Economic analysis on substitution of paper chart with ECDIS on board for Turkish Flag Ships

• Autorzy: Gurel O. , Er I. D.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

ECDIS as a real-time navigation system integrating variety of charts and navigation-related information that replaces the usage of paper chart. Nowadays, ECDIS usage is getting more recognized as being used for both navigation and collision avoidance tasks. In this consideration, Turkish ship management companies are at the right cornerstone to take a decision for the substitution of paper chart with ECDIS. Cost factor has a significant role during the selection process and it needs to be optimized with cost-benefit ratios of each alternative. This study originally tends to describe decision making process with alternative solutions that could be applied to ship’s bridge operations. By utilizing multi-criteria decision making model, it is aimed to facilitate the selection of two alternatives with “Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)”. Consequently quantifying the influence of related factors to the selection of two alternatives for Turkish management companies, a hierarchical analysis framework is developed and applied by AHP method.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Electronic Navigational Charts (ENC); ECDIS; economic analysis; Turkish Flag Ships; analytic hierarchy process (AHP); cost factor; paper chart; nautical chart

• Wydawca: Faculty of Navigation, Gdynia Maritime University
• Czasopismo: TransNav : International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation
• Rocznik: 2007
• Tom: Vol. 1, no. 4
• Strony: 399--404
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 28 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Gurel O.

• Maritime Transportation and Management Engineering Department, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

autor

Er I. D.

• Marine Engineering Department, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

Bibliografia

• 1. Shea, I. P. and Grady, N., 1998. Shipboard Organizational Culture in the Merchant Marine Industry, Proceedings of the Safe Navigation Beyond, Gdynia.
• 2. Er, Z. and Çelik, M., 2005. Definitions of Human Factor Analysis for the Maritime Safety Management Process, IAMU AGA-6 2005.
• 3. Akten, N., 2004. Analysis of Shipping Casualties in the Bosphorus, Journal of Navigation 57, 345–356.
• 4. Rodriguez, R. and Dauer, M., 2006. The Needs of Crews when Arriving in Port, Maritime Transport 3. Barcelona, pp. 923–928.
• 5. May, M., 1999. Cognitive Aspects of Interface Design and Human-Centered Automation on the Ship Bridge: The example of ARPA/ECDIS Integration, People In Control: An International Conference on Human Interfaces in Control Rooms, Cockpits and Commad Centres.
• 6. Smeaton, G.P., 1995. Display Requirements for ECDIS/ARPA Overlay Systems, Journal of Navigation, 48, pp. 13–28.
• 7. Casey, M.J., 1993. Paradigm shift in Maritime Transportation Ramping up for Electronic Charts Display, IEE Vehicle Navigation & Information System Conference, Ottawa -VNIS.
• 8. Rogoff, M., 1992. Electronic charts as the basis for integrated marine navigation, Navigation Symposium, 2. Record. '500 Years After Columbus -Navigation Challenges of Tomorrow'.IEEE PLANS '92., pp. 256–260.
• 9. Lanziner, H.H. and Michelson, D.G., 1990. Application of electronic chart systems in the prevention of ship’s groundings, Position Location and Navigation Symposium, 20-23 March, pp. 56–59.
• 10. Yang, S., Li, L. and Chaojian, S., 2006. ECDIS Based Decision-Making System for Vessel Automatic Collision Avoidance On Restricted Water Area, Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, June 21 - 23, Dalian, China.
• 11. Sullivan, T.S. and Alexander L., 1997. Benefits of an integratednavigation system: US Coast Guard cutter JUNIPER leads the way, Electrical and Computer Engineering, 2, pp. 854–857.
• 12. Shaw, P.T. and Pettus, W., 2000. An integrated approach to electronic navigation: Oceans 2000 MTS/IEEE Conference and Exhibition, Volume 1, pp. 299–308.
• 13. Gillard, D.G. and Heim, P.K., 2002. U.S. Navy Progress in Electronic Navigation, Oceans, 2, pp. 1038–1041.
• 14. Devogel, G.F., Baccei, P.K. and Shaw, P.T., 2001. The United States Navy navigating in 21st. century, Oceans, 3, pp. 1460-1465.
• 15. Hadley, M.A., 1997. Digital charting: a Royal Navy navigator’s view,IEE Pror -Ruduur, Sonor Navir., Vol. 144, No. 3. pp. 143–147.
• 16. Pillich, B. and Schack, C., 2003. Next generation ECDIS for commercial and military uses, Oceans '02 MTS/IEEE,Volume 2, pp. 1025–1032.
• 17. Forman, E. and Selly, M. A., 2000. Decision by Objectives, Expert Choice Inc.
• 18. Saaty, L.T., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-HillComp., U.S.A.
• 19. Wind, Y. and Saaty, T., 1980. Marketing applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process", Management Science, 26 (7), 641–658.
• 20. Golden, B. L., Wasil, E. A. and Harker P. T., 1989. Introduction, The Analytic Hierarchy Process,, Springer Verlag, pp. 1–36.
• 21. Zahedi, F. 1986.The Analytical Hierarchy Process, A survey of the method and its applications, pp. 96–108.
• 22. Chin K.S., Chiu, S. and Tummala, V. M. R., 1999. An evaluation of success factors using the AHP to implement ISO 14001-based EMS, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, pp. 341-361.
• 23. Kuruüzüm A. and Atsan N., 2001. The analytic hierarchy process approach ant its applications in business, Akdeniz İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi (1) pp., 83–105.
• 24. Rangone, A., 1996. An Analytic Hierarchy Process framework for comparing the overall performance of manufacturing departments, International Journal of Operation andProduction Management, pp. 104–119.
• 25. Saaty, T., 1991. Some Mathematical Concepts of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Behaviometrica,Vol. 29, 1–9.
• 26. Saaty, T., 1999. The Seven Pillars Of The Analytic Hierarchy Process, 322 Mervis Hall, Pittsburg.
• 27. Creative Decision Foundation, 2006. Super Decision Software Tutorials, http://www.superdecisions.com, Creative DecisionsFoundation, Pittsburgh.
• 28. IHO – WEND committee 2006. Increasing use/sales of Official ENC’s, Proposing: Pay-Per-Use model, Marine Press of Canada.