4.6 Article

On the Influence of Human Factors on Safety of Remotely-Controlled Merchant Vessels

期刊

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app11031145

关键词

maritime autonomous surface ships; MASS; human factor; human error; remote control; unmanned shipping; HFACS

资金

  1. Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (MOF, Korea)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research and expert analysis have shown that ensuring the safety of remotely-controlled merchant vessels is primarily dependent on addressing known issues promptly, monitoring the psychological and physiological conditions of remote operators, and placing emphasis on the actions of operators as the key barrier against accidents.
With numerous efforts undertaken by both industry and academia to develop and implement autonomous merchant vessels, their safety remains an utmost priority. One of the modes of their operation which is expected to be used is a remote control. Therein, some, if not all, decisions will be made remotely by human operators and executed locally by a vessel control system. This arrangement incorporates a possibility of a human factor occurrence. To this end, a variety of factors are known in the literature along with a complex network of mutual relationships between them. In order to study their potential influence on the safety of remotely-controlled merchant vessels, an expert study has been conducted using the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System-Maritime Accidents (HFACS-MA) framework. The results indicate that the most relevant for the safety of this prospective system is to ensure that known problems are properly and timely rectified and that remote operators maintain their psycho- and physiological conditions. The experts elicited have also assigned higher significance to the causal factors of active failures than latent failures, thus indicating a general belief that operators' actions represent the final and the most important barrier against accident occurrence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据