Arctic Navigation - Stanford University › group › scpnt › pnt › PNT12 › ... · Arctic...

Arctic Navigation Norvald Kjerstad Professor, Nautical Science Aalesund University College N 62°28’19’’ – E 006°14’06’’ nk@hials.no

2012 PNT – Challenges and Opportunities Symposium Stanford, 13 November 2012

Norvald©Kjerstad

Norvald©Kjerstad Norvald©Kjerstad

My presentation: -! Geography and some challenges -! High latitude shipping activity -! Survey and chart quality -! Navigation systems -! Future prospects and climate change

2

Norvald©Kjerstad Norvald©Kjerstad Norvald©Kjerstad

A random snapshot of activity in ice infested waters (from AISSat-1)

3

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

Total 25368 29991 25663 29974 32590 44298 44684 48448Boats 29 25 22 28 28 34 29 30

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Passengers visiting Svalbard The trend is similar in Antarctica, Greenland, Russia and Canada

Growth in shipping activity demands implementation of new international regimes !!Polar Code

!!Mandatory IMO guidelines

Norvald©Kjerstad Passenger vessels conflict – attraction vs. safety 4

When technology and humans meets the harsh and remote environment ----- problems occurs

1912

1989

23.11.2007 Norvald©Kjerstad

5

Norvald©Kjerstad

Northern Passages – shortcuts between Atlantic and Pacific Waters Northeast-Passage «Open» since 1991

6

Norvald©Kjerstad

2011 – a breakthrough for the Northeast passage

17th of July 2012 north of New Siberian Islands 7

Norvald©Kjerstad 8

Norvald©Kjerstad

Demanding season extension This is what you see in the winter time (only 1month after min. ice coverage)

Norvald©Kjerstad 9

Ridges can easily be seen

Much ice-clutter close to the ship

Blind sector

Close to the North Pole

Norvald©Kjerstad 10

Radar can be useful to avoid ice ridges

Navigation

Positioning / Dynamic Positioning (DP)

….. Different needs and requirements •! Accuracy •! Reliability •! Integrity •! Redundancy

Norvald©Kjerstad

Modes of navigation

11

GNSS performance GNSS performance

•! GPS have no significant latitude limitations

•! GLONASS more inclined orbits (64.8 vs. 55°). Improves performance at high latitudes.

•! Needs augmentation for integrity

•! Galileo og BeiDou will improve integrity, geometry and add SAR functionality

•! Signal strength normaly good, but ice on the antenna and auroral activity can reduce performance

Norvald©Kjerstad GPS-HDOP: 24hrs sailing along the Northeast Passage

• GPS

• GLONASS55°). Improves performance at high latitudes.

• Needs augmentation for integrity

Skyplot of GPS and GLONASS at 75°N (24hrs)

12

Limit for sat. 120 (15.5°E)

Route

Expected coverage of EGNOS satellites

Main research area at N 78°50’

Polar Circle

Norvald©Kjerstad

Limited DGPS and SBAS coverage

13

Satellites without EGNOS correction

Satellites with EGNOS correction

EGNOS sat. 124

Skyplot from N 71°29’ – E 015°20’

Norvald©Kjerstad Kongsberg DPS-132 receiver (GPS L1+L2+SBAS) 14

Period with correction (DQI > 1). Number of sat. are low. HDOP is high

Period without correction (DQI = 1). Number of sat. are high. HDOP is low

N 74° N 76°40’ DQI

HDOP Satellites

DQI = 1

DQI – timeplot from the Barents Sea (sat. 124) (Software: Kagstrom NMEA-suite / www.kagstrom.no )

13 hrs

Norvald©Kjerstad 15

EGNOS sat. 120 (Elevation is 2.2°)

Skyplot from N 78°49’ – W 004°08’

Norvald©Kjerstad 16

!"#$

WAAS MSAS

EGNOS

SNAS? CWAAS

SDCM?

!"#$%"$&''$%()$*"'+,$-+./$

•!$%&'()$*&++,-.*(/&-0$$$$.-123).145$(-6$.*2$6(1($$$$6.71).8,/&-$-22626$5$9).6.,+$&)$:;<$5$=;<$>:&'-.4(?$

•!$@'&8('$74712+$*&&)6.-(/&-$

•!$:&)2$A&'()$B9:C$

Norvald©Kjerstad

5$=;<$>:&'-.4(?$

Norvald©Kjerstad 17

All approved compass systems have limitations at high latitudes

Latitude (!) approaches 90°

!!Cos ! approaches 0

!!Error approaches !

Remember !! Errors will propagate to radar, ECDIS, direction-finders, AIS, SatCom, TV, etc.

Error =

Norvald©Kjerstad

Gyro

FOG

Magnetic

18

Satellite compass – have no latitude limitations (but still not approved by IMO) Ref. recommendations in IMO guidelines for ships operating in polar waters.

Display Norvald©Kjerstad Norvald©Kjerstad

19

Large and shallow shelf areas. What about the chart quality?

The seachart indicated 300m (Hinlopen, Svalbard)

Norvald©Kjerstad 20

New survey, 2007

New location of glacier

Not surveyed

Former unauthoriced chart Navigation in front of glaciers is dangerous due to limited survey and varying depths

Large datum shifts are common

Norvald©Kjerstad New location of glacier

Not surveyed

Navigation in front of glaciers is dangerous due to limited survey and varying depths

Large datum shifts are common

Norvald©Kjerstad 21

Margins between ” ingenuous” grounding and disaster are sharp (ref. Exxon Valdez)

Norvald©Kjerstad

MV Nordkapp grounded in Antarctica

22

A paradox:

Reduced ice coverage can contribute to more ice-navigation

•! Cruise / Expeditions

•! Oil and gas

•! Mining

•! Research

•! Fishing

Gradual change from thick multi-year ice to thin first-year ice

Norvald©Kjerstad Norvald©Kjerstad

2012 – All time low

23

Equivalent to year 2040-50 predictions

“Trans Polar Highway “– a future perspective?

Approx. 1000nm shorter

•! No depth limitations

•! Only international waters

Norvald©Kjerstad

Bering

NE

NW

Chinese icebreaker Xue Long tested the Trans Polar route over the North Pole (August-Sept.12)

*) Remember – shortest route is rarely the quickest 24

Norvald©Kjerstad Norvald©Kjerstad

Obvious need for:

•! Better competence

•! Stricter regulations (national and international)

•! Improved infrastructure and presence

Concluding remarks

25