Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)
2.7 The Working Group noted the information provided by IEC 0NAV 44/INF.9) on the need for amendment to various IMO resolutions concerning the Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) to keep them updated in view of a series of events that have taken place since their adoption. Such events include amongst others, namely, reports of interference to shipborne GPS receivers from Inmarsat and other sources, the adoption by IMO of resolutions on standards for high-speed craft and the experience from collisions/groundings etc. in which the use and performance of a GPS shipborne receiver has raised concerns with regard to the receiver characteristics. The Working Group was of the opinion that the Committee should be invited to include this topic in the work programme of the Sub-Committee.
Draft performance standards for Raster Chart Display Systems (RCDS)
2.8 The Working Group noted that the IMO/IHO Harmonization Group on ECDIS (HGE) at its eighteenth session, 15-16 September 1997, had considered the draft Performance Standards for Raster Chart Display Systems (RCDS) that were referred back to them by NAV 43 and developed a draft S/N circular detailing differences between RCDS and ECDIS. The Working Group also noted that an informal meeting of IHO on HGE matters had developed draft amendments to resolution A.817(18) on Performance standards for ECDIS.
2.9 The Working Group noted that trials had been conducted by a number of administrations at sea and on a simulator. The sea trials had given positive results and concluded that RCDS made navigation safer. Some Administrations however were of the opinion that more trials were required in order to test out all combinations of type of vessel and voyage.
2.10 The delegations of the Russian Federation,Norway and Italy preferred a stand alone performance standard but the majority preferred a performance standard associated with ECDIS. This would have the advantage of showing that ENC data is preferred to raster data and that RCDS is an interim measure to be used before ENC data is fully available. There was no evidence that the use of RCDS would slow the production of ENC.
2.11 The Working Group, having considered comments and proposals by Norway (NAV 44/7/12,NAV 44/7/13, NAV 44/7/14, NAV 44/7/15, NAV 44/7/16 and NAV 44/7/17), the Russian Federation (NAV 44/7/10 and NAV 44/7/11), Australia, France, Ireland, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States (NAV 44/7/6), the Note by the Chairman of the IMO/IHO Harmonization Group on ECDIS (I-IGE) (NAV 44/7/4) and IHO (NAV 44/7/8 and Add. 1 and 2), prepared the draft amendments to the performance standards for ECDIS (A.817(19)) which incorporates a new Appendix 7 on RCDS, given in annex 2, for adoption by the Committee.
2.12 These amendments to the performance standards for ECDIS permit the ECDIS equipment to work in two modes; ECDIS mode to be used when ENC data is available and RCDS mode when ENC data is not available. In RCDS mode the equipment does not have the full functionality of ECDIS and the Working Group prepared a draft S/N Circular explaining the differences between RCDS and ECDIS, given in annex 3, for adoption by the Committee.
2.13 The Working Group was divided on the question of the equivalency of RCDS with paper charts but was of the opinion that RCDS used with ECDIS equipment together with an adequate folio of up-to-date paper charts as derailed in the amendments would meet SOLAS carriage requirements.
