpoint of the brain activities of the ship operator. To ease a state of high load of the ship operator in the information analysis and decision making to make other ships, movements decision, it becomes possible to improve information throughput in the maneuvering in collision avoidance of the ship operator. It can think about the use of AIS as one of the methods to make the other ship movement decision.

　

 There is some way point information in the specifications of AIS as an information to become the decision of the other ship movement shown here as an option. A result by this research is shown as a guideline about the use of AIS.

　

 This research shows that the consideration of the human characteristics of the ship operator who becomes the center of the control is necessary for development of a ship handling support system.

　

[1] HIROAKI K. and KIMIKO N., (1987)Study on the Human Control of Ship in the Tracking Task-Viewpoint of Analysis on the Training Process-(in Japanese), Journal of Japan Institute of Navigation, Vol. 78, pp 63-71

[2] HIROAKI K. et. al., (2001), Human Handling Characteristics on Ship's Motion in Restricted Condition, Marine Technology 4, pp3-12, WIT Press

[3] MASATOSHI E. and HIROAKI K., (2002) A Study of Maneuvering Support System Based Upon Human Characteristics, Conference proceedings of INSLC2002

　

 Masatoshi Endo received a Bachelor of Mercantile Marine degree from Tokyo University of Mercantile Marine in 1985. From 1985 to 1990 he worked for Mitsubishi Precision Co., Ltd. From 1990 he is working for Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. He developed ship handling simulator. He has studied ship handling simulator, especially the training system based upon the elemental techniques of ship maneuvering techniques. He is a member of Japan Marine Simulator and Simulation Committee. He is a doctorial student of graduated school of Tokyo University of Mercantile Marine from 1997. His subject is concerning about the human supporting system.